# DirecTV and AT&T Uverse now have Fox News in HD!



## smackman (Sep 19, 2006)

Well that really hacks me.
Charlie needs to get off his "bottom" and add some real HD programming.


----------



## Jason Nipp (Jun 10, 2004)

*Note to all.

Please do not start all the Fox News conspiracy crap that was deleted out of the Direct forums.

If that discussion reappears here thinking it will be out of site of the D* mods, I will ban anyone that resurrects it and participates.

Regards,
Jason*


----------



## Stuart Sweet (Jun 19, 2006)

As a DIRECTV moderator I completely stand behind Jason in this. We are a united front on this forum.


----------



## paulman182 (Aug 4, 2006)

I'll trade it to you Dish guys for a new movie channel or two...


----------



## Richard King (Mar 25, 2002)

Jason Nipp said:


> *Note to all.
> 
> Please do not start all the Fox News conspiracy crap that was deleted out of the Direct forums.
> 
> ...


*DITTO*


----------



## smackman (Sep 19, 2006)

paulman182 said:


> I'll trade it to you Dish guys for a new movie channel or two...


Will you include Spike?:lol:


----------



## sethwell (Sep 19, 2008)

smackman said:


> :bowdown: All I want is The Fox News Channel in HD.
> WHAT CONSPIRACY! All do not troll!
> The rest of what is being said I do not know anything about and do not give a rats booty either but you have my antenna up and will start trolling only with my eyes. Look at the intro this morning:
> 
> ...


if you want the channel, write both E* and Fox News and complain to them. get an online petition going or something and present it to them.


----------



## smackman (Sep 19, 2006)

sethwell said:


> if you want the channel, write both E* and Fox News and complain to them. get an online petition going or something and present it to them.


No petition started but E* has been contacted numerous times.


----------



## Jason Nipp (Jun 10, 2004)

The rules of this website prohibit petitions or linking to petitions using DBSTalk.

But I do agree that contacted E* is the first step.

Personally I'd rather see some more movie channels in HD.


----------



## smackman (Sep 19, 2006)

Jason Nipp said:


> The rules of this website prohibit petitions or linking to petitions using DBSTalk.
> 
> But I do agree that contacted E* is the first step.
> 
> Personally I'd rather see some more movie channels in HD.


I am to old and to fat to even consider a you know what.
All I am concerned about is Fox News Channel and Spike. 
I believe E* trolls this forum. Give us Fox News HD and Spike HD


----------



## ehb224 (Apr 4, 2008)

Personally I have no interest in fox new in HD. I would prefer they use the bandwidth for channels with non news content.


----------



## EXTACAMO (Apr 7, 2007)

paulman182 said:


> I'll trade it to you Dish guys for a new movie channel or two...


Naa, All we got to offer is WFN. Guess we're SOL.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

paulman182 said:


> I'll trade it to you Dish guys for a new movie channel or two...


Lifetime, Lifetime Movies, Hallmark, Travel, WGN America, Action Max, Cinemax 5 Star, HBO2, HBO Comedy, HBO Family, HBO Latino, HBO Zone, Encore ... Has DirecTV added any of those yet?

I'll take Fox Business Network since it is new content (not just old content in a new format). I wouldn't mind getting Fox Business Network in SD. But I can watch Fox News ... I don't need Fox News HD.


----------



## phrelin (Jan 18, 2007)

Personally, I think all news in HD is greatly overrated, not to mention depressing.


----------



## EXTACAMO (Apr 7, 2007)

Yea we all know the news is depressing but the anchors like Megyn Kelly sure make it easier to take. :heart:


----------



## smackman (Sep 19, 2006)

Well, I have chosen not to receive Fox News when I signed up for Dish Absolute. 
I miss certain programs on Fox News. 
The "other" network IMO is very "different" to what I am use to. 
I also realize I could continue to Receive Foxs News in SD if I would give up my Dish Absolute and go with the AT200/ with silver HD using the DVR advantage plan. 
This would cost me a extra $19dollars a month and I would lose several HD Channels. I find that trade off unacceptable.
I am not willing to pay that much extra for Fox news or Spike nor do I want to give up any HD channels.
SD looks like poop when compared to HD. Once you go HD its hard to go back SD.
One day Fox News will be solely a Digital Transmission from the front end.
I assume that Fox News Channel currently does broadcast in Analog and Digital. E* currently at the front end processes a Analog signal from Fox right?

If they would allow me to purchase Fox News for a couple of dollars a month in SD, I would do it. Its #1 overall and #1 to me.

When All are forced in Feb. 09 to go Digital, maybe all of this will be over.


----------



## Mr.72 (Feb 2, 2007)

The digital TV switch in Feb has nothing to do with FNC availability.

I think news channels in HD are perfectly worthwhile, and I would happily sacrifice about 10 of my current HD channels for FNC.

I have Absolute HD and the big reason to add FNC in HD is so it will be a part of HD-only programming packages.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

I'm indifferent here, not because of a bias against FOX news but rather because I don't watch as much national news on any channel except when major stuff is happening.

But... isn't it a little overboard if DirecTV just said "we are adding this 10/17" to go nuts that Dish doesn't have it? I mean, even if DirecTV does/has add(ed) it today... that doesn't put Dish years or even months behind the curve.

If you want it, and Dish still doesn't have it in a couple of months, then panic time might be there... I just wouldn't panic on day one is all.


----------



## Paul Secic (Dec 16, 2003)

Jason Nipp said:


> The rules of this website prohibit petitions or linking to petitions using DBSTalk.
> 
> But I do agree that contacted E* is the first step.
> 
> Personally I'd rather see some more movie channels in HD.


I'm with you on more movies. NOTE: Dish please move HDNETMV in the same tier as Pladia.


----------



## ssmith10pn (Jul 6, 2005)

WOOO HOOO!!! now I get to see all the Hotties in HD.


----------



## brant (Jul 6, 2008)

James Long said:


> Lifetime, Lifetime Movies, Hallmark, Travel, WGN America, Action Max, Cinemax 5 Star, HBO2, HBO Comedy, HBO Family, HBO Latino, HBO Zone, Encore ... Has DirecTV added any of those yet?
> 
> I'll take Fox Business Network since it is new content (not just old content in a new format). I wouldn't mind getting Fox Business Network in SD. But I can watch Fox News ... I don't need Fox News HD.


i agree james. i was ecstatic to get my movie channels in HD, and would take that over fox news HD any day (and I like fox news channel).


----------



## Mr.72 (Feb 2, 2007)

The two big reasons why it would be good for subscribers to have Fox News HD *right now* rather than in a few months are:

1. Fox News has heavy coverage of the election, which happens once every four years, and happens to be ongoing right now and ending in less than three weeks

2. Many people are on a HD-only subscription with Dish so no HD = no channel.

Of course Dish makes channel lineup changes and additions based on some mysterious formula that seems to have little at all to do with what their customers demand, so I think it would be extremely unlikely that they would add this channel even though it is very clear that a large number of their customers, including new customers who signed on with Turbo HD due to a major advertising effort, would benefit from it immediately.


----------



## Richard King (Mar 25, 2002)

My feeling on Fox News HD is that if they put it up they should leave the SD feed available permanently. I could see watching the HD feed for live television, but HD recorded on the HD (hard drive) would be a waste of space. I record the 2 hour business block each Saturday and wouldn't want to waste 2 hours of HD space on the HD (this gets confusing) each week.


----------



## DodgerKing (Apr 28, 2008)

James Long said:


> Lifetime, Lifetime Movies, Hallmark, Travel, WGN America, Action Max, Cinemax 5 Star, HBO2, HBO Comedy, HBO Family, HBO Latino, HBO Zone, Encore ... Has DirecTV added any of those yet?
> 
> I'll take Fox Business Network since it is new content (not just old content in a new format). I wouldn't mind getting Fox Business Network in SD. But I can watch Fox News ... I don't need Fox News HD.


Check back in 2 weeks... 

http://www.dbstalk.com/showpost.php?p=1839929&postcount=7


----------



## exieramos (May 18, 2007)

Richard King said:


> ..... HD space on the HD (this gets confusing) each week.


If you want to abbreviate Hard Drive then you use the acronym "HDD" which has been the practice in the PC industry. That way it wouldn't be confused with High Definition "HD".  Now for me, I still have a problem on my local forum trying to comment on our Standard Definition only locals since I live in the San Diego DMA. i.e. " SD SD locals?" :nono2:


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

DodgerKing said:


> Check back in 2 weeks...


DirecTV's version of "soon". :lol:


----------



## DodgerKing (Apr 28, 2008)

James Long said:


> DirecTV's version of "soon". :lol:


I prefer soon = 2 weeks than soon = 2 months (which used to be their definition) :lol:

And you know that Satracer is a legit source.


----------



## GrumpyBear (Feb 1, 2006)

I would Rather have ESPNU, DIY, Speed, just to name a few before any more new Movie channels and WAY before, any news channel. I have no idea why anybody wants and screams for a HD channel that is still in SD format. Stretch-o-Vision Channels SUCK.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

DodgerKing said:


> I prefer soon = 2 weeks than soon = 2 months (which used to be their definition) :lol:
> 
> And you know that Satracer is a legit source.


"More HD" without naming channels? Anyways ... DirecTV trolling isn't really what this thread is really about. It's about people whining about not having one channel that DirecTV added on Friday (months after it was available via cable systems). And people saying that they could care less about the channel.


----------



## DodgerKing (Apr 28, 2008)

James Long said:


> "More HD" without naming channels? Anyways ... DirecTV trolling isn't really what this thread is really about. It's about people whining about not having one channel that DirecTV added on Friday (months after it was available via cable systems). And people saying that they could care less about the channel.


Just answering the question that YOU raised by using a source from THIS site that everyone knows is legit.


----------



## phrelin (Jan 18, 2007)

Ya want more HD. Consider this:


> Comcast, continuing its push toward offering more high-definition program by year's end, is celebrating its milestone of more than 1,000 HD options for its subscribers.


Yep. More HD "options", not where I live, but already somewhere.


----------



## PTN (Mar 6, 2008)

Well again my two cents is we would love to have FOX NEWS HD. I don't consider it whining expressing a preference for wanting a news channel in HD. We're news and political people and we just like FOX NEWs more than CNN except for Lou Dobbs. If you go by ratings FOX NEWS has a bigger ratinings number in general than CNN. I sent customer service a polite email that if Dish has a chance we would love to have this channel in HD. As I said before we are very happy with DishNetwork and our service and have no plans to change. We simply would like to have FOX NEWS HD someday.


----------



## TCPanzer (Feb 12, 2006)

GrumpyBear said:


> I would Rather have ESPNU, DIY, Speed, just to name a few before any more new Movie channels and WAY before, any news channel. I have no idea why anybody wants and screams for a HD channel that is still in SD format. Stretch-o-Vision Channels SUCK.


Fox News has been in HD not stretch-o-vision since May of this year. Count me in favor of Fox News as the next channel I would like to see. Once I get Fox News HD I will go HD only most likely.


----------



## ehb224 (Apr 4, 2008)

Mr.72 said:


> The two big reasons why it would be good for subscribers to have Fox News HD *right now* rather than in a few months are:
> 
> 1. Fox News has heavy coverage of the election, which happens once every four years, and happens to be ongoing right now and ending in less than three weeks
> 
> ...


1. Are you saying that CNN HD has NO election coverage?  How about local or OTA stations in your area also?

2. Well that is easily fixed by subscribing to something like the top 200 with HD (or the everything back with both HD tiers like I have.) Plenty of choices for news then! If someone wants only HD channels then the pickings are slim for news (especially since the demise of Voom on Dish) but that is their choice of prograqmming.


----------



## Richard King (Mar 25, 2002)

DodgerKing said:


> I prefer soon = 2 weeks than soon = 2 months (which used to be their definition) :lol:
> 
> And you know that Satracer is a legit source.


Sure, it's easy to say two weeks from today. The problem is that today's today is tomorrow's yesterday as tomorrow becomes today. So, in reality, two weeks from today never arrives.  (There's got to be song lyrics in there somewhere.)


----------



## GrumpyBear (Feb 1, 2006)

TCPanzer said:


> Fox News has been in HD not stretch-o-vision since May of this year. Count me in favor of Fox News as the next channel I would like to see. Once I get Fox News HD I will go HD only most likely.


I will see for sure tomorrow, but from what I have seen posted already on screen shots. Fox's own reports about being behind on HD cause they are looking for better equipment at better prices. Fox own words. So until I see it myself, or somebody puts pictures on that show No stretch-o-vision, hard to believe its not.
Granted I only saw 2 pictures and they were from yesterday. I have heard that Fox Business news is HD format. Wish my local fox would understand HD better, as except for football, NOTHING is HD. Still give me more sports, ESPNU, and Speed for starters.


----------



## GrumpyBear (Feb 1, 2006)

Well,
Like them or not, sometimes its easier to let others buy early and then buy after the prices comedown. 
Fox has Built a new Broadcasting center in HD, and did a good job, of all things with the feed for the DNC. Now how many of their shows have moved to HD format I will see tomorrow. I understand those that like their news. I just prefer Sports and Movies. I could Careless about CNN, FOX, MSNBC, or any news in HD, who cares about talking heads in HD. Sports and Movies are what HD is really for, not the news.


----------



## DodgerKing (Apr 28, 2008)

Richard King said:


> Sure, it's easy to say two weeks from today. The problem is that today's today is tomorrow's yesterday as tomorrow becomes today. So, in reality, two weeks from today never arrives.  (There's got to be song lyrics in there somewhere.)


All I can say is that Satracer has been reliable in the past.


----------



## Bobby H (Mar 23, 2008)

For those who have seen Fox News HD, how much is native HD?

Are they doing a lot of what CNN mostly used to do: pillar-boxing SD video with a HD ticker underneath? Are they taking the CNBC-HD approach: shifting a SD video image to the left and putting a lot of text/graphic information to the right (and then pillar-boxing nearly everything else)?

CNN-HD has slowly been transitioning to showing more and more HD-based news coverage. Still, some news room content is in SD. The Larry King show is also still just SD. Most of the other feature programs (Lou Dobbs, Anderson Cooper 360, American Morning, etc.) is native HD.

I'm just wondering how Fox is doing along those lines.

Considering The Weather Channel made a big leap forward in HD, I think the "larger" news channels and other cable networks should be embarrassed for not offering HD already. I mean I really have to wonder "WTF" regarding Comedy Central and its lack of HD at this point. That's one of the most popular networks on cable and it's still not HD. What is going on there!?


----------



## davethestalker (Sep 17, 2006)

Jason Nipp said:


> The rules of this website prohibit petitions or linking to petitions using DBSTalk.
> 
> But I do agree that contacted E* is the first step.
> 
> Personally I'd rather see some more movie channels in HD.


Contacting Dish's CSR is like taking to a shrink. They just listen and don't "do" anything. There is no way to verify if a complaint is being logged. When there is an oddity, sure it's dealt with. But, when complaints are being made continuously, the CSR's probably let us have our say and then take the next call, hoping it's not someone else complaining about what we don't have. I'm sure many of them would be love to tell us to switch, but they can't.

my 50 cents worth


----------



## DodgerKing (Apr 28, 2008)

Bobby H said:


> For those who have seen Fox News HD, how much is native HD?
> 
> Are they doing a lot of what CNN mostly used to do: pillar-boxing SD video with a HD ticker underneath? Are they taking the CNBC-HD approach: shifting a SD video image to the left and putting a lot of text/graphic information to the right (and then pillar-boxing nearly everything else)?
> 
> ...


I have only seen two programs on FNC that are in HD (Fox and Friends and the Fox Report). Everything else I have seen are like you describe. I am sure, like the Weather Channel and CNN, they will be showing more HD programming in the future.

The main thing is that events, such as speeches and debates, will be in HD, and the SD picture on the HD channel looks a lot better.


----------



## UKWildcatFan (Apr 23, 2008)

I would love to have Fox News as well as Fox Business in HD.


----------



## Paul Secic (Dec 16, 2003)

phrelin said:


> Ya want more HD. Consider this:
> Yep. More HD "options", not where I live, but already somewhere.


That's mostly VOD more than likely.


----------



## AColdStArnolds (Sep 15, 2007)

Trash can the stupid Green channel and put FoxNews HD in that slot.


----------



## ljr01 (Mar 6, 2008)

AColdStArnolds said:


> Trash can the stupid Green channel and put FoxNews HD in that slot.


Recycle bin please


----------



## CorpITGuy (Apr 12, 2007)

Man, this really makes that switch tempting. DirecTV now has my locals AND my favorite channels in HD...


----------



## CorpITGuy (Apr 12, 2007)

DodgerKing said:


> The main thing is that events, such as speeches and debates, will be in HD, and the SD picture on the HD channel looks a lot better.


Therein lies the true plus for me -- the events in 16:9 HD, and the better picture quality for stuff in 4:3.

I'm a longtime Dish customer and probably won't switch, but Charlie needs to end his feud with Rupert Murdoch. At some point the customer needs to get some attention.


----------



## Mr.72 (Feb 2, 2007)

ehb224 said:


> 1. Are you saying that CNN HD has NO election coverage?  How about local or OTA stations in your area also?


NO election coverage worth watching.



> 2. Well that is easily fixed by subscribing to something like the top 200 with HD


Right. At over 2x the price.

You see, it's not worth it for me to pay $50/month for Fox News in SD.

I guess you don't like Fox News but I was merely describing why Fox News in HD is a benefit over having it in SD, _even if the programming is exactly the same_.


----------



## Sphagnum (Oct 20, 2007)

ljr01 said:


> Recycle bin please


:lol: :lol: :lol:


----------



## kinglerch (Aug 29, 2007)

AColdStArnolds said:


> Trash can the stupid Green channel and put FoxNews HD in that slot.


My guess is that the appeal of these two channels is mutually exclusive.


----------



## smackman (Sep 19, 2006)

Mr.72 said:


> NO election coverage worth watching.
> 
> Right. At over 2x the price.
> 
> ...


+1


----------



## booger (Nov 1, 2005)

I can see how some would be upset with CNN in HD and not Fox. I would be upset if Fox HD were available and not CNN.

I'm also glad to see at least one news channel in HD during the election season.

News is a big deal to some people and there are some that will watch Fox and nothing else.

I think we'll see it soon....no pun intended.


----------



## Allen Noland (Apr 23, 2002)

Fox News HD would not be my first choice for new HD channels.


----------



## smackman (Sep 19, 2006)

James Long said:


> "More HD" without naming channels? Anyways ... DirecTV trolling isn't really what this thread is really about. It's about people whining about not having one channel that DirecTV added on Friday (months after it was available via cable systems). And people saying that they could care less about the channel.


I do not consider a "want" whining. 
E* needs to be "fair and balanced" here. Thats my opinion.
I bet if we get this channel, it will be in mid November at the earliest. 
I will wait and listen to Internet Radio for "fair and balanced" coverage and save 50 bucks a month.
E* will eventually come through.


----------



## smackman (Sep 19, 2006)

Allen Noland said:


> Fox News HD would not be my first choice for new HD channels.


I would take Spike over FNC especially after Nov. 4.


----------



## smackman (Sep 19, 2006)

booger said:


> *News is a big deal to some people and there are some that will watch Fox and nothing else*.


Thats me.


----------



## nataraj (Feb 25, 2006)

Allen Noland said:


> Fox News HD would not be my first choice for new HD channels.


Ditto here. Hoping to see Comedy Central and MSNBC in HD soon ...


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

> E* needs to be "fair and balanced" here. Thats my opinion.


Knowing zero sides of the negotiations to add the channel that is a fair opinion.  For the right price the channel would be there.


> I bet if we get this channel, it will be in mid November at the earliest.


There is a fair chance that there will be NO new HD channels in the next two weeks. I realize you are pushing a conspiracy theory here. It is time for that activity to stop. We're not going political.


----------



## HDRoberts (Dec 11, 2007)

nataraj said:


> Ditto here. Hoping to see Comedy Central and MSNBC in HD soon ...


Same. Comedy Central is at the top of my list. Though I would rather have CNN Headline News HD. Unfortunately, it seems neither of those channels exist yet.

The fact is, we all have different channels we want. Fox News, as the top rated cable news network deserves the HD treatment. But so do a lot of other channels.

I would think we will see an announcement, or even a launch somewhere around the Q3 earnings call. That should be in 2-3 weeks. However, as there are more issues with Fox to be sorted out than other nets, I would think we will see Viacom and/or some independents first.


----------



## CorpITGuy (Apr 12, 2007)

smackman said:


> I do not consider a "want" whining.


Exactly!

I don't think there is some grand conspiracy at E*. I simply believe they are having trouble making a business arrangement. Murdoch is in the position of power since viewership of his networks will continue even if they are in HD. Charlie, OTOH, might lose some of his subscribers to DirecTV, FiOS, local cable or UVerse.

My HD wish-list is a mile long, but Fox News HD is right at the top of it.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

The trouble with negotiations is that there is always a channel provider who thinks their feed is the best thing since sliced bread and that no system can refuse to carry their signal (how DARE they!) negotiating with a system that has several providers all pushing their channels with an equal "must have" stance.

Then the channel gets added to the fanfare of those waiting for it it turns out to be another TBS / A&E / History channel with next to no HD for several months. Stretch-o-vision SD upconvert? Some channels will keep the aspect ratio and at least keep their image centered (instead of pushed off the sides where TV2 viewers have to watch letterboxed or lose valuable content). But if it's not HD why were people fighting for it?

DirecTV is having a terrible time with Fox News HD ... perhaps it is the base feed that is wrong but they still should be able to adjust for the problem. It seems that they activated the channel before testing it - certainly before it was more than just another upconvert. Read the surviving DirecTV threads about the glorious new channel ... it doesn't seem to be any better than Fox New SD.

It seems the only benefit of DISH adding Fox News HD is for the HD Only (Absolute / TurboHD) viewers. Otherwise you might as well watch the SD feed. And without knowing exactly what FOX wants for carrying their channel (perhaps an umbrella deal that requires carrying all of their channels?) it is hard to say if DISH is the problem or if Fox is the problem. Although I'm sure I'll read a few posts blaming DISH since it is "always" their problem.


----------



## smackman (Sep 19, 2006)

James Long said:


> The trouble with negotiations is that there is always a channel provider who thinks their feed is the best thing since sliced bread and that no system can refuse to carry their signal (how DARE they!) negotiating with a system that has several providers all pushing their channels with an equal "must have" stance.
> 
> Then the channel gets added to the fanfare of those waiting for it it turns out to be another TBS / A&E / History channel with next to no HD for several months. Stretch-o-vision SD upconvert? Some channels will keep the aspect ratio and at least keep their image centered (instead of pushed off the sides where TV2 viewers have to watch letterboxed or lose valuable content). But if it's not HD why were people fighting for it?
> 
> ...


 This is absolutely true but Dish is pushing there Turbo pkg. and it is the way of the Future.
Competition is a great thing. 
You Have all the premium Channels competing for viewers. 
It would be wise IMO for Dish to do the same with the News Networks.
I understand we the consumer do not know what going on in the background but Directv secured THE FNC with very good timing.


----------



## Mr.72 (Feb 2, 2007)

Putting up FNC in HD, for Turbo and Absolute subscribers, 2 weeks or more ahead of a hotly contested Presidential election, would be a good move for Dish Network or any other provider. Neglecting to recognize that timing of channel introduction in favor of providing content that is valuable to the customer base is very poor business sense IMHO.

Kind of like all of the folks who were screaming for SciFi in HD before the beginning of the new season of BSG... It shows hat Dish has some clue that their customers actually want to watch TV, and there are shows that are important that happen only at a certain time, for them to make a solid effort to put up these channels in a timely fashion.

I agree that having FNC in HD a month ago would have been as good as having it tomorrow. But having it on November 10th is kind of a slap in the face of the viewers on some level. Having it in Feb. shows that they didn't even make any effort to introduce the channel at a time when demand is the highest. I'm sure it's about money or testing or whatever but DirecTV managed to work it out, Dish can too if they want to.


----------



## CorpITGuy (Apr 12, 2007)

James Long said:


> Although I'm sure I'll read a few posts blaming DISH since it is "always" their problem.


I agree with everything you said in your post, but the quote above is the only thing with which I take issue. From the customer's point-of-view, it *is* Dish's problem. I don't doubt that Rupert Murdoch is trying to negotiate a hard deal. Good customer service, though, means fixing problems with vendors to the benefit of the customer. If my grocery store decided not to carry produce because the produce farmers negotiate a hard bargain, I might just go to another store instead. They have to resolve it. I want produce (or in this case, Fox News HD). If I REALLY like my grocery store and merely complain about not having produce, that doesn't make me unreasonable or whiney... it makes me a loyal customer!


----------



## HDRoberts (Dec 11, 2007)

James Long said:


> It seems the only benefit of DISH adding Fox News HD is for the HD Only (Absolute / TurboHD) viewers. Otherwise you might as well watch the SD feed. And without knowing exactly what FOX wants for carrying their channel (perhaps an umbrella deal that requires carrying all of their channels?) it is hard to say if DISH is the problem or if Fox is the problem. Although I'm sure I'll read a few posts blaming DISH since it is "always" their problem.


Adding Fox News and FX (as well as the Viacom channels MTV, Nick, Comedy Central, and Spike) is essential to getting the Turbo packs accepted by the general public. With those on board, Dish will have an HD only pack with just about all the channels most consider to be a part of "basic" cable.

I have little doubt NewsCorp is a big part of the problem. I think there are 3 big issues.

- Placement in AT100 instead of AT200 (A lawsuit on this is pending)
- Fee increase (some have indicate a 30% increase is what Fox wants for FNC)
- Carriage of other Fox channels like Fox Business HD and Fuel HD (although I imagine Dish wants to carry FX and Speed anyway)

I bet Dish would give on 1 and 3, so price is probably the sticking point. We can just hope that if it appears the election is slipping away fro the Republicans, Rupert may be motivated to make a political move and get FNC HD to a million more voters, not to mention get FNC to millions more AT100 subs.


----------



## DodgerKing (Apr 28, 2008)

James Long said:


> DirecTV is having a terrible time with Fox News HD ... perhaps it is the base feed that is wrong but they still should be able to adjust for the problem. It seems that they activated the channel before testing it - certainly before it was more than just another upconvert. Read the surviving DirecTV threads about the glorious new channel ... it doesn't seem to be any better than Fox New SD.


They are? This is news too me. I have watched it a lot and I do not see this as being true at all.

Of course only a few of their shows are in HD. We knew that already. Even the ones that have the graphics with an SD image as the main program has much better PQ than the same program on the SD station. And, the events, such as debates are in HD. But, I haven't seen any problems with the station or Direct.

ETA: I just read through the threads. Some subs are having lip sync issues (this is not a PQ issue though). So there does seem to be some issues, although I have not experienced it myself. Maybe different receivers?

ETAII: Today's software update took care of the sound sync issues.


----------



## smackman (Sep 19, 2006)

HDRoberts said:


> Adding Fox News and FX (as well as the Viacom channels MTV, Nick, Comedy Central, and Spike) is essential to getting the Turbo packs accepted by the general public. With those on board, Dish will have an HD only pack with just about all the channels most consider to be a part of "basic" cable.
> 
> I have little doubt NewsCorp is a big part of the problem. I think there are 3 big issues.
> 
> ...


SHAME FOR USING THAT WORD! Political! Thread will be shutdown! :evilgrin: Just kidding.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

Mr.72 said:


> I agree that having FNC in HD a month ago would have been as good as having it tomorrow. But having it on November 10th is kind of a slap in the face of the viewers on some level. Having it in Feb. shows that they didn't even make any effort to introduce the channel at a time when demand is the highest.


The only problem with this logic train is that it implies the channel would only be good to have now, and would not be good to have later... in which case why the worry? I mean, if it will not be good except over the next couple of weeks, won't it be a disappointment after that?

Reminding people of TBS... Dish added that last year in time for MLB playoffs after a bunch of complaining... and sure enough, once MLB was done TBS didn't show any HD until sometime this year and folks were complaining about how useless the channel was all that time. Wouldn't this potentially happen again with Fox News HD if people just clamor for it now for election coverage? Once that's over, people will be in line for the next channel... and again claiming Dish never does anything for customers.

I don't agree with everything that is Dish, but in these channel negotiations they are damned if they do, damned if they don't... because once they add the "add this or I will leave and curse your heirs" channel, all those customers get in the next "ok now add this one or a pox on you and your family" channel line. It never seems to end.


----------



## Mr.72 (Feb 2, 2007)

Well clearly the demand for Fox News is higher during a Presidential election.

Also the demand for TBS is higher during MLB.

And the demand for TNT is going to he higher during the NBA season.

It's a fool in business who provides the product right after the demand subsides.

There will certainly be some demand for FNC after the election but it will be higher before the election. So to get maximum impact from the new channel introduction, Dish would be smart to make it happen right now rather than next month. That's all I am saying. A bunch of their customers will be happier if they did that, and happy customers is never a bad thing.

That is unless your hobby is being a Dish Network Corporate Policy Apologist.


----------



## dbsmoss (Sep 14, 2006)

I would love to have Fox News HD.


----------



## smackman (Sep 19, 2006)

Mr.72 said:


> Well clearly the demand for Fox News is higher during a Presidential election.
> 
> Also the demand for TBS is higher during MLB.
> 
> ...


Amen Amen and Amen!!!:listening


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

DodgerKing said:


> They are? This is news too me. I have watched it a lot and I do not see this as being true at all.


Rose colored glasses or just ignorant of the threads in the DirecTV forum?


> ETA: I just read through the threads. Some subs are having lip sync issues (this is not a PQ issue though). So there does seem to be some issues, although I have not experienced it myself. Maybe different receivers?


Ah, just ignorant of the DirecTV threads.

Not enough time in one's own provider's forum?


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

Mr.72 said:


> Well clearly the demand for Fox News is higher during a Presidential election.


And then what? Turn it off on November 5th (or whenever the vote has finished counting) until something worth watching comes on?

Sounds like TBS. Rushed to air because of a special event then zero reason to be HD for months.


----------



## IDRick (Feb 16, 2007)

James Long said:


> And then what? Turn it off on November 5th (or whenever the vote has finished counting) until something worth watching comes on?
> 
> Sounds like TBS. Rushed to air because of a special event then zero reason to be HD for months.


Fox has been the number one cable news network for a long time, not just during a presidential election. There would be a strong demand for FNC-HD post election, especially for those who are on absolute and TurboHD. You frequently make this arguement.... And a good one. I likely would go with Dish if/when they get FNC=HD and FX-HD. They have until next spring....


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

I want to see TurboHD become a more meaningful package ... and to do that there do need to be more channels in it. "By the end of the year" would be nice.

DISH is getting there ... DirecTV is getting there ... both have had their rush moments and stall moments over the past couple of years. They will both get there.


----------



## DodgerKing (Apr 28, 2008)

James Long said:


> Rose colored glasses or just ignorant of the threads in the DirecTV forum?Ah, just ignorant of the DirecTV threads.
> 
> Not enough time in one's own provider's forum?


It is called clarity. Count all of my posts I have made and you will see that I post the overwhelming majority of the time on the Direct side. Look at all of the posts in the Dish side and they are all made to correct something you said that is wrong or misleading, or to simply offer another perspective. After all, the title of this thread has Direct in it. So comparisons from both sides I think are warranted in this case, especially when someone says something that is not true.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

Mr.72 said:


> Well clearly the demand for Fox News is higher during a Presidential election.
> 
> Also the demand for TBS is higher during MLB.
> 
> ...


Depends on which side of the coin you called... When you have a bill due and you have a grace period, do you pay your bill early? On time? Or somewhere during the grace period as long as there is no penalty or hit to your credit score?

When Feb hits and Dish makes their next price increase (more than likely) how many people will remember then if Dish added FOX News HD in time for election coverage and say "I am happy to pay this increase because I remember Dish added that channel I wanted when I wanted it and at no increase to me at that time?" I'll wager nobody would say that come next February... so where is the incentive for Dish to spend more and add now vs spending less and adding in a few weeks?

Also consider... IF Dish added Fox News HD tomorrow... how many new Dish customers will Dish gain this year as a result of that? How many is Dish losing tomorrow if they don't add this particular channel? I'm betting no one can tie subscriber churn to that event.

DirecTV hasn't had the channel a week yet and some folks are on the panic train. IF this one channel was that important, people would be leaving in droves to go to DirecTV and then Dish would be extra-motivated to add it and I bet we'd see it soon... but that isn't happening, so here we are.. Dish waits to get the best deal they can before adding.



Mr.72 said:


> There will certainly be some demand for FNC after the election but it will be higher before the election. So to get maximum impact from the new channel introduction, Dish would be smart to make it happen right now rather than next month. That's all I am saying. A bunch of their customers will be happier if they did that, and happy customers is never a bad thing.


And if Dish did add now, and the current customers say "yay Dish"... how long does that last? A year from now will people still be saying "yay Dish"? Next Presidential election is 4 years from now... I fully expect in less than 6 months everyone who even remotely implies "yay Dish" would be in the "screw Dish for not adding my new favorite channel yesterday" camp again... So even the goodwill Dish might get for adding this channel right now would be fleeting.

Again TBS... Dish added for MLB... less than 6 months later people complained about TBS being sub-par AND were then saying "Dish needs to add more HD or they suck"... so how long did that really help them out?

Personally, I'd be fine with FOX News... or not. I don't watch CNN either. There are other channels I want, but I'm also not freaking out over not having those even. I could hop around to every provider each time they add something that no one else has.. or I can wait to see what happens and not worry myself to death in the meantime.

I have no worries that next year this time we'll have FOX News HD (who knows when we'll get it) and no one will remember hating Dish OR praising Dish by then with regards to that channel (or any other really).


----------



## smackman (Sep 19, 2006)

The majority of people who watch a cable" new channel choose The Fox News Channel. That stands for itself of its importance.


----------



## Paul Secic (Dec 16, 2003)

AColdStArnolds said:


> Trash can the stupid Green channel and put FoxNews HD in that slot.


Contracts are in place to forbid it.


----------



## CorpITGuy (Apr 12, 2007)

I was excited when I saw the Green Channel. I like the alternative fuel and energy production stuff I see on Discovery HD and was hoping for more of it on Green. I was disappointed it is mainly about renovating.


----------



## smackman (Sep 19, 2006)

http://tvbythenumbers.com/2008/10/21/cable-news-ratings-for-october-20/6587

Also The Fox New Channel was #1 in 2007. Just Google it


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

smackman said:


> The majority of people who watch a cable" new channel choose The Fox News Channel. That stands for itself of its importance.


More people watch breaking news and event news on CNN.

FoxNews has it's news junkies ... so does CNN ... people who turn on their news channel of choice every day and watch it for hours possibly so mesmerized by the ticker that they can't change the channel. But the casual news viewer ... the people who only look at news when there is something happening gravitate toward CNN.

FoxNews has it's regulars and the ratings show that ... but put an event on the air (hurricanes, convention acceptance speeches) and more people go to CNN.


----------



## ImBack234 (Aug 26, 2008)

smackman said:


> http://tvbythenumbers.com/2008/10/21/cable-news-ratings-for-october-20/6587
> 
> Also The Fox New Channel was #1 in 2007. Just Google it


I wouldn't get to excited over polls. You can take the same data and get several different results. :eek2: The best part is they all can be right. :eek2:


----------



## smackman (Sep 19, 2006)

James Long said:


> More people watch breaking news and event news on CNN.
> 
> FoxNews has it's news junkies ... so does CNN ... people who turn on their news channel of choice every day and watch it for hours possibly so mesmerized by the ticker that they can't change the channel. But the casual news viewer ... the people who only look at news when there is something happening gravitate toward CNN.
> 
> FoxNews has it's regulars and the ratings show that ... but put an event on the air (hurricanes, convention acceptance speeches) and more people go to CNN.


OVERALL, The Fox News Channel is the #1 rated cable news channel.
Look, I applaud your defense of Dish but its obvious you are "in the tank" to this company. 
Nothing wrong with this. I have been with Dish since 2000. 
The biggest reason I stay with Dish is because Directv does not offer my Locals AT ALL and another biggie is the quality of the HD DVR Receivers.
Being able to use The Dish DVR Features with my OTA input is a big time to me. 
Directv wants a 50 dollar add on fee to access OTA. Dual outputs with 622.
Also, Dish has been more than fair to me in the last 3 years with issues about my billing. Dish has always "made it right." I found how to deal with CSR issues through this website. 
This website is a tremendous asset to me.
I have looked very hard into the possibilty of moving to Directv but I always come back to Dish. One good thing is I am not under contract. I am a free agent.
I JUST WANT FOX NEWS CHANNEL. (and Spike)


----------



## Paul Secic (Dec 16, 2003)

CorpITGuy said:


> I was excited when I saw the Green Channel. I like the alternative fuel and energy production stuff I see on Discovery HD and was hoping for more of it on Green. I was disappointed it is mainly about renovating.


AT 200 doesn't have Planet Green so I'm thinking of switching to AT&T U-Verse where I can get 350 channels and high speed Internet for $124.00. Comcast raised Internet to $66.00.


----------



## Paul Secic (Dec 16, 2003)

James Long said:


> More people watch breaking news and event news on CNN.
> 
> FoxNews has it's news junkies ... so does CNN ... people who turn on their news channel of choice every day and watch it for hours possibly so mesmerized by the ticker that they can't change the channel. But the casual news viewer ... the people who only look at news when there is something happening gravitate toward CNN.
> 
> FoxNews has it's regulars and the ratings show that ... but put an event on the air (hurricanes, convention acceptance speeches) and more people go to CNN.


Well the only time I watch CNN is on Debates and national election nights.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

smackman said:


> OVERALL, The Fox News Channel is the #1 rated cable news channel.


And DirecTV has more customers than DISH ... why are you not with the "#1" satellite provider?


> The biggest reason I stay with Dish is because Directv does not offer my Locals AT ALL and another biggie is the quality of the HD DVR Receivers.


Ah, that's why. Sometimes the most popular service isn't the best. 

Apparently you're "in the tank" for DISH Network just as much as I am ... you see them as the better service and can defend your reasons for choosing DISH.

I can't tell you all of the reasons why Fox News isn't my favorite ... most of them are political. It seems that they spend a lot of time bashing other news networks and claiming to be "fair" and not so much on the news. It also annoys me when they claim to be family friendly and show gratuitous shots of hookers and night club girls. Sure, if the story is about hookers show them (appropriately blurred) but don't turn your family news network into a soft core porn channel by showing pole dancers when you talk about unrelated teen sex. (It's almost like "we're talking about sex - show something sexy" is the mantra.) And Fox News is in the "Family" package of both satellite carriers. 



Paul Secic said:


> Well the only time I watch CNN is on Debates and national election nights.


You are not alone.


----------



## PTN (Mar 6, 2008)

James Long said:


> More people watch breaking news and event news on CNN.
> 
> FoxNews has it's news junkies ... so does CNN ... people who turn on their news channel of choice every day and watch it for hours possibly so mesmerized by the ticker that they can't change the channel. But the casual news viewer ... the people who only look at news when there is something happening gravitate toward CNN.
> 
> FoxNews has it's regulars and the ratings show that ... but put an event on the air (hurricanes, convention acceptance speeches) and more people go to CNN.


Back that up with some ratings numbers please. Many of FNC's shows slaughter CNN in the ratings and since FNC is the number one cable news channel how can CNN be so good viewership wise casual or not if it's not number one in the ratings?


----------



## smackman (Sep 19, 2006)

Which "Cable" News Channel someone prefers depends tremendously on ones political persuasion.


----------



## smackman (Sep 19, 2006)

James Long said:


> Apparently you're "in the tank" for DISH Network just as much as I am ... you see them as the better service and can defend your reasons for choosing DISH.
> All I want is for E* to be "fair" and get Fox News. Seriously, You have to subscribe to AT 200 at a minimum with HD pkg.
> 
> I can't tell you all of the reasons why Fox News isn't my favorite ... most of them are political. It seems that they spend a lot of time bashing other news networks and claiming to be "fair" and not so much on the news. It also annoys me when they claim to be family friendly and show gratuitous shots of hookers and night club girls. Sure, if the story is about hookers show them (appropriately blurred) but don't turn your family news network into a soft core porn channel by showing pole dancers when you talk about unrelated teen sex. (It's almost like "we're talking about sex - show something sexy" is the mantra.) And Fox News is in the "Family" package of both satellite carriers.
> ...


----------



## rjsam2000 (Nov 6, 2007)

"And Fox News is in the "Family" package of both satellite carriers." 

Fox News is NOT in the DirecTV Family Package. Headline News is the only news channel in that package.


----------



## paulman182 (Aug 4, 2006)

I would prefer a news channel that showed NO political news, if such a thing existed.

Reporting on them only encourages them!


----------



## ImBack234 (Aug 26, 2008)

I would prefer a true news channel but they don't have any.:eek2:


----------



## CorpITGuy (Apr 12, 2007)

I'm like you, paulman182. I prefer Fox to CNN or MSNBC due to my political persuasion, but I can't stand the talking heads and "strategists" on either network. Just give me the news and let me decide without the commentary!

That's what CNN Headline News USED to be... now it is just like Fox and CNN.


----------



## etzeppy (Feb 16, 2007)

paulman182 said:


> I would prefer a news channel that showed NO political news, if such a thing existed.


This forum can't seem to operate with no polical news or spin. Good luck finding a news station that does.


----------



## smackman (Sep 19, 2006)

etzeppy said:


> This forum can't seem to operate with no *polical *news or spin. Good luck finding a news station that does.


What does polical mean? :scratchin

Just kidding. Everyone that is involved in todays "news" knows the hatchets are out on both sides. It gets ugly at times but it is also very educational as well as humorous at times.
CNN is one sided big time. Fox News "leans" right most of the time. Left right, up down, your way my way, etc. This is life as its always been.


----------



## ImBack234 (Aug 26, 2008)

smackman said:


> What does polical mean? :scratchin
> 
> Just kidding. Everyone that is involved in todays "news" knows the hatchets are out on both sides. It gets ugly at times but it is also very educational as well as humorous at times.
> CNN is one sided big time. Fox News "leans" right most of the time. Left right, up down, your way my way, etc. This is life as its always been.


I say fire them all and start again.:eek2:


----------



## Bobham (Jan 26, 2008)

I have refrained from jumping into the Fox vs CNN vs MSNBC discussion per Mr. Long's request early on, but since he has decided to provide editorial content, I will provide mine. Fox can truthfully declare itself "fair and balanced" when it is compared to the other networks. I have watched MSNBC's coverage, and find that it is all Obama, all the time. Olberman & Maddow's shows do nothing but chronical their hatred of Republicans, their candidates, and Fox News. Not once per week... but every show! Entire programs have been devoted to bashing Fox News by pulling Fox reports out of context. I think CNN mostly tries for "fair and balanced", but most of the show hosts cannot resist showing their bias one way or the other. Fox goes out of their way to have representatives from both sides on just about every interview. Even Obama and Hillary said that on the whole, Fox News was the most fair to them. James Carville, for Got's sake agrees. Yes, Hannity is a supporter of Conservative values, but he is paired with Colmes who is in the liberal tank. The fact that they are mostly fair is why Fox News ratings are huge... even among liberals.


----------



## ImBack234 (Aug 26, 2008)

Bobham said:


> I have refrained from jumping into the Fox vs CNN vs MSNBC discussion per Mr. Long's request early on, but since he has decided to provide editorial content, I will provide mine. Fox can truthfully declare itself "fair and balanced" when it is compared to the other networks. I have watched MSNBC's coverage, and find that it is all Obama, all the time. Olberman & Maddow's shows do nothing but chronical their hatred of Republicans, their candidates, and Fox News. Not once per week... but every show! Entire programs have been devoted to bashing Fox News by pulling Fox reports out of context. I think CNN mostly tries for "fair and balanced", but most of the show hosts cannot resist showing their bias one way or the other. Fox goes out of their way to have representatives from both sides on just about every interview. Even Obama and Hillary said that on the whole, Fox News was the most fair to them. James Carville, for Got's sake agrees. Yes, Hannity is a supporter of Conservative values, but he is paired with Colmes who is in the liberal tank. The fact that they are mostly fair is why Fox News ratings are huge... even among liberals.


Wow. I missed fox being fair and balance.:eek2:

I just tried to watch fox, Wonder Woman on Politics (strategy room). Well I guess she started to speak to much true so they cut off the video.
So I still don't see it, I do see unfair and not balanced.
Show the whole thing or don't show it at all!!!


----------



## Mr.72 (Feb 2, 2007)

You missed Fox News being "fair and balanced" because you think the other networks are not biased.

Fact is, CNN, MSNBC, etc. are all _extremely_ left biased. I mean extreme. I cannot watch CNN for five minutes without wanting to throw a brick through the TV. However, most viewers are conditioned to think this is balanced, because all news channels and network news coverage except Fox News is the same way.

Fox sticks out as not being completely 100% left-wing, and therefore many people falsely claim it is right-wing. It is not. In fact I cannot even remember ever seeing anything that was not outright commentary or opinion (such as Hannity or O'Reilly) on Fox that could be construed as biased in favor of conservatives. News should be void of bias. CNN et al do news pieces that are loaded with bias. Fox does news pieces that are just plain old news.

It's all a moot point though because Fox News Channel is not available in my programming package, or any HD-only package. HD-only programming is the wave of the future. This is not a conspiracy by Dish to not offer Fox News Channel right now. It is just because they are cheap, and the constantly drag their feet adding any new channels, without any bias whatsoever, unless those channels are forced upon them by virtue of an existing contract. I am hardly complaining since no other provider offers Fox News Channel, plus all of the other HD channels I have, for anything close to the price that I am paying.

I guess you get what you pay for, and in this case, I am not willing to pay to get Fox News Channel. But in the case of Dish Network, we all get and pay for a whole lot of things we don't want, like CNN for me. I'd trade 80% of my HD channels for Fox News HD, but I only watch about 8 channels.


----------



## ImBack234 (Aug 26, 2008)

Mr.72 said:


> *You missed Fox News being "fair and balanced" because you think the other networks are not biased.*
> 
> Fact is, CNN, MSNBC, etc. are all _extremely_ left biased. I mean extreme. I cannot watch CNN for five minutes without wanting to throw a brick through the TV. However, most viewers are conditioned to think this is balanced, because all news channels and network news coverage except Fox News is the same way.


I never said that. I don't watch any of them cause I find them all off. I think they all forget how to be open minded and report the news. They all report their opinion. Remember I did say fire them all and start again. To me for a news service to be fair and balance they need to find the true. No matter who it hurts.
So let me know when we have a news service that can do that.


----------



## smackman (Sep 19, 2006)

Mr.72 said:


> You missed Fox News being "fair and balanced" because you think the other networks are not biased.
> 
> Fact is, CNN, MSNBC, etc. are all _extremely_ left biased. I mean extreme. I cannot watch CNN for five minutes without wanting to throw a brick through the TV. However, most viewers are conditioned to think this is balanced, because all news channels and network news coverage except Fox News is the same way.
> 
> ...


Darn, we must be long lost Brothers of the same political persuasion.:group:


----------



## MLBurks (Dec 16, 2005)

I am a conservative and I find myself frustrated at FNC about 50% of the time. That pretty much says it all. When I switch over to CNN, I'm frustrated about 70% of the time. At MSNBC, well I just gave up there. I love CSPAN during debates and other political situation because they give it to you straight. No commentators telling you what is right or wrong or rephrasing what you just heard. I just wish that there was a 24 hour news channel that brings the news to you like CSPAN.


----------



## smackman (Sep 19, 2006)

Fox News Channel or Bust. 
I guess I bust.


----------



## DodgerKing (Apr 28, 2008)

The main reason why I was happy to get FNC in HD on Direct was so there would be no more FNC threads started. Mainly because it always goes off on a political tangent. Perhaps Dish needs this channel for the same reason?


----------



## Mr.72 (Feb 2, 2007)

Well DodgerKing I would like to point out, those asking for FNC did not say "Dish needs to add FNC because it is a right-wing maniac network". We want FNC in HD because it's a channel we would prefer to watch and it's not in the HD-only packages.

It's only when people begin to say "aw shut up, y'all bunch of whiners, you have CNN, what more could you want", that the thread begins to go political. It's the introduction of CNN or MSNBC as a fair substitute for FNC that drives it political and invites people to accuse one or the other network of having this or that bias.


----------



## DodgerKing (Apr 28, 2008)

Mr.72 said:


> Well DodgerKing I would like to point out, those asking for FNC did not say "Dish needs to add FNC because it is a right-wing maniac network". We want FNC in HD because it's a channel we would prefer to watch and it's not in the HD-only packages.
> 
> It's only when people begin to say "aw shut up, y'all bunch of whiners, you have CNN, what more could you want", that the thread begins to go political. It's the introduction of CNN or MSNBC as a fair substitute for FNC that drives it political and invites people to accuse one or the other network of having this or that bias.


I agree. My comment was made more in tongue and cheek than anything else.


----------



## Paul Secic (Dec 16, 2003)

paulman182 said:


> I would prefer a news channel that showed NO political news, if such a thing existed.
> 
> Reporting on them only encourages them!


Swami is reporting that MSNBC will be in HD by election night. Yeah right!


----------



## GrumpyBear (Feb 1, 2006)

I will trade, CNN, Fox,MSNBC, C-Span, The Weather Channel, or any news type station, for FoxMo, FX, Speed, EspnU, to name must a few. Who cares about talking heads in HD. I mean really, what worthy content is a must have on a news channel, ANY news channel? So a talking head looks clearer, I so no real reason to add any of them, when you have Movie Channels in the basic subscriptions and Sports channels, where there is HD content worthy of the space.


----------



## Mr.72 (Feb 2, 2007)

GrumpyBear said:


> Who cares about talking heads in HD.


*Those of us who have a HD-only programming package*

The point is not whether the content is worth having in HD... it's whether we get a choice of more than one news channel in a HD-only programming package.

IMHO if they carry CNN in this package, then they need to have FNC as well.


----------



## Bobham (Jan 26, 2008)

I would like to have FoxNews in HD on Dish. It's not just about talking heads... even, lord knows, it's mostly that and commercials. It's about some of the other stories they present with news video. Having said that, I wonder if the news footage they present would be in HD.... Hmmm....

My bedroom TV is not HD, and never thought it would make such a difference that I would stay up to watch in the living room. Actually, it does.


----------



## smackman (Sep 19, 2006)

I would be satisfied "temporarily" if Dish would just activate The Fox News Channel in SD during the election for *the HD only customers*.
As it stands, we have one left wing News organization to watch. 
Give us "others" A CHOICE at least in SD during one of the most important times in our Country which is the Presidential Election.


----------



## CorpITGuy (Apr 12, 2007)

smackman said:


> I would be satisfied "temporarily" if Dish would just activate The Fox News Channel in SD during the election for *the HD only customers*.
> As it stands, we have one left wing News organization to watch.
> Give us "others" A CHOICE at least in SD during one of the most important times in our Country which is the Presidential Election.


Careful now, you're making too much sense!


----------



## GrumpyBear (Feb 1, 2006)

Sorry your Turbo"X" package doesn't have all the channels you want. You bought it knowing it. There are far more worhty channels to add, to both a Turbo package and all other packages, than some talking heads channel. News and Weather in HD are very low priorty. Lots of Sports and Movie channels that offer more HD content is what we need.


----------



## space86 (May 4, 2007)

GrumpyBear said:


> Sorry your Turbo"X" package doesn't have all the channels you want. You bought it knowing it. There are far more worhty channels to add, to both a Turbo package and all other packages, than some talking heads channel. News and Weather in HD are very low priorty. Lots of Sports and Movie channels that offer more HD content is what we need.


It is funny how you will stop to watch a movie on a premium movie channel
when you own that exact same movie on DVD or Blu-ray. :lol: :lol: :lol:


----------



## GrumpyBear (Feb 1, 2006)

space86 said:


> It is funny how you will stop to watch a movie on a premium movie channel
> when you own that exact same movie on DVD or Blu-ray. :lol: :lol: :lol:


Sometimes that is VERY true. There are some movies that when you see them on a commercial free channel, you will watch them in HD, even if you do own them.
I haven't stepped up to Blu-Ray yet. Will do soon though, but my upconverting DVD plays my DVD's just fine.

Were I do understand, those that jumped on the Turbo not having the SD version of a channel they want, as Dish doesn't offer it in HD. Problem is when you buy something like that, you get what you get. There are far more Worthy channels to get than a News station. ANY news station. There isn't enough REAL HD content on any channel like that. They spendfar to much time in Studio talking and talking. Doesn't matter the subject, they just talk and talk and talk. None of them spend enough time out with the field reporters to make it worth while.


----------



## smackman (Sep 19, 2006)

GrumpyBear said:


> Sometimes that is VERY true. There are some movies that when you see them on a commercial free channel, you will watch them in HD, even if you do own them.
> I haven't stepped up to Blu-Ray yet. Will do soon though, but my upconverting DVD plays my DVD's just fine.
> 
> Were I do understand, those that jumped on the Turbo not having the SD version of a channel they want, as Dish doesn't offer it in HD. Problem is when you buy something like that, you get what you get. *There are far more Worthy channels to get than a News station. ANY news station.* There isn't enough REAL HD content on any channel like that. They spendfar to much time in Studio talking and talking. Doesn't matter the subject, they just talk and talk and talk. None of them spend enough time out with the field reporters to make it worth while.


That is a matter of opinion and I totally disagree with your opinion. I could watch The Fox News Channel at prime time hours M-F and never blink eye.


----------



## jackinbox (Sep 15, 2005)

smackman said:


> The majority of people who watch a cable" new channel choose The Fox News Channel. That stands for itself of its importance.


Actually, no. CNN has more total viewers but Fox News viewers watch longer. Apparently a lot longer considering the ratings discrepancy. The Weather Channel has more viewers than anyone, but low ratings because people only tune in for a few minutes.

LINK


----------



## MLBurks (Dec 16, 2005)

All I know is the ratings system is flawed. And I know that any time I check the "What's Hot" feature within DirecTV's "Active" application, FNC is consistently near or at the top in my time zone and nationwide. I don't recall ever seeing CNN on top of FNC in "What's Hot". So if "What's Hot" is an accurate shot of what DirecTV's customers are currently watching, FNC has more viewers than CNN on a regular basis.


----------



## smackman (Sep 19, 2006)

jackinbox said:


> Actually, no. CNN has more total viewers but Fox News viewers watch longer. Apparently a lot longer considering the ratings discrepancy. The Weather Channel has more viewers than anyone, but low ratings because people only tune in for a few minutes.
> 
> LINK


You can pull any poll up you want to but the major polls that have "respect" give The Fox News Channel the deserved #1 RATING.


----------



## DodgerKing (Apr 28, 2008)

MLBurks said:


> All I know is the ratings system is flawed. And I know that any time I check the "What's Hot" feature within DirecTV's "Active" application, FNC is consistently near or at the top in my time zone and nationwide. I don't recall ever seeing CNN on top of FNC in "What's Hot". So if "What's Hot" is an accurate shot of what DirecTV's customers are currently watching, FNC has more viewers than CNN on a regular basis.


Thanks for pointing out this feature. I never knew it existed.


----------



## jackinbox (Sep 15, 2005)

smackman said:


> You can pull any poll up you want to but the major polls that have "respect" give The Fox News Channel the deserved #1 RATING.


I'm not knocking Fox News. I actually researched this when CNN was running ads saying "More viewers get their news from CNN than anywhere else." when I knew that Fox has double the ratings.

I wasn't aware that Nielsen ratings aren't "respectful".

Personally, I watch all 3 news channels, although I watch CNN the least. The other 2, I watch about evenly.


----------



## Mr.72 (Feb 2, 2007)

jackinbox said:


> Personally, I watch all 3 news channels, although I watch CNN the least. The other 2, I watch about evenly.


Well, not if you have a HD-only programming package.

And FWIW, when I chose my HD-only package, which does not include FNC-HD but has CNN-HD, FNC was _not available_ in HD. It was reasonable to assume that once it was available in HD, it would be added to the HD-only packages as a matter of course since FNC and CNN are available in the same tier of SD programming. Certainly I expect it will be added to the HD-only packages in due time. My complaint is about the timing. I am quite certain they will add it, and quite certain that they will miss a great opportunity to add it during a time of peak demand, which would be right now, or two weeks ago, thus sufficiently before a major election cycle is complete.

Dish and everyone else knows that FNC is the #1 all news channel and they will duly add FNC in HD to all of the HD-only packages eventually. Then all of you folks who don't like news in HD can complain about how they added it even though there is some other channel you'd rather them add instead.


----------



## paja (Oct 23, 2006)

http://www.tvpredictions.com/forum/index.php?entry=entry081027-104756


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

Mr.72 said:


> It was reasonable to assume that once it was available in HD, it would be added to the HD-only packages as a matter of course since FNC and CNN are available in the same tier of SD programming.


FoxNews is not in the same tier as CNN on DISH Network. FoxNews requires AT200 or above or DISH Family, CNN is in AT100 and above (but not DISH Family).

FoxNews HD will be provided to TurboHD Silver (and above) subscribers when it becomes available to DISH Network customers. The HD channel is not available to any DISH Network customer at this time.


----------



## GrumpyBear (Feb 1, 2006)

There seems to be no love loss between, Dish and News Corp. 
Dish seems to have NO Fox channels other than Fox HD Locals.
Why in the world would you think that once Fox HD News was available, Dish and News Corp would be on the same page? 
Keep on asking for it, nobody is stopping you, and it might even help, with other News Corp stations.
FX, FoxMo, Speed, just to name a few of the News Corp stations. Granted There are even More channels that are Higher on the list.


----------



## nataraj (Feb 25, 2006)

MLBurks said:


> All I know is the ratings system is flawed. And I know that any time I check the "What's Hot" feature within DirecTV's "Active" application, FNC is consistently near or at the top in my time zone and nationwide. I don't recall ever seeing CNN on top of FNC in "What's Hot". So if "What's Hot" is an accurate shot of what DirecTV's customers are currently watching, FNC has more viewers than CNN on a regular basis.


So - lets see according to you the rating system based on statistics is flawed. But somehow "What's Hot" is accurate ?

BTW, FNC has higher ratings ... though not a majority.

http://tvbythenumbers.com/category/ratings/top-news/cable-news


----------



## MLBurks (Dec 16, 2005)

nataraj said:


> So - lets see according to you the rating system based on statistics is flawed. But somehow "What's Hot" is accurate ?
> 
> BTW, FNC has higher ratings ... though not a majority.
> 
> http://tvbythenumbers.com/category/ratings/top-news/cable-news


I said *IF* the "What's Hot" application is accurate, not that it was accurate. I seriously doubt it is 100% accurate. And I have doubted that fact for a long time since nobody seems to know definitively how it works.


----------



## space86 (May 4, 2007)

Turbo HD said 150 HD Channels by the end of the year, how many will
be HD Pay Per View?


----------



## Paul Secic (Dec 16, 2003)

paja said:


> http://www.tvpredictions.com/forum/index.php?entry=entry081027-104756


That's where I'm going in December. I'm getting U 350 channels and high speed for $124.00. I like Dish, but I want bundling.


----------



## davring (Jan 13, 2007)

Paul Secic said:


> That's where I'm going in December. I'm getting U 350 channels and high speed for $124.00. I like Dish, but I want bundling.


Be certain to examine their system limitations compared to what you are accustomed to. They tend to be quite limited in some functions compared to sat services and it varies greatly by area, I checked into it out of curiousity.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

paja said:


> http://www.tvpredictions.com/forum/index.php?entry=entry081027-104756


Make that "SOON" for UVerse having Fox News HD ...


> Washington, D.C. (October 27, 2008) -- AT&T announced today that it will add up to 30 new high-def channels next week at no additional charge to customers' current HD service package.
> 
> The telco says the new channels will give it more than 75 HD channels, exceeding the high-def lineups of most cable operators. DIRECTV and Dish Network both say they offer 100 or more HD channels.


----------



## Steve Mehs (Mar 21, 2002)

Time Warner addes Fox News HD to my line up on channel 1021 in 3 hours and 37 minutes


----------



## smackman (Sep 19, 2006)

Steve Mehs said:


> Time Warner addes Fox News HD to my line up on channel 1021 in 3 hours and 37 minutes


I am excited for you.:balloons:


----------



## paja (Oct 23, 2006)

Steve Mehs said:


> Time Warner addes Fox News HD to my line up on channel 1021 in 3 hours and 37 minutes


At least your system is adding. DISH cuts out 15 VOOM channels and somehow call that adding??!! :nono2:


----------



## Steve Mehs (Mar 21, 2002)

Well, in their defense, Dish did also bring on a lot of real HD channels, channels that haven't repeated the same programming a zillion times over the past 5 years. I don't see the Voom suite lasting another 5 years, at least not in it's current form. I'd rather have all those premium movie channels in HD over Voom.


----------



## JohnH (Apr 22, 2002)

There is still one issue out there with FOX. The conditions placed on FOX with the DIRECTV sale have not been removed and EchoStar may be on the wrong side of the fence on this one. May be the reason for the delay in adding FOX HD channels.


----------



## Paul Secic (Dec 16, 2003)

Steve Mehs said:


> Well, in their defense, Dish did also bring on a lot of real HD channels, channels that haven't repeated the same programming a zillion times over the past 5 years. I don't see the Voom suite lasting another 5 years, at least not in it's current form. I'd rather have all those premium movie channels in HD over Voom.


DITTO!


----------



## HDRoberts (Dec 11, 2007)

Hey, the Dish earnings announcement is 11/10/08, with a tech forum the same day. That is likely to bring us some new HD, possibly the Wed uplink the week before.

So watch: Fox News HD is turned on Nov. 5th. It seems more and more plausible.


----------



## Steve Mehs (Mar 21, 2002)

I didn't go to bed last night, I was eagerly awaiting the arrival of Fox News HD and wanted to tune in as soon as TW flipped the switch and be the first one on my cable system to see the channel live. By the time 12:05 hit I was a little nervous, as it was not added yet. For the next 26 minutes I just kept hitting channel up and channel down going from channel 1020 (CNN HD :barf to channel 1022 (Fox Business News HD) then low and behold, the clock struck 12:31AM and I couldn't believe my eyes. it was added. What was on at the time? The reboradcast of Hannity and That Other Guy. The segment? Hannity's interview with Elisabeth Hasselbeck. What a nice way to be introduced to Fox News HD. Yes! Finally after 15,640,261 seconds of waiting, we finally got Fox News HD.


----------



## BattleZone (Nov 13, 2007)

HDRoberts said:


> Hey, the Dish earnings announcement is 11/10/08


And it's going to be a BAD one.  Dish installers all over the country are starving for work. The folks in marketing are completely asleep at the switch.


----------



## peak_reception (Feb 10, 2008)

IIP said:


> And it's going to be a BAD one.  Dish installers all over the country are starving for work. The folks in marketing are completely asleep at the switch.


 A fish rots from the head down.


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

JohnH said:


> There is still one issue out there with FOX. The conditions placed on FOX with the DIRECTV sale have not been removed and EchoStar may be on the wrong side of the fence on this one. May be the reason for the delay in adding FOX HD channels.


Ah, I don't see any way possible that has anything to do with it... if anything, it would probably be something that was encouraged to add fox channels to competitors to directv, not discourage...


----------



## HDRoberts (Dec 11, 2007)

IIP said:


> And it's going to be a BAD one.  Dish installers all over the country are starving for work. The folks in marketing are completely asleep at the switch.


As I said elsewhere, they need to polish a turd. Only easy way to do it is new HD.


----------



## wmj5 (Aug 26, 2007)

directv just got foxnews and they are like all the rest, I have a sony 40" hdtv, and when they get all thier b/s on the screen you wind up with a 30" picture, they look like bloomberg did a few yrs. back, I don't know what makes a channel think they have to put all that crap on the screen as soon as they go hd!!!!!


----------



## paja (Oct 23, 2006)

Here is the official announcement from AT&T:
http://www.att.com/gen/press-room?pid=4800&cdvn=news&newsarticleid=26238


----------



## Paul Secic (Dec 16, 2003)

paja said:


> Here is the official announcement from AT&T:
> http://www.att.com/gen/press-room?pid=4800&cdvn=news&newsarticleid=26238


WOW! Lisa Robertson in HD.


----------



## texaswolf (Oct 18, 2007)

Steve Mehs said:


> I didn't go to bed last night, I was eagerly awaiting the arrival of Fox News HD and wanted to tune in as soon as TW flipped the switch and be the first one on my cable system to see the channel live. By the time 12:05 hit I was a little nervous, as it was not added yet. For the next 26 minutes I just kept hitting channel up and channel down going from channel 1020 (CNN HD :barf to channel 1022 (Fox Business News HD) then low and behold, the clock struck 12:31AM and I couldn't believe my eyes. it was added. What was on at the time? The reboradcast of Hannity and That Other Guy. The segment? Hannity's interview with Elisabeth Hasselbeck. What a nice way to be introduced to Fox News HD. Yes! Finally after 15,640,261 seconds of waiting, we finally got Fox News HD.


LMAO. Hannity and that other guy...I love it.

It has been no secret that Fox News has been setting up to go HD for awhile now...so in a way i see it as Dish has dropped the ball on this channel. I agree that we have a lot of new HD and I love it...but i have to think that with FNC being the #1 cable news channel, this would have been a no brainer....that being said, if they roll it out a day after the election, i will be annoyed.....CNN looks nice in HD, but it would be nice to have both sides of ballot coverage during election time for Turbo HD folks....im not panicking....just hope it comes soon (along with FX HD).

I'm still happy as hell with the channels i do have!


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

texaswolf said:


> .....CNN looks nice in HD, but it would be nice to have both sides of ballot coverage during election time for Turbo HD folks....


The results will be the same regardless of the network you watch it on.


----------



## CorpITGuy (Apr 12, 2007)

James Long said:


> The results will be the same regardless of the network you watch it on.


Sure, but on FNC the on-air personalities will tell you the results. On CNN they will either hysterically cry them to you or joyously sing them to you, depending on how the election goes. 

Watching CNN is bad for my mental health. Of course, as a FNC viewer, some here would already doubt my mental health.


----------



## texaswolf (Oct 18, 2007)

James Long said:


> The results will be the same regardless of the network you watch it on.


Results, yes, but coverage before the election for undecided voters is NOT the same...so thats why it would be nice to have both sides coverage before the election. Watch one minute of Cafferty Files and you will see that


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

I could say the same about FoxNews ... way to the right of "center", certainly not fair nor balanced. I only watch it when I want a partisan pep talk.


----------



## texaswolf (Oct 18, 2007)

James Long said:


> I could say the same about FoxNews ... way to the right of "center", certainly not fair nor balanced. I only watch it when I want a partisan pep talk.


your not getting my point.....thats why i said it would be nice for people to have both...CNN is left of "No bias, No bull" and Fox is right of "fair and balanced"....MSNBC is off the map....so when there is only one available...you only get those views.


----------



## smackman (Sep 19, 2006)

James Long said:


> The results will be the same regardless of the network you watch it on.


----------



## MLBurks (Dec 16, 2005)

James Long said:


> I could say the same about FoxNews ... way to the right of "center", certainly not fair nor balanced. I only watch it when I want a partisan pep talk.


Hillary Clinton has said that FNC has had the most "fair and balanced" election coverage more than any other network. That must mean something. Sure they are right of center, but without fail, for every conservative they have on, they have a liberal on to present the other side.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

Let's not get into politics and what one may think of any politician's opinion on anything.


----------



## Rainbird (Aug 22, 2002)

Jason Nipp said:


> *Note to all.
> 
> Please do not start all the Fox News conspiracy crap that was deleted out of the Direct forums.
> 
> ...


The way this thread is going, it may not be long for this world!


----------



## texaswolf (Oct 18, 2007)

James Long said:


> Let's not get into politics and what one may think of any politician's opinion on anything.


Right...which is why i was only talking about coverage of stations and not mentioning any names. We don't need a full blown political war in here. Hopefully FNC HD and FBN HD will become available soon enough.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

Regardless of your political views, if you are at this point (even this time last week) and are still undecided after all the campaigning... then I respectfully submit that it is unreasonable to blame lack of information on Dish not carrying a specific news channel.

Seriously... if Dish doesn't have your favorite channel, they didn't have it weeks ago either... nor the whole year... so if you sit there waiting don't blame Dish for lack of information.

Again, I say this respectfully to people on both sides of the fence.

Wanting the channel, asking for it, even demanding it to some extent is completely understandable... but this line-in-the-sand "Dish better add it or my future is ruined" kind of mentality about virtually every channel they don't currently carry really confuses me.


----------



## smackman (Sep 19, 2006)

HDMe said:


> Regardless of your political views, if you are at this point (even this time last week) and are still undecided after all the campaigning... then I respectfully submit that it is unreasonable to blame lack of information on Dish not carrying a specific news channel.
> 
> Seriously... if Dish doesn't have your favorite channel, they didn't have it weeks ago either... nor the whole year... so if you sit there waiting don't blame Dish for lack of information.
> 
> ...


Nothing wrong with being confused. Without sounding politically biased, you have missed the whole reason why many are disappointed. It has nothing to do with a favorite channel; It has to do with everyone being fair. This goes well beyond the Dish Customers.


----------



## phrelin (Jan 18, 2007)

Is there something I'm missing here? Fox News is available on Dish, just not in HD. If you really need the Fox News version of current events, it's there for you. The content doesn't change in the HD signal.

And this whole thing about an HD package contract with News Corp affects fans of FX, SPEED, etc. along with the Fox News fans, and dates back before the verdict on the lawsuit between Dish and the News Corp Canadian subsidiary's employee who facilitated piracy of Dish's scrambled signal.


----------



## CorpITGuy (Apr 12, 2007)

It's not available for those who have HD-only packages.


----------



## smackman (Sep 19, 2006)

CorpITGuy said:


> It's not available for those who have HD-only packages.


And to add to this, It would cost approx. $20 dollars a month extra to get FNC in SD and we would have to sacrifice several HD Channels in the process.
I am talking about Dish Subscribers with The Dish Absolute Pkg.
Speaking solely for myself, I would like to have a choice of which News Channel I watch. 
The FNC is offered in HD and I as a customer I want it from a political stand point.
I feel this will happen but not before the biggest election that effects this nation so drastically happens Nov.4,2008. 
The reasoning for the delay is "many" issues but political seems to be a front runner IMO.


----------



## Henry (Nov 15, 2007)

texaswolf said:


> Right...which is why i was only talking about coverage of stations and not mentioning any names. We don't need a full blown political war in here. *Hopefully FNC HD and FBN HD will become available soon enough.*


+1


----------



## CorpITGuy (Apr 12, 2007)

The thread going on over in the general dish discussion forum is similar. It isn't that FNC HD isn't there. It isn't even just that you can't watch FNC if you don't have SDs. The real issue for me is the lack of regard for customers being shown in general. MLB? Forget it. Basketball? Going away, because Dish can't negotiate? FNC? Others?

There is a general attitude on the part of Dish that they can charge what DirecTV charges, fail to carry as many national HD channels and local HD markets and still keep their customers happy. I'm a LOYAL E* customer and have been for about a decade... but I'm not a professional Dish apologist and I won't spend my time watching web forums defending my favorite vendor. Dish's inaction is inexcusable, and it's one of the reasons they're going to report really, really sad earnings in November.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

smackman said:


> Speaking solely for myself, I would like to have a choice of which News Channel I watch.


YOU DO!

All you have to do is pay for it. Subscribe to DirecTV or subscribe to AT200 or above.



smackman said:


> The reasoning for the delay is "many" issues but political seems to be a front runner IMO.


As messed up as DISH is at getting new channels why is THIS ONE being withheld for political reasons?
Answer: It isn't.

No conspiracy needed ... just the facts.


----------



## Henry (Nov 15, 2007)

James Long said:


> YOU DO!
> 
> All you have to do is pay for it. Subscribe to DirecTV or subscribe to AT200 or above.
> 
> ...


-1


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

James hit the nail I was going to hit...

Fox News in HD has not been in HD with Dish ever... so anyone who signed up for the HD package exclusively knew that going in, so sitting and complaining about it every day doesn't change the fact that you could have gone with an SD package if the channel was that important OR could switch to DirecTV who now suddenly has this channel.

This is true for any other HD channel that Dish does not yet have, but is carried elsewhere...

Now, IF this discussion was about Dish dropping FOX News over a contract dispute... then I could understand the questioning of motives and disappointment.. but the facts are this particular channel is no different than any other that Dish has never carried.

IF any channel was that important to me, then I'd switch to another provider that had it. This is not political, just a channel Dish doesn't yet have.. and another in the long line of "add XXX now or I will switch to DirecTV before my life ends" channel threads that I've seen over the years. There are people in the DirecTV threads who want some of the HD that Dish has and they are having the same conversations.

It really seems simple to me:

1. Don't sign up for the HD-only package unless you are 100% ok with what Dish has now. Don't sign up hoping your favorite channel gets added next month and then complain you were ripped off when it doesn't.
2. Switch to DirecTV or cable if your channel is there but not on Dish.

Not to be huffy.. but seriously, that is what I would do if any channel was that important to me.


----------



## ImBack234 (Aug 26, 2008)

HDMe said:


> It really seems simple to me:
> 
> 1. Don't sign up for the HD-only package unless you are 100% ok with what Dish has now. Don't sign up hoping your favorite channel gets added next month and then complain you were ripped off when it doesn't.
> 2. Switch to DirecTV or cable if your channel is there but not on Dish.
> ...


Most of all stop whining.:eek2:

VERB:
whined , whin·ing , whines
VERB:
intr.

1. To utter a plaintive, high-pitched, protracted sound, as in pain, fear, supplication, or complaint.
*2. To complain or protest in a childish fashion.*
3. To produce a sustained noise of relatively high pitch: jet engines whining.


----------



## texaswolf (Oct 18, 2007)

HDMe said:


> James hit the nail I was going to hit...
> 
> Fox News in HD has not been in HD with Dish ever... so anyone who signed up for the HD package exclusively knew that going in, so sitting and complaining about it every day doesn't change the fact that you could have gone with an SD package if the channel was that important OR could switch to DirecTV who now suddenly has this channel.
> 
> ...


I see your point. When i went to HD only, I knew i would lose FNC, because it was *NOT AVAILABLE* in HD at the time. I was not going to pay for the AT200 just to keep one channel...and that was fine. I listen to FNC on Sirius, and check the website, so I'm not doing without. That being said, I think the reason many are upset now is that FNC * IS AVAILABLE* in HD. Direct and TW cable have it in HD and Dish is left holding the question mark again. I find it funny that a cable company can roll out channels in HD on or before the same day of the two companies claiming "HD leader" status.

It was obvious that FNC was going HD, at least Direct and TW seemed to know, FNC launched before the election, on purpose i'm sure and Direct and TW were there and ready for it. So i would say Dish did drop the ball on this. But we will get it eventually, and as we have learned, Dish does not concern themselves with important dates like presidential elections or premiers of shows on soon to come channels, as Direct seems to be...so it's not a big surprise they didn't rush to provide it.


----------



## ImBack234 (Aug 26, 2008)




----------



## jgurley (Feb 1, 2005)

OK, it's time to jump in here. Putting aside all considerations except ratings, here's a quote from the Broadcasting & Cable web site giving a recap of last year's ratings:

_"Fox News Channel once again ended the year as cable's top news network, followed by CNN, with few radical ratings dips or surges for either network. But among the channels with smaller audience totals -- MSNBC, CNBC and CNN Headline News -- 2007 was a year of growth.

For the year in primetime, Fox News was the No. 6-ranked cable channel behind USA Network, TNT, ESPN, TBS and Lifetime Television. That's two notches higher than its ranking last year. *CNN, its closest news competitor, was No. 26,* down one."_

So FNC is the top rated news channel and the 6th rated primetime channel and Dish doesn't have it in HD. Go figure!


----------



## Paul Secic (Dec 16, 2003)

IIP said:


> And it's going to be a BAD one.  Dish installers all over the country are starving for work. The folks in marketing are completely asleep at the switch.


Yesterday I signed up for U-verse and the only install date I could get was November 24th. So they're busy.


----------



## paja (Oct 23, 2006)

Paul Secic said:


> Yesterday I signed up for U-verse and the only install date I could get was November 24th. So they're busy.


I've had them for over a month now. They blow DISH away and their hd dvr is outstanding. Getting 30 more hd stations on Monday including FOX NEWS HD/ FOX BUSINESS. You are going to love U-verse.


----------



## jbrooks987 (Jun 5, 2004)

> So FNC is the top rated news channel and the 6th rated primetime channel and Dish doesn't have it in HD. Go figure!


But Dish DOES Have FNC. No, not in SD expanded and called HD - but in the same format that you've seen before, with the same content. The news doesn't become "better" because it's presented in HD. News is news, is the same in SD, HD, Radio, Newspaper, Newsmagazine.


----------



## GrumpyBear (Feb 1, 2006)

UVerse, is still a pipe dream where I am at. Must be getting closer though, as I can at least, have my zip code bring something up. I may give them a chance, with some of the features on thier DVR. Still want to play with it though, as I do love my ViP622.


----------



## paja (Oct 23, 2006)

It was wonderful to wake up this morning, turn on my television and U-verse, and see the promise of more hd a reality. Not the "coming soon" I got from DISH. Right now-Watching FOX NEWS HD!!


----------



## texaswolf (Oct 18, 2007)

jbrooks987 said:


> But Dish DOES Have FNC. No, not in SD expanded and called HD - but in the same format that you've seen before, with the same content. The news doesn't become "better" because it's presented in HD. News is news, is the same in SD, HD, Radio, Newspaper, Newsmagazine.


I think the issue is from the HD only subs. a lot of people didn't want to keep paying for a bunch of channels they didn't watch and/or only watched HD only channels. Now that FNC is available on HD, people are getting upset.

on a side note..... I think it's time for a thread cleanup? May one of the mods on here can eliminate any of the off topic rant and or quick interjections of whining and pics, which do not contribute to the thread what so ever.....or we could always have a no holds bar thread...that works for me too...just let me know.


----------



## GrumpyBear (Feb 1, 2006)

I understand the feelings of the HD only crowd. I don't understand why those that have been on these forums, for sometime, all upset and surprised that a NEWS CORP channel isn't available on Dish. What in the world is the Surprise?


----------



## texaswolf (Oct 18, 2007)

GrumpyBear said:


> I understand the feelings of the HD only crowd. I don't understand why those that have been on these forums, for sometime, all upset and surprised that a NEWS CORP channel isn't available on Dish. What in the world is the Surprise?


I had dish put the at200 back on my account so i could watch FNC during the election (CNN was starting to become too much). I told them i would call back after the election to have it taken back off, and they put a note on my account that i would not be charged the "downgrade fee". Maybe that was due to my mentioning of Direct and Uverse having it in HD...i dunno...regardeless they seemed very understanding of it being election day, and wanting other news options.....surprising for the Philippines.

Now I can have CNN and FNC on pip. Comes in handy for a political junkie like me. Hey look! a Republican on tv! :lol:


----------



## cocoario (Nov 5, 2008)

Now that the election is over, can we talk? I agree with Smackman....Fox should be included in the HD package.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

Politics are never allowed ... so the election being over isn't relative. IMHO - Every channel with a true HD feed should be added. But I wouldn't say they should be added "at any cost" ... content providers need to be reasonable.


----------



## jimborst (Jun 13, 2006)

jgurley said:


> OK, it's time to jump in here. Putting aside all considerations except ratings, here's a quote from the Broadcasting & Cable web site giving a recap of last year's ratings:
> 
> _"Fox News Channel once again ended the year as cable's top news network, followed by CNN, with few radical ratings dips or surges for either network. But among the channels with smaller audience totals -- MSNBC, CNBC and CNN Headline News -- 2007 was a year of growth.
> 
> ...


Maybe we should look at how the ratings were for the election:

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/11/05/cnn-dominates-election-night/

On-air, CNN beat every broadcast and cable network Tuesday night from 8-12:30 a.m. ET with an average of 13.3 million total viewers, according to Nielsen Media Research.

ABC trailed with 12.5 million, NBC had 11.9 million, Fox News Channel posted 8.1 million, CBS averaged 7.5 million, MSBNC had 6.4 million, and FOX posted 4.7 million. In all, close to 80 million viewers tuned in to watch election night coverage.

Yes I know the story is from CNN but it's the only source I could find.


----------



## ImBack234 (Aug 26, 2008)

jimborst said:


> On-air, CNN beat every broadcast and cable network Tuesday night from 8-12:30 a.m. ET with an average of 13.3 million total viewers, according to Nielsen Media Research.
> 
> ABC trailed with 12.5 million, NBC had 11.9 million, Fox News Channel posted 8.1 million, CBS averaged 7.5 million, MSBNC had 6.4 million, and FOX posted 4.7 million. In all, close to 80 million viewers tuned in to watch election night coverage.
> 
> Yes I know the story is from CNN but it's the only source I could find.


So much for how great fox is.:eek2:


----------



## HDRoberts (Dec 11, 2007)

jimborst said:


> Maybe we should look at how the ratings were for the election:
> 
> http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/11/05/cnn-dominates-election-night/
> 
> ...


Proves James' point: day to day, more people watch Fox News. For breaking news, people tune to CNN.


----------



## CorpITGuy (Apr 12, 2007)

Yep. If people want to watch regular programming, i.e. Sean Hannity, Bill O'Reilly, Gretta, etc... they tune into Fox. If there is a big speech or something, folks will watch CNN. I'm a loyal Fox viewer who does that... if there is little commentary (e.g. during the debates) I turn on CNN due to HD. I think a lot of casual viewers (who don't view cable news normally) tune into CNN.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

Just like the people who could care less about sports, or movie channels, or whatever genre one can name there are people who could care less about 24/7 news.

The news junkies are going to want a 24/7 news channel - probably "their" 24/7 news channel, just like a sports junkie is going to want a Multi-Sport or single sport season pass subscription. But the masses that are not news junkies? I doubt they even notice what news channels are HD or not.

Those masses are the ones that put CNN through the roof during the brief moments of breaking and special news coverage. People who think "something's happening" and go straight to CNN. People who would be more upset if CNN were not in HD (complete with corny "holograms") or was unavailable (in HD only packages) than if FOX were missing.

I believe DISH would carry both if they could for a decent rate. CNN was first to HD (other than Voom HD News) which helped get them in the door and DISH has had a better relationship with the AOL/TimeWarner networks than Fox - so it makes sense that CNN would be on the DISH network system. Fox just has to come up with an acceptable deal and they will be there too.


----------



## paja (Oct 23, 2006)

Here is something that might shock a few people, especially here in Chicago. Ratings form the tv coverage of President-Elect Obama's speech in Grant Park just came out. No surprise that Channel 7 the ABC affiliate here got the top rating(they have been tops with news for decades) with Channel 5, the NBC affiliate coming in second. But in third place was CNN which beat out Channel 2 , the CBS affiliate, WGN channel 9 and the FOX affiliate channel 32.


----------



## kinglerch (Aug 29, 2007)

I have my doubts about these ratings. 70 million seems like a pretty large number for the amount that they say tuned in to watch the coverage. 

But over 120 million voted, not including the millions of others who may be interested in such a big story but were too young or not a citizen and therefore couldn't vote. I just don't buy that such a low number watched the coverage. Ratings schmatings!


----------



## Jason Nipp (Jun 10, 2004)

cocoario said:


> Now that the election is over, can we talk? I agree with Smackman....Fox should be included in the HD package.


So what your saying is that you agree with yourself?


----------



## phrelin (Jan 18, 2007)

kinglerch said:


> I have my doubts about these ratings. 70 million seems like a pretty large number for the amount that they say tuned in to watch the coverage.
> 
> But over 120 million voted, not including the millions of others who may be interested in such a big story but were too young or not a citizen and therefore couldn't vote. I just don't buy that such a low number watched the coverage. Ratings schmatings!


The other 50 million were on the street celebrating or in a local bar drinking heavily or were watching recorded shows except from 11:00-11:45 pm Eastern.


----------



## texaswolf (Oct 18, 2007)

James Long said:


> Just like the people who could care less about sports, or movie channels, or whatever genre one can name there are people who could care less about 24/7 news.
> 
> The news junkies are going to want a 24/7 news channel - probably "their" 24/7 news channel, just like a sports junkie is going to want a Multi-Sport or single sport season pass subscription. But the masses that are not news junkies? I doubt they even notice what news channels are HD or not.
> 
> ...


Lets not all forget that CNN is on the basic packages for most of the cable/sat providers out there, where as Foxnews is not (like it was supposed to be, says the lawsuit). So, many more people tuned to a national news network they *had* vs what they chose to turn too. Dish alone...anyone who has the At100 or HD only packs, gets CNN and not FOX.

That being said, I switched back and forth on election night, and where Fox would be talking about strategies that were used and blah blah, CNN was showing the party in Chicago, Jesse Jackson and Oprah crying and such....

So keep that in mind for when an entire nation will be watching vs news watchers daily....then you are looking at the 6th ranked cable channel vs the 26th ranked channel.....


----------



## kinglerch (Aug 29, 2007)

But if you count the total number of brain cells of the people watching, add the number of minutes each person in the room was actually paying attention, divide by the number of non news-based shows = rankings schmankings!


----------



## Paul Secic (Dec 16, 2003)

texaswolf said:


> Lets not all forget that CNN is on the basic packages for most of the cable/sat providers out there, where as Foxnews is not (like it was supposed to be, says the lawsuit). So, many more people tuned to a national news network they *had* vs what they chose to turn too. Dish alone...anyone who has the At100 or HD only packs, gets CNN and not FOX.
> 
> That being said, I switched back and forth on election night, and where Fox would be talking about strategies that were used and blah blah, CNN was showing the party in Chicago, Jesse Jackson and Oprah crying and such....
> 
> So keep that in mind for when an entire nation will be watching vs news watchers daily....then you are looking at the 6th ranked cable channel vs the 26th ranked channel.....


That's what I don't like about AT 100, not enough channels. I'm getting AT&T's U-verse 400 channels & high speed package for $142.00 monthly. My caregiver is spliting the cost. I ordered the Philipino Channel for her. Comcrap has been getting sluglsh for the past months so I think it's time for me to move on. This package is like Dish's AEP but it has lots more HBO/Cinamax and Showtime channels.


----------



## phrelin (Jan 18, 2007)

Paul Secic said:


> That's what I don't like about AT 100, not enough channels. I'm getting AT&T's U-verse 400 channels & high speed package for $142.00 monthly. My caregiver is spliting the cost. I ordered the Philipino Channel for her. Comcrap has been getting sluglsh for the past months. This package is like Dish's AEP but it has lots more HBO/Cinamax and Showtime channels.


Paul -

By "getting" do you mean you have this or have ordered it?


----------



## biz (Jul 30, 2004)

So I go home Tuesday, with the option of CNN or the networks. I wasn't thrilled with any of it, too partisan (not on my side of the spectrum). So I thought, well Dan Rather has a show on HDNET, so lets look there. SUCCESS!!

He had a wonderful, non partisan, very calm, refused to call states too early, "I had to reverse myself 3 times in 2000" LOL 

I thoroughly enjoyed it.


----------



## Paul Secic (Dec 16, 2003)

phrelin said:


> Paul -
> 
> By "getting" do you mean you have this or have ordered it?


I ordered it last weel. It won't be installed until the 24th...


----------



## cocoario (Nov 5, 2008)

Jason Nipp said:


> So what your saying is that you agree with yourself?


What are you talking about??????


----------



## smackman (Sep 19, 2006)

Well it looks like The FNC in HD is not going to happen anytime soon. 
I talked to a "supervisor" on the phone with Dish who informed me it was not on the list for this year. Oh Well, The Internet will have to work.


----------



## texaswolf (Oct 18, 2007)

smackman said:


> Well it looks like The FNC in HD is not going to happen anytime soon.
> I talked to a "supervisor" on the phone with Dish who informed me it was not on the list for this year. Oh Well, The Internet will have to work.


Probably the same "supervisor" who told me that we would not be getting Sci Fi HD anytime soon, and it was on a week later....however, with the lawsuit going on, it could be awhile

So did he happen to say that there IS other HD channels coming, or just that FNC isn't coming for this year?


----------



## GrumpyBear (Feb 1, 2006)

Well, 
I have yet to see any NEWSCORP/Fox station on the horizon, so I am not sure why anybody is surprised. I have learned a few things as I have been watching fox news to see whats all the rave. Started just before the election, with my daughter and all of her, new 18 yr old voters, the week before the election on Fox News, Obama was a Socialist. Thursday after the election, on Fox News we found out that Obama, didn't have a Mandate, as he was elected as a Fiscal Conservative. If nothing else Fox News is Very entertaining.


----------



## Steve Mehs (Mar 21, 2002)

Hey, what part of DBSTalk is not a political forum don't you understand?


----------



## GrumpyBear (Feb 1, 2006)

Steve Mehs said:


> Hey, what part of DBSTalk is not a political forum don't you understand?


:backtotop :beatdeadhorse:

Steve:bonk1: Bear


----------



## Mr-Rick (Dec 1, 2004)

GrumpyBear said:


> UVerse, is still a pipe dream where I am at. Must be getting closer though, as I can at least, have my zip code bring something up. I may give them a chance, with some of the features on thier DVR. Still want to play with it though, as I do love my ViP622.


Uverse in my area will only allow TWO HD events to be recorded at once with their service. So I would rather have two 612's in my house or FOUR 612's for that matter that would allow me to record EIGHT HD channels. Granted I could only watch those shows I recorded at that TV, but I am not limited to only two which is a joke.

Uverse is not everything it's cracked up to be.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

Technically two HD feeds would be enough for my household ... although that often means my wife doesn't get to watch TV because I'm using both HD recordable tuners (I only have one 622 ... the third HD feed in my house is a 211, not counting OTA).


----------



## GrumpyBear (Feb 1, 2006)

Mr-Rick said:


> Uverse in my area will only allow TWO HD events to be recorded at once with their service. So I would rather have two 612's in my house or FOUR 612's for that matter that would allow me to record EIGHT HD channels. Granted I could only watch those shows I recorded at that TV, but I am not limited to only two which is a joke.
> 
> Uverse is not everything it's cracked up to be.


I am not ready to jump on board, but I am willing to look at over closely right now.
I have confirmed I can watch 3 HD shows at the sametime, but I have other issues more pressing than that. The 37hrs recording for HD, without an external drive to offload things, is something that bothers me. I need to play with there PiP/swap, make sure it works the way I want it too. I will be really hard pressed to leave my 612 and 622. They work great, and have all the features that I am looking for. MRV is the only thing that is really missing, I don't hear Dish talking about it, either. If I can get an external drive, DLB, autotune, PiP, and a theme search that is useful. I could be tempted with the extra HD they are going to be carrying.


----------



## PTN (Mar 6, 2008)

Steve Mehs said:


> Hey, what part of DBSTalk is not a political forum don't you understand?


Great response! I'd be happy to debate this person on those statements anytime but as I understand it this is supposed to be a forum about DBS ! So back to the subject at hand.


----------



## paja (Oct 23, 2006)

Mr-Rick said:


> Uverse in my area will only allow TWO HD events to be recorded at once with their service. So I would rather have two 612's in my house or FOUR 612's for that matter that would allow me to record EIGHT HD channels. Granted I could only watch those shows I recorded at that TV, but I am not limited to only two which is a joke.
> 
> Uverse is not everything it's cracked up to be.


I find two hd feeds more than enough for me. I was told 3 streams are coming soon and for the time I've had U-verse, "coming soon" really meant just that. Now I'll get back to THRILLERMAX HD.


----------



## CorpITGuy (Apr 12, 2007)

I agree that two feeds is plenty for most folks. I've been giving Uverse some serious thought since it came to my town in September. Ultimately I just know I won't be as happy without Dish's DVR. It's the only reason I didn't go to D* a long time ago.


----------



## paulman182 (Aug 4, 2006)

CorpITGuy said:


> I agree that two feeds is plenty for most folks.


It probably would be plenty, except for the customers who would be the highest-paying ones...


----------



## Paul Secic (Dec 16, 2003)

phrelin said:


> Paul -
> 
> By "getting" do you mean you have this or have ordered it?


I have it now. I get tons premiums, 55 in all. I also get lots RSNS. I guess they got a deal. The only thing that I don't like about it, there are no timers. You have to DVR everything. But the channel lineup outweighs the timer issues. Also the VOD is great.


----------



## GrumpyBear (Feb 1, 2006)

Now I hear they have PiP, do they have anything like the DLB/swap the ViP series has. Lack of timers would be an issue, hopefully they will have that resolved soon.
As it getting closer and closer, so I am now begining to think about it. I will need more than just HD though, to pry the ViP out of my little ol hands.


----------

