# Locals for All



## Guest (Oct 3, 2002)

Looks like the Dish Merger is going down the tubes...Time for those of us without access to local programming via satellite to stand up and be heard with Congress to bring about changes that will allow us to get our Networks off the satellite regardless as to where we live.

Please visit here to sign our petition and spread the word...
Thanks!!!

Stephen Hilton
http://www.petitiononline.com/nets4all/petition.html

_Please note: The opinions expressed on the website referenced by the link above are not necessarily those of Dbstalk.com or its staff._


----------



## Karl Foster (Mar 23, 2002)

Explain to me why everyone in America has a right to, or is entitled to receive LiL via satellite? Why should DBS subs in larger cities be forced to subsidize those in smaller cities? Why should DBS providers be forced to lose money? While I feel for those who don't have LIL in their areas, how many of them had LIL when they signed up for DBS and have had it taken away. None. DBS companies do not "owe" locals to anyone. Again, where is the entitlement?


----------



## BrettR (Apr 24, 2002)

Where did this petition come from? The Philly Network O&O would love this. They'd claim Harrisburg and Scranton and collect more ad revenue from PA businesses and congressmen. However, one problem. It doesnt support local television in Harrisburg or Scranton.

What I do agree and think was unfair to the small market viewer was the NAB and Congress persistance on mustcarry. Meaning the larger markets have 20 channels up, but the DBS provider cant offer 1 local channel to the adjacent but smaller market because of channel capacity issues. No space for one channel from Harrisburg-Lancaster on TP 4 or TP 12 on DirecTV because Philly DMA had 18 channels. About only 7-10 of the Philly stations are really popular and signficantly viewed throughout most counties. The rest are either home shopping religious or airing same programming as national feeds.


----------



## Guest (Oct 3, 2002)

karl_f, please note...we are not asking for Local to Local in every single market although this would be nice. What we are asking is that the SHVA be ammended to state that you may pull from the Nearest Available DMA if your local market is not offered. In other words, those of us in Central PA could pull from Harrisburg, Pittsburgh or Philly. You are quite correct in stating that locals were not available to many of us when we got DBS, but most of us did have access to the networks in some capacity, from New York, LA or so on. The SHVA actually did cost many of us access to those feeds if we have so called "local broadcasters" somewhere nearby. We are only asking for the right to see networks from SOMEWHERE if our local market is not or cannot be offered, as you are quite right it is not feasible to offer local TV to everyone. But, bear in mind the SHVA was designed supposedly to help Rural and Smaller America. It did not. Instead, the only people who benefit are those in large cities who can get Local to Local tv. The rest of us are tied fast to the wills of the local broadcasters.
This is no different that if you were only permitted to read your local newspaper, ratehr than have a choice of the New York Times, Philadelphia Inquirer, etc.
That's all we want is a choice to be able to receive networks.
Thanks


----------



## mancow (Sep 14, 2002)

Explain to me why everyone in America has a right to, or is entitled to receive LiL via satellite? Why should DBS subs in larger cities be forced to subsidize those in smaller cities? Why should DBS providers be forced to lose money? While I feel for those who don't have LIL in their areas, how many of them had LIL when they signed up for DBS and have had it taken away. None. DBS companies do not "owe" locals to anyone. Again, where is the entitlement?


__________________
No I did not loose lil to DBS, you cant loose something you never had.
Have had Sat ( C-Band now E) since 1986. because lil PQ is so poor. NBC and Fox are unwatchable most of the time.
Would love to get Fox for the sports.
Just my 2 cents worth.


----------



## tampa8 (Mar 30, 2002)

If I am understanding the petition and idea behind it - I think it is NOT saying every DMA has to be carried - just that if it is not then the next one close to it ALREADY CARRIED BY DBS should be made available without waivers. With the use now of spot beams this probably is not feasible. 
I have to admit this whole question is more complicated then I first thought a year ago. It could be said that DBS knows the rules and must make business decisions based on that. If their technology doesn't permit them to carry every channel in every DMA then that is their problem to solve. (And one way to solve that is to merge or not to carry every DMA) But it can also be said that if those rules give an unfair advantange to a competitor (Cable) then those rules should be amended for the good of the public and to promote competition. I just have to say again as I have in other posts, for DBS to really thrive and give a good alternative to Cable, they have to offer the networks, and probably your local ones. There are many many reasons for this but I have already posted them elsewhere.


----------



## Kevin G (Jul 3, 2002)

I'd be content to let D* and E* freeze their local offerings as they are right now and allow the rest of us to receive the nearest DMA. Since I live in the Des Moines DMA, that means I would receive KC's channels. 

While I'm sure many want their locals on sat. I still believe that a lot more would be just as happy with some other's locals as long as the networks were covered.


----------



## razorbackfan (Aug 18, 2002)

Where I live, E* doesn't carry my locals, and I don't qualify for the networks, but I would like to be able to get them due to the fact that my local stations pictures are lousy, and the sound is in mono. I think if we're willing to pay for them, why not be allowed to watch what we want?


----------



## Chris Freeland (Mar 24, 2002)

I too would like to have the wright to receive the nearest DMA, here in Chattanooga it would be either Atlanta or Nashville on E* or the previous two or Knoxville on D*. The only problem I can see is since most carried DMA's are on or soon will be on spot-beams, their might be a small number of small DMA's out their that are outside the footprint of their nearest carried DMA and would still be out of luck.

For those of you that are getting so hot and bothered by this partition, why not take the time and read what the partition and other informed posters here have said? The partition is NOT asking that all DMA's be carried by satellite, just asking that we have access to the nearest ones that are.


----------



## Geronimo (Mar 23, 2002)

It also asks for a repeal of must carry. So no telling how amny of these locals you are going to get.


----------



## Karl Foster (Mar 23, 2002)

I'd like to play devil's advocate for a second. 

1. So this petition is asking to completely bypass local markets in order to get locals from another DMA. Local advertising would not be seen at all (although regional advertising would be seen). I can see how local stations would squeal about this. If an area has 15% DBS penetration, and these folks never watched local stations, you are taking away a large number commercial viewers.

2. What standards will be initiated to determine which stations are the "most popular" as stated in the petition? While I don't watch our local Pax, it may be the reason others have D* over E* in our area. Who is to make that determination. The petition makes it seem the responsibility of the government. Is that something we really want the government to determine? 

Like I said, I'm just playing devil's advocate, but I think these are issues that deserve more detail than the petition states.


----------



## catman (Jun 27, 2002)

I told directv and it would be very easy . so you don't have local commerals . Give us the distance feeds . from new york . How hard is that ?


----------



## Guest (Oct 8, 2002)

> _Originally posted by catman _
> *I told directv and it would be very easy . so you don't have local commerals . Give us the distance feeds . from new york . How hard is that ? *


This isn't the satellite companies' faults, its the big business between the main networks (NBC, etc.) and their affiliates. From what I understand, the local network franchises all want full control over their entire local market. So if dish or directv was to sell you a distant feed, you would in effect be bypassing the 'incentive' for the local franchise to be in business. The main networks have to comply to their franchise agreemnts, so by allowing dish or DirecTV to distribute what they wish, they would kill the local franchises. The local nets, whether carried by satellite or not, need local business,etc. to pay to run the station

Personally, i think it should be a free for all, and in order for the local franchises to compete, they should put up high wattage HDTV transmitters, perhaps even subsidized by their parent networks, (instead of this pre-HDTV pre-2007 low power generally weak signal) and distribute free STBs to the local audience.

Then none of us would *****.


----------



## Karl Foster (Mar 23, 2002)

> _Originally posted by catman _
> *I told directv and it would be very easy . so you don't have local commerals . Give us the distance feeds . from new york . How hard is that ? *


Here is the main problem that I see. Say an area has 15% penetration of DBS and the area doesn't have locals available. If these folks were given networks from out of area markets, they would not see local commercials. While that may be great for the DBS providers, it would take away 15% of the buying customers from the local commercials, which pay for programming on the local stations. Local vendors who pay for commercials would be more likely to pay less for commercial time on the local station. I can see why the local stations would squeal.


----------



## AJ2086 (Jun 1, 2002)

It is not like you dont have locals. There is the option to go to cable, or receive them OTA. Nobody forced you to use DBS so you have no right to have locals from DBS.


----------



## Geronimo (Mar 23, 2002)

I agree AJ. the law is pretty clear., If you can receive locals OTA you cannot be sold distant nets. If you can't receive them you can get NY/LA from DTV or a somehat wider menu from DISH.


----------



## JBKing (Mar 23, 2002)

But the unfortunate few (or many) like myself can't get a good OTA signal, even though I'm told I can. That's with trying 3 different antennas. Oh, sure I could get a decent signal if I add a 50 foot pole to clear the hill behind me.  

Waivers? - yeah, right! 

And don't get me started about the merger reducing competition. Pegasus' idea of 'competition' would be to charge me an additional $4.50 a month. 

While I'm ranting.....

Being in the 97th DMA or so, there's a slim chance I will ever see my locals on dbs. 

The merger was the only hope for locals I had.


----------



## mancow (Sep 14, 2002)

JB I agree with what you say about the locals, I do not get them worth a damn either. Could care less about ABC CBS and NBC but would like to get FOX.


----------



## Chris Freeland (Mar 24, 2002)

> _Originally posted by JBKing _
> *But the unfortunate few (or many) like myself can't get a good OTA signal, even though I'm told I can. That's with trying 3 different antennas. Oh, sure I could get a decent signal if I add a 50 foot pole to clear the hill behind me.
> 
> Waivers? - yeah, right!
> ...


I agree, I get tired of people that many times get their locals on DBS tell the rest of us to simply put up a antenna or get cable. I have an antenna on a 30' or so pole and I still can not receive my local FOX61 and it is supposedly a Grade "A" signal from my home and channel 61 refuses to give me a waiver. Not everyone that can not receive their locals are able to qualify for distant locals or get waivers. I also have plans to eventually upgrade to a E*PVR receiver, No current IRD/PVR combo will record off of ota or analog cable and I do not want a SA/PVR because of higher cost up front and higher sub rates. At this time my local NBC3 and CBS12 have granted me waivers. My local ABC9 has not, however I can receive them ota but rarely watch channel 9 because of grainy pq and out of protest, for local news I watch 3 or 12 because they gave me waivers. If the merger can not be saved I will likely not ever be able to get locals in my area on satellite unless I move either physically or virtually, I will not move virtually because it would be lying.


----------



## craig559 (Aug 10, 2002)

I too am in the same boat here in se MN. I suposedly can recieve 6 differant stations from the various networks and in reality can recieve none and these stations will not give me waivers and I can not afford to get a pro out to check my signal. The apartment owner refuses to hook up the outdoor antenna, so I am screwed as far as getting a decent pic if any from anyone local, to get mpls would be great!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## Guest (Oct 19, 2002)

> _Originally posted by catman _
> *I told directv and it would be very easy . so you don't have local commerals . Give us the distance feeds . from new york . How hard is that ? *


For one, cause you don't live in New York...


----------



## QualityIsJobOne (Apr 29, 2002)

> _Originally posted by karl_f _
> *.....If these folks were given networks from out of area markets, they would not see local commercials.......I can see why the local stations would squeal. *


...Hmm, I don't see a big problem here. I get all my locals via StarChoice(CBC, CTV Global)......

+ I can watch multiple CBC's, CTV's, +Globals from across Canada

......+ I can watch two sets of US Nets...NBC, CBS, ABC, PBS +FOX(East +West)...

......+ several Canadian "superstations"....NTV+ CH (East+West) + NewVR+ NewRO + NewPL+ CHEX + A Channel+ CITYTV(East + West)+ CMFT....

....+ US "superstations" KTLA, WGN, WTBS, WPIX + WSBK

My locals can instruct StarChoice to send a signal to compel my receiver to substitute their signal over the signal of US nets (NBC, ABC, CBS + FOX) for programs that they are airing at the same time...."sim-subbing"....This keeps them happy.

.......This gives me an amazing selection of local news shows...+ there is a very easy "work around" to avoid most local sim-subs.


----------



## James_F (Apr 23, 2002)

OK, but you are in Canada... Doesn't help those who have to deal with must carry. :shrug:


----------



## QualityIsJobOne (Apr 29, 2002)

> _Originally posted by James_F _
> *OK, but you are in Canada... *


....All the mini-dish systems....DirecTv, Dish, ExpressVu & StarChoice have very, very generous sat footprints on both sides of the border! :blush:


----------



## James_F (Apr 23, 2002)

Yea I know, but.....


----------



## Guest (Oct 21, 2002)

Maybe the folks at the FCC should look at the Canadian model for Satellite Programming. Yes we can get locals from all across the country and 2 sets of U.S. Network Feeds and this hasn't killed any local stations here, and our locals are much smaller with tiny budgets in comparison. The NAB in the U.S. is friggin paranoid.


----------



## Geronimo (Mar 23, 2002)

I am sorry if my remarks were construed as stating that the law is "fair". I do not necessarily agree with it. I just reported on what I thought the law said.I wish i could buy distant nets too.


----------

