Home » Consumer News » Recent Articles:

Amazon Introduces Fire TV: $99 for Voice Searchable Set-Top Box

Phillip Dampier April 2, 2014 Consumer News, Online Video, Video Comments Off on Amazon Introduces Fire TV: $99 for Voice Searchable Set-Top Box

amazonAmazon.com today introduced Fire TV, its entry in the increasingly crowded online video set-top box marketplace.

Fire TV is among the first boxes that supports voice search. The old way of dealing with scroll-and-click searching from an on-screen keyboard is replaced with a microphone on the remote that allows users to speak the title, actor, or genre and quickly find results.

Amazon.com is selling Fire TV for $99 — the same price as Apple TV — but considerably more expensive than Google’s Chromecast or entry-level Roku boxes.

Amazon’s box supports Certified Dolby Digital Plus surround sound and up to 1080p HDMI video. It offers access to Netflix, Prime Instant Video, Hulu Plus, WatchESPN, and many other TV Everywhere services (but not HBO Go). Fire TV is also a game console, with access to an online store selling more than 100 games at prices averaging $1.85 each.

“It has a powerful quad-core processor, dedicated GPU, 2 GB of memory, and dual-band, dual-antenna Wi-Fi,” says Amazon. “With a fast, fluid interface, high definition 1080p video, and Dolby Digital Plus surround sound, Fire TV looks—and sounds—amazing. We also added an exclusive new feature called ASAP that predicts what movies and TV episodes you’ll want to watch and gets them ready to stream instantly. No one likes waiting for videos to buffer.”

feature-techspecs._V340337968_

amazon fire

[flv]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/Amazon Fire TV 4-2-14.flv[/flv]

Gary Busey is featured in this humorous introductory advertisement for Amazon Fire TV. (1:00)

[flv]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/Amazon Fire TV Voice Search 4-2-14.flv[/flv]

Amazon elaborates further on its voice search feature for Fire TV in this video. (0:27)

Some Time Warner Cable Customers Getting The Design Network; Interior Design 24/7

Phillip Dampier April 2, 2014 Consumer News, Online Video Comments Off on Some Time Warner Cable Customers Getting The Design Network; Interior Design 24/7

design networkAn online-only television channel dedicated to interior design will become a traditional linear television channel available to some Time Warner Cable customers beginning today.

The Design Network, created by executives at the world’s largest furniture store — Furnitureland South — had managed to get 10,000 online subscribers since its launch in April 2013. But now the network will get a larger viewership on the lineup of some Time Warner Cable systems, starting in North Carolina.

“The Design Network was created for everyone who shares a passion for the home,” said Jason Harris, founder of The Design Network and executive vice president of Furnitureland South. “What I’m seeing on television has no correlation to the amazing home decor industry that I’ve grown up in and have been exposed to all my life.”

“We always look for opportunities to work with networks to enhance our diverse channel lineup,” said Mike Smith, area vice president of operations, Time Warner Cable. “The Design Network created a television network to engage consumers in decor and the world of interior design – we are excited to provide our customers with access to this unique source of programming.”

Furnitureland South

Furnitureland South – High Point, N.C.

In addition to The Design Network’s new television channel, the online version expands to further engage interior design professionals and home enthusiasts by allowing them to create their own channels, similar to YouTube. Viewers can upload and annotate their own videos and photos and grow their own audience. Through these channels, designers and home enthusiasts may earn commissioned, promoted series on TDN TV.

The network also exists as a self-promotion of Furnitureland South, which may limit the network’s reach. The Design Network’s programming is heavily influenced by its parent company’s furniture business.

The Design Network was created to help people become more inspired and knowledgeable about designing, decorating and living in their homes. “We are uniquely qualified to create a network featuring entertainment, inspiration and instruction for the home,” Harris commented. “With our retail business, Furnitureland South, being located in the epicenter of the home furnishings industry, we furnish more than 25,000 homes a year with clients from all over the world and work closely with the finest furniture brands and design influencers.”

It isn’t known if Furnitureland South is paying Time Warner Cable to launch the network or if cable customers will be underwriting the channel through their monthly cable bill.

The roof on your home is a big investment, so you want to make sure that you’re keeping it in great condition. Look for roofing company near me that can help you keep your roof in tip-top shape with regular inspections to prevent any issues that would create further expenses. For professional seamless gutter installers, contact today.

Media Concentration: FCC Closes Competing Local TV Station ‘Partnership’ Loopholes

Phillip Dampier April 2, 2014 Competition, Consumer News, Public Policy & Gov't 2 Comments
WHAM and WUHF are now both located at WHAM's facilities in Henrietta, N.Y.

WHAM and WUHF are now both located at WHAM’s facilities in suburban Rochester, N.Y. WHAM now produces WUHF’s newscasts.

Ever wonder why some local television stations air newscasts produced by another competing station?

When your local ABC station’s evening news ends up on a local FOX station, it is usually because the two have signed a joint agreement to let one station represent the other in making programming decisions and selling advertising.

FCC chairman Thomas Wheeler believes this growing trend represents an end run around the agency’s rules limiting how much control a single major media company may have in any particular community. On Monday Wheeler joined two Democratic commissioners and voted to ban the practice.

Wheeler said the vote against joint agreements represented “a win for common sense,” and preserved the FCC’s intent to make sure viewers have a diverse mix of news, information and programming. In several small and medium cities, viewers were instead getting the same newscast on competing stations and just one or two media companies made all the programming decisions for local viewers.

FCC media ownership rules prevent TV station owners from owning stations reaching more than 39 percent of the national TV audience, owning more than a single top-four network station in a market and owning more than two TV stations in a market. They also prevent a local newspaper from buying a local TV station.

But station owners found they could evade those rules and save money by turning over the production of costly locally produced programming like news and community affairs to another station, and in some cases even moving operations into another station’s building, while still holding the station’s license. In some markets, one company like Sinclair or Nexstar can end up owning a local network affiliate, a CW or MyNetworkTV station, and have a joint agreement to sell advertising and program another network affiliate.

Sinclair Exploits Loophole to Build a Media Empire

Owned by Sinclair

Owned by Sinclair

One good example of this practice can be found in the 78th largest television market in the United States — Rochester, N.Y.

Ten years ago, WROC (CBS), WHEC (NBC), WOKR (now WHAM) (ABC), and WUHF (FOX) each maintained their own news teams and ad sales departments. The first station to drop its own news was WUHF. Station owner Sinclair fired the news staff and signed an agreement with Nexstar’s WROC to produce a newscast for the station instead. WROC’s reporters could now be seen on two different stations.

In early 2013, WHAM was acquired by Deerfield Media, which has a whisker-thin separation between itself and Sinclair. The Wall Street Journal reported that Deerfield’s owner, Stephen Mumblow, was Sinclair CEO David Smith’s former personal banker. All of its stations are operated by Sinclair, despite being licensed to Deerfield.

Operated by Sinclair

Operated by Sinclair

Media consolidation critics say that is a blatant end run around the FCC’s ownership rules and violates local station limits.

Rochester viewers noticed a change on Jan. 1 of this year, when WUHF dropped WROC’s newscasts and began airing WHAM news instead. WUHF is now co-located in WHAM’s offices and despite the fact WHAM is owned by Deerfield, all of WHAM’s news and sales team are Sinclair employees. Sinclair now owns or controls Rochester’s CW, ABC, and FOX affiliates. Nexstar still owns WROC and Hubbard Broadcasting owns WHEC.

Nationwide, Sinclair owns, programs, or provides sales services to 167 television stations in 77 markets. In 2011, it owned 58 stations.

Smith

Smith

Sinclair is not a “hands-off” media player either. Sinclair’s CEO David Smith has regularly forced his conservative political views into his station’s newscasts.

Smith calls himself a family values man, but his 1996 arrest and conviction in a prostitution sting suggests otherwise. Smith was arrested for picking up a prostitute who performed what police called an “unnatural and perverted sex act” on him as he drove down the highway in a company-owned Mercedes.

As part of his plea agreement, Smith had to perform court-ordered community service. Smith subcontracted that out to his Baltimore station’s newsroom employees, ordered to produce a series of reports on a local drug counseling program, which Smith used to satisfy his sentence. That did not go over well with local reporters and at least one judge.

“I really hated the way he handled our newsroom and what he expected his reporters to do after his arrest,” LuAnne Canipe, a reporter who worked on air at Sinclair’s flagship station, WBFF in Baltimore, from 1994 to 1998, told Salon. “A Baltimore judge called me up,” she recalls. “He wasn’t handling the case, but he called to tell me about the arrangement and asked me if I knew about it. The judge was outraged. He said, ‘How can employees do community service for their boss?’”

Canipe left as the work atmosphere at Sinclair rapidly deteriorated.

Hyman

Hyman

“Let’s just say the arrest of the CEO was part of a sexual atmosphere that trickled down to different levels in the company,” Canipe told Salon. “There was an improper work environment. I think that because of what he did there was a feeling that everything was fair game,” says Canipe, who says she chose to leave Sinclair in 1998. She says that she once complained to management about another Sinclair employee, who had engaged in audible phone sex inside a station conference room, but that no action was taken against the employee.

How Sinclair Uses Its Stations to Push a Political Agenda

But Sinclair’s most controversial interference in local news operations came days before the 2004 presidential election, when Sinclair ordered its stations to air a highly charged documentary critics called a propaganda hit piece against Democratic candidate John Kerry.

“Stolen Honor: Wounds that Never Heal,” was the brainchild of Carlton Sherwood, a disgraced former reporter for a Washington, D.C. station that was later forced to donate $50,000 and air a lengthy retraction after Sherwood falsely claimed that the veterans responsible for creating the Vietnam Veterans Memorial Wall were misappropriating contributions. The charges proved baseless and at least one veteran signed a sworn statement claiming Sherwood had a political ax to grind, calling the project that “liberal memorial” and a “black gash.” Sherwood reportedly wanted the memorial to speak to the righteousness of the Vietnam War and focused most of his reporting on critics who felt the memorial looked like “a wailing wall.”

Sinclair owned/operated stations now carry news from conservative Newsmax and the Washington Times on their websites.

Sinclair owned/operated stations now carry news from conservative Newsmax and the Washington Times on their websites.

Sherwood’s one-sided anti-Kerry documentary created a firestorm of criticism that reached all the way to Wall Street. Sinclair faced advertiser boycotts, petitions to yank its stations’ licenses, and angry investors who wanted Sinclair to steer clear of controversy that was bad for business.

Since then, Sinclair’s conservative credentials are still apparent, although more subtle. Top-rated WHAM’s local news now features headlines from the Rev. Sun Myung Moon’s Washington Times and the fiercely conservative Newsmax. Many Sinclair stations are also still required to air conservative political commentaries featuring Sinclair’s Mark Hyman during their newscasts.

Sinclair’s “government is bad” philosophy is found in its franchised “Waste Watch” series, which also airs during station newscasts. Sinclair claims the feature investigates and exposes how viewers’ local tax dollars are spent. But news staff at several Sinclair stations find the series distasteful because it frames its reporting around the idea that local government is generally incompetent and wasteful. Media critics suggest that kind of framed reporting does not belong in a straightforward newscast.

Underlining Sinclair’s Waste Watch conservative bona fides is the prominent presence of conservative political groups including the CATO Institute, Citizens Against Government Waste (CAGW), and the National Taxpayers Union (NTU) on Sinclair station websites. CAGW has historically maintained ties with the American Legislative Exchange Council and was a former member of ALEC. NTU President Duane Parde is the former executive director of ALEC, and NTU remains an ALEC member.

Wheeler

Wheeler

Despite the meddling from Sinclair’s headquarters, many Sinclair stations’ news teams try to maintain balance around Sinclair’s political agenda. WHAM, for example, buries Hyman’s commentaries on its extended morning news aired on WUHF instead of airing them in its primary newscast on WHAM. In Rochester, “Waste Watch” has also had some unintended consequences. WHAM has used the franchise to extensively report on various scandals surrounding county contracts involving the highest levels of Monroe County government, long dominated by the Republican party.

With more than 100 “joint agreements” in place at stations around the country — primarily in news-scarce medium and smaller television markets, the declining number of people making decisions about what is newsworthy and how it is reported has become increasingly worrisome for media consolidation critics. Television news dominates audiences as newspaper readership continues to decline. Critics suggest the impact of media consolidation can already be seen at companies like Sinclair.

FCC Gives Stations Two Years to Unwind Agreements; Republican Commissioners Upset

Under the new rules, a broadcaster that accounts for more than 15% of another station’s advertising sales would be seen by the FCC as the de-facto licensee of that station. In dozens of markets, this new rule will put companies like Sinclair and Nexstar in violation of the FCC’s ownership limits. The FCC is giving stations two years to disconnect their joint agreements or apply for a waiver if they can prove the partnership serves the public interest.

Deerfield Media is likely to be one of the hardest hit media groups, although critics contend the partnership with Sinclair was created primarily to evade the rules.

Although the rules change received support from all three Democrats, the commission’s two Republicans voiced strong opposition and claimed that the FCC was regulating a solution for a non-problem.

Commissioner Ajit Pai didn’t seem interested in the views of media consolidation critics. Instead, he looked for complaints from advertisers forced to buy ad time through the joint sales agreements. Finding none, he declared the case to end the joint agreements “embarrassingly weak.”

“This is the dog that didn’t bark,” Pai said.

Pai recommended station owners sue in federal court to overturn the FCC’s new rules. Pai is on the record opposing most ownership limits of any kind.

Viacom Demands 100% Rate Increases for Hundreds of Small Cable Systems, Military Bases

viacom networksSmall cable systems across the country and on overseas military bases are being granted hourly reprieves that are keeping up to 24 Viacom-owned cable channels on the air after negotiations to extend an agreement with their program buyer stalled.

Cable operators belonging to the National Cable TV Cooperative, which represents independent cable systems on cable programming matters, report Viacom is demanding an unprecedented 100 percent rate increase for its networks and a guaranteed rate hike of 10% annually on each of its channels.

Viacom’s demands would cost each subscriber at least $4 a month, noted Jack Capparell, general manager of Service Electric’s cable system in the Lehigh Valley of Pennsylvania. Service Electric is a private, family owned cable business with 250,000 subscribers in central and northeastern Pennsylvania and northwestern New Jersey.

The impasse also affects cable systems serving American military bases. Americable has notified subscribers in Yokosuka, Atsugi, Iwakuni, and Sasebo, Japan Viacom was likely to cut off 10 of its cable channels to military families sometime today. Allied Telesis, which offers service to Air Force bases in Japan is also expected to lose programming.

cableoneNCTC members complain Viacom requires cable systems to carry nearly all of its lineup, including lesser-known channels few customers have even heard of, much less want. Even if a cable system chooses not to air a Viacom channel, Viacom’s contracts require cable providers to pay for them if they want to carry Viacom’s most popular networks.

Some cable systems are breaking away from NCTC’s negotiations and opening one on one talks with Viacom. Metrocast secured an agreement for its customers earlier today by negotiating directly with Viacom.

viacomFor most affected cable operators, there is a ‘wait and see what happens’ approach. Others, including Cable ONE, have already moved to replace the Viacom networks with other channels.

“Viacom asked for a rate increase greater than 100%, despite the fact that viewing is down on 12 of their 15 networks – some by more than 30% since 2010,” said Cable ONE. “We asked Viacom to either reduce their rates or allow us to drop some of their less popular networks to reduce the total cost. They refused these reasonable requests.”

Logo_Service-ElectricEarlier today, Cable ONE didn’t wait for Viacom to pull the plug. They pulled it themselves.

“Cable ONE has let these networks go and expects to add many top-rated networks you’ve requested and expand several other highly requested networks to our most popular level of service. Some of the new networks include BBC America, Sprout, Investigation Discovery, the Blaze, Hallmark Channel, National Geographic, TV One, Sundance, and more,” said the company, which expects to publish a full list of the new networks on Wednesday.

Viacom responded with a news release tailored for each affected provider:

GCI_Color_LogoWe are offering Service Electric a double-digit discount off of our standard rate card. It is a better deal than HUNDREDS of other TV providers in the country have agreed to. We have been actively trying to get a deal done with Service Electric for months and they have refused to negotiate in any meaningful way. And now, on top of this, Service Electric is throwing out numbers which simply aren’t true. Our expiring deal with Service Electric is nearly five years old. In that time, we have been great partners and given Service Electric more channels, more on demand content and access to our content beyond the TV – at no additional cost. We don’t understand why Service Electric has chosen to negotiate in this manner. And now, as a result of their lack of interest in coming to a mutually beneficial agreement, you are at risk of losing 19 Viacom networks. We are serious about getting a deal done.

Virtually the entire state of Alaska is also affected.

“We’ve unified to fight for Alaskans and to work toward a fair, long-term agreement that keeps prices stable for our customers,” said Paul Landes, GCI senior vice president. “Viacom wants a rate increase that is 40 times that of the rate of inflation. Alaska pay TV providers, along with 700 small to mid-sized operators nationally, are saying ‘no’ to Viacom’s take all 26 channels or nothing demands.”

GCI is joined by Alaskan providers MTA and KPU in the dispute.

[flv]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/Cable ONE Viacom Channels Removed New Channels Added 4-1-14.mp4[/flv]

Cable ONE released this video earlier today informing customers they were dropping Viacom networks. (1:00)

Math Problem: The Telecom Industry’s Bias Against Fiber-to-the-Home Service

Phillip "Spending $6k per cable customer is obviously a much better deal than paying half that to build a fiber to the home network" Dampier

Phillip “Spending $6k per cable customer is obviously a much better deal than paying half that to build a fiber to the home network” Dampier

Math was never my strong subject, but even I can calculate the groupthink of American cable and telephone companies and their friends on Wall Street just doesn’t add up.

This week, we learned that cable companies like Bright House Networks, Suddenlink, and Charter Communications are already lining up for a chance to acquire three million cable customers Comcast intends to sell if it wins approval of its merger with Time Warner Cable. Wall Street has already predicted Comcast will fetch as much as $18 billion for those customers and pegged the value of each at approximately $6,000.

But for less than half that price any company could build a brand new fiber to the home system capable of delivering 1,000Mbps broadband and state-of-the-art phone and television service and start banking profits long before paying off the debt from buying an inferior coaxial cable system. Yet we are told time and time again that the economics of fiber to the home service simply don’t make any sense and deploying the technology is a waste of money.

Let’s review:

Google Fiber was called a boondoggle by many of its competitors. The folks at Bernstein Research, routinely friendly to the cable business model, seemed appalled at the economics of Google’s fiber project in Kansas City. Bernstein’s Carlos Kirjner and Ram Parameswaran said Google would throw $84 million into the first phase of its fiber network, connecting 149,000 homes at a cost between $500-674 per home. The Wall Street analyst firm warned investors of the costs Google would incur reaching 20 million customers nationwide — $11 billion.

“We remain skeptical that Google will find a scalable and economically feasible model to extend its build out to a large portion of the U.S., as costs would be substantial, regulatory and competitive barriers material, and in the end the effort would have limited impact on the global trajectory of the business,” Bernstein wrote to its investor clients.

dealSo Google spending $11 billion to reach 20 million new homes is business malpractice while spending $18 billion for three million Time Warner Cable customers is confirmation of the cable industry’s robust health and valuation?

Bernstein’s firm never thought highly of Verizon FiOS either.

“If I were an auto dealer and I wanted to give people a Maserati for the price of a Volkswagen, I’d have some seriously happy customers,” Craig Moffett from Bernstein said back in 2008. “My problem would be whether I could earn a decent return doing it.”

Back then, Moffett estimated the average cost to Verizon per FiOS home passed was $3,897, a figure based on wiring up every neighborhood, but not getting every homeowner to buy the service. Costs for fiber have dropped dramatically since 2008. Dave Burstein from DSL Prime reported by the summer of 2012 Verizon told shareholders costs fell below $700/home passed and headed to $600. The total cost of running fiber, installing it in a customer’s home and providing equipment meant Verizon had to spend about $1,500 per customer when all was said and done.

Moffett concluded Verizon was throwing money away spending that much on improving service. He wasn’t impressed by AT&T U-verse either, which only ran fiber into the neighborhood, not to each home. Moffett predicted AT&T was spending $2,200 per home on U-verse back in 2008, although those costs have dropped dramatically as well.

Moffett

Moffett

Moffett’s solution for both Verizon and AT&T? Do nothing to upgrade, because the price wasn’t worth the amount of revenue returns either company could expect in the short-term.

It was a much different story if Comcast wanted to spend $45 billion to acquire Time Warner Cable however, a deal Moffett called “transformational.”

“What we’re talking about is an industry that is becoming more capital intensive,” Todd Mitchell, an analyst at Brean Capital LLC in New York told Bloomberg News. “What happens to mature, capital-intensive companies — they consolidate. So, yes, I think the cable industry is ripe for consolidation.”

Other investors agreed.

“This is definitely a bet on a positive future for high-speed access, cable and other services in an economic recovery,” said Bill Smead, chief investment officer at Smead Capital Management, whose fund owns Comcast shares.

ftth councilBut Forbes’ Peter Cohan called Google’s much less investment into fiber broadband a colossal waste of money.

“Larry Page should nip this bad idea in the bud,” Cohan wrote.

Cohan warned investors should throw water on the enthusiasm for fiber before serious money got spent.

“FTTH authority, Neal Lachman, wrote in SeekingAlpha, that it would cost as much as $500 billion and could take a decade to connect all the houses and commercial buildings in the U.S. to fiber,” Cohan added.

Cohan was concerned Google’s initial investment would take much too long to be recovered, which apparently is not an issue for buyers willing to spend $18 billion for three million disaffected Time Warner Cable customers desperately seeking alternatives.

An investment for the future, not for short term profits.

An investment for the future, not short term profits.

Municipal broadband providers have often chosen to deploy fiber to the home service because the technology offers plenty of capacity, ongoing maintenance costs are low and the networks can be upgraded at little cost indefinitely. But such broadband efforts, especially when they are owned by local government, represent a threat for cable and phone companies relying on a business model that sells less for more.

The American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), funded by Comcast, Time Warner, AT&T, Verizon, and other large telecom companies is at the forefront of helping friendly state legislators ban community fiber networks. Their excuse is that the fiber networks cost too much and, inexplicably, can reduce competition.

“A growing number of municipalities are […] building their own networks and offering broadband services to their citizens,” ALEC writes on its website. “ALEC disagrees with their answer due to the negative impacts it has on free markets and limited government.  In addition, such projects could erode consumer choice by making markets less attractive to competition because of the government’s expanded role as a service provider.”

The Fiber-to-the-Home Council obviously disagrees.

“Believe it or not, there are already more than a thousand telecom network operators and service providers across North America that have upgraded to fiber to the home,” says the Council. “The vast majority of these are local incumbent telephone companies that are looking to transform themselves from voice and DSL providers into 21st century broadband companies that can deliver ultra high-speed Internet and robust video services, as well as be able to deliver other high-bandwidth digital applications and services to homes and businesses in the years ahead.”

Stephenson

Stephenson

In fact, a good many of those efforts are undertaken by member-owned co-ops and municipally owned providers that answer to local residents, not to shareholders looking for quick returns.

The only time large companies like AT&T move towards fiber to the home service is when a competitor threatens to do it themselves. That is precisely what happened in Austin. The day Google announced it was launching fiber service in Austin, AT&T suddenly announced its intention to do the same.

“In Austin we’re deploying fiber very aggressively,” said AT&T CEO Randall Stephenson. “The cost dynamics of deploying fiber have dramatically changed. The interfaces at the homes, the wiring requirements, how you get a wiring drop to a pole, and the way you splice it has totally changed the cost dynamics of deploying fiber.”

Prior to that announcement, AT&T justified its decision not to deploy fiber all the way to the home by saying it was unnecessary and too costly. With Google headed to town, that talking point is no longer operative.

Search This Site:

Contributions:

Recent Comments:

Your Account:

Stop the Cap!