# FOX NEWS HD



## terrymr (Feb 16, 2008)

Fox news went HD on MAY 1. When will I get it on DISH???


----------



## garys (Nov 4, 2005)

Soon!


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

November 5th ... or as soon as the votes are finished being counted (could be January). 

Certainly some time after DirecTV adds it. DISH already has two HD news networks. There are better things to put in the available space than a third news channel.


----------



## Mocco71 (Jan 13, 2007)

James Long said:


> November 5th ... or as soon as the votes are finished being counted (could be January).
> 
> Certainly some time after DirecTV adds it. DISH already has two HD news networks. There are better things to put in the available space than a third news channel.


I don't have a horse in this race as I am with D*, however, that 3rd news channel is the highest rated channel on all of cable news and has been smoking the competition for approx 5-6 years now. Regardless of the political views, it is a very popular news source.


----------



## GrumpyBear (Feb 1, 2006)

Mocco71 said:


> I don't have a horse in this race as I am with D*, however, that 3rd news channel is the highest rated channel on all of cable news and has been smoking the competition for approx 5-6 years now. Regardless of the political views, it is a very popular news source.


Give me MSNBC in HD before Fox. With the Olympic's coming up, they will have lots of Live sports, much better than watching robot's read teleprompters.


----------



## Henry (Nov 15, 2007)

James Long said:


> There are better things to put in the available space than a third news channel.


Let me see now ... that was an opinion, right, James? A non-political one, I trust?


----------



## Kman68 (Jan 24, 2008)

Maybe after the lawsuit, but only if Dish wins. If Dish loses, it will not appear in the line up for years.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

HDG said:


> Let me see now ... that was an opinion, right, James? A non-political one, I trust?


Everything that isn't stated as a fact is an opinion ...
Please mentally apply the following disclaimer to all of my posts:
All comments are my own and do not necessarily represent the views of DBSTalk.com, DISHNetwork, DirecTV or the author

BTW: Clarification ... by "third" channel I wasn't intending it to be read as "third rate" or any less valuable as a channel or a news source than the existing news channels already in HD on DISH.

As a discussion point, remember that Fox Business News exists in HD and has not found it's way on to DISH Network ... this channel with different content than just Fox News SD with a better PQ would be more valuable than Fox News HD. I doubt if Fox would want Fox News HD added without the new Fox Business News. Plus there is an outstanding (not "terrific" outstanding but "unresolved" outstanding) lawsuit where Fox has apparently complained about the 2nd tier placement of Fox News SD.

In a nutshell ... there are a lot of issues to overcome before DISH adds the channel in question. 

Fox Business News would be a better add (even if in SD) as it adds new CONTENT.
ESPNNews HD would be a good add too ... assuming the replay clips are actual HD and not just SD presented in a frame.

My opinion, of course!  Remember?
All comments are my own and do not necessarily represent the views of DBSTalk.com, DISHNetwork, DirecTV or the author


----------



## phrelin (Jan 18, 2007)

Keep in mind there were _*no*_ News Corp. channels on the Charlie Chat HD list.


----------



## slowmo (Sep 22, 2006)

James Long said:


> DISH already has two HD news networks.


Better described as 1.0000082223333 networks? And I'm being generous with the rounding.


----------



## daleles (Jul 2, 2005)

Would be nice if Dish added Fox News/HD and Fox Business News/SD (at least). Fox News has been the #1 news channel for years, it has always had better ratings than CNN. It's only fair that both Fox/CNN/ HD would be available.


----------



## TulsaOK (Feb 24, 2004)

James Long said:


> Everything that isn't stated as a fact is an opinion ...
> Please mentally apply the following disclaimer to all of my posts:
> All comments are my own and do not necessarily represent the views of DBSTalk.com, DISHNetwork, DirecTV or the author
> 
> ...


James, don't get all PC on us, man. :eek2:


----------



## TulsaOK (Feb 24, 2004)

daleles said:


> Would be nice if Dish added Fox News/HD and Fox Business News/SD (at least). Fox News has been the #1 news channel for years, it has always had better ratings than CNN. It's only fair that both Fox/CNN/ HD would be available.


Is the news any better in HD?


----------



## Henry (Nov 15, 2007)

TulsaOK said:


> Is the news any better in HD?


Good question ... I don't know. Are the recipes any tastier in HD?


----------



## Henry (Nov 15, 2007)

James Long said:


> ... As a discussion point, remember that Fox Business News exists in HD and has not found it's way on to DISH Network ... this channel with different content than just Fox News SD with a better PQ would be more valuable than Fox News HD.


I don't share your "opinion" here, James. Business is business, news is news. I happen to like Fox News a lot more than CNN. In fact, I don't even watch CNN in either definition. So for me, FNC in HD is a value added plus and puts it on an even keel with CNNHD.

But I'll keep your "discussion point" in mind. When E* starts offering CNBC in HD, I'll be looking for FBN HD to be added to the lineup as well.


----------



## daleles (Jul 2, 2005)

TulsaOK said:


> Is the news any better in HD?


Well that's just it. Most raw news footage is still shot in SD. It's only the in house programs and studio shows that are in HD. Nothing wrong with that....


----------



## peak_reception (Feb 10, 2008)

> Is the news any better in HD?


It is when we're talking Fox News Studio Beauties.


----------



## A2736 (Feb 11, 2006)

Any rumours on getting CNBC HD on DISH . It will be a great addition to those of us who cant see 119 satelite.


----------



## Paul Secic (Dec 16, 2003)

James Long said:


> Everything that isn't stated as a fact is an opinion ...
> Please mentally apply the following disclaimer to all of my posts:
> All comments are my own and do not necessarily represent the views of DBSTalk.com, DISHNetwork, DirecTV or the author
> 
> ...


CNBCHD hasn't found it's way to Dish either.


----------



## dbconsultant (Sep 13, 2005)

James Long said:


> ... DISH already has two HD news networks. There are better things to put in the available space than a third news channel.


Not if that's the news channel you watch and would like to be able to see the crawl without having to watch it 'pillared'.


----------



## JeffBostock (Feb 23, 2006)

Mocco71 said:


> I don't have a horse in this race as I am with D*, however, that 3rd news channel is the highest rated channel on all of cable news and has been smoking the competition for approx 5-6 years now. Regardless of the political views, it is a very popular news source.


Yeah, their political views are unbalanced. Quite the opposite of what they claim their channel to be. "Fair and Balanced"?? A more accurate description of Fox News is "unfair and unbalanced" IMHO


----------



## TulsaOK (Feb 24, 2004)

James Bond said:


> Yeah, and CNN and MSNBC are fair and balanced? Give me a break! Ratings speaks volumes and FOX wins hands down. Sorry you are on the Dark Side, I feel for you.


You do realize this is news reporting you are discussing. 
Fox is conservative, CNN is liberal. Neither is offering unbiased news reporting. They each have an agenda.
Dark Side? Please!


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

CNN's OJ girl Gretta on Fox? Tony Snow back on CNN? Seems like they are the same.

Both networks have their problems ... Fox likes to show gratuitous video of scantily clad women (even when not relevant to the story) and call themselves a family channel. (I can see why some would want that footage in HD.) CNN has Lou Dobbs and Nancy Grace ... two of the most annoying people in television.

Don't buy into the lie that any network is completely "fair and balanced" ... they all have a format to follow that comes before the news. Not a liberal vs conservative bias but a role to play. Fox is playing the "role" of being "the only conservative voice in a world of liberal media". Sometimes maintaining the role at the cost of being "fair and balanced". Whatever gets the ratings.

I expect that the most balanced reporting would be a network no one would view. People like a network that is telling their viewpoint ... pandering to their audience more than any politician would dare.

If this sounds anti-Fox I apologize ... but they are the ones that are claiming to be "fair and balanced". The other guys are what they are ...


----------



## phrelin (Jan 18, 2007)

The last time I saw "fair and balanced" was when Walter Cronkite finally, and I emphasize "finally", questioned the truth of the Vietnam War.

By then, 10's of thousands of young Americans and millions of Vietnamese had died. Don't let anyone tell you that the news media "got it right" back then. Just try to find footage of anyone saying on TV in early summer of 1964 that the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution before Congress might be based on a distortion of the truth (where I come from we call that a lie).


> It is an old story, this life of ours. There is nothing new under our sun. - Josiah Royce


Yeah, I have a bone to pick with the press.


----------



## DodgerKing (Apr 28, 2008)

GrumpyBear said:


> Give me MSNBC in HD before Fox. With the Olympic's coming up, they will have lots of Live sports, much better than watching robot's read teleprompters.


I would still bet that more people watch FNC than the Olympics. Heck, more people people probably watch the public access channel than the Olympics?


----------



## Carl Spock (Sep 3, 2004)

James Long said:


> I expect that the most balanced reporting would be a network no one would view.


As a C-SPAN junkie, I take exception to this remark!  :grin:


----------



## phrelin (Jan 18, 2007)

Carl Spock said:


> As a C-SPAN junkie, I take exception to this remark!  :grin:


Yep, James got it all wrong. He should have said "almost no one.":lol:


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

Who said C-SPAN was "fair and balanced"? Not I!


----------



## lv99 (Jan 3, 2008)

James Long said:


> Who said C-SPAN was "fair and balanced"? Not I!


"Saudi Arabia" owned huge percentage of all networks. They're all bias. Day in day out in past 6 months, All they showed is Hillary vs. Hussein. Why everyone waste time for these none news garbage? It's not even Nov yet :lol: only independent voice worth to spend time listening is Michael Savage in the afternoon


----------



## space86 (May 4, 2007)

> only independent voice worth to spend time listening is Michael Savage in the afternoon


Talk about drinking the Kool Aid


----------



## mystic7 (Dec 9, 2007)

phrelin said:


> It is an old story, this life of ours. There is nothing new under our sun. - Josiah Royce


That's actually from Ecclesiastes Ch. 1 v. 9, which I believe predates Josiah Royce by a few thousand years.


----------



## Steve H (May 15, 2006)

I still think that DISH should get the 4 major networks in HD to everyone first then work on the other channels.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

Steve H said:


> I still think that DISH should get the 4 major networks in HD to everyone first then work on the other channels.


It seems much easier to broadcast three or four channels to everyone than 840 channels...

News is overrated, but like its inbred cousin reality TV, it is cheap to produce and yet it keeps the little *******s happy.

Why is it that people who watch a lot of news never seem to make news?


----------



## Nick (Apr 23, 2002)

mystic7 said:


> That's actually from Ecclesiastes Ch. 1 v. 9, which I believe predates Josiah Royce by a few thousand years.


...and Jeremiah Rice as well!


----------



## eudoxia (Apr 8, 2008)

harsh said:


> Why is it that people who watch a lot of news never seem to make news?


Never heard that one before, but I bet the companies who "make" the news...um I mean report it....only see dollar signs. So that should tell you who's deciding what you need to watch.

I like Olbermann but I know he's not news, purely entertainment.


----------



## phrelin (Jan 18, 2007)

mystic7 said:


> That's actually from Ecclesiastes Ch. 1 v. 9, which I believe predates Josiah Royce by a few thousand years.


Well, yes and no. The last sentence yes. The first sentence no. Everything is about context. I like the first sentence: "It is an old story, this life of ours." But as long as we're there, I like Ecclesiastes Ch. 1 v. 11 (KJV):


> There is no remembrance of former things; neither shall there be any remembrance of things that are to come with those that shall come after.


 IMHO it is this thought that expresses the greatest weakness of our way of living. We have no understanding of historical context - historical context in terms of (a) the 600 years European culture has dominated the Western Hemisphere, (b) the last 5000 years of human history, and (c) the last 10 million years of geological history.

And our news is communicated as if what happened 10 minutes ago is actually new when the only thing different are the names of people and places, and the tools used which unfortunately are most frequently weapons.

At least in the 1950's those who experienced two world wars first hand interpreted what was going on. Except from a select few newspeople such as Lara Logan who last night silenced the room on the Daily Show (including almost silencing Stewart), we don't get the news. This interview says everything you need to know about our news programming.


----------



## Bobby H (Mar 23, 2008)

I'm not a big fan of Fox News, but I think E* and News Corp. need to get their differences settled and pave the way for the HD versions of Fox News and other News Corp. channels to get broadcast.

Oklahoma is a "red state" and I see a lot more E* dishes on roof tops than those from D*. One reason is better availability of local channels. Slightly lower prices might be a factor too. Fox News gets more viewers in this part of the country than channels like CNN. That's just the way it is.

Some friends I've told about the Dish HD only package balked at doing a similar upgrade because Fox News wasn't being carried as part of the package.

Actually, the HD news channel I'd like to see is "Bloomberg HD".


----------



## phrelin (Jan 18, 2007)

Bobby H said:


> Actually, the HD news channel I'd like to see is "Bloomberg HD".


That would be the one addition that would push me up to AT250. I watch it on line and for some dumb reason it comes as "squish-o-vision."


----------



## Lincoln6Echo (Jul 11, 2007)

HDG said:


> Good question ... I don't know. Are the recipes any tastier in HD?


Not a fan of Food-HD? 

No, but seriously...all opinions and policies aside, most people on this BBS are always clammering for FNC-HD. When we finally got CNN-HD, barely a peep was heard. And I'd venture a guess the same would be true for MSNBC-HD, except for possible Olympics coverage.

The truth is that FNC dominates cable news ratings, and for a good reason in my opinion. FNC never endorses candidates in political races. *ahem* unlike MSNBC being in the tank for Obama from Day One. *cough* Some people may believe and have a problem with FNC being so-called "right-wing", but why the *****ing when every other network, news source in print and electronic, is decidedly "left-wing". It's like how dare the other side has a voice. We must shut them down at all costs...all your base belong to us, or some such stuff.


----------



## Lincoln6Echo (Jul 11, 2007)

eudoxia said:


> I like Olbermann but I know he's not news, purely entertainment.


No...really??? A former (and maybe current) ESPN sports caster who thinks he's a political expert? He's as knowledgable about politics as Rosie O'Donell is.


----------



## mystic7 (Dec 9, 2007)

phrelin said:


> Well, yes and no. The last sentence yes. The first sentence no. Everything is about context. I like the first sentence: "It is an old story, this life of ours." But as long as we're there, I like Ecclesiastes Ch. 1 v. 11 (KJV): IMHO it is this thought that expresses the greatest weakness of our way of living. We have no understanding of historical context - historical context in terms of (a) the 600 years European culture has dominated the Western Hemisphere, (b) the last 5000 years of human history, and (c) the last 10 million years of geological history.
> 
> And our news is communicated as if what happened 10 minutes ago is actually new when the only thing different are the names of people and places, and the tools used which unfortunately are most frequently weapons.
> 
> At least in the 1950's those who experienced two world wars first hand interpreted what was going on. Except from a select few newspeople such as Lara Logan who last night silenced the room on the Daily Show (including almost silencing Stewart), we don't get the news. This interview says everything you need to know about our news programming.


Of course there's Santoya's famous remark, as well. There's a reason certain historical events are chronicled in the Bible. They are forerunners of events that will soon happen again.


----------



## mystic7 (Dec 9, 2007)

"No exercise is better for the human heart
than reaching down to lift up another person." 

-- Tim Russert, May 7, 1950 ~ June 13, 2008

Now THAT's ironic.


----------



## Paul Secic (Dec 16, 2003)

harsh said:


> It seems much easier to broadcast three or four channels to everyone than 840 channels...
> 
> News is overrated, but like its inbred cousin reality TV, it is cheap to produce and yet it keeps the little *******s happy.
> 
> Why is it that people who watch a lot of news never seem to make news?


I agree with you. RealityTV & local news show cheap junk. I just watch 1 hour of local news. I read news online.


----------



## DAFTEK (Dec 13, 2006)

*Can we get back on topic? Any news on FOX NEWS HD? MSNBC-HD? CNN is driving me crazy and i need Change *


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

We were on topic ... no posts for 2 1/2 months. 

BTW: Check out the TV Talk forum for a thread on Fox News being in HD at all.
DISH can't carry it until Fox provides it. The lack of Fox News HD isn't a DISH issue.

Fox News Channel to Take HD Leap beginning May 1, 2008


----------



## RedChef (Jan 18, 2007)

DAFTEK said:


> *Can we get back on topic? Any news on FOX NEWS HD? MSNBC-HD? CNN is driving me crazy and i need Change *


Direct TV apparently has no plans to add it ... see:

http://www.dbstalk.com/showthread.php?t=127301&highlight=foxnews+HD


----------



## RedChef (Jan 18, 2007)

James Long said:


> We were on topic ... no posts for 2 1/2 months.
> 
> BTW: Check out the TV Talk forum for a thread on Fox News being in HD at all.
> DISH can't carry it until Fox provides it. The lack of Fox News HD isn't a DISH issue.
> ...


FOX News is being broadcast in HD ... Verizon FIOS and Comcast Cable have it!!!


----------



## DAFTEK (Dec 13, 2006)

10x FOR THE UPDATE GUYS....  Lucky i can still get some news on locals CNN is gone crazy lately....


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

DBSTalk is not a political forum ...

Recent posts this thread (now deleted) were no longer about the availability (or not) of the channel so this thread is hereby closed.


----------

