Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'DIRECTV General Discussion' started by slice1900, Mar 15, 2019.
i called and asked ...nothing good has happened. how do i contact the office of the president?
Office of the President Contact Form
this takes me to an ATT ad site..
Try a different browser or make sure you don't have some sort of malicious browser redirect going on. The link took me to the form.
Occasionally when Viglink (a service that tries to get credit for the forum reference to an outside site) goes nuts, it will do what you describe so you may have caught it on a bad day.
Tried the link on Safari and Chrome, he's correct, what the heck is 44siteplug.com, it starts there in the address bar and then redirects to ATT's site, att.com/internet with some internet offers.
Go to Investor Relations AT&T. Select Resources - Select Customer Service Contacts - Select Executive Customer Care Contact. The form you need will appear.
thank you very very much.. i truly appreciate it.. thank you..
Yes vigilink is screwing up the URL. The actual link is
I must have clicked it on a good day. Today I get the wrong page.
Viglink is a dangerous tool.
Hi Michael. I just spoke with my contact in the President’s Office. Is it possible you might share your DirecTV case number with me, the one given to you when you made your initial appeal to them? My contact wishes to explore my situation further, but needs your case number for further research.
Thanks for any consideration. It is appreciated.
anyone get your dns turned back on please pm me..
Here’s an update Michael. My rep in the President’s Office pulled your case. She stated that no contact was made with a specialized DNS department on your behalf...because no such unit exists. Oh boy. And my rep also definitively stated the newest current policy, that once a distant is removed, it cannot, and will not, be turned back on. Grandfather status no longer applies once a distant is pulled.
I am posting this to the forum for informational purposes. And really, to save anyone from wasting anymore time. That doesn’t mean some of us may prove exceptions for whatever administrative or technical reason. But from personal experience, I wouldn’t recommend trying to get those lost channels back. Even the most helpful and conscientious customer reps can’t pull it off, so be content with what you may have left.
Thanks again Michael for sharing your experiences with us. You and I can now be designated the unofficial guinea pigs for this experiment, on behalf of dbstalk.com.
After watching the Super Bowl last night, and seeing all the glitching and terrible uplink from my local station(small market Elmira NY), there is no way i am settling for this.
I have waivers from all the local stations from many years ago that should still remain valid.
If you do not currently have distants you will not be able to get distants. The waiver system is gone.
So what is to prevent them from pulling a DNS channel accidentally, when they should not have, then saying something like, "Oops! Sorry, but we shouldn't have done that. Unfortunately, once a distant network is turned off, it cannot be turned back on. There's nothing more that can be done"?
I ask because that's exactly what happened to my CBS and ABC feeds. I still have NBC and Fox; however, last spring, when the deadline approached, CBS and ABC were pulled precisely at 6:00 p.m. my time (Central Daylight Time, BTW). Fox and NBC remained on due to agreements reached with them (or something to that effect). When I found out that the deadline wasn't until midnight—the new law effective date had not yet arrived and wasn't arriving until midnight—I called and complained. Not one but THREE different reps, each successively higher up the food chain, so to speak, confirmed that those channels should not have been turned off just quite yet. They were shut off too soon, sooner than they legally had to; however, there was nothing they could do. I spent 2 hours on the phone with them that evening and about the same amount of time the next evening complaining about this, but that didn't matter. It was THEIR mistake, but THEY "couldn't" rectify it, to which I say BS.
If the channels can be deactivated, intentionally or unintentionally, then they sure as heck can be REactivated, intentionally or unintentionally.
Tue 2021-02-09 12:18 PM
I've seen your name on a couple of occasions in online articles regarding the post STELA (and each prior 5-year version) of the distant network service eligibility, and now under the DirecTV network carriage agreements with the major national networks for RV and residential accounts for STILL UNSERVED DMA areas.
My DirecTV service address is in the:
##### zip code,
which still has no local network affiliate LIL DirecTV broadcast transmission nor does it have an OTA broadcast signal.
DirecTV account: ########
I have had DirecTV continuously since 1994, the first decade with Pegasus, the rural DirecTV provider, before its acquisition by DirecTV.
So during the time from 1994 up until 01 June 2020, when each of the 5-year STELA legislation versions were extended, I received both east and west HD DNS, and although I was grandfathered to continue to receive those, had I not been grandfathered, I still would have continuously met eligibility requirements under the then existing legislation during that entire time.
There has been almost no information released to the public by DirecTV regarding the specifics of the DirecTV distant network carriage agreements entered into after the expiration of the last STELA agreement, so I am basing my request on information you have been quoted as providing as the official DirecTV public information release source.
Again, I do not and am NOT ABLE to receive any broadcast of any major network affiliate of any kind, either with DirecTV LIL or any OTA reception.
I have a ticket in:
Case Number: #####
and awaiting a callback from Kelli Wantland of the DirecTV Office of the President, to request reconnection of DNS, based upon my CURRENT ELIGIBILITY under current DirecTV network carriage agreements, as explained by you in interviews with online news media outlets.
I had contacted Ms. Wantland last year, and she had been given no information from DirecTV that corroborated the information that you provided and was unable to fulfill my request at that time but suggested that maybe the information would be eventually disseminated internally and to feel free to revisit the request at a later date.
My reason for contacting you is to request that you provide or direct Ms. Wantland to a link or source to substantiate the specifics of current eligibility for distant network reception.
Or if there are no disclosure restrictions on that information, if you could provide the link or source to me.
Update from #736:
Finally talked to Ms. Kelli Wantland, DirecTV Office of the President, today.
She confirmed that I do not / cannot receive any major network broadcasts, no LIL, no cable, no OTA, whatsoever.
No, I am not above the arctic circle... I am located in the contiguous 48 states.
She did revert early in the discussion to the STELA legislation, to explain that the law was not renewed, so that DirecTV could not legally provide DNS.
I was able to explain that I understood that, and that my request to connect DNS was NOT based upon STELA legislation, but upon carriage agreements which took effect immediately upon retirement of the STELA legislation, agreements between DirecTV and the respective major network corporate offices, not any network affiliate offices, information based upon statements to media outlets, attributed to Mr. Jim Greer, spokesperson for DirecTV.
Ms. Wantland basically repeated what she said in our discussion last year, that DirecTV had no authority to provide DNS according to any of the departments knowledgeable about DNS that the Office of the President communicates with.
Interestingly, she did say that if I were to receive waivers from each affected affiliate station, then I would be eligible to receive DNS under FCC guidelines, which I was surprised to hear her say, because I was under the impression that waivers were a thing of the past, and no longer used to determine eligibility for DNS.
Many on this site and others were told specifically, that when they inquired about waiver eligibility, they were told that that was no longer an option.
Anyway, I explained my dilemma regarding that approach, and asked her what affiliate stations I should submit waiver requests to, since my home is not in OTA broadcast range of ANY affiliates for ANY major network.
Jim Greer is a public relations voice for DirecTV / ATT of some standing, given that he was the official spokesperson who addressed the media regarding the fraudulent creation of DirecTV Now / ATT Now accounts to manipulate revenue numbers / stock prices according to the DirecTV / ATT investors' lawsuit.
So he is at a position to answer the highest level questions posed to DirecTV / ATT.
For the record, DirecTV's position is that they became aware of the situation upon an internal investigation after numerous complaints of subscribers being signed up and billed, but denied involvement in the plan to artificially inflate reported numbers, and were dealing with the individuals that conducted unacceptable sales tactics .
I told her that what I found confusing is that at DirecTV, Public and Press relations, Mr. Greer, someone of stature, is saying that I was and still am eligible under the new carriage agreements to receive DNS, that I should not have had service interrupted... on 01 June 2020... yet eight months later...
and on the other hand, the Office of the President, is telling me that everyone at DirecTV that they've asked, I'm assuming that's everyone with the exception of Mr. Greer and his department, is saying no way, no DNS because DirecTV is not authorized to provide it.
I closed by saying, it might be worthwhile for the Office of the President to contact Mr. Greer directly, to conclusively put this conflicting information by DirecTV to rest.
If DirecTV has information inconsistent with that being provided by the Office of the President, DirecTV should want to address that.
If Mr. Greer was mis-quoted, mis-interpreted, if the media fabricated his statement and it is an outright lie, I would like to think that DirecTV, and Mr. Greer himself, would want to be informed of that.
End of the conversation with Ms. Wantland.
If anything comes of it, I'll post again... don't hold your breath...
At the end of 2019 Congress passed a law that made major changes to STELA. Under the law DIRECTV could not continue to carry distants in any market (including markets missing a major affiliate) unless they offered carriage to local stations in every market. DIRECTV would not be required to carry every station in every market, they would just need to offer carriage. Stations could refuse carriage if DIRECTV was unwilling to pay their price. Under the new law all grandfathering, waivers, etc. ended. Carriage under the law is solely based on the stations in each TV market dependent on offering local carriage in all markets. DIRECTV was given until June to comply.
DIRECTV went outside the law and made deals with the individual networks. The wording of those deals and qualifications have not been made public. This very long thread has attempted to decode those rules via observation. The primary observation being that only people who had distants up to the moment the grace period expired on June 1st kept them. Most people who lost their distants had in market locals available. Who kept which network varied by network and market where the subscriber was located.
Mr Greer could in no way be speaking of your specific account or promising that you specifically would qualify for distants.
The broadcast affiliates in your market for each network own the rights to their network for their entire market - including areas where their signals do not reach. Your in market stations would be the ones harmed if DIRECTV delivered distant stations in your market. If there are "waivers" available only your in market affiliates would be the ones who could waive their exclusive right to provide the network(s) they carry within the footprint of your market. These affiliates would be the same stations that DIRECTV would offer carriage to if they offered local-into-local carriage in your market.
Yes indeed, they can technically be turned back on. Years ago mine were pulled in error, but reinstated within minutes after I complained. But lately no one at DirecTV seems to want to rectify any similar mistake. Almost like a blanket directive from way up high, one which supersedes every other rule or regulation. And apparently the new agreements with the networks are so super-secret that no full explanation may be offered, even to some top-level executives. If that’s the case, don’t expect AT&T to consider imparting the truth to more lowly people—namely us, their customers.