1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Welcome to the new DBSTalk community platform. We have recently migrated to a community platform called Xenfono and hope you will find this change to your liking. There are some differences, but for the most part, if you just post and read, that will all be the same. If you have questions, please post them in the Forum Support area. Thanks!

Radical TV regulation reform proposed in Congress

Discussion in 'Legislative and Regulatory Issues' started by phrelin, Dec 19, 2011.

  1. phrelin

    phrelin Hall Of Fame DBSTalk Club

    14,886
    282
    Jan 18, 2007
    Northern...
    From Deadline New York (and a multitude of other sources):
    Variety comments:
    And from Broadcasting & Cable:
    So the lobbyists are divided based on their economic interests (big surprise).

    The public would benefit from a fair discussion of the proposal. But this is the United States where the public rarely know what's going on with anything that really affects them.
     
  2. kenglish

    kenglish Icon

    973
    2
    Oct 2, 2004
    Salt Lake...
    I just wish they would outlaw ALL laws, and let everybody do whatever we want. Don't just pick on the broadcasters.:D
     
  3. SayWhat?

    SayWhat? Know Nothing

    6,255
    133
    Jun 6, 2009
    As long as they ban retrans fees and severely limit the NAB, I'm all for it.
     
  4. Ira Lacher

    Ira Lacher Icon

    823
    0
    Apr 24, 2002
    Current laws simply perpetuate forced mediocrity on local viewers, who are free to purchase anything anywhere but cannot choose a better newscast, or view network programming a local affiliate has opted to preempt.
     
  5. wxguy

    wxguy AllStar

    91
    1
    Feb 17, 2008
    central...
    This bill would move along what is inevitable. Satellite communications have outstripped the need for a land based system to distribute programming. Between sat dishes, cable and telco systems delivering tv programs almost nobody needs to get their "free" programming from an antenna.

    News and weather? Internet is quickly replacing newspapers and broadcast outlets as the preferred source for information. After all, how much actual news do you get from a television station? Mostly I see stories that were already distributed through the paper or internet, and then they use the rest of the news block to repeat stories that are already on the national news feeds. Weather? Noaa weather radio, smartphones and internet can deliver the same info. Plus do we really need a half dozen "meteorologists" hyping the various storms. If just one did a decent job, that would be enough.

    Sportscasts are probably the only original stuff done by a broadcast tv station and most of it is hype. Eventually we will wind up with one or two stations that deliver info in any market, so why prop up all these other outfits through inefficient distribution methods.

    Imagine the reduction in greenhouse gasses if we weren't using all that coal to pump out high powered broadcasts? If you want to watch a certain station, it should be that they are providing the best service to the community, not because current law prevents you from seeing it. Right now the laws prevent competition rather than encourage it.
     
  6. kenglish

    kenglish Icon

    973
    2
    Oct 2, 2004
    Salt Lake...
    As a broadcaster, I have no clue what the NAB does anyway...other than put on a convention every year. From the comments here, I know they don't promote broadcasting to the general public.
     
  7. kenglish

    kenglish Icon

    973
    2
    Oct 2, 2004
    Salt Lake...
    Funny, but when I proposed that the land-based distribution system could be replaced with satellite distribution of all local broadcasting (freeing up ALL the UHF spectrum for broadband), I was told I was "an idiot" and asked if I had "any clue how broadcasting or satellite even worked".:rolleyes:
     
  8. SayWhat?

    SayWhat? Know Nothing

    6,255
    133
    Jun 6, 2009
    Are you going to pay the $50/mo for people who can barely put food on their own tables to replace what they now get for free?

    I thought the trend was going the other way -- people dropping pay-TV in favor of OTA?
     
  9. Ira Lacher

    Ira Lacher Icon

    823
    0
    Apr 24, 2002
    If broadcasters could have figured out a way to charge people for watching TV when the technology first came out, you know they would have.
     
  10. kenglish

    kenglish Icon

    973
    2
    Oct 2, 2004
    Salt Lake...
    SOMEBODY has to pay for the work it takes to do TV.

    Back then, there were fewer advertising venues, and there were enough eyeballs watching any particular station, that they could make their money off commercials.

    Now, with the idea that everything can be advertising, and anyone can provide TV, the ad dollars are not enough. The answer seems to be, just cut quality, cut content, and try to survive on an ever-decreasing share of the available ad money.
     
  11. runner861

    runner861 Icon

    859
    0
    Mar 20, 2010
    Side channels can provide useful alternative content. They are granted market exclusivity, just like primary channels. Some stations in small markets have taken on a second network on a side channel. However, generally when the station does this the market does not benefit in the same way as if a new station, with a different news department, had entered the market. The news on the side channel is generally a simulcast of the primary channel. This does nothing to expand local coverage, something the NAB says that it wants to encourage.

    Take a look at KSBW is Salinas. It is a long-time NBC affiliate, providing NBC programming and local news coverage in that market. To its credit, it has done a good job with local news coverage and with providing NBC programming.

    The ABC programming in that market has been provided for years primarily by KGO, the San Francisco ABC affiliate in the next market to the north. KGO also covered some events in Salinas, and provided excellent news coverage from Sacramento, the state capitol.

    Now that the KSBW side channel is broadcasting ABC programming, KGO is gone from the market, along with its news. In its place KSBW is just simulcasting its news from the NBC channel on the ABC side channel.

    I believe that this new affiliation with ABC on the side channel is a net loss for the Salinas market. A new ABC station coming into the market, if the market could sustain it, would have been ok. This side channel, however, is worthless.
     

Share This Page