Slashdot Mirror
DirecTV Drops Viacom Channels
An anonymous reader writes "DirecTV has dropped all of Viacom's channels. This includes channels such as MTV, Comedy Central, and Nickelodeon. The drop is reported to be over a carrier fee dispute. It appears programming content can magically disappear from satellite, too, and not just from streaming services. Viacom said it was 'because contract talks with DirecTV had “reached an impasse.” DirecTV, in turn, said in a statement that it had offered Viacom “increased fees for their networks going forward; we just can’t afford the extreme increases they are asking for.”' I guess pirating and physical media is the only way to make sure the content we pay for doesn't disappear."
If you want to see riots in America, this will do it.
“He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
Aside from a few Comedy Central programs, I don't seem much here that I'd miss. MTV is full of BS "reality" TV and Nick is full of kids shows that are usually no Netfix if you need them and, being kids shows, they probably won't care if they're watching reruns (or notice). So, really, what does Viacom have that is worth paying increased fees anyway? It's not like South Park costs that much to produce (maybe FCC fees?).
-SaNo
we go through this every year or so
Content owner wants more money and demands rate increase
TV service operator says no
content owner pulls channels
viewers scream bloody murder and rape and demand tv operator pony up a few $$$ of their limitless magical bank account
tv operator blinks first then raises rates
viewers complain but don't do anything
repeat in a few years
the content owners know people are dumb and live by the monthly payment and will blame their cable or satellite company. they sell their channels in bundles and raise the rates every few years. people continue to pay the higher rates because they are too stupid to do anything else other than look at rectangle with moving pictures
And nothing of value was lost.
Any reason why Viacom or any other such wastewater producer can't just switch to streaming all their shows? I know not everyone has a computer, but I don't see why `channels` can't cut out the middle man in some instances and go directly to end users on a contract type basis. Maybe simulcast on cable for those that care and streaming only for those that want a la carte. Seems like a revenue source waiting to be tapped.
If thou see a fair woman pay court to her, for thus thou wilt obtain love
The problem is, both sides and neither side have the position of strength here. Viacom obviously wants the big bucks from the cable/satellite company, and the cable/satellite companies don't want people cancelling because you dropped the channels they care about. Maybe that's why there has been such a push for 2 year contracts on these services as of late. If the consumers are locked in the company could have a lot more leverage over the content producers.
I read the internet for the articles.
Both CC and MTV used to have Descent programs and Music respectively. Since neither, have either, I'm good with that.
Now that Larger and larger companies are being bitten by the content producers, MPAA, RIAA, and other copyright moguls out to make money off someone else's work...
Maybe we can finally make some progress.
I was considering switching from Comcast to DirecTV recently. Without Comedy Central (specifically The Daily Show and The Colbert Report) I wouldn't switch. But what if I had switched and they dropped one of the main channels I wanted? Would I have grounds to get out of a term contract? Would I have to go to small claims court if they resisted?
DirecTV has dropped all of Viacom's channels.
... DirectTV will, of course, lower their subscription fees accordingly.
It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
I wonder if there is verbiage in consumer's contracts that allow them to end it early with no fee due to an adverse change, similar to cell phones. People outside of the 6 month or 1 year promo pricing who are still in the 2 year contract might benefit from this.
Yes, drop your comcast and DirectTV and just pirate everything! Nice ethical solution... (ducking)
Stories aren't broken on Slashdot. We wait for one or preferably several news articles are written, people have a chance to actually read them (I know, not exactly reality), and then we can discuss them intelligently.
This was precisely the motivation I needed to finally make the jump and cancel my TV cable/satellite services completely. For months I've been dancing around the idea of just picking up the TV shows I enjoy on Disc or using Netflix but I stuck around.
I almost made the jump when this sort of bullshit was going on with AMC. But now that this is the second time this has happened I am done. Good luck sticking it to your loyal customers with either increased rates to pay for Viacom or by reduced quality of service (which I'm certain they will not reduce prices for).
I'm not on a contract so I do not have to worry about this, but I wonder if this can be considered a change in service and allow people to get out of their contracts early.
Good... and I mean it. Television is the worst thing that people do to themselves. End the control that corporations have on us
Remember when cable channels were commercial free? I do. It was because you paid to watch them.
Now cable networks are raking in advertisement revenue, and are demanding cable and satellite providers give them more money.
They are biting the hand that feeds them. I guess they don't want anyone watching their ads.
What do you think this is, some sort of high speed electromagnetic thing that can be updated at a whim? AT A WHIM?!
Geez, you kids today are so demanding.
Canceled my Cable Subscription, which I was paying over $100 a month for. With Roku, I have Netflix, Hulu Plus, and Amazon Prime, all of which cost less than $25 a month, plus my roof antenna for local channels. Internet TV is going to be the future.
-- By all means let's be open-minded, but not so open-minded that our brains drop out.
Regardless of the weasel words in the fine print of the subscription brochure, it seems to me that when you sign up with DirectTV and they drop channels simply because there was a cost change seems like a breach of contract. Costs have always changed over the years, up and down, yet DirectTV's prices seldom decline when suppliers offer programming for less.
Holding your customers hostage seems to be the common tactic these days. Cities counties and states pass new taxes for one fluff package after another, but when the budget shrinks and they need a tax increase the first cuts threatened are to Police Fire and Teachers.
Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
for consumer reimbursement in such cases
you'd see these situations get settled long before the consumer suffers
but i guess the average consumer, because they don't have a lobbyist, doesn't get a say
perhaps it is good then: no tv, maybe they'll get off their asses and agitate or vote
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
Hearst says "you can still watch with antenna or satellite", but the irony is that here in Hawaii, ABC content is relayed to neighbor islands via TWC fiber.
ABC "solved" the problem by simply powering down their transmitters; you can only watch KITV with antenna if you're also on Oahu.
Even if I wanted to install cable to watch ABC, there's no cable on my street.
How ironic: CAPCHA is "consumes".
Net neutrality: ensuring that the Internet does not become like this.
Palm trees and 8
I think it's about Epix as well.
HAY DIRECTV want to keep the Viacom channels then you must add EPIX in the tear that we want.
Look out comcast you may be next.
Cancel your cable. Go outside and enjoy it while it's still free.
Join the Slashcott! Feb 10 thru Feb 17!
They own the following (via Wikipedia):
MTV, MTV2, MTV Tr3Âs, MTV Desi, MTV Hits, MTV Jams, mtvU, Nickelodeon, Nick 2/Nick at Nite, Nick Jr., TeenNick, Nicktoons, CMT, CMT Pure Country, CMT (Canada) (10%), TV Land, VH1, VH1 Classic, VH1 Soul, BET Networks, BET, BET Hip-Hop, BET Gospel, Centric, Palladia, Comedy Central, Logo, TMF, VIVA and Spike.
Of course the real loss there is Nickelodeon. Folks have to plop their kids down in front of something and no Nickelodeon or Nick Jr. means crying young 'uns and cancelled service. Not a pleasant thought if I were DirecTV.
Wait. People PAY for Snookie????
Sorry, but gray text on gray background is making my eyes bleed.
Piracy?.. no, more like corporate greed.
I know the facts sometimes confuse things so I'm sorry to lead with them.
Slashdot is a user contributed site (like Wikipedia only smarter).
If nobody thought Viacom/Directv was of any importance (and it isn't) for fifteen
whole hours, and you were glued to your laptop hitting "refresh" "refresh" "refresh"
hoping to learn why you couldn't watch Snookie and the other sluts of New Jersey,
please don't blame Slashdot.
You could have either submitted the thread yourself,
or quit whining about it.
Personally I prefer if you did the latter.
Mark
So I have DirecTV and was watching a DVRed show on ComedyCentral last night and noticed that Viacom had added a scrolling message to the bottom of the screen where they published the DirecTV customer service number and told everyone to call DirecTV to protest the removal of Viacom channels. So DirecTV allows that to stand, but shrunk the actual broadcast channel subtly, so they could fit their own scrolling message below the Viacom one telling subscribers that Viacom are greedy bastards that want to charge DirecTV a billion extra dollars for their channels.
Hilarious. Then it went black at 9pm PDT and switched to one of those generic channel selector guide channels.
Whatever... I guess I'll have to browse Youtube to get my fill of Tosh.0-style Internet video idiocy for a couple weeks until the babies work out an agreement.
Of all these channels, the only one I really care about is Comedy Central, but I might watch something on Spike every once in a while. Do you think Viacom would be doing this if we could buy individual channels? They make money from ads which they bombard us with more and more every year. I think Viacom would be happy that their ads are getting to more households. I find it ridiculous that I have to pay for BET Gospel and CMT Pure Country when all I want to watch is South Park.
Ha, you WISH it were that easy to stop a Snooki!
What political party do you join when you don't like Bible-thumpers *or* hippies?
All the good parts of the Daily Show and spinoffs are available legally on the 'net anyway.
How long until the sites that legally make The Daily Show and The Colbert Report available require the user to sign into an account provided by a participating cable or satellite provider? (See this Slashdot article.)
http://www.theonion.com/articles/area-man-constantly-mentioning-he-doesnt-own-a-tel,429/
Support the EFF and Creative Commons. The war is coming, and they're supporting you...
Think so? You watch.. The person that settles this dispute will be the next president, and more worthy of a Nobel Peace Prize.
“He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UDcfPZOBiow
So apparently Viacom is even taking away their free streaming services to keep people on DirecTV from seeing the Daily Show/Colbert.
DirecTV gave numbers, 30% increase where as Viacom said "pennies a day". Pennies a day add up to dollars a week and hundreds a year.
DirecTV also pointed out 8 of the 26 Viacom channels going away were HD versions of the same channel, so it is double counting. I don't see Viacom countering these arguments.
In a time when people are being asked to do more for frozen wages or even pay cuts, why does Viacom deserve a raise? If they were cutting commercials sure. Giving me more value for my money, that's great. As it stands they are asking for more just to see if they can get it.
=================
Unix is very user friendly, it's just picky about who its friends are.
The same thing happened with Viacom and Dish Network. The whole thing was just a bargaining tactic. As I recall, Dish Network lost viacom channels for about a day, and then they worked out a deal.
I am from Europe and have no tv. What is a SNOOKIE?
[Googled it]
Kill it! KILL IT WITH FIRE!
Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
... at least for me but I missed the days when they showed old movies OTA on late nights. Saw all kinds of films I never would have known to exist. I only had to put with watching ads with Cal Worthington and his dog Spot (which can be anything from a tiger to an armadillo) and ambulance chasing lawyers saying, "If you are involved in a serious automobile accident, you need to seek legal advice immediately!" [don't bother calling paramedics].
mfwright@batnet.com
Broadcasting is dying, especially TV broadcasting
DirecTV's one-way service was very interesting and high-tech in 1995.
However, "broadband" Internet penetration has rendered this technology obsolete except in remote, rural areas.
Comcast knows this, which is why they have invested heavily in Hulu. (The new) AT&T also knows this, which is why their UVerse service is another IPTV implementation)
Like many other posters have written, why pay so much for satellite or cable TV, when you can pay a lot less to (legally) stream, to watch what you want, when you want it?
there are 3 kinds of people:
* those who can count
* those who can't
Hey, is the Sci-Fi network one of theirs?
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
I signed up just to comment on this story. This is not the first time DirecTV has done this with the guise of customer prices. Last year it was NatGeo and a few other channels. Before that it was Versus (before NBC changed it.) This is an ongoing theme with DirecTV where a contract comes back around and they almost automatically shut down and refuse to make a deal until the company accepts. This can last some time. I realize Comedy Central is not a huge loss for everyone, but next time it could be a group of channels you do care about and it will be no different, and I'm personally pretty sick of it. I have a year left on my contract and will not continue it. I'll use ESPN3 and NetFlix I guess.
But don't blame me if I amass a pr0n collection that could outmatch Bin Laden's.
WARNING: Smartphones have side effects--most of them undocumented.
I, for one, am very happy they do this. This allows them to have the broadest selection of channels for the lowest price.
Peter predicted that you would "deliberately forget" creation 2000 years ago...
They're subbing in "The Soccer Channel," "The Lesbians Talking About Their Vaginas Channel" and "CSPAN 4" to make up for it! That should pretty much be a wash, shouldn't it?
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
First they came for MTV,
and I didn't speak out because it had died twenty years ago.
Then they came for Comedy Central,
and I didn't speak out because it's a big loop of the same old stuff.
Then they came for the Kardashians,
and I bought them lunch and a full tank of gas.
I know E! is not owned by Viacom, but a person can dream, can't they?
You have the right to remain sentient. If you give up the right to remain sentient, you will be elected to public office
Go ahead....take your crappy programming off of DirecTV. See if I care. Your channel lineup sucks. Now a days about the only thing I watch live on tv is the evening news and sporting events. Everything else gets DVR'd and I catch up on it when I'm bored. Or maybe I just delete it without ever watching it...whatever. My wife likes watching international programming that DirectTV has so I keep it connected for her. Otherwise I'd give the dish back and go to Netflicks....or maybe just find better things to do with my time.
Cable TV was never advertised as commercial free outside of the subscription channels, just a wider selection of channels without the need to constantly fiddle with the rabbit-ears, and some premium options to boot
Viacom says the increase is "pennies per day" implying that DirecTV is obligated to suck up the cost and not pass it on to the consumer, and DirecTV says it's a 30% increase amounting to $1B. The calculations actually seem to match, amounting to something like $0.02 per day increase for 20 million customers is 146M/year or $1B over 7 years. So what does that mean, Viacom wants to go from $.06/day to $0.08/day? That would mean Viacom wants $2.40/month per subscriber out of DirecTV's $29.99 retail minimum subscription fee. Assuming 50% of which is the retail markup, means 16% of DirecTV's wholesale cost would be going to Viacom. Seems like a large enough chunk for DirecTV to complain about.
Content providers need bundling to stay alive, you know tax everyone regardless of whether or not they use the service. I just don't see that inflation has gone up 30% in 7 years do you? consumers would like a-la-carte, but content providers would find it difficult to fund any of the lesser channels, and we can see quite a few good series shunned by big networks being picked up by cable channels like The Walking Dead, so bundling isn't actually as terrible as it seems
Let us all pick the channels we want, or much finer-grained package choices. But, until the service providers bite the bullet, they'll continue to be extorted by the content providers.
I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!
Hah. And yes, people watch that show, apparently, to feel better about themselves.
Like a straight-D's student laughing at the kids riding the short bus to school.
I am John Hurt.
Is it deliberate that the page I'm reading this story on has an ad for DirectTV at the top?
This may be the wake up call that many advertisers get to fully understand the link between what the advertising block buyers were telling them vs real sales figures. If the people who run ads on TV ever find out how useless they are, it will end TV as we know it.
Take one of the largest Advertisers like Coke. This will result in more people being out side and more people buying their high profit products which will increase their sales figures. Unfortunately their ad agency will be claiming it's a result of all the Olympics Coke ads and the ad buyers at Coke will snort up those claims like they were provable facts.
TV has been trying to show advertising in a good light since the days of the back and white sitcom when ad men were always shown as the moral and honest ones (Bewitched is the best example of this). More ad buyers need to remember that it's not the end product that is the advertisers product, it's getting suckers to buy the useless commercials that is their product.
wanted another billion dollar for direct TV to show their reruns. Reruns available elsewhere for less.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
Viacom wants another billion from direct TV to play reruns.
Netflix sucks. Viacom, and other content owners, keep changing the amounts and netflix keeps loosing content.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
Probably the best shows Viacom has to offer, and they're both on break right now. I predict that Viacom and DirecTV will resolve their difficulties before they're off break on Monday the 16th and the shit really hits the fan.
À la carte menus FTW!
\o/
Those who think Viacom is worth 30% more can continue their subscription to those channels. Those who don't can quit. It's time to end the table d'hôte channel lineup.
now we need to go OSS in diesel cars
If they give you any runaround, take'm to small claims court.
I did that with freelancer.com last week. They owed me a few hundred dollars, and were being difficult about transferring the funds through standard banking channels.
They're in Australia, and New South Wales allows on-line filing of small claims cases. After a disappointing go-round with customer support, I spent about 20 minutes filing a case. Once the case is filed, the court's system generates a PDF file with all the info. I sent a copy of that to Freelancer.com with no other comments.
Within four hours, they'd agreed to send a wire transfer to my bank. Two days later (the 4th of July slowed things down) the funds were in my bank in the US.
WHAT! NO new episodes of Futurama! No way!
Why would they. Those sites are a complete end run around the cable/satellite companies.
WatchESPN.com requires a valid pay TV subscription because ESPN relies on both revenue from pay TV operators and revenue from advertisers. With only revenue from pay TV operators, or with only revenue from advertisers, ESPN wouldn't be able to outbid other networks for exclusive television rights to professional sport leagues.
I thought they changed their name to SyFy and showed various WWE programming now?
Time to offend someone
I feel that I earn my view by watching the commercials (or muting them whilst I dash for a fresh brew), and I resent being a pawn in Viacom's failed negotiations.
I already eschew the CCTV and Satellite television as they are not worthwhile for my purposes.
Greedy Bastards.
They feared that it could be used to suppress protest or support unpopular rule.