[Steve Mehs]

The Supreme Court will tackle a new issue concerning satellite TV this week, this time scrutinizing the industry's challenge of must-carry rules.

The must-carry rules, part of the Satellite Home Viewer Improvement Act, were upheld in December by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, just weeks before the mandates took effect. Since then, EchoStar's DISH Network and DirecTV added channels that fell under the must-carry rules to local TV packages in the markets they serve, as required by law.

Supreme Court justices are scheduled to convene privately this week to decide whether they will take a look at the must-carry challenge. The court plans to make its decision public June 17. Four justices are required to approve any review of any case.

Satellite interests are challenging the rules, saying must-carry is unconstitutional under the First Amendment.

From SkyReport (Used with Permission)

 

[invaliduser88]

I think that must carry for the most part is a good thing. Allows that small channels to get the same exposure as the big boys.

 

[woodman]

Originally posted by invaliduser88
I think that must carry for the most part is a good thing. Allows that small channels to get the same exposure as the big boys.

Yes, must-carry is a good thing FOR CABLETV, but not for satellite, where it's completely inappropriate. This is not merely "apples & oranges" ... it's "apples & elephants".

 

[invaliduser88]

If Dish wants to carry a particular DMA, why should they be treated any differently than a cable company? Why is it inappropriate?

 

[BrettR]

For DBS, I'd like mustcarry to be more stricter

1) TV station must run fiber connection to DBS headend or provide City Grade or Grade A picture.
2) TV station's Grade B must reach atleast 60% of people in DMA
3) TV station must have certain amount of original local affairs, local sports or local news type programming (Okay this would be hard to determine, but all WUVP 65 is is a Univision with local advertising slots. Not enough local programming IMO.)
4) No duplicate PBS stations or duplicate anything in primetime. Sorry PBS 39/Allentown. Only one NJN, one of each PBS.
5) If commercial station has over 50% of programming in paid religion or paid programming format, they dont qualify.

This would eliminate many loser stations. Instead every dinky licensed full power UHF station is eligible(few exceptions). Some full powers contours are smaller than the low powers. Some stations do make serious attempt to reach to the community. Since some others dont, all must-carry stations get a bad reputation for being "local home shopping feeds" and this is why the providers want to overtturn mustcarry.

 

[arjay]

I don't have much use for DBS LIL. However LIL appears to be necessity if DBS service is to successfully compete with cable.

I currently sub. to Dish's L.A. locals, including those at 148, but am considering dropping them. Dish provides 24 channels of L.A. locals including 3 (or 4) channels I can't receive OTA. It includes all 4 L.A. PBS stations. About 12 of the LIL channels are of interest to me.

Occasionaly there is something worth watching on thethe 3 or 4 extra channels. But there are so many channels available from DBS I don't care.

I'd much prefer that DBS provide national feeds for the networks instead of LIL. But that's not going to happen.

If DBS needs to provide LIL's "must carry" is an appropriate law. Not only for viewers but for the broadcasters. There's no reason for a program provider to shut a broadcaster out of a market. I can choose not to watch a channel if I receive it. I can't choose to watch a channel I don't receive. LIL is an inefficient use of bandwith but with "must carry" it is at least fair.

 

[invaliduser88]

Originally posted by arjay


I'd much prefer that DBS provide national feeds for the networks instead of LIL. But that's not going to happen.

That's why must carry is the best compromise under the current law.

I'd love national feeds for the majors too! But, as you said, a cold day in purgatory will happen before that.