Where Montana TVs Go to Die Our new Senator Steve Daines urges DirecTV, CBS stations to resolve contract dispute…or else.
Ok, there’s no real threat there or anything like that, just a friendly nudging in a story that appeared in the Missoulian today. Don’t waste one of your articles this month by click on it – there’s nothing of real value there.
It pretty much boils down to the 10th day of a contract dispute between KPAX, a local station here, and DirecTV. The corporate behemoth is stopping 19,000 people from watching Jeopardy, as well as other shows, so it’s a pretty big deal…or is it?
I made the following comment on the article, and it might have appeared there by the time you read this:
We lost our TV coverage last fall, and I know it happened to many others in Missoula because numerous large TVs were sitting in dumpsters. But this was a story the Missoulian didn't feel the need to report on, why?
What am I talking about here? I’m talking about how consumers were forced to get a conversion box or just lose all TV reception like that. I suppose this wasn’t really an issue, however, because it only affected poor people, or those that refuse to pay for TV. Both are useless to society, so there was no story on it.
What is the story, why did people in Montana lose their TV signals in August of 2014 but hardly anyone talked about it?
Ok, there’s no real threat there or anything like that, just a friendly nudging in a story that appeared in the Missoulian today. Don’t waste one of your articles this month by click on it – there’s nothing of real value there.
It pretty much boils down to the 10th day of a contract dispute between KPAX, a local station here, and DirecTV. The corporate behemoth is stopping 19,000 people from watching Jeopardy, as well as other shows, so it’s a pretty big deal…or is it?
I made the following comment on the article, and it might have appeared there by the time you read this:
We lost our TV coverage last fall, and I know it happened to many others in Missoula because numerous large TVs were sitting in dumpsters. But this was a story the Missoulian didn't feel the need to report on, why?
What am I talking about here? I’m talking about how consumers were forced to get a conversion box or just lose all TV reception like that. I suppose this wasn’t really an issue, however, because it only affected poor people, or those that refuse to pay for TV. Both are useless to society, so there was no story on it.
What is the story, why did people in Montana lose their TV signals in August of 2014 but hardly anyone talked about it?
On August 27 of that year the Missoulian ran an article called Charter digital TV conversion could mean higher costs for city, schools that talked about the company “replacing outdated analog channels with new digital service.”
Great, but that meant if I didn’t get a conversion box, I was out of luck. And even if I did get one, I’d have to pay for service beginning a year later. I don’t know about you, but the idea of paying for what I used to get for free just doesn’t appeal to me.
You can get a big history of the Digital television transition on Wikipedia, but it’s pretty dry stuff. You have to figure as well that this was all happening when I was living in China. Before I moved there in 2008 I was watching TV by plugging it into the wall and getting CBS, PBS, NBC (very choppily) and sometimes a fourth channel if I was lucky and moved the paperclip sticking out of the back around just so.
It was a process, let me tell you, but it got me my TV, and over four years of college that saved me…what’s the going rate going to be for TV when it goes up?
According to a wonderful article by the Missoula Independent on August 18, Charter will only rent the boxes to people, they will never sell the conversion boxes. Now, perhaps we should say that they’re nice enough to give us the boxes for 2 years for free before charging us $6.99 a month.
If that nonsense was happening when I went to school I’d have to pay $83.88 a year extra for something I was getting for free. Why would a student do that? They wouldn’t. As the Independent article mentions, mainly old people are going to Charter to get the box. Young people like me just threw their old TVs away.
I suppose the idea was to get people into the stores to buy the new, hug, flatscreen digital TVs, right?
Great, but that meant if I didn’t get a conversion box, I was out of luck. And even if I did get one, I’d have to pay for service beginning a year later. I don’t know about you, but the idea of paying for what I used to get for free just doesn’t appeal to me.
You can get a big history of the Digital television transition on Wikipedia, but it’s pretty dry stuff. You have to figure as well that this was all happening when I was living in China. Before I moved there in 2008 I was watching TV by plugging it into the wall and getting CBS, PBS, NBC (very choppily) and sometimes a fourth channel if I was lucky and moved the paperclip sticking out of the back around just so.
It was a process, let me tell you, but it got me my TV, and over four years of college that saved me…what’s the going rate going to be for TV when it goes up?
According to a wonderful article by the Missoula Independent on August 18, Charter will only rent the boxes to people, they will never sell the conversion boxes. Now, perhaps we should say that they’re nice enough to give us the boxes for 2 years for free before charging us $6.99 a month.
If that nonsense was happening when I went to school I’d have to pay $83.88 a year extra for something I was getting for free. Why would a student do that? They wouldn’t. As the Independent article mentions, mainly old people are going to Charter to get the box. Young people like me just threw their old TVs away.
I suppose the idea was to get people into the stores to buy the new, hug, flatscreen digital TVs, right?
Thanks but no thanks – we’ll just live without TV. Don’t really need it much, after all, not with the internet and streaming video. I will say that I’ve begun listening to the radio more, but since Republican Fox News is the only thing that comes in good in my crappy basement apartment, maybe that’s not good.
But good for whom? Montana Democrats? Ha, don’t make me laugh! Already we saw them pat themselves on the back yesterday for a monumental failure, and then today we saw one of their up and comer’s drop out to follow the dark money trail. No, I don’t think they could fall into a hole right now if they were trying to – they’re already at the bottom of one.
Good for Republicans? Dumbing-down the electorate is typically a strategy we expect from them in their rush to condemn women and minorities and anyone else that doesn’t bow to corporate subservience, and fewer people watching TV might be good for that. But, there I go again, thinking TV is really for information and not propaganda.
When I got to China in 2008 I watched it a bit, then quickly unplugged the damn thing. It was full of BS, skewed ideas, and Party-dominated thought. When I got back to America in 2013, I saw it was no different.
In that regard, having less propaganda is bad for Republicans, but also for Democrats too. What will they do with all those people not willing to pay $6.99 a month that now don’t have TV? Are you going to get them on the radio, the internet, the newspaper and magazines?
You can’t get them now!
God, no wonder this story wasn’t reported on much.
But good for whom? Montana Democrats? Ha, don’t make me laugh! Already we saw them pat themselves on the back yesterday for a monumental failure, and then today we saw one of their up and comer’s drop out to follow the dark money trail. No, I don’t think they could fall into a hole right now if they were trying to – they’re already at the bottom of one.
Good for Republicans? Dumbing-down the electorate is typically a strategy we expect from them in their rush to condemn women and minorities and anyone else that doesn’t bow to corporate subservience, and fewer people watching TV might be good for that. But, there I go again, thinking TV is really for information and not propaganda.
When I got to China in 2008 I watched it a bit, then quickly unplugged the damn thing. It was full of BS, skewed ideas, and Party-dominated thought. When I got back to America in 2013, I saw it was no different.
In that regard, having less propaganda is bad for Republicans, but also for Democrats too. What will they do with all those people not willing to pay $6.99 a month that now don’t have TV? Are you going to get them on the radio, the internet, the newspaper and magazines?
You can’t get them now!
God, no wonder this story wasn’t reported on much.
