# Supers in HD questions



## Stephen J (Mar 26, 2006)

Besides needing to get a carriage agreement from Tribune, are their any leal issues with E* adding HD versions of the superstations. Espically WPIX and WWOR since they have MLB games on the weekends. Thanks.


----------



## ssmith10pn (Jul 6, 2005)

WTBS says Sept 1


----------



## scooper (Apr 22, 2002)

WTBS is not a Superstation by what we talk about here - 
2 NY stations (WWOR and WPIX) , one Boston (WSBK) , one Denver(KWGN), and KTLA in LA are the Superstations.

And current law is unclear on their status regarding the ATSC digital TV conversion.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

Probably also worth mentioning as a reminder for the casual reader...

WTBS is a different station than TBS that most of us have via cable/satellite.


----------



## Yes616 (Sep 6, 2006)

HDMe said:


> Probably also worth mentioning as a reminder for the casual reader...
> 
> WTBS is a different station than TBS that most of us have via cable/satellite.


Only just a little different now but that will change alot next year when WTBS 17 Atlanta becomes "The Peachtree Channel"? or something like that with lots of local Atlanta programming. New call letters in store for WTBS 17 I beleive as well.

The TBS national feed will remain pretty much the same.

I read all of this somewhere but I can't seem to find it at the moment.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

Yeah, that was sort of why I posted the reminder. When TBS goes HD in September, that is the one we should all expect to eventually come to Dish. the WTBS that folks watch OTA in Atlanta may or may not be available in HD to anyone other than folks in the Atlanta market.


----------



## SWTESTER (Apr 7, 2004)

scooper said:


> WTBS is not a Superstation by what we talk about here -
> 2 NY stations (WWOR and WPIX) , one Boston (WSBK) , one Denver(KWGN), and KTLA in LA are the Superstations.
> 
> And current law is unclear on their status regarding the ATSC digital TV conversion.


Add in Superstation WGN (satellite) please, which is different than WGN 9 (Chicago local CW affiliate), mainly less Bulls basketball on the Superstation.

--cheers :grin:


----------



## BobaBird (Mar 31, 2002)

But be sure to add WGN in with TBS in the "superstation that isn't really a superstation" column.


----------



## RAD (Aug 5, 2002)

About WGN Superstation. I checked with a contact I have at the station (from when I lived in the Chicago area) about when they could do HD on the Superstation side of the operation. Their response was: _"We're almost finished moving all our analog head end customers over to our digital distribution platform - that should be completed before the end of the summer. Once I can turn the analog off, we'll have room for multiple digital carriers . . . and yes it is most likely that a HD signal will be available to our cable system customers sometime in early to mid 2008."_ At that point it would be up to the various companies to decided to carry it or not. Hope that helps.


----------



## ssmith10pn (Jul 6, 2005)

Call it what you want but I have always considered WGN and TBS super stations.



> In 1970, R. E. Turner, then head of a successful Atlanta-based outdoor advertising firm, purchased WJRJ-Atlanta, Channel 17, a small, struggling UHF station, and renamed it WTCG, for parent company Turner Communications Group. Through careful programming acquisitions, Turner guided the station to success. In December 1976, *WTCG originated the "superstation" concept, transmitting via satellite to cable systems*
> 
> In 1979, the company changed its name to Turner Broadcasting System, Inc. (TBS, Inc.) and the call letters of its flagship entertainment network to WTBS. In 1980, the company broke new ground with the launch of CNN, the first 24-hour all-news network, forever changing the way the world saw breaking news. Today, CNN services reach nearly one billion people around the globe.
> 
> ...


----------



## FTA Michael (Jul 21, 2002)

ssmith10pn said:


> Call it what you want but I have always considered WGN and TBS super stations.


And I sometimes call any generic tissue "Kleenex" even though I know better. Around here, "superstation" is a term designating the five OTA stations with different satellite delivery standards than of all the other OTA stations. What most of us see on the channels "TBS" and "WGN" are nifty pay-TV networks, not superstations.


----------



## kbuente (Mar 25, 2007)

So how is it that you'd call KLTA a superstation but not WGN??

They both offer WB programming and share Tribune resources...


----------



## garys (Nov 4, 2005)

kbuente said:


> So how is it that you'd call KLTA a superstation but not WGN??
> 
> They both offer WB programming and share Tribune resources...


WB has been gone for almost a year now. WGN (the one supplied nationally via Dish, not Chicago local) dropped WB before that and is an independent and KTLA is now a CW station.


----------



## JohnL (Apr 1, 2002)

ssmith10pn said:


> Call it what you want but I have always considered WGN and TBS super stations.


Smith,

The reason you thought that is because they USED to be considered "Superstations".

The definition of "Superstation" is an individual Local Market channel whoms signal distribution is exactly the same for even Distant viewers.

Since BOTH WGN and TBS are now completely seperate with totally different programing from their original Local Market they are NO longer Superstations.

Both TBS and WGN cleared all their local content that would not satisfy separate distant "local" Syndicated exclusivity contracts. This was so their Distant Viewers would not have content Blacked out or have third party providers stop providing their channel to each MSO's individual subscribers.

John


----------



## JohnL (Apr 1, 2002)

kbuente said:


> So how is it that you'd call KLTA a superstation but not WGN??
> 
> They both offer WB programming and share Tribune resources...


Kbuente,

Simple, KLTA's Local Feed is EXACTLY the same as their Satellite Feed. WGN's National Satellite FEED IS NOT the same, and DID NOT carry WB nationwide. WGN's Local OTA feed was different and DID carry WB programing. If you lived in the Chicago local market, you got TWO seperate and distinct feeds of WGN; the local WGN and the Distant Satellite WGN.

John


----------



## FTA Michael (Jul 21, 2002)

kbuente said:


> So how is it that you'd call KLTA a superstation but not WGN??


Ultimately, the answer is that KTLA one of five stations for which Congress created special rules for distant carriage. WGN is not.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

In the law:
The term "superstation" means a television station, other than a network station, licensed by the Federal Communications Commission, that is secondarily transmitted by a satellite carrier.
17 USC 119 (d) (9)​
Common usage only calls the major non-big four network stations that are seen across the country "superstations". The national feeds of TBS and WGN are not technically superstations as what a national audience sees is not the television station feed secondarily transmitted but some other feed from the same source company. However, both TBS and WGN used "superstation" in the name of their separate non-local feeds.

E* has a selection of channels they sell nationally as "superstations". WGN and TBS are not sold in that manner (they are part of the usual AT packages). As noted by Michael, there are special rules for stations that were superstations on a particular date and have remained superstations.


----------



## Stephen J (Mar 26, 2006)

scooper said:


> WTBS is not a Superstation by what we talk about here -
> 2 NY stations (WWOR and WPIX) , one Boston (WSBK) , one Denver(KWGN), and KTLA in LA are the Superstations.
> 
> And current law is unclear on their status regarding the ATSC digital TV conversion.


OK, so back to the original question, what is being done to clarify that law? Is E* just going to play it safe and never have the supers in HD? Are they going to use their legal department to find out an answer to this?


----------



## ssmith10pn (Jul 6, 2005)

JohnL said:


> Smith,
> 
> The reason you thought that is because they USED to be considered "Superstations".
> 
> ...


You may be on to something here. This may explain why I couldn't find the Giants Braves game when it was blacked out on ESPN. I only looked at WTBS Atlanta Local Channel 8307 instead of Channel 139. I didn't realise they were different. Currently they are showing the same thing.


----------



## scooper (Apr 22, 2002)

Stephen J said:


> OK, so back to the original question, what is being done to clarify that law? Is E* just going to play it safe and never have the supers in HD? Are they going to use their legal department to find out an answer to this?


I'm not sure if there is enough demand now for E* to pursue asking if the Digital versions of the "Superstations" are still available under the Superstations section of the applicable Federal law. They've been in enough hot water over the issue of Distant networks that may just forego pursuing this. The best thing I could think of to do on this would be to address a letter to the [email protected] address asking about this. I also wouldn't be too surprised if you got a generic "We're working on it" to "They will not be available after Feb 17, 2009".

I'm pretty sure nothing is being pursued in Congress, but I could be wrong on that.


----------



## davethestalker (Sep 17, 2006)

All of this bickering of what 'is" is, all I want to know is when will I see Cubs games in HD. And, if WGN is "supposed" to no longer have "local content", then why are people across the country on virtually every cable and satellite system forced to watch Chicago news? 

The only difference between true WGN and the "Superstation" WGN is that (even though I only live across the lake) I am forced to watch more Mattlock and less Cubs games. There is some content that is different. For instance WGN carries CW while WGN-Superstation does not.

BTW...I really resent the Cubs for giving Concast Chicago (which I do get and am blacked out of 100% of the games) so many Cubs and Sox games.

I don't want to stray too far off topic, but since I do qualify for Comcast Sports Chicago (I live near South Bend IN.) and my local networks show Chicago sports (Bears, Sox, and Cubs, never Detroit), why am I blacked out by Concast? Obviously I DO live in the "Chicagoland Market" since my Indiana locals (mind you I live in Michigan) show Chicago sports.

I know I'm begging to be corrected, but if WGN and TBS are not really Superstations, then somebody needs to tell them that. 'Cuz they think they are.


----------



## RAD (Aug 5, 2002)

davethestalker said:


> BTW...I really resent the Cubs for giving Concast Chicago (which I do get and am blacked out of 100% of the games) so many Cubs and Sox games.


You know who's the majority owners of Comcast Sportsnet Chicago, the Cubs, Sox, Bulls, Hawks. They wanted to keep more of the revenue for broadcast right vs. letting Fox take it.


----------



## Geronimo (Mar 23, 2002)

FTA Michael said:


> Ultimately, the answer is that KTLA one of five stations for which Congress created special rules for distant carriage. WGN is not.


Actaully WGN was listed in the law as enacted. most interpret the general language of the law to now exclude WGN because its programming is not the same as the broadcast version. Here is a link http://64.233.169.104/search?q=cach...ons&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=4&gl=us&client=firefox-a

Interstingly though while this legislation defines the term any station caould call itselfa superstation and TBs and WGn were using the term freely for some time before the legislation. In fact I have never heard the other five use it but I could be wrong there.

I a m not sure that there is a whole lot unclear about all this. there are five stations that satellite companies are allowed to carry. the only real ambiguity is whether the law covers the digital versions as well as the analog. Some say no because the law specifies call letters and technically WSBK-DT has different call letters than WSBk-TV. but Echostar is required to filea report with the FCC specifying the number of subs receiving analog and digital versions of these channels. To me that implies that coverage of the digital versions is allowed.

herre by the way is an example of an FCC form that specifically references digital superstations. http://www.copyright.gov/forms/formsci.pdf

I think that the intent is clear.

Having said all that if I am not mistaken the statutory authority to carry the superstations currently expires in early 2009. So unless congress acts to change it the whole question could be moot ina year and a half.


----------



## mrfish67 (Jan 19, 2007)

davethestalker said:


> All of this bickering of what 'is" is, all I want to know is when will I see Cubs games in HD. And, if WGN is "supposed" to no longer have "local content", then why are people across the country on virtually every cable and satellite system forced to watch Chicago news?
> 
> I know I'm begging to be corrected, but if WGN and TBS are not really Superstations, then somebody needs to tell them that. 'Cuz they think they are.


I agree that it would be great to get WGN in HD (along with the other "real" superstations). It isn't that WGN on satellite is not supposed to have local content; it's that the station's satellite version must be free and clear of programming that local stations can claim to have syndication exclusivity. If WGN did not do this, chunks of programming would either be blacked out all the time, or operators would simply drop the channel for good because it was too much of a pain to keep track of things that had to be blacked out.

And, as somebody else has pointed out, stations can pretty much brand themselves whatever they want. The superstation term, although strictly defined in the law, is not a term that WGN or TBS are forbidden to use, even though they may technically no longer be true superstations. The bottom line is that people still THINK of WGN and TBS as superstations, and most people know nothing about the FCC rules.


----------



## Geronimo (Mar 23, 2002)

In fact there are probably more people that think of WGN and TBS when they hear the word superstation than think of the other five. But the thread is about HD carriage of the five. BTW I learned today that at least one (WSBK) apparently still has no HD content.


----------



## Geronimo (Mar 23, 2002)

I satand corrected on at leas tone point. Some have advised me that WSBK does offer some sports in HD.


----------



## Yes616 (Sep 6, 2006)

It's been a long time but I too have to ask it again..

Why not make Superstations available in HD? It would be the perfect fix for many of us who would like to see the CW and MyTV shows in HD without adding all the local feeds. It really should be done by now. WPIX-TV vs. WPIX-DT shouldn't be an issue. WPIX is WPIX except for crummy picture vs. nice picture. Why else would we even be discussing this? IMHO.

Also, besides what we get (WPIX, WWOR, KWGN, WSBK and KTLA), are there any more Superstations out there that we (E* customers) do not get?


----------



## mrfish67 (Jan 19, 2007)

Yes616 said:


> It's been a long time but I too have to ask it again..
> 
> Why not make Superstations available in HD? It would be the perfect fix for many of us who would like to see the CW and MyTV shows in HD without adding all the local feeds. It really should be done by now. WPIX-TV vs. WPIX-DT shouldn't be an issue. WPIX is WPIX except for crummy picture vs. nice picture. Why else would we even be discussing this? IMHO.
> 
> Also, besides what we get (WPIX, WWOR, KWGN, WSBK and KTLA), are there any more Superstations out there that we (E* customers) do not get?


There is some dispute here about whether or not the digital versions of the superstations are covered by the existing laws.

As for other superstations, the list you named is all there is. There will be no more. Many regional superstations have come and gone since the early 1990s, like KTVT Fort Worth (now CBS O&O), and others have been gobbled up by Fox or the netlets like CW and MyTV.

Combine all that with Syndex and that fact that much of the superstations' staple programming has moved to specialized cable channels and regional sports nets and you pretty much have the end of the classic superstations that we used to know.


----------



## Lincoln6Echo (Jul 11, 2007)

Whether a station is considered a "Superstation" or not now, just seems like a bunch of semantics. FCC or not. 

And even when you give me a text book definition of a superstation, I still don't understand it. 

I didn't even realize there were two different feeds of WGN. I live in southern Illinois, about 350 miles south of Chicago and we still get Chicago news on WGN. I never watch it, because it's irrelevant to me, but as long as they carry my Cubbies games, I don't care. Just wished they'd go HD. Especially now that CSNCH went HD last month.


----------



## FTA Michael (Jul 21, 2002)

Lincoln6Echo said:


> Whether a station is considered a "Superstation" or not now, just seems like a bunch of semantics. FCC or not.
> 
> And even when you give me a text book definition of a superstation, I still don't understand it.


It's very simple. When Congress made (and later remade) the laws governing the retransmission of over-the-air channels by satellite TV companies, it wrote a specific exception for exactly five channels, which we and Dish call Superstations.

Until and unless there is a change in those laws, those five will be the only Superstations.

I too would love to see them in HD, but I don't expect it any time soon.


----------

