OTA broadcasts being phased out?

[Phoena]

On 05/21/2013 04:51 PM, William Sommerwerck wrote:

You can see it happening... all the interesting and entertaining
programming is being sequestered to the cable-only stations.
Then, they'll plead that nobody watches OTA.

I don';t think you understand how broadcast -- or cable -- television
works.

I understand how broadcast -- or cable -- television works. It's sole
purpose is to sell advertising. I'm sure your familiar with that queer
ass Geico gecko or Flo's fat ass. The television shows are just filler
between commercials and it doesn't matter if they are any good, as long
as the television channel sells advertising then they will remain on the
air while they are profitable.

Unless your a news channel like Commie News Network or Faux News then
your purpose is to sell advertising while broadcasting propaganda as
filler between commercials. Misinforming your gullible viewers. Like let
them think that wogs flew planes into the world trade centers on 9/11
when it was controlled demolition that brought down the towers.

Then get the public mad at those ragheads and then get their approval of
an expensive and lengthy war in the middle east. But don't tell them
that the ragheads really don't really want to start a war with the US
but it's really Israel wants the U.S. to terrorize the ragheads because
of all the kikes that control the U.S. government, banks and media.

So I understand how broadcast -- or cable -- television works and that's
why I don't own a TV or subscribe to cable television.

I get my news from real news websites like PressTV.

 

[(PeteCresswell)]

Per Phoena:

I get my news from real news websites like PressTV.

Charlie Rose interviewed a guy named Shane Smith who is owner of a
YouTube-based media company called "Vice" which seems tb headed for a
dominant position in news coverage.

His assertion was that something like 60% of people under a certain age
(30 comes to mind, but I'm not positive) do not even own a TV.
--
Pete Cresswell

 

On Mon, 27 May 2013 09:17:18 -0400, "(PeteCresswell)" <x@y.Invalid>
wrote:

Per Phoena:

I get my news from real news websites like PressTV.

Charlie Rose interviewed a guy named Shane Smith who is owner of a
YouTube-based media company called "Vice" which seems tb headed for a
dominant position in news coverage.

His assertion was that something like 60% of people under a certain age
(30 comes to mind, but I'm not positive) do not even own a TV.
That may be accurate, but misleading. Assuming the age given was 30,

60% of people in that group are under 17. While most of the people
under age 17 have access to a TV, most of them don't OWN it.

It's a little like saying 75% of the people under 25 have never worn a
bra. True, but not indicitive of a paradigm shift.

PlainBill

 

[josephkk]

On Tue, 21 May 2013 11:52:10 -0700, Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com>
wrote:

You can see it happening...all the interesting and entertaining
programming is being sequestered to the cable=only stations. Then,
they'll plead that nobody watches OTA.

Nope. CATV has the "Must Carry" rule:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Must-carry
The result of requiring CATV to carry local OTA broadcast TV signals
is causing an odd problem in demographics. Many OTA stations find
that the bulk of their viewing audience is watching via CATV and not
via OTA. In some cases, the stations are so isolated, that the OTA
viewers could be counted on both hands. Other stations merely recycle
the same syndicated programming that can be watched on other channels,
resulting in massive duplication. So, why are they doing this?
Because the Must Carry rule has dramatically increased the number of
viewers, which keeps the stations afloat with advertising revenue. The
FCC could easily mandate that all OTA broadcast station should get a
fiber feed to the local CATV or DBS feed point, turn off the
transmitter, and only those few watching OTA TV will notice. It's
been discussed, but the FCC wants to hold onto the OTA broadcast
license revenue, making such a transition unlikely.

Acronym decoder:
OTA = Over the air
CATV = Cable Television
DBS = Direct Broadcast Satellite (Sirius-XM
, DefecTV).
FCC = Federal Communications Commish.
TV = Television

?-)

 

[josephkk]

On Wed, 22 May 2013 14:50:12 +0100, "N_Cook" <diverse@tcp.co.uk> wrote:

William Sommerwerck <grizzledgeezer@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:knigim$mne$1@dont-email.me...
A (digital) TV transmitter with a few thousand watts and
a well-sited high-gain antenna covers a city of 5 to 10
million people and beyond. The electricity bill is trivial.

OTOH -- the cost of installing and maintaining a cable TV
network [sic] serving 5 million people is enormous.

Broadcasting is unique and cannot be economically replaced
by cable or satellite.

You're overlooking the fact that a cable system can provide 100 channels.


Only 10 of which are watched by any particular household

If that many. My primary use for TV is weekend morning cartoons, and not
all that important to me. I think my time would be better spent watching
my Buster Keaton and Charlie Chaplin DVDs. Well, i do have some
"Avengers" and "The Prisoner" and other good stuff as well.

Sports types may like the cable and sat packages, that is their thing
though.

?-)

 

[Harvey Daye Jr]

On 05/27/2013 01:17 PM, (PeteCresswell) wrote:

Per Phoena:

I get my news from real news websites like PressTV.

Charlie Rose interviewed a guy named Shane Smith who is owner of a
YouTube-based media company called "Vice" which seems tb headed for a
dominant position in news coverage.

His assertion was that something like 60% of people under a certain age
(30 comes to mind, but I'm not positive) do not even own a TV.

YOU WANT TO KNOW WHAT I SAW ON TEE VEE ONCE. I SAW A GUY WHO SAID THAT
NO WHITE MAN SHOULD EVER GO TO JAIL FOR KILLING A NIGGER OR A JEW. THEY
ARE NOT HUMANS BUT FILTHY DISGUSTING BEASTS.

 

[Wond]

On Tue, 21 May 2013 09:51:38 -0700, William Sommerwerck wrote:

You can see it happening... all the interesting and entertaining
programming is being sequestered to the cable-only stations. Then,
they'll plead that nobody watches OTA.

I don';t think you understand how broadcast -- or cable -- television
works.

Locally, the main OTA company has been purchased by the huge cable
provider. Since then, OTA service has deteriorated in several ways.
It is OTA I want, being a cheap sort.