21 Comments Add your own

• 1. thedetroitchannel  |  January 6th, 2007 at 7:38 am

  good move…

  do everything you can to limit the number of folks who watch the crap you put ota.

  sinclair. ain’t this the same group that refused to air something they deemed anti-administration?

• 2. curt  |  January 6th, 2007 at 8:09 am

  I live in one of these effected areas, and to say that I’m pissed off about this is a total understatement.
  This kind of crap is just another reason to use torrents.

• 3. Safran  |  January 6th, 2007 at 8:25 am

  Curt: I sympathize. But torrents aren’t gonna cut it when it comes to the football playoffs. This is another reason for Slingboxes, too. Maybe someone in another state can “Sling” the video to you. Good luck to you.

• 4. Jake  |  January 6th, 2007 at 3:30 pm

  Ah…i too live in one of the affected areas. I get a kick out of the two companies I hate most dueling it out. Sinclair - a company which runs crappy and flawed news operations and doesn’t treat its staff well vs. mediacom - a company which takes advantage of its government-provided monopoly and can’t even contact the tech support people when a receptionist is calling from a few rooms away from the call center.

• 5. aidian  |  January 6th, 2007 at 4:39 pm

  if only there was some way both companies could be destroyed in this spat….

• 6. yuba  |  January 6th, 2007 at 6:32 pm

  Hey folks, this is nothing new. Nexstar Broadcasting did this in 2005 and Cox Communications and another cable company in Missouri and the cable companies finally caved after 10 months of handing out rabbit ears. Dish Network came into several markets and made a killing by offering the local stations. That also put a number of small mom and pop cable companies out of business as well as they were going to have to start paying Nexstar as well. Cox then sold a lot of their systems but their predecessor and several other systems are now paying Nexstar to carry their stations. This isn’t brain surgery people. Why should a cable company be allowed to re-package a TV station’s product they get for free and turn around and sell it and make a profit on it while at the same time they pay ESPN, etc for their programming? If you have your pulse on the broadcast trade you know that 2007 is going to be a flat revenue year, if that. No Olympics, no elections, and many stations are still spending millions on full power digital/conversions. Les Moonves of CBS is also serious about seeking compensation for CBS programming…..

• 7. Greg  |  January 6th, 2007 at 10:40 pm

  Cox communications and Belo’s WWL-TV are doing the same thing here in New Orleans as well. WWL-TV is the CBS affiliate and has the Super Bowl this year and since the Saints have a really good chance of going for the first time, both companies are waiting to see who blinks first. Also, Cox and Belo have been negotiation for years on the CBS HD feed and I suspect that Cox is doing this so they can (hopefully) get CBS HD. Won’t bother me, I have DirecTV and HD OTA

• 8. Sue  |  January 7th, 2007 at 5:44 pm

  I expect to see a refund in my cable bill.

• 9. themediacomchannel  |  January 8th, 2007 at 12:39 am

  Don’t hold your breath, Sue…

• 10. carol kohler  |  January 8th, 2007 at 10:44 am

  like most people i don’t have a good understanding of the problems going on other then money conflicts. i do understand that i have lost my abc channel & i’m mad! if this can’t be resolved then i’ll be looking for an alternative to cable.
  thanks
  c. kohler

• 11. larry  |  January 11th, 2007 at 5:39 pm

  How can you people start jerking channels during football
  playoffs? Many people like myself have gone out and bought new big screen high def televisions to enjoy the programing you offer, now you want to TAKE IT BACK!!!!!!!This situation better be straightened out by the Daytona 500 or there is going to be a dish sitting in my yard!! And I know many other people feel the same way.

• 12. Misti  |  January 12th, 2007 at 11:06 pm

  I want my C W back! I miss Not watching my show Supernatural! It’s not fair.

• 13. lewis  |  January 12th, 2007 at 11:46 pm

  I no longer get coverage on my favorite basketball team, because you money-hungrey excecs refuse to negotiate a small problem. I do however recieve a bunch of other crappy stations that I never watch. Think about it!

• 14. Steve  |  January 13th, 2007 at 3:37 pm

  I live in one of the affected areas. This whole situation is ridiculous. I refuse to get a dish. I had one for a while, and it was OK for what it was. But I have 5 tv’s in my house. Do the math. That’s an extra $20 a month to get service to all of them. On top of what I would pay for dish service similar to my cable? I don’t think so.

  Instead of paying that extra $20 a month, I took a different direction. I’ve only ever had analog cable. And I don’t get my internet service from the cable company. So I took a modulator that I had around for another project, an old VCR, an antenna that I had around, and I ordered a filter online the blocks out signals above channel 86. I hooked up the antenna to the VCR, set the VCR to my missing channel and remodulated the output of the VCR to a channel above the analog cable (92) and now I’m sitting here watching the playoff game on at least 3 sets in my house. Assuming this goes on into the spring, I’ll actually put up a real antenna. Then I don’t care. The could pull off all the broadcast stations. I’ve got enough old VCR’s sitting around to make my own mini head-end system.

  I applaud Mediacom’s attempt to hold the line, but they mishandled the whole thing in the first place. Sinclair on the other hand is granted the right to broadcast by the public in the form of the FCC. They are already paid handsomly through advertising dollars for something they do very badly in my area. I don’t have any complaint with them being compensated for rebroadcast rights, but they need to get their collective heads out of their lower regions. Medicom is willing to submit to binding arbritration. Sinclair is refusing for two reasons. In their minds, they’re punishing Mediacom for suing them. And they know their demands are unreasonable and that they won’t get what they want out of arbitration. The only way it’s going to be solved is for the government to follow through and change the laws so the FCC can force both paties in to binding arbitration. So, in the mean time, we have choices. Get a dish, get an antenna, or go without. I wish everyone well in their quest to replace lost programming

  In case anyone’s interested, I got the filter and modulator from a company called Smarthome.

• 15. Marie Thompson  |  January 14th, 2007 at 6:07 am

  I too will be looking for a refund on that hefty 150.00 a month bill from mediacom. Spread a little of your wealth you take from your customers so that they can have the channel, and or shows they are paying dearly for. No Football Playoffs, no Courttv, no CSI and etc, well guess who will be saving 150.00 a month. I will definitly be getting a dishtv for my home.

• 16. bill  |  January 14th, 2007 at 9:17 am

  media and the dish they both suck. i cant the rabbit ears to work. both can stick it.

• 17. steve  |  January 15th, 2007 at 2:36 pm

  better get settled before the Daytona 500 or i will cancel mediacom

• 18. Scott  |  January 16th, 2007 at 4:19 pm

  I can see how each side wants what they want, but Sinclair should be happy to get ANYTHING from the cable companies. Considering Sinclair stations make the bulk of their money off of advertising on shows that are syndicated or network, they are not hurting so far as to demand so much from the cable companies.

  Cable MSO’s are used to shelling out 25-30 cents per subscriber for TLC, TBS, Comedy Central. But paying terrestrial channels for the right to rebroadcast is new. CBS is just starting to get into the mix. Back in the early 90’s, “must carry” was the rule and cable balked at that (loss of channel space).

  Despite what you think, cable companies really do want to keep your rates low. They can’t do that when every network on every channel is demanding payment. Dish and DirecTV are no different. It is not fair that Mediacom had to drop Sinclair’s stations because one side won’t budge and the other is being as flexible as possible. I applaud Mediacom for holding their ground and doing what they could to keep the stations on the lineup. They are still trying. I just wish Sinclair would realize that they are only hurting themselves by reducing the number of eyeballs they are reaching.

• 19. Kristi  |  January 21st, 2007 at 8:13 am

  I’m not totally unsympathetic to MediaCom’s situation. However, it’s FOX!!! I could care less if MediaCom dropped 30 other channels. And a big thanks to both MediaCom and Sinclair for doing this during the NFL playoffs. I mean who would rather watch the Bears and the Saints when they could watch a 10-year-old Lindsay Lohan in a movie that was too crappy to make it in the theatres for more than a week? Seriously, they take away FOX and replace it with Family Starz? WTF? I called MediaCom and they offered to send me an antenna. Great solution. The grainy resolution really adds the finishing touch to the sports watching experience. My friends were so excited about it that it took them 30 seconds to decide to watch the game at somebody else’s house. So as great as the antenna idea is, here’s my solution. I’ll watch the game at a friend’s house (thank you DirectTV), steal the shows on Fox that I’d want to watch (thank you internet), and I’ll drop MediaCom (thank you antenna!). Both Sinclair and MediaCom can go the Hell.

• 20. steve  |  January 25th, 2007 at 9:34 pm

  well the thing I can’t understand is why Mediacom thinks Sinclair has a monoply - If I had the money I bring comcast in my area an bankrupt Mediacom in a couple of months

• 21. Lawrence  |  February 1st, 2007 at 10:31 pm

  so i just heard that because of this dispute, no one in eastern Iowa (Iowa City / Cedar Rpaids) will be able to view the Superbowl.

  Is this true, is there another means aside from having directv to see it?

  visiting the area from out of town, and very pissed i might not be able to see the game

Leave a Comment

Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed