Coathanger Locals?

[briansanders007]

Is it me or does anyone else have local channels that looks like they are uplinked from someone using a coathanger as an antenna? Some of my locals are ok and some look like they are really an OTA uplink. Why can't they use the same uplink as the cable company or better yet, use the digital signal (not pass hd of course) but just so it's reall clear.

 

[Greg Bimson]

For each market DirecTV offers, DirecTV must set up a site in that market to collect the feeds from each local television station, then fiber them back to an uplink facility. The site in each market that collects these feeds is called a Local Receive Facility (LRF).

DirecTV, when local channels first became available, made most of the channels provide fiber feeds. However, when must-carry was enforced on 1 January, 2002, the FCC ruled that forcing a fiber feed is not a requirement for carriage; the ability to get a good signal to the LRF is what matters. The television station in question, if they did not provide a fiber feed, was then responsible for setting up an antenna if they wanted carriage of their channel.

So, the short story is that DirecTV tried to force fiber feeds, but Congress made mention in the law that all that is required for carriage is a "good quality signal", and Congress' version won out.

 

[colebert]

so what you're saying is, greg, that some local signals getting passed down over D* are being fed by nothing more than what the LRF can grab with an antenna?

 

[jimisham]

so what you're saying is, greg, that some local signals getting passed down over D* are being fed by nothing more than what the LRF can grab with an antenna?

That seems to be the case. We've got 6 stations in the South Bend DMA. Their signals on D* varies from what looks like a fiber feed from the station where the LRF is located, to a severe ghost on the PBS station, which really shows up in dark scenes.
Our cable company does the same thing. Everything is OTA and it looks like it.

 

[briansanders007]

That's just crazy! They should be free if they are nothing more than OTA. It's just OTA with a dish and an expensive multiswitch.

 

[Newshawk]

That's just crazy! They should be free if they are nothing more than OTA. It's just OTA with a dish and an expensive multiswitch.

How do you figure that? It's not D*'s (and, in this case, E*'s) fault that this situation is allowed to happen. It's the FCC, under the influence of the NAB. Rather than allowing the DBS companies to ensure the best quality signals be delivered to them, the Feds have forced the lowest common denominator reception method upon them. If you want to complain to anyone, complain to the FCC/NAB/local stations that don't feel that YOU are a valuable enough consumer to give you the best quality product they are capable of providing.

 

[briansanders007]

I'm not ticked at D*. I think the feds or whoever else is behind all the stupid laws. I think the whole government regulation and satellite laws are just wacked. They have been this way for a long time. It just seems like they will never make sense.

How do you figure that? It's not D*'s (and, in this case, E*'s) fault that this situation is allowed to happen. It's the FCC, under the influence of the NAB. Rather than allowing the DBS companies to ensure the best quality signals be delivered to them, the Feds have forced the lowest common denominator reception method upon them. If you want to complain to anyone, complain to the FCC/NAB/local stations that don't feel that YOU are a valuable enough consumer to give you the best quality product they are capable of providing.

 

[Greg Bimson]

That's just crazy! They should be free if they are nothing more than OTA. It's just OTA with a dish and an expensive multiswitch.

No, they shouldn't.

Dish Network and DirecTV have both made tons of money off of subscribers by providing local channels to 90+ percent of the households in the United States. Since the availability of local channels, the DBS companies have went from almost nine million subscribers almost six years ago, to over 24 million subscribers. So, even if it is OTA, most people still want their local television. And those stations should be compensated.

Besides, from what I have seen on both Dish Network and DirecTV, it is now getting to the point where you are better off putting up a good antenna, as the picture quality appears to be suffering due to bandwidth constraints.

 

[fkostyn]

And those stations should be compensated.

I believe they are compensated, in the form of selling commercial time. This is why we all have such a hard time getting waivers, is that the local channels do not want to loose local advertising revenue.

 

[briansanders007]

I agree they should make money since they are providing a service, however when I can see ghosting and fuzzies it sure makes me wonder what I am paying for. One channel was completely fuzzy and black for half a night and the audio was goofy. OTA it was clear as a bell. Guess I can't wait till hd locals start rolling out. Ease of access I guess, aka the wife can tune to them so I guess that's worth paying for with out her having to change inputs or do something funky with the tv.

No, they shouldn't.

Dish Network and DirecTV have both made tons of money off of subscribers by providing local channels to 90+ percent of the households in the United States. Since the availability of local channels, the DBS companies have went from almost nine million subscribers almost six years ago, to over 24 million subscribers. So, even if it is OTA, most people still want their local television. And those stations should be compensated.

Besides, from what I have seen on both Dish Network and DirecTV, it is now getting to the point where you are better off putting up a good antenna, as the picture quality appears to be suffering due to bandwidth constraints.