Slashdot Mirror
Viacom and DishNetwork Battle On Air Over Contract
An anonymous reader writes "This weekend, Viacom stations began scrolling messages on their cable stations(MTV, Comedy Central, Nickelodeon, etc) stating that DishNetwork may soon be removing the channels from its lineup and urging subscribers to call DishNetwork. DishNetwork subscribers(me!) may have begun to see black bars cover the messages and calls to DishNetwork regarding the messages were greeted with a recording telling subscribers to call the President and GM of KCBS. These antics stem from lawsuits here. I, for one, will be switching to DirecTV if they don't get this figured out."
I still get those damn scrolling messages. Haven't looked to see if they covered them up with anything, but it's quite a freaking shame to have MY PAID FOR channels have a scroll-bar at the bottom because of a scuffle with an entirely different company.
The message itself was inflamitory, saying how customers should call Dish to keep the channels that "they [the consumer] paid for!" when that doesn't describe the scope of the suit in the least...
First we have SCO suing customers (and another company did too last year) and now crap like this being pulled with companies using customers as pawns in their power games between each other.
Maybe companies are forgetting one thing and one essential thing. No matter how much money they have or how many years theyve been around and on top they got where they are by being a service to their customers
It sounds like neither of these companies are doing that any more. It's the death throes of business when distraction overcomes service.
nude mac desktop gallery
I've been a DishNet sub for 8 yrs now. To say I'm unhappy with the quality of their products would be an understatement. I'm ready to jump ship to DTV as soon as the HD DirecTiVo ships.
BUT, Viacom is the evil party here IMO. They're holding Dish and all of its customers hostage until Dish accepts unreasonable contract terms. I for one, don't want higher TV monthly charges just because Viacom forces Dish to carry some obscure channels that the vast majority of subs will never watch.
A la carte pricing would address this, but that's a whole nuther discussion.
Who would ever subscribe to Dishnet? DirecTV rules! Seriously, I've seen both, and DirecTV won hands down!
Those of us who want a package for $25.
MTV is such crap. They had an excellent show, Clone High, which they cancelled. As far as I'm concerned, Viacom can screw themselves.
And Comedy Central is just boring most of the time. I can't figure out how Dave Attell earned the title of "Comedian". All he does is just take us around shitty neighborhoods chatting with stupid people. If I wanted to see that, I would watch Cops.
DirecTV rules!
Their content is _arguably_ better (especially when it comes to HD), but the company is no better than the RIAA. Remember the smart card lawsuits? Why on earth would you willingly do business with a company like this?
Where's my lobbyist? Right here.
You forget that this is an election year and that due to corporate scandals and the like, the unwashes masses *want* to see some blood in the water.
And let's not forget their own investors.
Dish Network holds about 8% of the TV audience. What that means is that there will be an instant drop in the audience by 8% on all of the affected stations.
Viacom does not own any distribution arms other than OTA TV stations. Their entire cable empire stands at risk if they can't make deals with outside distributors. Viacom needs Dish more than Dish needs Viacom.
You miss the point. Viacom is putting the thumbscrew on and demands more money. Dish Network has told them they want to keep negotiating because they don't think the fees are worth it - if Dish gives in the customers will have to pay more. Obviously Dish Network is looking out for themselves too, but they have the same interest as their customers: To keep the price of their service down.
Yeah...I don't understand why Dish has to pay Viacom to carry them. Doesn't Viacom already have commercials to support them? Dish is just a nice way to distribute their commercially supported content....you'd think they'd be more reasonable.
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
No, it's not censorship... jesus christ. Viacom is intentionally scrolling messages to try and turn Dish Network subscribers against Dish Network by making it seem like Dish is "threatening" (I quote) to drop various popular channels such as Nickelodeon, Comedy Central, etc.
I don't think it's unfair to expect Dish to try and block out that kind of obvious bullshit. If the issue really were that simple, then okay, but Viacom is trying to play ignorant consumers against Dish Network by manipulating them with half-truths and menacing terms. I see nothing wrong with Dish trying to defend itself from these flagrant attacks by blotting the messages out.
Alito: A vote for Alito is a punch in the eye to put that bitch back in her place!
unfortunately, its going to be Howard Stern's blood :(
- tom -
Each time, a few words in, a black bar appeared across the screen to block it out.
;) ), and besides, I'm perfectly capable of filtering for spam on my end.
[ from the article: "DishNetwork subscribers(me!) may have begun to see black bars cover the messages"]
Now, I seem to remember a fuss about how modifying web-proxies (like Proxomitron) which remove ads from web pages, and TIVO-like devices, which allow the editing out or skipping of broadcast ads, violated the creator's copyright.
My feeling is that editing out, as an end-user, is perfectly acceptable, equivalent to glancing away from a TV or scribbling over an ad in a magazine.
But that's because I got the content the creator wished me to get, and I made a decision to ignore it. And indeed, that's what a judge decided in the case of those browser add-ons that replace a site's ads with their own: since the end user (wittingly or nor!) installed it, it's ok.
But were my ISP to start modifying pages I received via my ISP's pipe, I'd be outraged: it's one thing for me to ignore whatever ad is showing on Slashdot today (yes, I use Proxomitron), it's quite another not to have the option to see that ad. Similarly, at one point, my hosting company (not my ISP) was filtering my email for spam. I promptly told them that wasn't what I wanted: I'm paranoid enough to about missing mail (you never know when an old ex-girlfriend is suddenly going to realize she's still in love with you -- and so far none of them have, but I live in hope
So how can it be legal for Dish to edit out content that's is efficiently advertisements on Viacom's stations?
And how can we let the precedent be set that a carrier, not a creator or an end-user, has any right to do this? Because while what's being edited out is effectively an advertisement by Viacom, it is also an editorial comment. which leads to a slippery slope: if Dish can censor this, can they also censor a story on "60 Minutes" critical of Dish? A new story about, or an advertisement by, a political candidate that Dish doesn't want you to see?
Just because you're the client of some carrier should not mean that that carrier has any right to regulate -- or, as in this case, change what you see. This is dangerous, and desires to be slapped down quickly and decisively.
Opinions on the Twiddler2 hand-held keyboard?
That is just the tip of the iceberg. Personally I don't like Stern at all, I think he's one of the most overrated radio personalities ever. However, I do support free speech, and I think that parents should be responsible for what their kids read/see/hear, within reason.
Swich to DirecTV, and Viacom will try to shake them down next. To hell with Viacom!
How ya like dat?
If you want to know an advantage, how about Dish never sued any of their customers or started filing blanket lawsuits against anyone with a completely legal and legitimate ISO card programmer.
If you are not willing to vote with your dollars, what are you willing to do?
Go Charlie [Ergen, spiritual and actual leader of Dish Network]!
This is *exactly* why ala-cart channels are better for citizens. The package idea would not fly in any other market.
"No, sir, you can not buy that printer without also buying the computer."
"No, sir, you can not have a soda without also buying the burger and fries."
The media companies, however, are huge and know they have the weight to toss around. I've never used either dish provider, but I'm glad to see one stand up to keep citizen's prices lower (and thus their own, of course.)
Except that DirecTV has recently struck a deal with Viacom. Perhaps this is what the problem is and DirecTV is hoping to dislodge their main competitor with Viacom as a pawn?
I'm not speaking on any authority here, just musing.
"Terminate?"
"Terminate... with extreme prejudice"
If they start, Bush and Ashcroft are going to go down as the people who sent the Republican Party into the graveyard.
Rupert Murdoch is basically gambling his empire on DirecTV. Increased content regulations will hurt his profit (porn is the most profitable aspect of DirecTV's business). If the GOP becomes a threat to the profitability, Rupert will try to eliminate the GOP.
This means prime-time specials on Fox, Fox Sports, and Fox News denouncing the Republican Party as the Communist Party of the USA. This means every GOP scandal will be fully aired in the New York Post.
He's taken down governments in Australia and the UK before.