News   May 28, 2024
Core Architects Wins a Trio of Awards for 210 Bloor West
 757     1 
News   May 28, 2024
Quayside Resubmission Refines Block 3 and 4 Tower Plans
 1.4K     0 
News   May 28, 2024
News Roundup for May 28, 2024
 516     0 

"Save Local TV" vs. "Stop the TV Tax" Campaigns

bleeepbluuup said:
Seriously. You can get better quality HD signal over the air than through the cable sometimes. And what isn't broadcast you can likely stream over the internet.
Click to expand...

I've tested OTA satellite and an indoor antenna (I have a clear view of the CN tower). One day I'll move my entertainment centre and connect the antenna to the audio feed of my receiver. There's no doubt that to my eyes that the HD picture quality is considerably better than cable, obviously I can't speak for the sound quality. I'm torn though, I have to admit that I'd really miss my HD specialty channels (TMN, HBO, Discovery, National Geographic, TLC, CBC News (formally CBC Newsworld) + The Comedy Network, IFC & such) not to mention my PVR's!
 
The whole TBS debacle kind of puts the whole screwed-up nature of Canadian broadcasting rights into perspective. Canadians no longer get the real TBS, but they do get Peachtree TV, a local TV channel from Atlanta. Fantastic if you're obsessed with weather patterns from Georgia, I guess.
 
Canadians no longer get the real TBS, but they do get Peachtree TV, a local TV channel from Atlanta.
Click to expand...

TBS changed their name to peachtree....it's still TBS, and it's still a local Atlanta station that attained "superstation" status many years ago.
It has nothing to do with local Canadian television.
 
TBS throws a curveball to Canadian baseball fans

by WILLIAM HOUSTON
From Friday's Globe and Mail
October 4, 2007 at 8:11 PM EDT

Atlanta-based Turner Broadcasting System played a dirty trick on Canadian baseball fans this week.

Immediately before the start of the postseason, Turner launched a new TBS channel in the United States. The old TBS Superstation was renamed Peachtree TV and given new programming.

That threw a spanner into the viewing plans of some Canadians. TBS, you see, owns exclusive rights to baseball's divisional playoffs.

The problem is, the only Turner channel licensed to air in this country is the old TBS, now called Peachtree TV. And its schedule no longer includes baseball.

Some Canadian viewers actually made a point of subscribing to the old TBS this week, assuming they would be getting the playoff telecasts. Instead, the schedule consists of old sitcoms.

Rogers Sportsnet is picking up the baseball telecasts, but some purists would have preferred to watch the clean TBS feed without the updates inserted by Sportsnet.

For example, on Wednesday, the baseball studio spots were dropped by Sportsnet to make room for NHL scores and highlights.

Cable and satellite companies in this country cannot pick up the new TBS because the channel doesn't have a licence and won't for several months.
 
AGTO said:
TBS changed their name to peachtree....it's still TBS, and it's still a local Atlanta station that attained "superstation" status many years ago.
It has nothing to do with local Canadian television.
Click to expand...

No. TBS most assuredly still exists as TBS. From wiki:

Due to a technicality, cable and satellite companies in Canada are only permitted to carry the over-the-air Atlanta station, and therefore most now carry WPCH ("Peachtree TV") instead of the nationwide TBS channel that American viewers receive.[1] This dated back to prior to the change, when TBS programming was offered to Canadian viewers through WTBS, not the national cable channel. Many cable companies were apparently unaware of the changeover until after it occurred.[2] As a result, should Canadian cable companies wish to air "cable" TBS, it will be several months before the necessary approvals are received. It is also available in the Philippines and the United Kingdom on their various cable providers.
Click to expand...

It just kind of strikes me as ridiculous that a local cable channel from Atlanta is part of our standard cable package - and assumedly gets some money from Rogers/Bell for being broadcast to the entire country of Canada. At least when it was TBS it felt more like a general interest cable channel.
 
AGTO said:
They're not part of any agreement, the only "agreement" in place was forced on them by the CRTC and involves local broadcasters. Superstations have nothing to do with "100 miles to the boarder" either....how far do you think Atlanta is from here?
Some of you seem to think that cable supplied TV is a right, it's not.
Cable companies are private and for profit....just like broadcasters.
Click to expand...

Um, what do you think I was saying - there is an agreement between the US and Canada on broadcast copyright of channels for Cable that dates back a fair distance - and there is a clause - and it relates to distance from the border. Of which TBS is not part of that agreement - and must be attained from Satellite at a cost. All the super stations were included at a time when there was less cable "choice" (yes in quotes because a lot of "choice" is just a way of charging more for the same stuff) which was bundled with TMN/Super-channel (the third channel C-Channel was already quickly and long defunct by that point) as a way of getting more sales for the Canadian movie channels.
 
assumedly gets some money from Rogers/Bell for being broadcast to the entire country of Canada.
Click to expand...

Here's a good example of the misnderstandings. Cable doesn't broadcast, they're technically a narrowcaster, they have a targeted audience who chose the service.
It's not a right.
Yes, these carriers have to pay for some of the programming, but not the locals that the CRTC forced them to carry.
 
Simply...

CTV, CBC and Global put out a product (Their main channel). Rogers takes that product and then sells it to Canadians. Rogers does not give any of that money back to the main channel of those networks. How is Rogers in the right here?
 
Rogers takes that product and then sells it to Canadians.
Click to expand...

Rogers is forced to "take" this (already paid for) product, which it provides free of charge to cable subscribers.

Rogers does not give any of that money back to the main channel of those networks. How is Rogers in the right here?
Click to expand...

Local broadcasters sell commercial time. The cost of this time is determined by ratings, which are tied to the number of viewers. Cable companies increase the number of viewers, allowing local broadcasters to charge more for their commercial time. Why don't the local broadcasters pay rogers for their increase in viewers? How are the broadcasters in the right here?

Simply...
Click to expand...

It would seem that way, but for many, it's not. ;)
 
AGTO said:
Why don't the local broadcasters pay rogers for their increase in viewers?
Click to expand...

With what? Old tape stock?

Do you think Rogers or Bell Expressvu care about which local stations they carry? They just want one or two CTV feeds to fill their CRTC mandate.

Both sides need each other. But one side is stealing.
 
With what? Old tape stock?
Click to expand...

With the millions they receive in advertising revenue. How do you think broadcasters make money?

Do you think Rogers or Bell Expressvu care about which local stations they carry?
Click to expand...

No, they don't want to carry them at all...since they're available locally, for free.

I understand that you're unfamiliar with the way broadcasting works.

They just want one or two CTV feeds to fill their CRTC mandate.
Click to expand...

you're finally getting it. yay!

But one side is stealing.
Click to expand...

Correct, local broadcasters want to steal from the viewing public.
They're already stealing from themselves whenever they air that 2 1/2 minute music video...that amounts to thousands in lost revenue.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top