Directv/ATT vs Local CBS station... Question

jorbill2or wrote:

bgum wrote:
One would think that the local channels would want DTV and others to carry them as their advertising would reach a large audience therefore be worth more. After all OTA is paid for by advertising.

One would think so but not enough for them. The cable and satellite must pay them to rebroadcast the signal you may be able to get with an antenna. and all the outages are the locals raising prices to the dish and direct that they ( in the end you) refuse to pay. Locast is being sued to stop as they aren’t paying the rebroadcast fees.

Cable and Sat providers insert THEIR OWN commercials over top of the local channels commercials (one or two "spots" per commercial segment), hence the local channels advertising "foot print" is not really expanded and the local channel doesn't see as much or minimal "profit" from cable and sat providers foot print.

OTA broadcasters lobbied and won the right to charge cable and sat providers in the Re transmission Consent in the 1992 Cable act legislation. Up until then ALL cable cos and sat providers that offered ANY locals where under a "MUST CARRY" rule (carry one local channel and you HAD to carry ALL locals in that market). Sat providers at that time often did not "offer" locals at all.

For a good read you can visit FCCs website HERE while that addresses cable, some of also applies to sat providers..

And by the way, cable and sat providers ALSO insert their own commercials on EVERY channel that is not commercial free.. Sometimes you will notice a slight timing issue on the insert where a commercial was too short or too long or timing was off a little and you can see a second or two of the commercial that would have been seen..