Gazette's Statehouse beat on WCHS TV

[CoolBreeze]

I had many people ask about Deborah Linz's abrupt departure as Tomblin's press secretary to return to the anchor desk at WCHS-TV, which occurred while I was on holiday break.

As I understand it, it turned out to be just a matter of good old-fashioned leverage. She used the state job -- and what I'm sure was a flood of calls from angry viewers to WCHS during her time off the air -- to go back to her old gig, with a better deal.

Speaking of WCHS, a black mark for journalistic ethics is in order for the station, and sister station WVAH, for a month-long screed against Time-Warner cable over plans to drop the stations from cable system line-ups in eastern Kentucky.

Under the guise of news reporting, the WCHS/WVAH newsreaders even incited viewers to call Time-Warner to threaten to cancel their service, and promoted rival satellite TV providers.

What they didn't tell us is that the reason Time-Warner was thinking about dropping the channels is that WCHS/WVAH's parent company, Sinclair Broadcasting, is playing hardball to hike up cable retransmission fees for all its stations -- fees that would get passed on to cable subscribers in the form of higher rates to watch the "free-TV" channels.

They also failed to mention that, even if the stations are dropped, Time-Warner subscribers will still get the network programming. Fox television, for one, has already offered to provide network feeds to Time-Warner systems that lose rights to retransmit Sinclair affiliates.

http://www.wvgazette.com/News/201101091 ... uild=cache


I STILL don't understand why Sinclair Broadcasting wants to charge cable and satellite companies to carry their station. Are they just stupid? What am I missing here? They are getting more coverage for free, which means they have more viewers which means they can charge more for advertising right? And the other issue is that any fee paid by Cable must be passed on to customers. Many or most of these customers couldnt pick up some of these local stations on an antenna and would not be able to watch them at all if not for cable or satellite. WHAT YOU HAVE HERE THEN IS LITTLE MORE THAN PAY PER VIEW.

[Hoss]

I think Sinclair only sees the revenue source and feels the cable companies will pay the carriage fee and the loyal viewers will carry WCHS/FOX’s water and make enough noise so the cable company will capitulate. Of course cable will eventually pass the cost on but no subscriber will see a line that says WCHS/FOX cost that has raised your cable bill. Sinclair relies on the fact that no matter how the signal is delivered to the set they get credit in the ratings book and also it’s a small gamble that a Time Warner subscriber actually gets a book. I agree pay per view is HERE both actually paying to get the channels and paying the price to watch with as much as 22 minutes per hour of commercials. Just my opinion.

[Hoss]

Let's discuss the amount of commercial content in programming, if I may suggest a topic. It used to be, in TV, 7 minutes 10 seconds per half hour was regulated by the NAB as the amount of commercials allowed by member stations. Most local News shows still adhere to this but it doesn't count the endless forward promoting or teases. 21:30 is the time most local news departments are given as content. I've watched cable channel movies with 7 minute breaks and actually forgot what movie I was watching. The TBS formulae seems to be longer between the breaks and not as long, maybe 4 minutes, at the start and once you're hooked more frequent and longer breaks. Radio has gotten just as bad, I've heard spot sets as long as 4 or 5 minutes. How far will the viewing/listening audience go before they tune out? I know that I do not watch a TBS movie anymore. This escalation is across the board, the major networks may be less than the cable but free TV and radio certainly comes at price.

[---]

Sinclair/TWC reached retrans deal.

[Hoss]

WE ARE PLEASED TO REPORT THAT OUR PARENT COMPANY SINCLAIR BROADCASTING AND TIME WARNER HAVE REACHED AN AGREEMENT ON THE MATERIAL TERMS OF A NEW RETRANSMISSION CONSENT AND HAVE AGREED TO EXTEND THE EXISTING AGREEMENT UNTIL MIDNIGHT ON FRIDAY FEBRUARY 21, 2011 WITH NO INTERRUPTION OF CARRIAGE WHILE THEY WORK ON DOCUMENTING THEIR AGREEMENT.

Does protocol suggest I should have started another topic to open a new discussion?