• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Dish Network says Fox blocks 19 channels

BDBoop

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 17, 2010
Messages
9,800
Reaction score
2,719
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Other
My Way News - Dish Network says Fox blocks 19 channels

NEW YORK (AP) - Dish Network says Fox is blocking access to 19 sports networks and other TV channels as it demands a rate increase of more than 50 percent from the satellite TV operator.

Dish Networks Corp. said Friday the rate increase Fox is asking for is "unprecedented."

Dish says it will continue to negotiate with Fox to help restore sports programming and prevent rate increases. It says the talks don't affect local Fox TV stations, Fox News or Fox Business News.

In the meantime, it says it will make the NFL Network, NBA TV, ESPN Classic and other pay channels available at no extra charge to those affected by the blackout.

Fox Networks is owned by News Corp. A representative for its Fox Sports unit could not immediately be reached for comment.
 
It used to be all/most of your utilities could be paid in under 200 bucks each month.

But some folks are actively working hard to make each utility in itself over 150 a month.

What is up with greedy corporations these days maaaaan.
 
Or just dont watch TV at all :) Much better for you
 
Glad we have DirectTV. This sucks, especially for big time sports fans. I know we would change providers before missing a Thrashers game.
 
Starring at the wall is better for me how exactly?
There are these magical things called books :) They're much cheaper and far more entertaining.

Also, the internet. If I REALLY want to watch a show (Mythbusters! WOO!) I'll download it or buy the DVD if I have the money
 
Starring at the wall is better for me how exactly?

There are these magical things called books :) They're much cheaper and far more entertaining.

Also, the internet. If I REALLY want to watch a show (Mythbusters! WOO!) I'll download it or buy the DVD if I have the money


Books what are those?

Kidding, but yes you have books, the internet, you can actually go outside and take walks or jog around the neighbourhood.


I got rid of my cable about 11 months ago and am not left starring at a blank wall
 
This is why I download my TV shows via torrent. I hate cable companies.

And yet it is because of torrents that cable companies keep trying to raise the costs of their programming. Oh, the irony.
 
Its the simple effect that a black market has on the economy.
Yeah, see, several times different industries have complained that "piracy is hurting us!" but in court, they've admitted that downloading didnt make much of a dent in their bottom line. I'm less inclined to buy the idea.

I'd like to see some actual proof of damage.
 
I can has proof?

LOL... Hoplite again demanding proof of anything that contradicts his world view.... which he doesn't provide proof for himself when posting...
 
LOL... Hoplite again demanding proof of anything that contradicts his world view....
Umm...shocker? That's what you do when someone makes a claim that you arent familiar with.

which he doesn't provide proof for himself when posting...
All you need to do is ask.
 
I can has proof?

Its the simple effect that a black market has on the economy.

Yeah, see, several times different industries have complained that "piracy is hurting us!" but in court, they've admitted that downloading didnt make much of a dent in their bottom line. I'm less inclined to buy the idea.

I'd like to see some actual proof of damage.


Im sorry, You I thought I JUST read you reply that you weren't familiar with this claim, and that is your reason for asking for proof.

Yet you have previously showed that you ARE in fact familiar with this claim........


Any more foot in mouth?
 
Im sorry, You I thought I JUST read you reply that you weren't familiar with this claim, and that is your reason for asking for proof.

Yet you have previously showed that you ARE in fact familiar with this claim........

Any more foot in mouth?
Then let me rephrase, I always ask for proof if someone is presenting me with an idea I dont currently hold. Is that a problem?
 
I don't have cable or satellite tv at all, and haven't for almost 20 years. I have been watching more programming in the last couple years because of the availability through various outlets on the Internet, of which none of the ones I use are engaged in piracy. I rent stuff from Netflix and so forth as well.

Cable TV is not a right. I think there is much more justification for regulating the necessary utilities, like power, water, phone and such. Really, you ought to just get rid of your cable.
 
I can has proof?

Yeah, see, several times different industries have complained that "piracy is hurting us!" but in court, they've admitted that downloading didnt make much of a dent in their bottom line. I'm less inclined to buy the idea.

I'd like to see some actual proof of damage.

Whoa. I never said that torrents were actually hurting the cable companies, which was why they were raising prices. I said that the cable companies were raising prices because of torrents. There's quite a bit of difference between those two stances.
 
I'd like to see some actual proof of damage.

I know plenty of people who don't have cable because they just bootleg stuff online. It's one of those things that is difficult to measure via study, but is pretty straightforward if you just look at people's behavior.
 
I know plenty of people who don't have cable because they just bootleg stuff online. It's one of those things that is difficult to measure via study, but is pretty straightforward if you just look at people's behavior.
If it's that straightforward, then there shouldn't be any difficulty in studying it.
 
If it's that straightforward, then there shouldn't be any difficulty in studying it.

Call up 1000 people and ask them "Do you pay for cable or do you illegally watch tv shows online instead? If you did not illegally watch those shows, would you pay for cable?" Let me know how that works out for you.
 
Then let me rephrase, I always ask for proof if someone is presenting me with an idea I dont currently hold. Is that a problem?

Yes. Are you always showing proof of the ideas you currently hold?
 
Call up 1000 people and ask them "Do you pay for cable or do you illegally watch tv shows online instead? If you did not illegally watch those shows, would you pay for cable?" Let me know how that works out for you.

Watching online does not automatically mean 'illegally'. See Hulu and Fancast for starters.
 
Back
Top Bottom