KeepMyTV.org

[yelraek]

Have you seen the AD that the NAB is putting out? I saw it tonight. The site does not say what the issue is. This is a quote from the site:

Pay-TV companies, such as cable and satellite, are seeking new rules in Congress that could jeopardize the free, local TV service that nearly 60 million Americans rely on each day to stay safe and informed.

 

[Tampa8]

http://www.keepmytv.org/

http://www.keepmytv.org/action.asp

 

[Bodo Fenrirsson]

What are they talking about? I went to the above link & I'm still confused.

 

[Tampa8]

I'm betting they don't want you to know the details.

 

[yelraek]

I meant to say that I saw the AD on TV. They have a copy of the TV AD on the site. I think it has something to do with a Bill in congress. Anyone know what the Bill is?

 

[KAB]

Retransmission fees.

 

[dlharm]

I saw the NAB ad on TV also--and wondered what this was about--still not sure--if it's retran fees or some other bs.

 

[MikeD-C05]

I sent my email . IF you want ota to stay free you had better send one too. Looks like they are trying to do away with ota and make everybody pay.

 

[yelraek]

I'm a skeptic. I want to know what the bill actually says. Why is the NAB supporting this? Anyone know what the name if the bill is?

 

[stung4ever]

I believe they also run these commercials whenever there's a movement to convert portions of the spectrum from OTA TV to cell phone/wireless data.

 

[KAB]

This is what it's about, H.R. 3719 and H.R. 3720, to modify Stella:

https://www.tab.org/public/upload/files/misc/2014-SLC-Talking-Points-and-Issue-Sheets-FINAL.pdf

 

[Bodo Fenrirsson]

So the gist is if the broadcasters are not allowed to hold Cable/Satellite companies hostage to high transmission fees,they'll cut off free OTA transmissions to make everyone suffer,the same threats they made if the Supreme Court allowed Aereo to continue operating.

 

[KAB]

So the gist is if the broadcasters are not allowed to hold Cable/Satellite companies hostage to high transmission fees,they'll cut off free OTA transmissions to make everyone suffer,the same threats they made if the Supreme Court allowed Aereo to continue operating.

Now where do you read that? Ain't gonna happen. FCC would put the kabosh on that in a heartbeat. They control the licenses. They simply do not want Congress to screw around with the way they are screwing around providers.

 

[yelraek]

This is what it's about, H.R. 3719 and H.R. 3720, to modify Stella:

https://www.tab.org/public/upload/files/misc/2014-SLC-Talking-Points-and-Issue-Sheets-FINAL.pdf

This is NAB's side of it. Here is a look at the original bill.

http://www.edwardswildman.com/bills...ble-and-dbs-signal-carriage-rules-12-18-2013/

I believe NAB is running scared of loosing it's foothold on charging for transmission fees.

 

[KAB]

BINGO!

 

[Tampa8]

I think the sentiment of many here is, go right ahead and make it no longer free. Make them compete to be on Cable systems, in fact compete with the rest of the entertainment world. It's soooo unlikely they would give up the frequencies. End must carry then lets see how potent they are.

 

[KAB]

I think the sentiment of many here is, go right ahead and make it no longer free. Make them compete to be on Cable systems, in fact compete with the rest of the entertainment world. It's soooo unlikely they would give up the frequencies. End must carry then lets see how potent they are.

If they gave up the frequencies, they'd be out of business. That is NO option for them.

 

[yelraek]

I think the ad is misleading. They are trying to frighten people into taking their side of the issue.

 

[sam_gordon]

I think the sentiment of many here is, go right ahead and make it no longer free. Make them compete to be on Cable systems, in fact compete with the rest of the entertainment world. It's soooo unlikely they would give up the frequencies. End must carry then lets see how potent they are.

I don't think you'd want them to end must carry. As I understand it, the local stations elect to do EITHER retransmission OR "must carry". If they elect "must carry", they can't charge retransmission rates.

 

[Tampa8]

True, but how many choose must carry over holding hostage negotiating for carriage and fees? You are correct when you say don't end must carry, the system would be better if it was only must carry. Carrier should have the choice, carry all from a market or none. (As it is now) (If the only Carrier available in an area then they must carry them) But there are no fees, the provider can pass along costs to carry them to the consumer. (Again much like now) But only the actual cost. No one makes any real money on it.

Rare that I would ever say that, I get on people for expecting things to be free but this is a different business. Those locals are meant to be free. Both the Networks and the Carrier gain by them being on the Satellite or Cable system. And since the Networks already have a monopoly in a given Market it's even more insulting that fees are now going up and up that we must pay.