Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Viacom and DishNetwork Battle On Air Over Contract

Posted by CmdrTaco on from the this-is-just-bizarre dept.

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."

38 of 604 comments (clear)

  1. Viacom really needs to watch themselves by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    They currently own two broadcast networks (CBS and UPN), and abuse of their holdings like this to bully a carrier like this will get them in hot water with not only the FCC, but the FTC as well.

    1. Re:Viacom really needs to watch themselves by swordboy · · Score: 5, Interesting

      It should be noted that Viacom are the ones putting the scoll bar on those channels - they are appearing to EVERYONE watching from any provider. The irony is that they are plumbing them through Dishnetwork's own system. Some cool stuff is here.

      Pick up the phone and call Don Corsini and let him know how you feel.

      The summary: Dishnetwork has the lowest cost programming in the US. They'd like to keep it that way so they are dropping these channels from their basic package. They will allow people to add them if the cost is deemed worth while on a per-user basis. This is good for the consumer and good for the free market because Viacom will learn that they can't just raise their prices arbitrarily and still keep their seat in the basic package.

      Fuck Viacom

      --

      Life is the leading cause of death in America.
    2. Re:Viacom really needs to watch themselves by macshune · · Score: 5, Interesting

      It's the same thing in the cable world. Most of the rate-rises on your cable bill aren't from increased "costs" of distribution or just the cable company wanting to raise prices. It's because the channel-owners charge cable companies money per household that receives the channel. This is why we are beginning to see a move by industry giants like Comcast to purchase content, rather than just be content with their distribution system. They did just try to buy disney and they own the golf channel, among others:)

      Also, at least in the cable world, the cable companies puts the commercials in. Dish probably injects the commercials too, so Viacom only makes dough off of the fees it charges Dish Network.

    3. Re:Viacom really needs to watch themselves by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Accually Dish network has been WONDERFUL with problums like these. I'm sure the bill will reflect a pricedrop automagicly if they pull the stations. They did the last time a local station decied to pull the rebroadcasting rights. Station was down for 2 days and was issued a one month credit. ($1)

    4. Re:Viacom really needs to watch themselves by milkman_matt · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Swich to DirecTV, and Viacom will try to shake them down next. To hell with Viacom!

      That "I'll be switching to DirecTV" had me thinking (don't get me wrong, I think DirecTV has a very high quality product, and I was very happy with it until I moved somewhere where I couldn't have it.) Isn't this the company that just got busted under the RICO act for suing people with card reader/writers? Did that ever get settled? Like I said, I really dug that company, but I was extremely disappointed when I heard they were throwing out all of those lawsuits.

      -matt

    5. Re:Viacom really needs to watch themselves by jridley · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Yes, except according to the Dish Network help people, you can't buy channels a'la carte anymore. So if I want to pick up Nick in addition to basic, I have to buy the whole next package up. This kind of stinks.

      According to the person I talked to, the ala carte thing was taken away because they'd get people sitting on the phone with customer service, looking through a listing of 500 channels, hemming and hawing, asking what was on different channels, and taking 30 minutes of phone time to decide to buy 2 channels that cost $1.50 each per month.

    6. Re:Viacom really needs to watch themselves by leifm · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Howard should try to get onto XM or Sirrius(sp), he could be free of FCC restraint and those two need something of that caliber to bring more subscribers. I'd seriously consider it if I could get Stern.

      --

      "Windows Me offers tremendous reliability and stability improvements..." -- Paul Thurott
    7. Re:Viacom really needs to watch themselves by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      I mean that's the thing isn't it. People like him. Other people don't think they should. And there's this really small minority who think that not only should no one be able to listen to him, but it's their job to put a stop to it. As if the job of government is to regulate what people talk about at the cool table.

      I, for one, welcome the culture war. Contrary to what Harrison Bergeron might predict, I somehow doubt people will just sit idly by while soccer moms on a preacher's wives tell everyone how to live their lives in a pathetic attempt to escape their own existential crisis. Maybe we won't see cities subsidizing rural services.

    8. Re:Viacom really needs to watch themselves by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

      It doesn't matter, the FCC is looking to regulate cable TV and satellite radio http://slate.msn.com/id/2095398/. Welcome to life in a fundamentalist state. Soon we'll get all the repression, legislation of morality and holy wars that go with it. Or did we already get those?

    9. Re:Viacom really needs to watch themselves by Necrobruiser · · Score: 2, Interesting

      However, I do support free speech, and I think that parents should be responsible for what their kids read/see/hear, within reason.

      I also support free speech. And I think that it's a shame for Howard to get pulled off the air for what is clearly someone trying to cover their ass over the Superbowl halftime stupidity. Even if he is a no-talent hack.

      But how can parents be responsible for what their kids see, when idiocy like the Superbowl halftime show goes on? And when Britney Aguilera or whoever the latest 16 year old piece of jailbait is showing everything except nipple and labia on TV 24/7, how do you prevent your kids from seeing that? I don't know the answer to this, but I think that it's not as simple as saying that parents should be responsible for what their kids see.

      --
      "I planned within my means and got a fixed rate mortgage, so where's MY bailout?" -cafepress
    10. Re:Viacom really needs to watch themselves by shadowcabbit · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I used to work for the cable company (not saying which one, but I'm sure you can guess based on past comments--please don't spoil it for anyone) and number one on my big list of questions was why, if the set-top digital receivers had all these fancy whizbangs for communications and PPV ordering, didn't the cable company use them to simplify stuff like tech support or channel selection? If you spend $1 million on customizing the firmware for your set-top box (a moot issue for mini-sat providers like Dish and DTV, which already use proprietary boxes) to allow customers to alter their channel lineups or fix their internet service via their boxes without ever picking up the phone, imagine the money you'd save on not having to pay overtime to the excessively-overworked phone monkeys! You could even turn the screw an extra half-inch by making the individual channels more expensive than buying the package (which is usually what happens anyway)! Make your customers happy and screw them over!

      --
      "Why Subscribe?" Good question...
    11. Re:Viacom really needs to watch themselves by d.valued · · Score: 3, Interesting
      Rupert Murdoch is basically gambling his empire on DirecTV.


      1: Charlie Ergen, CEO of Echostar, IS a gambler. Not as in a business sense.

      2: You forget that NewsCorp. is one of the largest media empires of the world. DirecTV gives him worldwide satellite coverage, Fox News gives him news. While DirecTV may be a jewel of his crown, there are other elements that make it sit high on his head.

      If the GOP becomes a threat to profitabity, Rupert will try to eliminate the GOP.


      Not a chance. His politics lean conservative to begin with. FCC regulation? Bah. So what if it means he can't PPV porn (fat chance, especially once courts get involved, possibly fixing original indecency decision)? The satellite network is useful for other reasons to Rup.

      Content regulation only affects certain aspects of broadcasting. The primary target is OTA broadcasters, the ones you pick up on a radio dial or with a pair of rabbit ears on your radiation box. Secondary targets may be basic cable channels, as they tend to use unscrambled satellite signals for broadcast. Note, *may* *be*. One typically cannot receive such signals without equipment, my neighbor's (EM-wise) noisy TV notwithstanding.

      Premium services and PPV events, which are encrypted and encoded, are most likely to avoid any regulation. Current laws, including our ol' friend 12 USC 1701, preclude illicit reception of the signals.

      I am not a lawyer, but I play one online. Do not use for legal advice, medication, stock tips, or to induce vomiting.
      --
      I used to be someone else. Now I'm someone better.
      Real life is underrated.
  2. sounds familiar by bandy · · Score: 5, Interesting

    This sounds familiar to the situation where the owners of KRON [tv] in San Francisco wanted them to air a station of theirs from LA, and withheld broadcast rights to KRON until they caved.

    We did without NBC for six months, Charlie [Dish] never caved. NBC moved itself to a San Jose station and we get NBC again.

    Viacom probably wants Dish to carry additional channels or drop competing channels from their line-up.

    --
    "You might as well get your son a ticket to hell as give him a five string banjo." -unknown minister
  3. Very Annoying by britrock · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I'm a directv subscriber, and I'm seeing these messages as well. It scared the hell out of my wife yesterday. She thought it applied to us, and was really mad.

    These kind of games are very annoying. Honestly, even if dish network did drop the channels, how long do you think it would last? They would either bring them back or loose a lot of customers.

  4. I was wondering what that was about.. by falzbro · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I'm a Dish subscriber. I saw this message begin to scroll by several times over the weekend, and wondered what the hell was up.

    Each time, a few words in, a black bar appeared across the screen to block it out.

    This explains a lot. How childish.

  5. Wasn't just Dish Network by danuary · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Although the ads were -directed- at DishNetwork viewers they were visible on other networks. I saw the "Attention Dish Network Subscribers" message when watching Comedy Central over the weekend -- and I have Time Warner Cable in NYC. I'm most certainly not who they were looking to reach.

  6. Dish will get sued and lose by Mente · · Score: 3, Interesting

    If I had to guess, I would say that Dish is going to get sued for the black bar. I don't think they are entitled to alter the broadcast, but only to re-broadcast.

  7. Crawl being seen on all other providers too by LostCluster · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The annoying crawls are not just limited to Dish Network. Viacom has no way to force a crawl onto only Dish Network feeds of their networks, so they have to put the crawls onto the network's backhaul feeds and therefore everybody sees them.

    I've been told that DirecTV's call centers have also been geting calls from their own consumers who don't read the whole ticker and are wondering if they're at risk too. (DirecTV's contracts are not lapsing right now, only Dish's.)

  8. The message was... by Ayandia · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The message was something like this:

    DishNetwork will stop offering BET, MTV, Nick at Night, Comedy Central...and many others. DishNetwork subscribers, call DishNetwork and tell them you want to keep the channels you paid for.

    It seemed to me like they were really saying:

    DishNetwork subscribers, please call DishNetwork and tie up their support lines with furious indignance while we spread disinformation!

    But the message had a complete lack of WHY those channels were going away, if at all. Anyone have some insight?

  9. ABC pulled this crap a few years ago.... by Newer+Guy · · Score: 3, Interesting
    ABC pulled this crap a few years ago with a cable operator, and the public (and FCC) backlash was to say the least, massive!

    I'd have thought that with all the crap their Infinity radio division is having with the FCC, not to mention the Janet Jackson flap they'd be doing their best to stay off the radar screen!

    I don't know whether these big companies are arrogant or stupid, but it sure illustrates why media monopolies are bad for the consumer.
  10. its a bloody shame by dj245 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Its a bloody shame that this is happening. I've found that the DirectTV box is buggy, or full of nasty "features". My carefully pruned favorites lists will have channels added to it at random times. I am often surprised to find that my 30-channel DirectTV favorites list has grown overnight to a 50-channel list with the inclusion of all the DTV informational channels and most of the QVC and shopping type channels. Does anyone elses box do this? I'd like to hope its a coincidental bug, but I'm the ever cynic, so I'm afraid its a very shameful "feature".

    --
    Even those who arrange and design shrubberies are under considerable economic stress at this period in history.
  11. Why are we even seeing this battle? by PotatoHead · · Score: 3, Interesting

    All you folks paying for some sort of Dish based access feel like cattle now?

    Boy I sure do. If anything needs a bit of regulation, this industry does. People should not have to wonder if they can watch their paid for programming or not depending on the whims of some fat ass execs.

    Do you think Dish will compensate their customer base? Do they even care about their customer base?

    Too many programming choices are an either or bundle situation. People are stuck paying high rates in return for few real choices about their programming.

    Dish and Direct TV both should be forced to carry programming on a RAND basis. Their customers should be able to choose what they want with a finer grained degree than they do now.

    The bundled programming does not save any of us a dime because the 30 percent of good channels are spread throughout the bundles. This forces people to just pay for all the crap at once, rather than be able to pick 'n choose.

    We are seeing this because there is no real check on the power these distributors have over both their customer base and those who seek to distribute programming.

    Viacom is going to lose on this one because Dish holds most all the cards. People are going to wonder what happened. Dish will make sure and tell them their version first.

    --
    Blogging because I can...
    1. Re:Why are we even seeing this battle? by Nicholas+Schumacher · · Score: 2, Interesting

      "Dish and Direct TV both should be forced to carry programming on a RAND basis. Their customers should be able to choose what they want with a finer grained degree than they do now."

      And you actually beleive that it is the cable/dish companies who are forcing the bundling?

      Wrong, the bundling is being forced on them by the media companies. Given the cost of some of the channels (Like ESPN) the Cable/Dish companies would love to be able to make those channels as seperate a la carte programming - but Disney (the owners of ESPN) will not allow companies to purchase ESPN unless it will be placed in the first general tier of programming (and usually they also require that the company purchase a number of other channels from them as well)

      If you want regulation, then you had better start with the content producers, because the Cable/Dish providers do not currently have any other choice.

      --
      -Nick
      My name is Obi-Wan Kenobi. You killed my master. Prepare to die.
    2. Re:Why are we even seeing this battle? by elrick_the_brave · · Score: 2, Interesting

      "We are seeing this because there is no real check on the power these distributors have over both their customer base and those who seek to distribute programming." I disagree! You control this system by paying for it or not... have no illusions that you can opt out of subscribing to a service. Now... it means less TV for ya.. but then.. that's the only way a consumer can push back.

      --
      (1st sig) If this were a snappy sig, you'd be reading it right now. (2nd sig) I'm a karma whore. >Insert FUD here
  12. Re:not a Dish fan, but... by Gr8Apes · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I'm a current dish customer. I've been waiting for HD DVR systems to come out. Dish just did, wants over $1000 for it. DirectTV is coming out in another month or so. Dish also restricts any deals to new customers, guess they think once in, always in.

    We'll they're right about one thing, once you've used a DVR, you'll always want one (total freedom to do whatever you want over being locked into your TV broadcasters schedule is you want to see something does that). However, they're by no means the only game in town for DVRs, and if they don't wise up soon, they may soon be less at least 1 customer, as I'm currently looking at HTPCs to replace my Dish PVR system for HD reception (just a simple addition of about $200 to my extra PC, and off air HD broadcasts will be taken care of).

    --
    The cesspool just got a check and balance.
  13. the notice is no big deal...nor is the price hike by jwpacker · · Score: 2, Interesting

    As a DirecTV customer, and generally passive viewer from the outside, I just can't understand the ire that this is causing people that don't have DISH.

    It's a banner that scrolls quickly along the bottom of the screen. It's not terribly obtrusive, it's not very long, and it made me interested in what was going on. It made me more than just a passive viewer-- I wanted to know the details. I looked things up.

    Yes, my rates just went up-- now I know why. And yet, considering just what percentage of my time watching TV is spent on Viacom channels, I'm not going to sweat the small stuff. I'm still paying just $3 a month more than I was, less than the cost of a single DVD rental. Had they done the same increase just to keep crap that I don't watch (as opposed to the crap that I do), I'd likely be making my opinion known to them, both by directly contacting DirecTV to complain, as well as researching other options.

    But yes, for now I'm willing to pay more to maintain those channels that I watch. Especially now that they're rerunning Beavis and Butthead on MTV2. :)

    --
    Software is like a goldfish - it'll grow to fit the size of it's bowl...
  14. Re:DirecTV rules by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Yes, TiVo on DirecTv is pretty nice. So is Dish's 921.
    Too bad DirecTv doesn't have a (shipping) product like the 921.

  15. Viacom / Victory Sports / respect for the consumer by Dan+Stephans+II · · Score: 2, Interesting

    As one poster above put it, Dish is doing the right thing. Viacom is in the wrong and Dish is not caving to their demands. I am a Dish customer and will remain one because I respect their commitment to the customer. In Minnesota we are facing a similar soap opera with the adoption (or non-adoption) of Victory Sports network. Carl Pohlad (the owner of the Twins) figured he could charge outrageous carriage fees for his untested new product and the carriers wouldn't balk at either the fees or the requirement that VS be carried on "basic" and not be offered as part of a premium package. Boy did he underestimate the resolve of stubborn minnesotans. I think Viacom is playing their hand just as poorly.

  16. Re:I work there.. by LostCluster · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I'm not happy about this either, but from I was told by management, Dish wants to pick and choose what they want to air, instead of taking packages. (ie they want MTV MTV2, Nick, and Comedy central but not Spike and cmt, Im not sure if the exact grouping though...) and Viacoms stance is its a package, they want some they take them all. This has started a pissing contest.

    Viacom basically wants the right to say "We started this new Nicktoons channel. You have to take it (and pay for it) or lose all of the MTV Networks package channels." Dish Network sees Nicktoons as having no value to them since it at this point consists of only programs that have already run on the main Nick network.

    There's the core source of the dispute.

  17. Wait a second.... by Roger+Keith+Barrett · · Score: 1, Interesting

    This is all about Viacom forcing cable/sat companies to take packages of programs. Am I remembering history correctly, but wasn't this what the hollywood anti-trust trials in the 30s and 40s all about... studios so big that they would require independent theatres to take 5 crappy B movies for every good A movie they put out? That was found majorly illegal....

    but, having said that, one of the first thing Ronald Reagan did was to explicitly make it legal again in law. Looks like that little change that Gipper made for his buddies is making these problems crop up again (and again.. and again...). Thanks, government.... goes to prove once again that some regulation is actually good and necessary.

    --

    Why don't you embrace your slashbotness instead of living in a dreamworld?
  18. Re:And as usual the customer gets screwed... by wik · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Don't forget the pirates!

    OJ Simpson dug the dish at nicely discounted price.

    --
    / \
    \ / ASCII ribbon campaign for peace
    x
    / \
  19. Programming, shmoegramming... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Why does anyone (*particularly geeks*) even give a Fark (rat's ass) about television programming anymore? I cut the umbilical cord several times, lastly in 97. Honestly the quality of your life improves dramatically. Everytime we get a house guest they flip out and do the dummy dance when they learn they will not be able to veg in front of the box. They always leave relaxed and changed. Why sit and be passively programmed when you can take control and responsibility?

    1. Re:Programming, shmoegramming... by mabu · · Score: 2, Interesting

      This is what Tivo is for. I don't watch television either. I watch Tivo. It's like an entirely different medium.

      This is the problem the cable/sat companies can't deal with. They bundle channels into packages so they can sell advertising. If they let users pick the programming they wanted a la carte, they'd lose tons of ad revenue because most of the channels nobody wants. Tivo essentially does the same thing, which is why companies like Comcast are doing their best to shunt its implementation.

      TV sucks. I agree with you - it's probably better to not have any TV than to have to wade through 1000 channels of crap, but with something like Tivo, it allows you to extract just the content you feel is worthwhile.

  20. New Packages by RayMarron · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I have DirecTV. I'd love to see them (DTV, Dish, cable co's) break these blocs of extra-cost channels out as separate options just like the premium movie channels.

    You want the Viacom channels?
    You want the ESPN lineup?
    You want the Disney lineup?
    You want the Discovery/History channels?
    You want Starz?
    You want Cinemax?
    etc. etc.

    I like Comedy Central, but if it was the only channel I wanted among all the other Viacom garbage, I'd skip if it would save me money.

    I'd also like to not pay for all that sports programming I never watch!

    Since the content providers only get paid per subscribing household, they'd find out real quick how valuable their content is when it comes as a distinct package rather than scattered throughout all the current tiers.

    --
    ON DELETE CASCADE
  21. How to contact Viacom? by microTodd · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Interesting...I cannot find Viacom contact information on their website.

    http://www.viacom.com/factsandfig.tin#contact yields nothing...no phone numbers, addresses, email, nothing.

    Anyone know how I can email Sumner Redstone? (grin)

    --
    "You cannot find out which view is the right one by science in the ordinary sense." - C.S. Lewis on Intelligent Design
  22. Microsoft Of the TV industry by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Way back during the C band dish era I worked for a third party packager. I must say that Viacom's methods closely match Microsoft's. Whenever they would have a Channel that wasn't selling very well they would make you tie it to a more popular station. Back then ESPN was a big seller and VH1 was having some trouble. Their soultion was to allow the packager to sell ESPN only if VH1 was included. Basically they were forcing the customers to pay for VH1 whether they wanted it or not. After caving in to them for a couple of years we finally called their bluff. We told them we would be dropping Showtime and The Movie Channel as a result of their forcing channels on customers. We even printed up 40,000 bill inserts notifying customers that we would no longer be offering the channels and anyone with a current subscription would be refunded the balance and be given three months of HBO/Cinemax free. Faced with losing 40,000 customers and giving HBO/Cinemax a PR win Viacom dropped the bundling requirement for us. I cna't help but feel like Dish is facing the same thing we were. If they stick to their guns Vicom will cave, the scrolling message shows that they are desperate.

  23. Re:Yes! Finally a TV supplier gets a clue! by jrockway · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Your homeowner's association may SAY you can't have a dish, but according to the Federal Government, you are allowed to have one, as long as it's all contained on your property. This was to prevent cable companies from paying off homeowner's associations to make satellite TV illegal. Fuck the cable companies, fuck the homeowners. Get a nice big dish :)

    --
    My other car is first.
  24. Happier than ever Dish customer by Potent · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I've been a happy Dish customer for years. I am proud of Charlie Ergen standing up to these jerkoffs. Because he has the stones to do what's right, our rates have increased at only about 1% per year over the past 5 years. Can any of you cable or DirecTV zealots say the same? I didn't think so. Dish Network is the only service that actively fights to keep its customers' rates down.

    I might miss the Power Block on Spike TV, but won't lose any sleep over the loss of any of Viacom's programming - since 95% of it is crap and reruns of crap to me anyway (and that's before I figure in the endless commercials and the infomercials that occupy more than 12 hours a day per channel).

    Would I be willing to pay more money to keep any of it? HELL NO! You get 'em Charlie!

    I hope the FCC and the DOJ each break a boot off in Viacom's arse over these obviously illegal practices.
    --

    --
    Out of order? Fuck! Even in the future nothing works! - Dark Helmet (Rick Moranis) "Spaceballs"