# DIRECTV & DISH: Broadcasters Want to "Fossilize" Reception



## phrelin (Jan 18, 2007)

MediaBiz in its SkyReport epublication yesterday says:


> DIRECTV and DISH called the broadcasters to task in their latest FCC filing on local broadcast signals. "The Broadcasters are very blunt as to what they want from this proceeding: 'to protect the role of local broadcasters in providing over-the-air television by limiting satellite delivery of network broadcast programming . . . '," the duo noted. "It is, therefore, perhaps no surprise that the Broadcasters are advocating methods that would significantly and systematically overpredict the number of households served over-the-air.
> 
> "The Broadcasters thus ask the Commission to fossilize the method of predicting whether a household can receive an over-the-air signal while ignoring any available improvements to a model that, as they themselves emphasize (as if it were a mark of distinction), had its origins in 1968."


Does anyone knokw what this is about? I've tried all kinds of searches and can't figure out what the particular FCC issue is.

Obviously it's important to both Dish and Directv.


----------



## Codfishjoe (Sep 3, 2010)

From what it says, I interpret it as the local networks (abc, nbc, cbs, fox, etc) doesn't want programming that is available on their networks (house, simpsons, etc) to be available on any national channels so there is still incentive for over the air local channels to exists. To help their argument, they want to use an inaccurate method to count the households that would receive over the air programming by using an outdated counting method. 

The rebuttal being the broadcasters (dtv, dish) want to make the outdated method of counting obsolete so as not to overforecast the amount of homes that could get use out of over the air signals. I assume this is all to prevent the loss of programming currently available on national channels by making it over the air local channel exclusive.

maybe?


----------



## shadough (Dec 31, 2006)

I think your on the right track. I believe the broadcasters are fighting to keep their antiquated(sp?) DMA measuring scheme from 1968 in place even after the analot shutoff, with which we all know, has really reduced the networks effective DMA as the digital broadcasts dont' seem to reach as far as the analogs did. Meanwhile directv and mainly dish net want to be able to more acuratly measure a networks true reach so as to sell distant network service (aka non-local channels) as well as siginificantly viewed networks into DMA's they presently cannot. Or something along those lines


----------



## runner861 (Mar 20, 2010)

I believe as part of STELA the FCC is directed to develop a new predictive model as to where each television station is receivable. This ultimately may be used to determine when a household is eligible for distant network service, as well as other things.

The situation is frustrating. I am aware of huge areas of the Salinas-Monterey market where one or more local stations simply cannot be received OTA, regardless of the rooftop setup used. Distance and/or terrain simply prevent reception in some areas. Nevertheless, the local station can prevent the viewer in that area from receiving a distant station. The stations in Salinas-Monterey claim large areas that in many cases are very rural and mountainous and in some cases close to 100 miles from the transmitters. There are other cases where an area is not receiving the signal due to terrain, even though the area is only 10 or fewer miles from the transmitter.

DirectTV viewers in Salinas-Monterey are hurt more than Dish viewers. Dish offers HD in that market, while Direct only offers SD.


----------



## FTA Michael (Jul 21, 2002)

This might have to do with the slight change in wording in STELA compared to previous versions. Unlike those old versions, which used the rooftop antenna standard to determine whether a location could receive a given OTA channel, STELA simply says "antenna". Some folks are trying to suggest that an interior, rabbit-ear antenna should be the standard, which would allow more viewers to subscribe to out-of-market networks. It's all explained much better here: http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/454912-STELA_Could_Redefine_Local_Satellite_Signals.php

The quote sounds like there has been pushback from the broadcasters, who understandably want to preserve their exclusivity, and that Dish and DirecTV naturally want as many OOM customers as possible.


----------



## runner861 (Mar 20, 2010)

There is also a difference in how digital signals propagate. The grade A, grade B, and grade C distinctions are gone, and there is a different definition of signal quality. I would have to refer to the text of STELA to better describe it.


----------



## kenglish (Oct 2, 2004)

Still trying to figure out why my OTA "Antenna" won't pick up satellite signal. It's on top of the fridge, in my basement, with a clear view of the ceiling.
An "antenna" is an "antenna"....right?
Should I sue DISH and DirecTV?


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

kenglish said:


> Still trying to figure out why my OTA "Antenna" won't pick up satellite signal. It's on top of the fridge, in my basement, with a clear view of the ceiling.
> An "antenna" is an "antenna"....right?
> Should I sue DISH and DirecTV?


Just sue DirecTV. DISH has enough lawsuits to deal with.


----------

