Tutor
•
1 Message
No Al Jazeera
Please do not carry Al Jazeera. We already have plenty of, so called, news channels that are nothing more than propogandists that sell advertising time. That last thing the American television landscape needs is to be inundated with the propoganda of Islamic extremists.
dhascall
Master
•
9.8K Messages
10 years ago
Yup OPW's can be an issue. BUT we all came to this board with no posts - maybe with an issue, to learn something and so on. It's up to them to stay and be productive (and up to us to make 'em feel welcome). Some are just going to be OPW, sadly.
0
0
dhascall
Master
•
9.8K Messages
10 years ago
I PM'd you.
0
0
dwinth
ACE - Professor
•
2.5K Messages
10 years ago
It is very difficult to make a new poster welcome, when he comes on here with an agenda posting in all capital letters, and threatening to quit U-Verse after he makes his unreasonable demands.
Owning a computer and not having the internet is like buying a refrigerator and not stocking it with food.
0
0
MicCheck
ACE - Expert
•
14.2K Messages
10 years ago
Even more of a non-entity it seems:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/11/18/al-jazeera-america-ratings_n_4297591.html
0
0
dhascall
Master
•
9.8K Messages
10 years ago
It doesn't matter how low of rating it is, I the end user should be deciding what I watch. I understand if they could not reach a deal but my bigger fear is that AJA not being available is an ideological decision and not a contractual one. Bear in mind that it's okay to have the foreign owned Bein but not AJA.
dwinth: Most of the posters that come here do not have an agenda other than letting us know that they want TVG, Hallmark, AJA, hate the 8 hour screensaver and so on. I gar-un-darn-tee you if someone comes here witrh a suggestion, ask about a channel and so on, there are the same three or so fellow ACEs who are pre-programmed to shoot them down. Not too welcoming. Most of these posters are not "cable company:" plants but some are quite nutty. The main thing is, if folks are shot down, it just turns into an Ace Club. We may not always agree but lets all go get a drink, lol.
1 Attachment
ace-club.jpg
0
stufried
Guru
•
1.1K Messages
10 years ago
I dropped the competing carrier in my town because I was having too many internet problems so I'm stuck between a rock and a hard place, but I really don't like what is going on and ATT's decisions to engage in viewpoint discrimination bothers me. The fact that some subscribers might be offended by the content is not grounds to exclude it and despite the corporate excuses, I really believe that ATT is thinking that middle Americans (if there is such a creature) will have a bias against Al Jazeera because of its reporting on 9/11.
My position is that I want to hear viewpoints that I don't agree with. It makes me know what the other side is saying which is always a good thing. It gives me a better ability to talk intelligently on issues and sometimes they are right! I am a Jewish and I'd like to hear what they say.
I think that internet providers and cable tv carriers are like common carriers and have a duty to carry messages and viewpoints that they don't agree with. How would people react if Uverse started blocking access to Verizon.com, Tmobile.com, Comcast.com, etc?
Am I going to leave ATT over the issue? Probably not, but they definitely lost a lot of points and I think most defections take place because of multiple issues.
0
Fox Mulder
Former Employee
•
310 Messages
10 years ago
Were you in the meeting where they had this discussion? If you google, you will find out there are legal issues that have nothing to do with your suspected "viewpoint discrimination"
0
0
dhascall
Master
•
9.8K Messages
10 years ago
Fox: I was not at the negotiating table and I'm sure that stufried was not either. BUT the timelines on the legal wranglings did not start happening until after it was clear that AT&T was not going to carry AJA.
Stu and myself are stating an opinion - (which we are allowed, right?) that the decision not to carry AJA could be very well based on politics and ideology instead of legal or contractual issues. After all, they did carry beIN sports, which is under the same umbrella.
0
0
JefferMC
ACE - Expert
•
35K Messages
10 years ago
While you said "it is my fear that...", Stu did not frame "but I really don't like what is going on and ATT's decisions to engage in viewpoint discrimination" with "in my opinion" or anything similar; he stated it as fact.
It is my opinion that AT&T is working on a profit motive and calculated that the rate they were getting for the channel before the branding change wasn't enough to deal with the public backlash (and potential loss in revenue therefrom), i.e. the content had changed and the value proposition was different. If AJA had come up with more $$, then it would be on right now.
0
0
dhascall
Master
•
9.8K Messages
10 years ago
I hope that it was a contract dispute and nothing more.
0
0