1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Press Release - DISH NETWORK STATEMENT ON THE PASSAGE OF THE SHVRA of 2009

Discussion in 'General DISH™ Discussion' started by Jason Nipp, Dec 3, 2009.

  1. Dec 3, 2009 #1 of 46
    Jason Nipp

    Jason Nipp Analog Geek in a Digital World Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Gold Club DBSTalk Club

    10,064
    2
    Jun 10, 2004
    Northern...
    DISH Network Statement on the passage of the Satellite Home Viewer Reauthorization Act of 2009:
    ENGLEWOOD, Colo. – Dec. 3, 2009 – DISH Network L.L.C., a subsidiary of DISH Network Corporation (NASDAQ: DISH), the following statement on the passage of the Satellite Home Viewer Reauthorization Act of 2009:
    “DISH Network thanks the U.S. House of Representatives for passing this bill. House leadership, as well as Chairmen Henry Waxman, John Conyers and Rick Boucher, and Ranking Members Joe Barton and Cliff Sterns, were instrumental in securing its passage. DISH Network remains concerned about the HD carriage mandate for PBS stations included in the bill, and the substantial additional penalties and burdensome audit requirements recently added to the bill. We look forward to working with House and Senate committees to make the changes necessary to ensure that legislation is enacted this year that serves the needs of the American public and continues to provide the framework for a vibrant satellite industry to compete with cable and telcos.”

    # # #
    About DISH Network L.L.C.
    DISH Network L.L.C., the nation’s HD leader, provides approximately 13.851 million satellite TV customers as of Sept. 30, 2009 with the highest quality programming and technology at the best value, including the lowest all-digital price nationwide. Customers have access to hundreds of video and audio channels, the most HD channels, the most international channels, state-of-the-art interactive TV applications, and award-winning HD and DVR technology including 1080p Video on Demand and the ViP® 722 HD DVR, a CNET and PC Magazine “Editors’ Choice.” Visit www.dishnetwork.com.
     
  2. Dec 3, 2009 #2 of 46
    nmetro

    nmetro Godfather

    944
    53
    Jul 11, 2006
    I think Congress is right to force satellite providers to deliver PBS in HD as soon as possible and rightfully so. Why should we have to wait to 2013 or later to get PBS in HD? DISH and PBS make it so we can't even get the nation PBS HD feed. That would go a long way for subscribers. As for PBS subchannels, there are only a finite number of nation PBS subchannels which could be easily carried in the Public Access Channels in the 9400 range. There are people out there who cannot get cable or are too far away to recive a signal; hence, why they subscribe to satellite in the first place. And we expect that PBS HD be delivered with other other major channels already in HD. Also, if DISH Network did not centercut PBS channels, then would be too bad to wait, but right now watching a pBS "centercut" picture is enough to give anyone a headache.
     
  3. Dec 3, 2009 #3 of 46
    SayWhat?

    SayWhat? Know Nothing

    6,259
    133
    Jun 6, 2009
    PBS as a Public Service, Yes. No one should be 'forced' to carry anything in HD. HD is fluff, optional, extra and should never be mandatory.
     
  4. Dec 3, 2009 #4 of 46
    phrelin

    phrelin Hall Of Fame DBSTalk Club

    15,008
    307
    Jan 18, 2007
    Northern...
    IMHO PBS HD should be part of the local HD package. Unless, of course, we get rid of locals and have national feeds of the seven broadcast networks which is my preferred choice.
     
  5. Dec 3, 2009 #5 of 46
    wilbur_the_goose

    wilbur_the_goose Hall Of Fame

    4,492
    50
    Aug 16, 2006
    so, what is E* thankful for in the bill?
     
  6. Dec 3, 2009 #6 of 46
    phrelin

    phrelin Hall Of Fame DBSTalk Club

    15,008
    307
    Jan 18, 2007
    Northern...
    From Television Broadcast:
    However, the article notes "The House bill must be reconciled with similar legislation in the Senate before being signed into law by the president."

    You can read the whole bill here, for what it's worth.
     
  7. Dec 3, 2009 #7 of 46
    Stewart Vernon

    Stewart Vernon Roving Reporter Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    21,609
    380
    Jan 7, 2005
    Kittrell, NC
    The thing about PBS...

    I believe Dish would love to carry one national PBSHD feed, but PBS local channels would be left out in the end-around... so the local PBS stations will not agree to that for very obvious reasons.

    Then there's the decisions of must-carry vs being paid to carry that have to be ironed out...

    And then Dish has to have the bandwidth in each market to carry the PBS in HD.

    Also... the sub-channels may or may not be part of the deal. IF Dish had to agree to carry all the subchannels in each local market to carry the HD in each market, that is a big difference than just having to find bandwidth for the 1 HD channel.
     
  8. Dec 4, 2009 #8 of 46
    brant

    brant Icon

    755
    0
    Jul 6, 2008
    I assume every PBS does those weekly telethons to raise funds like GPTV (georgia)? That could mean a national feed has the potential to severely limit their ability to solicit money from "local" viewers.

    I get both FL & GA PBS stations via antenna, and the programming varies widely between them.

    I don't think anyone should be forced to broadcast PBS, but a national feed is certainly better than no feed.

    The only complaint I had, is that even though I'm in GA, my DMA is Tallahassee, FL, so I had to pay dish network extra to receive GPTV (GA PBS). I wasn't able to receive the station via antenna until about 4 months ago when they were finally able to boost their power output after the digital transition was complete. I had been unable to receive their signal for the past couple of years.
     
  9. Dec 4, 2009 #9 of 46
    BillJ

    BillJ Icon

    859
    6
    May 5, 2005
    In Chicago market Dish has a spare transponder that could be used for PBS HD but they've failed to negotiate carry authorization. DTV has had it for close to 2 years.

    And don't tell me to use an antenna. Too far away for that to work.
     
  10. jonesron

    jonesron AllStar

    77
    0
    Jun 23, 2007
    Since some market areas have more than one PBS station, would the bill require the sat provider to carry all of them or only one?
     
  11. farmerdave4

    farmerdave4 Mentor

    44
    0
    Apr 19, 2007
    drop national funding of PBS altogether and Dish will not need to carry it.
     
  12. nmetro

    nmetro Godfather

    944
    53
    Jul 11, 2006
    If DISH did not centercut the picture to make PBS unviewable, then I agree with you. So, if we can't have PBS in HD, then the PBS stations need to tell DISH to not centercut the picture. Black bars around a picture (which can be removed on newer DVRs) was a viable option until the DTV conversion. The picture was actually better, than what is being sent out now.

    And by the way, not everyone lives near enough to broadcast station to get it over the air, that is why they have satellite. And it make no sense to pay $10 to $20 extra a month just to get cable fro one over the air channel in HD.
     
  13. NightTimeHD

    NightTimeHD Cool Member

    18
    0
    Nov 24, 2009
    Disagree.
     
  14. Paul Secic

    Paul Secic Hall Of Fame

    6,226
    23
    Dec 16, 2003
    Hmm. I wonder why U-verse had KQED in HD last year? Surly Dish could find some transponders for big DMAS.
     
  15. Michael P

    Michael P Hall Of Fame

    3,107
    21
    Oct 27, 2004
    This (from the summary of the bill):
    Bottom line:

    If this bill passes in the conference committee with the above portion intact E* will once again be able to provide "significantly viewed" stations. Examples of this are Washington D.C. stations inthe Baltimore DMA and visa versa, Dayton, OH and Cincinnati stations, etc. In other words where there is significant interest in a neighboring DMA's stations (especially if they are carried on cable and/or receivable by an antenna).
     
  16. joshjr

    joshjr Hall Of Fame

    4,807
    84
    Aug 2, 2008
    NE Oklahoma
    Its gotta pass more then that. It will be interesting considering they have to have this ironed out by the 31st of this month but have been dragging their feet for the last 6-7 months.
     
  17. DJ Lon

    DJ Lon Legend

    270
    0
    Nov 3, 2005
    I totally agree. I used to live about 10 miles from the local PBS station transmitter in Phoenix and was able to use OTA on my 722 as a stopgap measure to get it in HD. After I moved earlier this year to my new home (which is now about 40 miles away from the transmitter) OTA is no longer an option and now I'm stuck with Dish's centercut presentation including cut-off names & credits.
     
  18. James Long

    James Long Ready for Uplink! Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    45,736
    984
    Apr 17, 2003
    Michiana
    It has been a long five years waiting for this revision of the law ... I hope they get it right (they didn't last time).
     
  19. Wapello County Iowa Resi

    Wapello County Iowa Resi New Member

    3
    0
    Dec 5, 2009
    I live in an area of southern Iowa in which 4 counties do not have local-into-local coverage by satellite at this time. We are unable to receive adequate tv reception from an adjacent DMA because of the current law. Currently we must use an outside antenna with rotor to get ABC, FOX and PBS and each station is broadcasting from a different direction. We do not have access to CBS and NBC as the digital broadcasting is not reaching our area. It would be nice to get the channels on satellite in order to watch local news, weather and emergency information. It is my hope that the bill passes and is signed with provisions to receive adjacent DMA's in order to watch satisfactory television. Those that live inthe cities are able to receive the tv channels on cable, but those of us that reside in the counrty are left without satisfactory tv coverage.
     
  20. Lincoln6Echo

    Lincoln6Echo Godfather

    348
    0
    Jul 11, 2007
    I reject the whole idea of the PBS station. What are we in here, the 1950s? It's a publically (tax-payer) funded station. There should be no tax-payer funded station in the United States. Period. Same goes for the NPR radio station as well. All channels/stations should be funded by advertising by sponsering companies/interest groups (in times of political issue debates). I reject the idea that my tax dollars are gong to fund a station that does not necessarily reflect my political values. This is un-American. Period.

    Hell, I haven't watched PBS since about 1994 when they played the Yanni at the Acropolis concert.
     

Share This Page