TE
TechEcho
Home24h TopNewestBestAskShowJobs
GitHubTwitter
Home

TechEcho

A tech news platform built with Next.js, providing global tech news and discussions.

GitHubTwitter

Home

HomeNewestBestAskShowJobs

Resources

HackerNews APIOriginal HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 TechEcho. All rights reserved.

Time Warner Cable drops Ovation and Current TV

31 pointsby abdophotoover 12 years ago

6 comments

nmacriover 12 years ago
More context: <a href="http://www.deadline.com/2013/01/al-jazeera-to-acquire-current-tv-ny-times/" rel="nofollow">http://www.deadline.com/2013/01/al-jazeera-to-acquire-curren...</a><p>Since Time Warner Cable would not consent to the sale “Current will no longer be carried on TWC. This is unfortunate, but I am confident that Al Jazeera America will earn significant additional carriage in the months and years ahead.” Time Warner Cable says that it is “removing the service as quickly as possible.” The loss of the No. 2 cable operator will hurt: Time Warner Cable has 12.2M video subscribers and Current reaches about 59M homes. Others also could follow Time Warner Cable’s lead as they look to prune their often bloated channel lineups.
GabrielF00over 12 years ago
Time Warner and other cable companies are anticompetitive monopolies that offer poor-quality service at high prices. At one point Comcast had a worse customer service rating than the IRS (hence the new Xfiniti brand). Dropping these channels is pure greed.
eliover 12 years ago
Seems like a strange overreaction. I mean, I get Al Jazeera English here in DC. There really isn't anything on it that should be controversial.<p>Perhaps it has to do with the fact that Current was reportedly tanking, which is why it was on the block in the first place.
评论 #5000833 未加载
评论 #5001053 未加载
unreal37over 12 years ago
How does carrying a TV channel cost Time Warner real money? I guess they pay the channels for the rights to broadcast, but how much was really costing them? A few hundred thousand a year? What if Ovation was free?<p>As for the politics of carrying an Al Jazeera owned channel in the U.S., it's a sad day for free speech.
评论 #5000829 未加载
评论 #5001068 未加载
geuisover 12 years ago
That's fine. I dropped Time Warner and Comcast years ago. Oddly enough, between Youtube, podcasts, Netflix, iTunes, and bittorrent I have no need to have "channels" any more.<p>If there's a movie or tv show I want to see, Netflix -&#62; iTunes -&#62; bittorrent.<p>I've actually been finding I watch Youtube more than anything else. I have a particular set of interests and have found a particular set of regular independent producers on Youtube and subscribe to them.<p><pre><code> Minecraft: Etho's Lab Starcraft: HDStarcraft and Husky Bread baking: multiple Telescope mirror making: multiple Photography: multiple </code></pre> Beyond that, I listen to a variety of podcasts about tech and photography.<p>I literally have <i>no</i> need for cable tv and haven't for years. All of the interesting stuff is online.<p>What I'd really love to see is a popular tv show with a loyal fan base but marginal viewers on cable to just switch over 100% to Youtube. Put the episodes in full HD and run regular Youtube ads. Maybe do some in-show advertisement, product placement, that kind of thing.<p>Recently, Dirty Jobs was cancelled after 8 years by Discovery. That was a really cool show with a loyal fan base. Its numbers got too low for Discovery so they canned it. It'd be the perfect example to try switching to a pure online model.
评论 #5001145 未加载
评论 #5001148 未加载
jspthrowaway2over 12 years ago
&#62; <i>Carl Meredith is one local viewer upset about Ovation’s removal from his Time Warner lineup. Meredith and his wife, who live near Clayton, are big fans of Ovation’s reruns of the original British version of “Antiques Roadshow.” Meredith said he had his DVR set to record the episodes during the day, and the couple would watch them together at night. Now, he gets a blue screen telling him Time Warner Cable no longer carries Ovation.</i><p>That's a rather left-field choice of show to enjoy, and in most of these discussions reruns (especially esoteric ones) don't get a lot of focus. Pundits tend to focus on the newest episode of, say, <i>Homeland</i> as the item worth buying. The Merediths show us that there is more to that puzzle.<p>The à la carte selection of and payment for individual shows, as opposed to individual channels, may have some merit after all; if you read between the lines, they don't want Ovation. They want reruns of British <i>Antiques Roadshow</i>, and Ovation just happened to have them. This couple is already down the road toward a different model, too, since they utilize their DVR to time-shift the episodes anyway.<p>The downside to shifting to paying for shows is (the often useful) local network affiliates, live sports programming, real-time news, and so forth, which are problems yet to be solved. Basically, anything live. I think the generation that's in their 20s and 30s now, though, is more palatable to this kind of model, and we're very likely on the way.<p>----<p>Other point I'd like to make here is that British <i>Antiques Roadshow</i> is produced by the BBC, who haven't quite figured out the United States yet. Different legal systems force them to make real bummers, like rescoring <i>Top Gear</i> since they have a very liberal licence to use popular music in the UK and America is a very different picture. In many <i>Top Gear</i> films, the music is half of the equation[1] and its replacement with stock light rock jams is a real shame. Heard some of that in the <i>Best of Top Gear</i> edits that BBC America just aired. That's also probably why they have to be really aggressive on YouTube, and a lot of the unofficial clips of <i>Top Gear</i> on YouTube have been disappearing, replaced by official edits following the same rules.<p>A lot of Americans, myself included, are chomping at the bit for <i>Top Gear</i> but the BBC finds itself having to edit it to remove British-specific jokes (which I disagree with) or rescoring as mentioned above (which is just unfortunate). They're pretty lax on <i>QI</i> on YouTube, though, which is just great; I've seen all of <i>QI XL</i> Series J so far, not far behind Britain.<p>[1]: Example from last series, brilliantly written, shot, edited, and scored: <a href="http://vimeo.com/40226173" rel="nofollow">http://vimeo.com/40226173</a>