Dish Pulls Fox News, Fox Business Network As Talks Break Down 275
An anonymous reader writes Fox News and Fox Business were pulled by Dish Network over the weekend, as both continue to argue over a fee agreement. From the article: "Dish said in a statement early Sunday morning that 21st Century Fox had blocked access to the two networks after Dish balked when rates for other networks owned by the media conglomerate were made a part of the negotiations. Tim Carry, executive vice president of distribution at Fox News Channel, countered in a statement that "Dish prematurely ceased distribution of Fox News in an attempt to intimidate and sway our negotiations. It is unfortunate that the millions of Fox News viewers on Dish were used as pawns by their provider. Hopefully they will vote with their hard earned money and seek another one of our other valued distributors immediately."
In unrelated news: Average IQ up 5 points in US. (Score:5, Funny)
Fox news did not report it.
Re:In unrelated news: Average IQ up 5 points in US (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
In unrelated news: Average IQ up 5 points in US.
When did you leave?
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Yeah, it was originally an attempt by Fox EG to compete with Stephen Colbert and The Colbert Report.
Re: In unrelated news: Average IQ up 5 points in U (Score:5, Funny)
Damn, the Republicans are up early this morning. Church let out already? Run out of abortion clinics to firebomb?
Re: In unrelated news: Average IQ up 5 points in U (Score:5, Insightful)
I personally don't depend on any of the networks because I have had the displeasure of having the opportunity of learning how broadcast journalism actually works. As a result, I have absolutely no use for their media. I certainly don't wish to be a target for what passes as journalism today.
The government operations (like the Senate, House, etc...) are broadcast an televised. We're choosing candidates as members of a team. We pick a team like Fox or CNN and they broadcast play by play or blow by blow reports of how they interpreted events in the government. We don't choose politicians to represent our best interests. We choose politicians to be a member of one team or another. We want our teams to win and we don't care what they have to do in order to do it. We love the technicalities too. Like, "My team doesn't like what the president did. Look here, there's a little rule in the rule book which says we can throw a card and sue the president for doing his job the best he can".
I must admit, I put little faith in the silliness you seemed to come here to attack. I have far less use for a drone like yourself who seems to think that just because someone won a popularity contest and was voted CEO (which actually doesn't mean what you think it does) he/she or they are special by some means.
Comments here are a waste of time and effort, but for many of us provide an outlet for our frustrations with the system. It's probably no more productive than talking sports at a bar, but it at least keeps us from being drunk all the time. If you're not interested in the Slashdot method of communicating, why would you bother coming here? Of course, I guess maybe you're just using the comments as a place to be a dick and unload a bit. More power to you. Enjoy, Slashdot is here to offend and we are its little helpers
Re: (Score:2)
This is hardly news. Read about the Greens and the Blues [wikipedia.org] in Byzantium.
I guess they only need a football team each and it would be complete.
Re: (Score:3)
Says the person posting on Slashdot trying to exert the fact that he is smarter than everyone......
Says the person meta-criticizing a /. criticism, and who also apparently cannot tell the difference between the words "exert" and "assert".
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
That's because intelligent people don't watch either network. You get a better perspective from a mix of NPR, BBC, and even Aljazheera English.
Re: wrong totally (Score:4, Insightful)
Also, the bonus for doctor's offices and car dealerships doesn't account for the success of Fox's prime time shows. Fox News routinely blows out its competitors in prime time, a time at which most of those businesses are closed and viewers are watching at home.
Re: (Score:3)
I've never heard of a cable package with CNN not on basic cable. You usually get CNN, Fox, and MSNBC. Dish network, the company who we're allegedly talking about, has all 3 on their basic service.
Also, the bonus for doctor's offices and car dealerships doesn't account for the success of Fox's prime time shows. Fox News routinely blows out its competitors in prime time, a time at which most of those businesses are closed and viewers are watching at home.
The people still glued to their TV sets and cable television in the US in 2014 are very likely politically and educationally uniform.
Admittedly with no data to hand, the demographic who watches FOX as a source of news likely anti-intellectual, science-denying, god-fearing, economically disenfranchised, and socially regressive.
But even if I'm mistaken in my gross stereotype of the audience for FOX News, judging the "merits" of a TV network according to the size of the TV audience misses the forest for the tr
Re: wrong totally (Score:3)
What a staggeringly ignorant post, oh wait, it's Slashdot...
What? CNN and MSNBC are also part of 'basic cable', and do you simply not understand the difference between subscribers and viewers?
Oprah's OWN network and Algezera America have LOTS of subscribers, but no viewers to speak of. This impacts the advertising rate and the typ
Re:In unrelated news: Average IQ up 5 points in US (Score:5, Funny)
Look who's bored. Dish customer?
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Wish I had mod points so this could be raised up...
Also, I think that's the first time I've ever uttered those words for an AC comment... lol
Re: (Score:3)
Mod parent too close to the truth. People need to take responsibility for their actions rather than blame it all on racism. Enough of you libtards and your disgusting and vile BS, trying to label anyone who disagrees with your appalling communist ideology as a racist. Absolutely shameless. The only racist around here is YOU. What the hell is your problem anyway and why do you have such a racist hatred of white people that you feel so inclined to go on the attack whenever anyone should call you out?
You forgot something... (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Faux News is not much of a loss. :)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
-1, Flamebait? Obviously someone with mod points has no sense of humor. This is why people jokingly refer to Fox News as "Faux news:"
http://www.addictinginfo.org/2... [addictinginfo.org]
http://www.businessinsider.com... [businessinsider.com]
http://www.alternet.org/news-a... [alternet.org]
http://mathbabe.org/2012/04/21... [mathbabe.org]
http://foxnewsboycott.com/fox-... [foxnewsboycott.com]
http://www.google.com/url?sa=t... [google.com]
http://www.google.com/url?sa=t... [google.com]
http://www.salon.com/2013/10/1... [salon.com]
Re: You forgot something... (Score:3)
Dan Rather stands behind every story on his reports, even if the documents he bases them on are forgeries!
ABC stands behind their exploding pickup truck story, even though they had to put model rocket igniters in the gas tank to blue up the pickup truck for their story.
Andrea Mitchell will argue till the cows come home that she only edited the George Zimmerman 911 call to make his perfectly innocent answers to the questions he was asked by the operator for 'clarity', despite completely re-arranging the sequ
Re:You forgot something... (Score:5, Insightful)
Personal opinion on the merit of FOX News aside, I can see where it has fiscal value as it's turned on and left on all over the goddamn place. Lobbies, break rooms, waiting rooms, all seem to have left CNN for FOX News and it's rare to find other stations on these days. But, it sounds like it's FOX News that's worth something, not the other, lesser channels, and even then, FOX News' value might itself be overinflated if it's serving as background noise more than actually being watched by the people in those lobbies, break rooms, and waiting rooms.
We don't have any subscription TV because we didn't want to pay for channels that we don't watch. This licensing model that is being pushed on DISH in turn forces DISH to push on to consumers, as if DISH has to pay for twenty channels to get one or two that people want to watch, they must charge for those twenty channels and push them to consumers, even if no one watches them.
I didn't expect to hear myself say this, but good on DISH for standing up to FOX/Newscorp for now.
You forgot something... (Score:5, Insightful)
I actually don't like the idea of being a faceless member of a collective, or causing a great divide between management and workers. But right now we have a situation where one side is organized and using its leverage to drive a tough bargain (with companies growing ever-larger, and more profitable), and the other is just lying down.
Re: (Score:2)
In America we hardly have unions any more...
I didn't realize that 11.3% of the US workforce hardly exists.
In 2013, the union membership rate--the percent of wage and salary workers who were ... The number of wage and salary workers belonging to
members of unions--was 11.3 percent
unions, at 14.5 million, was little different from 2012. -- UNION MEMBERS -- 2013 [bls.gov]
Re: (Score:2)
Having members and actually having power are two different things, the person you replied to was saying unions don't exist with the teeth that they used to.
We have unions in name only. Every single time the UAW contract comes up at my company they rabble back and forth and then "hurray, we reached an agreement." Union bosses and contractor get their cut for the 'negotiation'. Employees don't really get anything and the people at top win.
The standard of living for a lot of the US would improve if more people
Re: (Score:2)
I didn't realize that 11.3% of the US workforce hardly exists.
A lot of people don't realize that. Have you heard about the Ferguson protests? Blacks make up 13% of the US population yet they are treated as an insignificant minority. In America the Black population doesn't count for that much and it is larger than the population of union workers. Draw your own conclusions or analogies using this additional point of view.
Re: (Score:2)
In America we hardly have unions any more...
I didn't realize that 11.3% of the US workforce hardly exists.
Every year that number goes down or at best stays the same. Either way every year the unions give up a little more of what little power they have. Bargaining is supposed to be a give-and-take procedure where labor gets some of what they want and management gets some of what they want. Yet every time labor comes to the table management further diminishes their clout. With union enrollment this low it is very easy for management to say "we'll just hire non-union replacements for you" and labor knows that
Re: (Score:2)
The problem is that if you go back to when unions were relatively powerful, the ones who were powerful were the management of the unions. And they often didn't do well by their members. (Other times they did, but ran afoul of some law or other, some times a reasonable one.)
Centers of power tend to become corrupt, because corrupt people are attracted to them more strongly than those who are not corrupt.
Re: (Score:3)
Pretty well put, I mostly agree, and am glad you wrote that. One point on your very last statement: do keep in mind that for many public and infrastructure unions (like police, government admins, teachers, bus drivers, etc.) it's been made illegal to go on strike by law, or as part of a contract required by the employer. I agree that that pretty much takes the possibility of fair negotiations off the table.
Re: (Score:2)
They could strike like they do in Montreal [imgur.com] by not wearing Standard issue uniforms. [montrealracing.com]
Re: (Score:2)
In the name of freedom.
Re: (Score:2)
For great justice.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Samzenpus forgot to blame this on the freedom-oppressing and america-hating labor unions. Clearly they are some how at fault here if fox news has been disconnected. I would have expected him to at least have read the article far enough to find a way to make that connection happen.
No it's Obama's fault. I don't know how but *everything* bad is Obama's fault.
(Perhaps I've been watching too much Fox News.)
Dish Customer Here (Score:5, Insightful)
This is far from limited to just Dish customers, as each major cable provider has to renegotiate regularly.
I've noticed a common theme, though... no matter who you talk to, it's the other greedy bastard who's being unreasonable.
Re:Dish Customer Here (Score:5, Insightful)
I have an idea - let them run adverts and offer the channels for free, OR charge cable and dish companies (ultimately the viewer) for the channels and run no adverts. End the greedy double-dipping. Cable and Satellite carriers perform a service by increasing their potential viewer share, which increases their advertising value. It is the networks who are greedy, not the rebroadcasters.
Re: (Score:2)
I wonder what it would take for Dish to just start their own channels and programming.
Netflix has done it. Amazon has done it. Yahoo is doing it with Community. I would actually subscribe to dish if they had new original programming and not Fox News.
Re: Dish Customer Here (Score:3)
Cable TV was never sold as "commercial-free" - cable TV traces it's roots back to CATV - "Central Antenna TeleVision" - intended to provide better reception of over-the-air broadcast TV stations. Then, later, satellites provided cable companies with the ability to carry commercial free cable channels (HBO) along with rebroadcasting local broadcast TV which always has contained commercials. Then along came cable channels that straddled both markets emerged - they are cable only, but include commercials.
How w
Re: (Score:3)
XBMC is now Kodi.
Plex was OSXBMC renamed. The sources got quite divergent when Plex went more commercial.
Re: (Score:2)
We also lost CNN and the Turner stations in October/November due to a renewal disagreement.
This is far from limited to just Dish customers, as each major cable provider has to renegotiate regularly.
I've noticed a common theme, though... no matter who you talk to, it's the other greedy bastard who's being unreasonable.
That just shows how nasty the negotiations are- each company is employing their PR department to push statements and try to influence the public as part of an overall negotiation strategy. Bringing in other people, especially one of a higher authority, into a negotiation is standard practice in negotiations (car sales manager is one good example). Trying to rope your customers into influencing a negotiation, however, is unusual and generally only happens when the negotiation is so nasty that you want peop
Re: (Score:2)
I would side with Dish in this disagreement. Fox wants to jack up the distribution fees and Dish is telling them no. If the fees go up Dish will pass that right along to you the customer.
Re: (Score:3)
...and I didn't miss CNN at all. At work they moved the cafeteria TVs to CNBC. At home if I watched the news at all I switched to Al Jazeera America to check them out. When CNN came back work switched em back.
All of these news channels are replaceable. If Dishes loses they'll pass the rate increase on to me, and I'd rather lose one or two of them. Losing Fox is just a bonus.
Re:Dish Customer Here (Score:4, Informative)
Dish costs less because they're willing to tolerate these lockouts... DirecTV is similar and available most places Dish is, and gets its deals done on time, but has to pay more and passes the costs on to consumers.
Re: (Score:2)
Apparently the news stations are shouting "price increase!" and DirecTV accepted and Dish, as usual, rejected.
Re: (Score:2)
This.
Also, Dish can't retransmit what it doesn't have a contract for, and the contract expired. The disagreement is over the terms of a new contract.
Apparently the various network heads haven't learned, despite plenty of opportunities to, that Charlie Ergen doesn't bluff.
Re: (Score:2)
I've noticed a common theme, though... no matter who you talk to, it's the other greedy bastard who's being unreasonable.
I think we can agree: All of the greedy bastards are being unreasonable.
Re: (Score:2)
The real retards here are the poople that will flee a cable service just because they stand up to an upstream content provider.
This is not about the bill going down. This is about the bill going up. Fox wants your cable bill to go up and Dish is fighting that.
Like any sane business, they don't want their costs going up. Unfortunately, they are dealing with monopoly products that have a single supplier.
It's high time that ALL cable providers itemized prices so that when channel X raises the bill, it is obvio
Re: (Score:3)
Welcome to what awaits the internet post-neutrality: more of the same, only online, and with fewer scrolling banners letting you know it's the other guy's fault.
GOOD NEWS (Score:2)
good riddance. Please die.
Thanks,
Everyone.
Pretend capitalism (Score:2, Offtopic)
The primary beneficiaries are the upper management. No big corporation is run for the clients, stockholders, or employes who do the real work. It's all intended to enrich the people at the top.
It's how things are right now: no democracy, no capitalism, no freedom. Not
Re: (Score:2)
The interesting thing was also that the Fox rep said: "Hopefully they will vote with their hard earned money". I can't imagine that it was Fox insisting on a lower compensation for their shows. So, Dish could choose either to increase the rate for the customers and take their hard earned dollars for Fox or cough the money up themselves. Is it that Carry is too stupid to realise this (just uttering one of the typical cliche expressions) or what?
Bert
Substitution channel (Score:4, Funny)
When Turner Networks pulled their newschannels like CNN, CNNi, and HLN during the negotiations with Dish, Dish substituted for Glen Beck's Blaze channel and Al-Jazeera America. This time, Dish only substituted Beck's Blaze for one of the Fox News channels. I'm guessing that putting Al-Jazeera in as a substitute for Fox News would have caused a substantial portion of Dish customer's heads to explode. So kudos for Dish for thinking of the cranial integrity of their customers.
What do you want? (Score:2)
In areas with bad or no cable TV service, Dish Network and DirecTV can be your only option. Dish has these channel dropping problems because they hold the line on price, refusing to pay up for overpriced channels. In the case of Fox, Rupert controls both the channel and the delivery service so Fox-branded channels will most likely never go down on DirecTV... but that causes DirecTV to cost more.
If you can't handle the loss of your favorite channel, then you don't want Dish, you want DirecTV or a cable servi
Re: (Score:2)
Stop Being Pawns and Do Our Bidding! (Score:2)
It is unfortunate that the millions of Fox News viewers on Dish were used as pawns by their provider. Hopefully they will vote with their hard earned money and seek another one of our other valued distributors immediately.
Stop being their pawns, do our bidding! Choke their cannon with your dead! And peel us some grapes!
Dish customer here (Score:2, Insightful)
These outages can be pain, but as long as it keeps my bill from increasing, I support Dish's tough negotiating tactics.
Broadcast TV viewer here (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't really understand the issues. How much was Dish charging Fox News to deliver their content to Dish viewers? And what sort of fee increases was Dish asking for?
Re: (Score:2)
You've got that backwards (or I'm missing the sarcasm).
Dish has to pay Fox News to retransmit Fox's content (copyrights!), Fox wanted to increase the price and/or require Dish to carry additional Fox-owned channels as part of the same contract.
When Fox (or any other network in negotiations) claims that "Dish pulled the channel", they're stretching the truth. What they really mean is "the contract expired, and Dish cravenly stopped retransmitting our copyrighted content so we couldn't sue them for infringem
Re: (Score:2)
It was probably sarcastic, but from a cost standpoint the GP has a point. Fox gives their signal "for free" OTA and makes money on advertising. Seems like the distributors could reverse the table if they wanted to play hardball. What good is a phone is you are unable to speak?
Re: (Score:2)
It was probably sarcastic
Probably.
We'll see when Netflix starts charging Verizon and AT&T for distributing their content.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't really understand the issues. How much was Dish charging Fox News to deliver their content to Dish viewers? And what sort of fee increases was Dish asking for?
Brilliant!
Re: (Score:3)
Other way around.
That doesn't make sense. What with broadband providers trying to squeeze all the money they can out of Netflix, Google and any other content providers. Just call it sattelite Internet service and charge Fox for the bandwidth.
Which is it? Who blocked it? (Score:2)
FTFA: 21st Century Fox had blocked access to the two networks ... Dish prematurely ceased distribution of Fox News
So each one is blaming the other...
Generally speaking (Score:2)
Generally speaking, major owners of multiple networks such as Fox often try to force distributors (cable networks, dish, etc) to bundle all of their networks. Kind of an all-or-nothing approach. Otherwise networks like Fox News just wouldn't get distributed at all. It doesn't have a large enough following.
This is slowly changing as peoples viewing habits change. People are watching less T.V. these days and that is shifting the cost model such that the 'junk' channels are now more of a drag on profits vs
Re:Generally speaking (Score:5, Informative)
While I'm definitely not a fan of their ouvre, Fox News is the fourth most popular [medialifemagazine.com] cable channel, behind only Disney, Nickelodeon, and Adult Swim. As much as you may not like that, they certainly do have a "large enough following".
Grandparents. (Score:2)
So my grandmother who lives where there is no cable TV is only being brainwashed by the Christian Broadcast Network now.... (seriously)
Dish and NewsCorp (Score:2)
What's Up with DISH? (Score:2)
First they lose all the Time Warner channels, then they lost CBS, now they lost all the Fox Channels...
Pretty soon there's going to be no actual channels left on DISH.
Not the first time in recent history (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
and after some time fox will say you must take fox news with you want FS1, FS2, FXX, FX, FSN, FOX OTA, and more.
Re: (Score:2)
and when the contract for the other channels ends fox news will be part of them.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Fox News is not offering a different viewpoint, they're offering right-wing FUD.
Re: (Score:2, Flamebait)
I am not sure that it really is right wing, instead it is news through the lens of the super-rich.
Re: (Score:2)
What's the difference?
I am not sure that it really is right wing, instead it is news through the lens of the super-rich.
Re:Pulled Fox News ... (Score:5, Insightful)
Do differing viewpoints upset you?
There is nothing wrong with Fox News as a source for people who go looking to hear the news from a particular viewpoint. The problem with Fox News is that they pretend - smirkingly because they're smart enough to know the truth - that they are "fair and balanced." And some (many, actually) people who are naive or intellectually uncurious actually believe this is an even-handed depiction of reality instead of an editorialized view. This leads these people to think that everything in the world that is wrong is due to muslims, liberals or Obama (who is both). And that in turn leads to extremism and fosters ever more deep and toxic political divides.
I have no problem at all with differing viewpoints. I only have a problem with those - and this includes "news" sources across the spectrum from the New York Post to Adbusters - that are willing to actively mislead the reader in order to advance their particular editorial slant and agenda. While it may be fun as entertainment for the knowing, it is deadly poison for the health of the community as a whole for those who really believe it. Think about someone who has a 100 IQ... and then realize that half the country is dumber than that.
Re: (Score:2)
Think about someone who has a 100 IQ... and then realize that half the country is dumber than that.
Only if 100 is the median, not just the average.
Re:Pulled Fox News ... (Score:5, Insightful)
looks like someone is hurt
Who's hurt? I have no problem with Fox News per se and I have no problem with people who agree with Fox News. If that's what you like, that's fine, especially if you understand Fox News to be an editorial product. But it is clearly disingenuous at best when it claims to be "fair and balanced," and some people either trust Fox more than they should, or are not possessed of enough critical thinking skills to see if for what it is, which is bad for society.
fox news is number one in viewers and ratings for every 1 cnn hln etc viewer there is 100 to 10,000 watching fox news . if it was fud then other news networks would eat them alive
I think you are equating being "popular" with being "good," and that is a pretty serious mistake. I think it's also a mistake to recognize that it may well be popular entirely because it's FUD. Many, many people - conservative Fox viewers, liberal MSNBC viewers, whatever - want someone to pick all their news for them in advance so that they don't have to encounter any news in the world that doesn't agree with their beliefs. That's their right but I think we would be less of a toxically polarized society if we listened to more two-sided views, or at least acknowledged the biases that were driving us to want to only consume a politically slanted news message.
Re: (Score:2)
I give Rupert Murdoch credit. He found this untapped area of news and cashed in. Getting upset at Fox News is like getting upset at Andy Kaufman wrestling and making fun of southerners.
Re: (Score:2)
Blatant propaganda wrapped up as news does upset me. And no, the left does not do the equivalent in scope or magnitude in the slightest.
Re: (Score:2)
No, it isn't a "great service" since a significant number of Dish customers are going to want to watch that programming and now won't be able to do so. That is the opposite of "great service."
Re: (Score:2)
No, it isn't a "great service" since a significant number of Dish customers are going to want to watch that programming and now won't be able to do so. That is the opposite of "great service."
Don't worry. Fox will cave and people will get their highly editorialized "news" to keep them happily enraged about all the wrong stuff. And Dish's tactics means they get all that spin without paying the higher rates that would be required by Fox's current demands. It's a win-win.
Re: (Score:2)
.. and did their customers a great service. You can thank them later.
I hope I can spell Pyrrhic correctly.
They replaced it temporarily with the Blaze.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, look on the bright side .... when the deal is done and Fox is back on the air, they might keep the Blaze too after Dish helps it build up a fan base with wider exposure. I wonder if it is a plot?
Re: (Score:2)
Dish Network already carried The Blaze (channel 212). If they've put The Blaze in for Fox "News", all they did was re-direct it during the dispute.
Re: (Score:3)
In *most* cases, they *don't*. They stick to Fox "News", and then read about how horrible MSNBC is via Breitbart, The Blaze, World Net Daily, etc, which only furthers the political divide.
WTF areyou watching either of them?
Re:Get Out of Your Bubble (Score:5, Insightful)
You need Fox news so Democratic administrations are held accountable.
You need MSNBC so Republican administrations are held accountable.
There are blowhards and static on both channels, but there is some useful information to be gleaned amongst the chaff.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
You need Fox news so Democratic administrations are held accountable.
You need MSNBC so Republican administrations are held accountable.
There are blowhards and static on both channels, but there is some useful information to be gleaned amongst the chaff.
As a rule of thumb, take the 'liberal' and 'conservative' commentary, split the difference between the two, and then factor out any common business interest between the various media companies (e.g. SOPA, advertisers, etc.) and you will have a much more accurate view of world events.
Re:Get Out of Your Bubble (Score:5, Funny)
Nobody watches MSNBC.
Re: (Score:2)
+1 and well played
Re: (Score:2)
but there is some useful information to be gleaned amongst the chaff.
Except that most people don't seem smart enough to discern the wheat from the chaff, and believe 100% what their preferred news source is saying.
Re: (Score:2)
What you actually need are impartial and unbiased news networks who report news in a genuinely unbiased way, strictly separate their reporting from their editorialising and ask hard questions of whomever happens to be in charge and the opposition. Preferably this would codified with broadcast standards that they would be required to stick to.
I agree. But sadly that requires a demand for real journalism, but sensationalism and anger-porn are what people tend to gravitate toward.
Re:Get Out of Your Bubble (Score:4, Informative)
There's a problem there... MSNBC's weekend lineup is filled with "Lockup", a program about jail that they ordered a batch of too many episodes. CNN is broadcasting mostly recorded programs on the weekend. So, only Fox News is covering the world as it happens with weekend newscasts during the day on weekends.
Re: (Score:2)
You don't understand Slashdot....
Dish Network is a information service that uses DBS bandwidth... and we talk about TV shows geeks like around here.
If you want tech business only, check on the weekday business day stories. If you want the fun stuff we do with tech, it's here on the weekends.
Re: (Score:2)
What was the topic?
Re: (Score:2)
Yep, the problem is at Fox News Channel Inc. (the company that holds the copyrights to Fox News and Fox Business produced shows.) NFL is carried the affiliates at Fox Television Stations Group and produced by Fox Sports. Dish Network fans can still see the games on Fox.
Re: (Score:2)
Shut up, Stewie.
Re: (Score:2)
There is no such thing as Comcast-Time Warner yet. It's still a proposed merger and may or may not even get approval.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
There exists some people who need to know what Bill O'Rielly is talking about each night. Those people can't tolerate Dish's occasional dropping of networks. DirecTV gets most of its deals done without disruption, but therefore has to increase prices more often.
Those people can watch The Daily Show...
Re: (Score:2)
Then there's no such thing as a news service. Some may be more informative than others, but they're all ultimately entertainment.