[crackasmile]

I live in Terre Haute, IN. I have Distants for all 4 networks from grandfathered waivers. T.H. doesn't have an ABC and no way to get it via Dish (which they told me on the phone when they called to let me know I would lose Distants by Dec 1).

Here are 10 reasons I (along with everyone else) should be able to choose where they get their networks from:

1) No local ABC and no way to get it via Dish after Dec 1 (unless new legislation passes).

2) NBC is not in HD and won't be until 2009.

3) FOX is not in HD and won't be until 2009.

4) NBC is rarely in stereo or surround sound, especially during Nascar and Sunday Night Football.

5) FOX is rarely in stereo or surround sound.

6) CBS always forgets to "flip the HD switch" until well into a program. 2nd week in a row that local CBS hasn't had the NFL game in HD until after the 2nd quarter starts....usually when the 2nd is about over.

7) CBS's sound engineer says they cannot broadcast in surround sound because their equipment went down over a year ago and they have not replaced it.

8) local networks do a lot of pre-empting of prime time programming for local sports...distants rarely do so.

9) Distants allow me to see NFL games I wouldn't normally get to see in local area.

10) The overall picture quality is far superior from distants over local networks.

11) (forgot one) Time shifting. If I miss a program at 8pm I can catch it at 11pm.

 

[WI0T]

I live in Terre Haute, IN. I have Distants for all 4 networks from grandfathered waivers. T.H. doesn't have an ABC and no way to get it via Dish (which they told me on the phone when they called to let me know I would lose Distants by Dec 1).

Here are 10 reasons I (along with everyone else) should be able to choose where they get their networks from:

1) No local ABC and no way to get it via Dish after Dec 1 (unless new legislation passes).

2) NBC is not in HD and won't be until 2009.

3) FOX is not in HD and won't be until 2009.

4) NBC is rarely in stereo or surround sound, especially during Nascar and Sunday Night Football.

5) FOX is rarely in stereo or surround sound.

6) CBS always forgets to "flip the HD switch" until well into a program. 2nd week in a row that local CBS hasn't had the NFL game in HD until after the 2nd quarter starts....usually when the 2nd is about over.

7) CBS's sound engineer says they cannot broadcast in surround sound because their equipment went down over a year ago and they have not replaced it.

8) local networks do a lot of pre-empting of prime time programming for local sports...distants rarely do so.

9) Distants allow me to see NFL games I wouldn't normally get to see in local area.

10) The overall picture quality is far superior from distants over local networks.

Are you serious ?

 

[Stewart Vernon]

Remember... your distants are someone else's locals!

If it annoys you when your local station breaks into a program to show something local... imagine when your distant breaks in to show something that is local news to them!

 

[TonyM]

other than point 1, the rest are invalid.

 

[crackasmile]

other than point 1, the rest are invalid.

The rest are only invalid for people who are not really into their home theatre system and the best picture and sound quality possible. When I lose my distants, I will gain some of them back in HD when I "move". I also like to record live concert and performances from bands. The sound quality is important to me there. And why would I wanna watch a game in SD for part of it and then HD for the other part of it?

The 10 reasons are valid for me.

 

[pdxsam]

Especially invalid is #9

 

[Codeman00]

What's up with #9 being invalid? That's my biggest perk of having distant networks. With my 3 CBS channels from Dish and my 2 CBS channels from cable, along with my 2 Fox's from Dish and 1 Fox from cable, I have the opportunity to have 5-6 different NFL games at one time on Dish without having NFL Sunday ticket. I love it! Most of the time I can tune in the game I want.

The 2nd perk of having distant nets is being able to record network programming on the 622 DVR.

I'm really going to miss my distants.

 

[grooves12]

What's up with #9 being invalid? That's my biggest perk of having distant networks. With my 3 CBS channels from Dish and my 2 CBS channels from cable, along with my 2 Fox's from Dish and 1 Fox from cable, I have the opportunity to have 5-6 different NFL games at one time on Dish without having NFL Sunday ticket. I love it! Most of the time I can tune in the game I want.

The 2nd perk of having distant nets is being able to record network programming on the 622 DVR.

I'm really going to miss my distants.

You my like it, but it is against the rules and actions like this are why Dish has lost their right to use distant locals. Im surprised the NFL hasn't caught on and sued them yet. Those games are supposed to be blacked out.

 

[James Long]

It probably should be looked at as "11 reasons why I want distants" more than valid reasons. Make it personal since problems with Terre Haute locals don't affect people outside the Terre Haute market.

#1 reason: Cable can offer channels that satellite cannot.
Fix that problem and we will be a long way toward not needing distants.

The rest are personal preferences - pre-empted programming being one that would be the most annoying, followed by interrupted programming (for weather, etc.) and quality of signal.

 

[pdxsam]

#1 reason: Cable can offer channels that satellite cannot.

That's my #1 complaint about broadcast rules as they stand. Cable in Canada can export US Distants to each and every one of their customers without a problem, yet here in the states we can't watch what we want.

 

[kenglish]

Canada has different laws, different rules, and a whole different structure for their broadcasting system.

Which would you like to do now? Move to Canada? Or, change our U.S. system to match theirs.....and watch all programming originate from Washington, DC?

Think about it.

 

[pdxsam]

I'm not saying be that drastic. I'm saying make things equitable. Either stop Canadian systems from carrying distant networks from the states, or allow everyone in the states to also get distants. Force a requirement that subs have locals(if available) when they want distants.

I'm not saying the Canadian model works. What I'm saying is that out of the country cable outlets should not be able to get what I cannot.

 

[Greg Bimson]

That's my #1 complaint about broadcast rules as they stand. Cable in Canada can export US Distants to each and every one of their customers without a problem, yet here in the states we can't watch what we want.

Yes, but look at what Canada also does...

Simultaneous substitution - where if a program on an American network is being shown on a Canadian network, the American network feed is replaced with the Canadian network feed.

Canadian affiliate system - the big networks in Canada own affiliates that reach most of the Canadian households. There are very few affiliates owned by an independant or other station group.

Canadian copyright code - this allows someone to be a "rebroadcaster" fairly easily, provided fees are paid to their general copyright fund.

Without recopying the entire list:
1) Not having an ABC affiliate is a valid reason to have distants. And it is the only valid reason on this list.
2-8) Not having a local affiliate network in HD, nor surround sound, or with pre-emptions are not the problems. The problem is contractual, between the network and their affiliate, and the fact that the local affiliate might not spend the money to fix things. Yes, we are in the midst of a digital transition, and a pox on the local station that is not trying to implement the transition. However, that does not give another party the right to take something that doesn't belong to them.
9) Sunday Ticket also allows access to out of market games. Distant Networks do not exist simply to give you more game options than you already have.
10) Picture quality is an issue. There is no reason why NY locals look better than Terre Haute, unless Dish Network doesn't care how the Terre Haute locals look. And this is coming from a DirecTV subscriber where his Baltimore locals look horrible. This is about your provider giving you quality.
11) Timeshifting is good, but again not valid. And the same networks you want to watch do not really want you to be able to timeshift.

 

[joblo]

Which would you like to do now? Move to Canada? Or, change our U.S. system to match theirs.....and watch all programming originate from Washington, DC?

Um, as far as I know, not a lot of programming is produced in Ottawa. Try Toronto, Montreal, and Vancouver.

Nor will the citizens of the DC area ever be likely to take enough time away from political wheeling, dealing, and influence peddling to produce any significant amount of quality entertainment. (Unless you consider C-SPAN great entertainment, which, admittedly, sometimes it actually is.)

However, if programming produced in New York and Hollywood were delivered directly from those cities, instead of being filtered through a couple of hundred local affiliates that add little or no value to it, that would suit me just fine, thank you.

I think you said, yourself, in some other thread I can't recall now, that you expect local TV to eventually be limited to local news, weather, and the like. I say that's just fine with me.

Simultaneous substitution - where if a program on an American network is being shown on a Canadian network, the American network feed is replaced with the Canadian network feed.

Only Bell ExpressVu implements the rule this broadly, because of limitations of the E* receivers that it uses for its service. The rule only requires substitution when local stations air the same programming at the same time. So excepting live broadcasts, Canadians receiving east and west coast U.S. nets through any other provider will generally have at least one non-substituted American feed.

Canadian affiliate system - the big networks in Canada own affiliates that reach most of the Canadian households. There are very few affiliates owned by an independant or other station group.

And those few markets get protection from simultaneous out-of-market broadcasts only. They are not protected from time shifting, either advanced or delayed.

 

[JohnH]

You my like it, but it is against the rules and actions like this are why Dish has lost their right to use distant locals. Im surprised the NFL hasn't caught on and sued them yet. Those games are supposed to be blacked out.

No blackout is required for valid subscriptions.

 

[kenglish]

"I think you said, yourself, in some other thread I can’t recall now, that you expect local TV to eventually be limited to local news, weather, and the like. I say that's just fine with me."

Yes, I said that. Just hope you, and everybody else, have a lot of money to buy entertainment programming with.

 

[joblo]

Ken,

If you think elimination of a monopolistic, balkanized middle distribution tier is going to increase prices for the end user, you need a refresher course in Economics, my friend.

 

[Michael P]

Only Bell ExpressVu implements the rule this broadly, because of limitations of the E* receivers that it uses for its service. The rule only requires substitution when local stations air the same programming at the same time. So excepting live broadcasts, Canadians receiving east and west coast U.S. nets through any other provider will generally have at least one non-substituted American feed.

HUH? When a program is scheduled at the same time on both a U.S. and Canadian network, the Canadian network's feed is substituted at the BEV (and Star Choice, and Shaw Cable etc.) uplink/headend. A receiver's "limitations" are a moot point when it comes to sim-sub. Did you think the receiver magically changes channels?

"Local" stations in Canada? :rotfl: Have you ever been able to receive Canadian signals or visited up there? If you are lucky - you get local news, other than that you get the stock network feed that every other "affilliate" gets (I put affilliate in quotes becuase the "locals" are more like repeaters of the nearest "big regional city" i.e. Toronto, Montreal, Winnepeg, Vancouver).

 

[TheRatPatrol]

I know you don't want to, but can't you get locals from somewhere else in Indiana?

 

[joblo]

HUH? When a program is scheduled at the same time on both a U.S. and Canadian network, the Canadian network's feed is substituted at the BEV (and Star Choice, and Shaw Cable etc.) uplink/headend. A receiver's "limitations" are a moot point when it comes to sim-sub. Did you think the receiver magically changes channels?

I read and post to Canadian boards, and I've seen numerous posts indicating that *C simsubs are done in the receivers, not at the uplink. People in areas without local signals report that they never see any simsubs at all on *C. *C also provides the feed for numerous cable systems, and apparently even for some channels on BEv. (I saw a *C banner on BEv one night, presumably due to an error at the BEv uplink.) So *C receivers need this capability to accommodate differing requirements in various areas.

"Local" stations in Canada? :rotfl: Have you ever been able to receive Canadian signals or visited up there? If you are lucky - you get local news, other than that you get the stock network feed that every other "affilliate" gets (I put affilliate in quotes becuase the "locals" are more like repeaters of the nearest "big regional city" i.e. Toronto, Montreal, Winnepeg, Vancouver).

I've had BEv for five years. You're right that most Canadian "networks" would not meet the FCC definition of that term. I think, last I checked, CTV has three affiliated stations left, CBC has maybe half a dozen or so, and Global and CHUM don't have any, unless you count NTV as an affiliate. Although I suppose you might consider CFJC Kamloops as a CH affiliate now.

The French networks TVA and TQS do have several affiliates, however, and those stations, with the help of the CRTC, have gotten BEv to black out OOM stations of the same network in their markets. This is unfortunate because the Montreal PQ is noticeably superior to many of these smaller market stations.

It's also true that news programming on English nets is mostly regionalized, as you say, and the French nets have even less local news or other local programming than the English nets. On many stations, the only things "local" are commercials.

Finally, there is apparently much more Canadian HD being delivered directly to headends than OTA, which is probably one reason the CRTC is considering shutting down Canadian OTA entirely sometime in next decade or so.