LGT
Contributor

Re: WGN America

I agree 100%.  But most people are too lazy or uninformed to attach an antenna to their TV and hit a button on their remote to switch back and forth. The local station being out won’t affect me because I do have my OTA antenna set up. 

 

Now obviously you can’t do that to get WGN America. So if that is one of your go to channels you are out of luck. 

Observer

Re: Tribune Broadcasting - WGN

they should let us drop the locals and save the broadcast fee every month as dish lets you drop the locals and save on the broadcast fee every month. they should even make a dvr that can accept an ota antenna and still be able to record the locals as well. that would put some heat under em!!!

Observer

Re: WGN America

i have to agree with you to that people are to lazy or uninformed or some just like to call up and complain LOL. they need a box and or a DVR that one can hook an antenna up to it so there's no need to switch back and forth on the t.v. inputs. me to i also have an antenna hooked up to my t.v. so why should i even need to pay for it and i get the tribune stations free of charge. i know when i had dish you could hook an antenna up to the hopper 3 via a usb dongle and it would record them as well just like you were paying for them. to be honest i don't know why spectrum is so stone aged in hardware and programming!!! it seems like TWC was going forward vs this

Helper

Re: WGN America


@krel_2018 wrote:

i would gladly save the $ 10.00 a month if i could drop the locals!!! no sense in wasting $$$ when i can get 150 channels OTA. then they would just have to come out with a DVR that will let one hook up an OTA antenna to it


TiVo Roamio OTA or Bolt OTA.

Newcomer

Re: Tribune Broadcasting - WGN

Hope they come to an agreement soon on the Channel 4 Fox 4 news because it’s my favorite channel to watch for news here in Kansas City!!! I miss it!!! Not sure how I can get it unless I change my cable provider and I’ve had Spectrum for quite awhile now... hate to change!!!

Observer

Re: Tribune Broadcasting - WGN

have you tried picking it up with an antenna???

Not applicable

Re: Tribune Broadcasting - WGN

So in the meantime we all paying for service that we can't watch
Browser

Re: Tribune Broadcasting - WGN

I am using my TiVo DVR with cable card from Spectrum.  It does allow input from OTA antenna but am not doing that yet.  I may have to investigate doing this.  

Contributor

Re: Tribune Broadcasting - WGN

The same thing has happened with Fox 8 in Cleveland, which is also owned by Tribune Broadcasting. I wouldn't mind, since I don't watch FOX much or at all, but I do watch the DTV subchannel 8.2, Antenna TV; it's only been one day since the channel was removed, but already I miss the latter.

 

  I hope these issues are resolved soon, as I am sure there are many folks here in northeastern Ohio who do enjoy watching FOX news and the network's other programming. However, until the impasse over retransmission fees is resolved and the channel returns to TW cable, there are two ways to continue to get FOX 8: with an antenna or on YouTube TV or Hulu streaming video services. These services are not affected by cable company disputes with local stations and will generally be available, regardless of whether or not the cable operator decides to carry the channel(s) in question.

 

 There once was a "must carry" rule for all cable systems which required every cable service in the US to carry all local TV stations in a given area; however, that law was changed some time ago, with the result that every US cable system is now free to add or drop any channel (even major network affiliates),  for any reason.

 

 

 

 

 


 

Proven Sharer

Re: Tribune Broadcasting - WGN


@@jhs190 wrote:

 

 There once was a "must carry" rule for all cable systems which required every cable service in the US to carry all local TV stations in a given area; however, that law was changed some time ago, with the result that every US cable system is now free to add or drop any channel (even major network affiliates),  for any reason.

 


Before 1992, cable companies did not have to pay to carry OTA Stations.  They didn't even need their permission.  Cable companies used antennas to capture local TV stations and simply retransmited the OTA signal on its cable system.   The cable system was under no obligation to carry local TV stations, and in my market (New York City), they didn't carry the 6 lightly viewed UHF Stations, but did carry WTBS from Atlanta, WSBK from Boston, WVIA from Scranton, and WTAF from Philadelphia.  (To be fair, the cable system was only 36 channels, and carrying all 14 local stations would leave little room for the PayTV networks - they showed what people wanted to see.  Synd-ex and market exclusivity ended the widespread improtation of out-of-market signals.)

 

The Cable Act of 1992 changed how terrestrial television stations are carried on cableTV systems.  This act defined two ways for a terrestrial TV station to get on a cable system's broadcast basic programming tier.  (The broadcast basic tier is the minimum level of service.  You MUST subscribe to this tier in order to add any other video service, and therefore pay the retransmission fees.)

 

Method 1:  "Must Carry".  A local television station can elect "must carry".  If the station elects to do so, it forgoes any re-transmission fees.  The cable company "must carry" the station.  It cannot be dropped from the broadcast basic lineup.

 

Method 2:  "ReTransmission Consent".  The local television station and the cable operator negotiate a per-subscriber fee for carriage on the broadcast basic tier.  It is these fees which have driven up the cost of broadcast basic itself and the institution of the broadcast TV surchage.  The cable company can only carry the station if a rate is negotiated.  If a station demands a high-fee, the cable company can walk away and not carry the station.  This is the primary reason why there are blackouts of local stations on cable systems.  TV station wants $2 per subscriber per month; cable company is only willing to pay $1 per subscriber per month.  TV Station says no.  Station goes dark.  (The average per-month fee a TV Station received in retransmission consent was $1.07 - back in 2014.  I am sure it is much higher now.)

 

Retransmission fees make up a sizeable portion of a station's revenue.  A television station wants their fees - the content they provide isn't cheap.  So unless the station is very low-rated, or they are showing very cheap programming (brokered time, old re-runs, infomercials), they aren't going to elect "Must Carry".   A station may choose Must Carry if they are difficult to receive with an antenna, as they will get more eyeballs on the channel and therefore can sell ads at a higher rate.

 

The fees collected by O&O (owned and operated) stations go right to the Netowrk.  An affiliate station is charged for its programming by the Network, so the fees collected by the affiliate are passed up to the Network. 

 

I have no sympathy for stations which "pull" their signal.  There shouldn't be a reason why a cable subscriber should be forced to pay for the same content the content owner gives away for free to those who elect to use an antenna.  Until the Cable Act / FCC rules are changed, stations will exploit the fact that every video subscriber is required to pay for broadcast basic (and the re-transmission fees) in order to receive any additional video programming.  I recommend you write your congressman, and suggest revisions to the Act which would force terrestrial TV Stations  which elect re-transmission consent fees to be moved off the broadcast basic tier, either to a higher tier or be sold a-la-carte.

 

This is not Spectrum's (or any other operator's) doing.  It's the terrestrial stations leveraging existing law to force cable customers to pay for their content, whether it is wanted or not.