Scholar
•
175 Messages
where is New Orleans NBC channel?
I have no idea where to post this, so I'll try here. Tell me where to post if this is wrong.
I live on the Gulfcoast in Mississippi. I used to get NBC from New Orleans on channel 1006. Now I get a local channel, WXXVH2, which does not have near the programing that the New Orleans channel has. Why did U-verse take away the New Orleans NBC channel. The local NBC channel on the coast in Mississippi is awful.
I want to know why the New Orleans channel was taken away, I used to get it and the local NBC channel, but only watched the New Orleans channel.
vid30jk
Scholar
•
129 Messages
10 years ago
Some additional information:
If you're wanting to place blame in this situation, look squarely at NBC itself, and then at WXXV. Until June 25, 2012, there was no NBC affiliate for the Biloxi TMA (more on that later). At that time, WXXV changed their 25.2 subchannel affiliation from MY to NBC, and moved MY to 25.3. They later discontinued MY over-the-air and placed it on cable only.
The situation can be boiled down to this:
As Biloxi had no NBC affiliate locally, the next choice was to provide the New Orleans market affiliate. Obviously NBC was fine with this -- it gets them market penetration without having to erect broadcasting towers (low-power or otherwise), which WDSU would need to provide. And given that the digital transition just happened a few years prior, WDSU probably didn't want to expend any more money, their own ROI would not have been good enough. However, NBC would always like a full-time local affiliate in each TMA.
So U-verse signed an agreement (much like the other cable/satellite providers) to provide WDSU to the Biloxi market. But when 2012 comes, and NBC/WXXV ink their deal, WXXV has the TMA "right to coverage" for all of the area specified by the FCC as theirs. That means they would need to wait-out the contracts --OR-- petition the FCC to strike null and void those contracts. In either case, there would be a wait for anything to happen. So while they waited, they built their station, the news operation, and local advertising staff.
U-verse's contract ended with WDSU for retransmission and they complied with the FCC rules, placing WXXV 25.2 NBC in the Biloxi TMA areas they serve.
An explanation of TMAs:
A Television Market Area (TMA) is a group of counties in the United States covered by a specific group of television stations. The term is used by the U.S. Government's Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to regulate broadcast, cable, and satellite transmissions, according to the Code of Federal Regulations, at 47 CFR § 76.51and FCC.gov.
The TMAs not only have full control over local broadcasts, but also delineate which channels will be received by Satellite or Cable subscribers ("must-carry" rules). These market areas can also be used to define restrictions on rebroadcasting of broadcast television signals. Generally speaking, only stations within the same market area can be rebroadcast. The only exception to this rule is the "significantly viewed" list.
Additional resources:
WXXV, WXXV-DT2, Biloxi-area TV stations
0
dhascall
Master
•
9.8K Messages
10 years ago
Good explanation. My question would be did WXXV opt for must carry, sign a contract or what? This gets a bit more muddied as (AFAIK), subchannels such as NBC 25.2 aren't covered in must carry. SO, if they did not sign a contract it is possibkle that AT&T simply let the WDSU contract end and picked up 25.2 on their own. Again, AT&T does this in SE Wisconsin and NW Ohio, where other ops pick up both Chicago and Milwaukee and Toldeo and Detroit but AT&T only picks one (Milwaulee for those in SE Wisc and Toledo for thiose in NW Ohio) and it always is in the same state.
0
0
vid30jk
Scholar
•
129 Messages
10 years ago
My guess is that WXXV/NBC signed a contract rather than opting for "must-carry" coverage, especially given the fact that they are a new operation.
Prior to Congress meddling with the system, the local stations were pleased as punch to have cable carrying their signals -- as a sort of "community service". Remember, also, that at that time, the broadcast networks commanded much more viewership, given that "cable" had little in competition to them. After Congress said that the local stations could solicit "bribes" and commit "extortion" to everyone who decided an antenna on top of their roof wasn't aesthetically brilliant anymore, and "cable" services kept expanding taking eyeballs from them, they are more interested in their cashflow than doing their "community service."
Certain cable systems still do carry out-of-market broadcasters because their customers want them, since back in those "old days" they used to have them and EXPECT them. Keep in mind that the local stations can always flex their muscle to force the other channels off, risking customer pushback and alienation, or they can coexist, possibly pushing the local cable company to pay a premium for the out of market channels' carriage. A small market such as Toledo, Ohio is a prime example of this, where back in the old days, if you had a pretty good antenna, you could pick up the Detroit market stations. It made natural sense for Buckeye Cable to carry them, to satisfy customers to make the choice of cable versus antenna.
WJRT in Flint, Michigan tried exactly this, alleging that by Comcast carrying Detroit's WXYZ, their business was being damaged. WJRT made threats to Comcast of going to the FCC, but when the story got out, the Flint community told WJRT in no uncertain terms that they were NOT pleased. At the time, the analog-signal of WXYZ could easily be captured via antenna, since Flint is only ~40-50 miles away from their huge transmitter. There was plenty of bad press on WJRT being so petty that they changed direction fairly quickly (this was also because the majority of residents subscribed to the local paper as their primary source of news at the time). It actually forced WJRT to "upgrade" itself, becoming more in tune with the Flint community ---- which, ironically, was a benefit to them.
EDIT--ADD: In regards to this NBC station being on a subchannel, and AT&T's sporadic broadcasting of those, it seems to lean more towards it being a "Big 4 Network" affiliate. In AT&T areas where CW or MY are on subchannels and were never full-blown stations before they arrived with U-verse, the subchannels are not carried, as a rule. As a further example, ION has full-blown stations in the larger markets, but may be on subchannels in others. AT&T may provide the full-blown stations in the local station list in those markets, whereas in the others, the ION national feed (from satellite) appears on (IIRC) 194.
Another thing to keep in mind about subchannels:
The stations don't just provide This TV or LiveWell or Antenna TV subchannels gratis to the cable companies. They charge for retransmission of those just like their main station. CenturyLink's PRISM carries *most* of the subchannels in their coverage areas, and uses MediaRoom/the U-verse system. So it's not that AT&T *can't* put subchannels out, it's either that they don't include that in their negotiations, or a more likely case would be the incumbent cable company "persuades" the stations to not make them available to AT&T.
0
mpw101
Scholar
•
175 Messages
10 years ago
No one ever called me about case#2**** which was opened by the tech support call center on May 11 to find out why I cannot access http://www.att.com/Common/iptv/files/programming/index.html and why Mississippi is not in the drop down menu on the page, if I could get the page to load.
AT&T did email a survey to ask my opinion of the service I received when I called the tech support center. I explained I was satisfied so far but still waiting for an answer. So then the survey asks if I want them to call and I responded yes and they called this evening. The lady who called asked me to enter a different site, www.uversechannels.com/programming. IE could not go there. The icon just spun on the tab and so IE searched instead. As I was telling her this I reached for the phone and I guess a bumped a button or something and we were disconnected. I waited 15-20 minutes and she did not call back. I don’t know why, I was mid-sentence when I lost the connection. We were in the middle of a conversation. I thought for sure she would call back. Never did.
So I called the number she called me on 1-888***-****. The voice menu did not offer a way to call the people who follow up on surveys. So I had to choose tech support again. They had no record of her call and no way for me to reach her. So the guy I talked to tried to get an answer and it took a while but here it is:
First, AT&T had to drop WDSU (NBC) in New Orleans because their contract expired and they could not reach an agreement with WDSU to continue providing WDSU on the coast of Mississippi. The guy read a whole long statement to that effect from the web page I can’t see.
Second, I can’t access either of the two websites above or www.uversechannels.com/national-legal-description (another one he asked me to try) because there is a law that prevents it. The “government” blocks Mississippi from access to these websites. The guy says he does not understand it or know why but for some reason it is illegal for people in Mississippi to view AT&T Uverse Programming sites and so they are blocked for Mississippi. That is what he was told. Bizarre.
Finally, last night WXXV (NBC) Gulfport lost sound and pixilated for the better part of an hour. This used to happen at their prior location on the channel line up as well, before they moved to 6/1006. So I think it is WXXV and not AT&T that has the problem. All the other channels were fine.
Survey lady never did call back and I don’t have a clue how to reach her.
Edit - I had misspelled "programming" with one "m" in the second URL above and I corrected it.
[Edited to comply with Guidelines]
0
0
skeeterintexas
ACE - Expert
•
27.7K Messages
10 years ago
The first link works with Firefox so perhaps it's IE...but I have no idea why Mississippi does not show up on the drop down menu.
Second link is a bad URL
The third link does in fact take you to a "National Legal Description".
Try using Firefox or Google Chrome to access them.
0
0
mpw101
Scholar
•
175 Messages
10 years ago
I have tried IE and Chrome and two different computers. The sites really are blocked in Mississippi. Although I am not sure the tech understood exactly why. He gave me the answer he got. The "government" won't let people in Mississippi view these websites.
The second link did not work because I misspelled "programming" and I have gone back and corrected it.
0
0
mpw101
Scholar
•
175 Messages
10 years ago
To vid30jk:
You seem to know a great deal. I don't understand it all. You keep saying "cable" and "satellite" and I think AT&T is neither. I don't quite understand how AT&T fits in here. Could you explain?
Also since WDSU is all we had on the coast for years, why is it not an exception because it is a "significantly viewed" station?
Finally, why does "the government" block Mississippi from viewing all programming sites at AT&T Uverse? I really don't get that. (See my post about contact with tech suppot on 5/13/14.)
Thank you.
0
0
aviewer
Expert
•
10.1K Messages
10 years ago
Cable, satellite & U-verse is a distinction without a difference. While the significantly viewed list was created for satellite, it applies to all rebroadcasters.
The list unlocks the door for rebroadcast. Individual agreements are required for each channel in order to include them in the lineup.
The government protects the broadcast rights of stations by geography because the lobbyists convinced them that it was the right thing to do to encourage investment in a station. Besides, it did not matter to any viewers because the broadcast signal did not reach that far. That is whats changed. With the internet, there is broadband access to any station.
0
0
vid30jk
Scholar
•
129 Messages
10 years ago
AT&T isn't "cable", you are correct in that. The cable and satellite references from Wikipedia are purely because those have been the dominant ways people have received "pay TV", worldwide. IPTV (Internet Protocol TV), which is what U-verse is, has not caught on as a delivery model in peoples' minds or understanding. In fact, if we went through a very simplified description here, most people would become lost after a paragraph or two. But in a general sense, U-verse is closest to what "cable" is: a wire coming into someone's premises over which their TV programming is provided.
One of the main reasons that the New Orleans affiliate was dropped, at least on U-verse, is because AT&T seems to have a policy of transmitting the distinctively LOCAL broadcast channels in their coverage areas. This policy mirrors what both DirecTV and Dish have done throughout their existence, when it comes to local channels. You need to remember that, back when AT&T was rolling out U-verse, the dominant cable companies obviously did NOT want to have competition, since they were enjoying monopoly status in the areas they were serving. AT&T was thwarted by the "cable franchise" laws/ordinances that were on the books and was going to be forced to go door-to-door, if you will, to individual cities to attempt getting the green light to provide service. In many states, AT&T went to the top, and convinced the legislatures to change or rescind those requirements purely because of breaking up the cable monopolies. Naturally, the cable companies were not happy, and AT&T knew that. So rather than continue to rock the boat, AT&T probably decided -- at least in the local broadcast channels being provided -- that they would be confined by the "strict" interpretation of the TMA as the FCC described them. One less whining event that the incumbent cable company could cry to the FCC about, which of course means legal wrangling and money being spent with lawyers instead of going into revenue service (serving paying customers).
NOW ... COULD AT&T have worked out a deal, like the incumbent local cable operators, to keep providing WDSU while also providing WXXV? Possibly, but that would depend on the consent of all parties -- WDSU, WXXV and NBC -- and agreeing to PAY both WDSU and WXXV for rebroadcasting them. Being that WXXV was "new", and that the owner of WXXV isn't getting programs from NBC free, I'm sure that they wanted to fully establish themselves with the people of their market as THE NBC affiliate. Therefore, they may have grandfathered the cable companies' contracts because WDSU had been being provided for years, longer than when "the phone company" (AT&T) decided to ride into town. (Whether the local cable operator(s) are providing WDSU still I do not know. I am just going by other examples around the country where this happens.)
As to the "significantly viewed" provision, remember that the FCC really has no problem with that happening PROVIDED that ALL broadcasters agree to that happening. Certainly the Biloxi market could fall into that, in the consumer-sense ... BUT if the TV stations themselves do not agree between themselves, then that's where it ends. WXXV, according to FCC codes, has now become the "official" NBC affiliate; therefore, unless THEY allow otherwise, the FCC says that THEY are the only NBC affiliate that can go over cable or satellite (or U-verse) to customers within their mapped area.
On to the other parts:
Googling leads me to no discussions or webpages about sites being blocked to Mississippi residents.
Best way to test this is to go to your local library or university and access the Web from there. Even if they are using blockers, those would be for "adult" or similar sites, but anything AT&T would go through. Another option would be to go to a neighbor's or friend's house and use their internet service if they're not on AT&T.
AS FOR the webpage where programming changes are posted, there is basically NO CHANGE between states as to content. They are reprinting what they have advertised in USA Today, for the most part, and if you read a few states' listings, you'll see no localized content. Why would AT&T buy separate markets with USA Today when one or two sentences in a given month could be location specific, rather than running a national ad?
0
0
dhascall
Master
•
9.8K Messages
10 years ago
vid30jk: You keep mentioning "NBC." Are you sure that they are "part and parcel" to wether U-Verse went with a local station (WXXV 25.2) or the further New Orleans one (WDSU)? When local TV stations renegotiate, I never hear anything about the parent network signing the contract too. I just hear "Tribune Media," "LIN Broadcasting" and so on.
0
0