Sinclair Broadcast Group, Inc. today said Time Warner Cable Inc. will no longer hold talks in a programming dispute between the two firms. The stations will no longer be available on Time Warner Cable after December 31st.

According to Sinclair, Time Warner did not accept its latest offer of a monthly $0.10 increase per station, per subscriber.

Officials from Time Warner, however, said the cable company “has at no time told Sinclair that we were terminating negotiations.”

But Time Warner Cable has strengthened its hand in negotiations with its own agreement with the Fox network, which will allow the cable operator to continue carrying all Fox network programming after the local stations are blacked out.

A source at Time Warner Cable tells Stop the Cap! subscribers who have called the cable company to complain have been generally satisfied once they learn the network shows will still be available.

“It may cost viewers some Judge Judy, People’s Court, and a whole mess of program length ads these stations run all night and on weekends, but as long as they still can watch Glee and football, they are fine with it,” says our source.

“As for local news, does anyone watch Sinclair stations for local newscasts?  There are better choices, and viewers already knew that,” our source adds.

Time Warner Cable initially plans to place a chyron on the blacked out stations when network programming is not available, but discussions are underway about replacing that with cable-company acquired programming if the standoff continues for long.

“Time Warner Cable can easily license some older shows and movies and place them on our new ‘Fox’ channel and many viewers might find that more interesting than the stuff Sinclair stations run,” our source said.

The cable operator has experience doing exactly that in many markets, especially when they create channels to support networks like CW or MyNetworkTV that are not aired over the air in many medium-sized cities.  The cable operator could license a number of syndicated shows for free, ranging from talk programs to court shows, and run them during the day.

Stop the Cap! predicts after a few weeks at most, Sinclair will be back at the negotiating table to pound out a deal.  Sinclair stations will face an enormous financial hit from the loss of local advertising revenue, especially considering the majority of viewers still watch their stations over cable.

Stations Impacted

• AL Birmingham — WTTO (CW)
• AL Birmingham — WABM (MyNetworkTV)
• FL Pensacola — WEAR (ABC)
• FL Tallahassee — WTWC (NBC)
• FL Tampa — WTTA (MyNetworkTV)
• KY Lexington — WDKY (Fox)
• ME Portland — WGME (CBS)
• MO Girardeau — KBSI (Fox)
• NC Greensboro — WXLV (ABC)
• NC Greensboro — WMYV (MyNetworkTV)
• NC Raleigh — WLFL (CW)
• NC Raleigh — WRDC (MyNetworkTV)
• NY Buffalo — WUTV (Fox)
• NY Buffalo — WNYO (MyNetworkTV)
• NY Rochester — WUHF (Fox)
• NY Syracuse — WSYT (Fox)
• NY Syracuse — WNYS (MyNetworkTV)
• OH Cincinnati — WSTR (MyNetworkTV)
• OH Columbus — WSYX (ABC)
• OH Columbus — WTTE (Fox)
• OH Dayton — WKEF (ABC)
• OH Dayton — WRGT (Fox)
• SC Charleston — WTAT (Fox)
• SC Charleston — WMMP (MyNetworkTV)
• PA Pittsburgh — WPGH (Fox)
• PA Pittsburgh — WPMY (MyNetworkTV)
• TX San Antonio — KABB (Fox)
• TX San Antonio — KMYS (MyNetworkTV)
• VA Norfolk — WTVZ (MyNetworkTV)
• WI Milwaukee — WVTV (CW)
• WI Milwaukee — WCGV (MyNetworkTV)
• WV Charleston — WCHS (ABC)
• WV Charleston — WVAH (Fox)

Sanders

Sen. Bernie Sanders has challenged FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski’s view that a merger between NBC-Universal and Comcast would not harm America’s media landscape or consumers.  The independent senator from Vermont released a statement today blasting the chairman for rolling over for another media conglomerate:

The FCC released some very bad news for the future of American media and, in my view, for the future of American democracy.  FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski has circulated an order that would allow Comcast, the country’s largest cable and Internet provider, to merge with NBC Universal, one of the country’s largest media conglomerates.

If approved, this new media giant will be the largest cable provider, the largest Internet provider, and one of the largest producers of content in the United States.  At a time when a small number of giant media corporations already control what the American people see, hear, and read, we do not need another media conglomerate with control over the production and distribution of media content.  What we need is less concentration of ownership, more diversity, more local ownership-and more viewpoints.

By law, the FCC may only sign off on the merger if it determines that it serves ‘the public interest, convenience, and necessity.’ Far from meeting the public interest standard, Comcast’s takeover of NBCU would create a monolithic media superpower and cause irreparable damage to the U.S. media landscape and society as a whole. In addition, the merger of these two media giants would likely precipitate other media mergers and make an already bad situation of media consolidation far worse.  Despite the public interest standard, Chairman Genachowski appears to be charging ahead, pressuring his fellow commissioners to approve this deal.

Some take solace in the fact that Chairman Genachowski’s order would approve the merger only subject to certain conditions and regulations.  This in no way changes my opinion about the scope of the damage.  If this merger is approved, I have little doubt that Comcast-NBCU will retain hundreds of attorneys and lobbyists to exploit gaps and loopholes in any conditions and regulations.  Once we allow companies to become this powerful, the FCC does not regulate them.  They regulate the FCC.

Time is running out to stop this deal.  I hope the American people will take notice and stand with me to demand that the FCC change course, vote down the order, and reverse the disturbing trend of media consolidation.

[flv width=”640″ height=”380″]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/Sanders on Comcast 12-2-10.flv[/flv]

Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont appeals to Americans to join him in opposing the merger of Comcast and NBC-Universal.  (2 minutes)

[flv width=”480″ height=”380″]HTTP://WWW.phillipdampier.com/video/KTVX Salt Lake City Comcast for the Holidays 12-22-10.flv[/flv]

Salt Lake City’s local ABC affiliate never runs out of wonderful things to say about Comcast, the area’s dominant cable company. KTVX devoted more than four minutes of airtime last week to a puff piece promoting Comcast’s cable products.

It’s just the latest example of the blurring of the line between journalism and ingratiating sponsors by lending the station’s news talent out to shill for advertisers.

Included in the ‘Good Things Utah’ segment, an extended interview with Comcast’s Ray Child, who was encouraged to rattle on about all of the wonderful things Comcast/Xfinity offers local residents.  The two cheerleaders hosts presiding over the affair offered nothing but extended praise, although one host may have touched the third rail when she mentioned “monopoly.”  (4 minutes)

Frontier Communications continues to deliver monthly headaches to many of their customers in the form of wildly inaccurate bills that take months and repeated calls to correct.

Complaints are piling up on websites like My3Cents, particularly from ex-Verizon customers sold down the river by state regulators that approved the sale of their landlines to Frontier.

At fault: Frontier’s myriad of promotional plans which deliver discounts only when the salesperson correctly configures the account.  When things go wrong, customers get bills far larger than anticipated:

I’m on a contract for $26.99 per month. Each month the bill arrives showing $41.99 due. Each month I call and the agent confirms $26.99 is correct and a ticket will be put in to correct this. The next month I have to do this all over again. The last two months the agents have examined my account and have hung up on me. That is 20 minutes of phone calls per month. This is pathetic!

This customer was signed to a term contract for a service bundle that is supposed to deliver savings, but only delivers headaches when the bill arrives in the mail.  Frontier is also notorious for marketing service plans without disclosing a myriad of fees, surcharges, and taxes that dramatically increases the final amount due each month:

I have been with Frontier for 15 years, since moving to this area. A couple of years ago, a woman from Frontier was plying the neighborhood (repeatedly) with an offer I couldn’t refuse: around $30 for an unlimited local/LD plan with numerous features. Came with a 1-year contract. BUT when I got the first bill, it was around $50.

I called to query and was told, patronizingly, that “everyone has to pay their taxes.”

Everyone but Frontier that is — the company managed to pull off its purchase of Verizon landlines tax-free thanks to a legal tax loophole known as a Reverse Morris Trust.

After this customer discovered $50 is the new $30, they canceled their service.  That opened a whole new runaround — waiting months for a refund check promised on their final bill.  In this case, it took three months.

“At this point, my feeling is that if Frontier were the last phone company on earth, I’d be using carrier pigeons and a tin can with a string,” writes the exasperated ex-Frontier customer.

But sub-standard service doesn’t stop with the billing, as one Arizona customer reports.  The company’s contention it could bring 3Mbps DSL service to Navajo was an unfunny joke for one customer:

They claim to offer “up to 3Mbps.”  Beware of the words “up to” because this means that anything less can be expected and less is exactly what you will get. I have tested my speed many times and the best I get is around 0.25 Mbps. Not to mention that service gets interrupted almost daily and my Internet disconnects all the time. I called them about this and they said they would send someone. Well some incompetent tech from the Navajo office came here and checked around outside while I was gone from my house and just left a note saying everything was OK. Well, OK and so now what? I just have to accept this mediocre service that goes off and on all day? No follow up? Nothing? Stay away from this company… stay very far away. The only reason they are still around is because they offer the only service in some areas and therefore think that they don’t have to be a legitimate company because they have no competition here.

Frontier’s telemarketing is also relentless, and irritating for many customers as the company comes a-calling to push its two and three year service contracts with Internet and satellite television service.  Not interested?  One customer in West Virginia found that didn’t matter — Frontier started billing them for services they didn’t order anyway:

Frontier is a horrible company. I was sent two bills for Internet and phone services that I didn’t authorize. I called the first time and they were suppose to cancel the service and didn’t. I called when we got the second bill and was put on hold for 20 minutes and the representative was very rude to me and hung up because I asked if we were to receive another bill what was I suppose to do. I believe the reps need some more in depth customer service training.  I had Frontier before and had a problem with them then so I canceled my service. This just proves that they have no idea what they are doing.

Perhaps the only thing worse than getting bad service is no service at all.  Dennis’ Frontier landline has been out of service for a month… and counting:

I am so fed up with this horrible company. We got stuck with them due to Verizon selling out to them. Our phone has been out of order for over a month. Every time I call they tell me they have already fixed the problem but the phone is still not working, so they put in another repair ticket. Sometimes its at least a week before they can get out to “repair” the line.

I call at least once a week. I am using all my minutes on our cell phone plan just trying to get a working phone. When you call customer service they are rude and treat you like you are wasting their time…..isn’t that what they are paid to do? When we had Verizon and they came to repair the phone they would always call or stop by the house to let you know what the problem was and give you their card. The only way to find out if Frontier had been out is to call the repair line and get treated like crap again. They are supposed to come out again tomorrow and if the phone is not working I am going to cancel the phone service and get a cell phone booster for the house and go with cell service only.

Media excitement about recent iterations of allegedly “4G” networks aside, no currently available wireless broadband service will replace the need for traditional wired broadband so long as providers limit consumption to 5GB (or less) per month.

As average consumption per household is now at least three times that level, wireless broadband customers will be faced with three choices:

1. Supplement a wireless broadband account with an unlimited, wired broadband service;
2. Be prepared to pay overlimit fees or purchase additional accounts or “usage packs;”
3. Reduce usage to remain within plan limits.

Sprint currently remains the largest carrier offering unlimited access to its 4G network, also sold independently under the Clearwire brand.  But as Clear subscribers found out, “unlimited” comes with “unlimited hassles” if Clear’s “intelligent network management” software catches you using it “too much.”  Speeds are quickly throttled downwards, well below even Sprint’s slower 3G network.

Many of Clear’s customers signed up in response to ads promising the 4G wireless service as a “home broadband replacement.”  Ditch your cable modem or DSL service for a wireless alternative!  Some salespeople even dared to suggest Clear was faster than cable or DSL.  Only for most it is not.

Every carrier has their own version of “4G” here or on the way, most of which can deliver better and faster service than the 3G alternative, but wireless providers are hellbent on ensuring customers never get used to the concept of truly unlimited service.

Glenn Britt, CEO of Time Warner Cable, admits the wired broadband industry erred when it got people used to all-you-can-use broadband.

“We made a mistake early on by not defining our business based on the consumption dimension,” Britt told investors back in 2009 when the company was contemplating its own metered usage trials.

4G networks can bring out the "data hog" in everyone if you actually take advantage of the faster speeds to stream multimedia.

Wireless providers are working hard not to repeat that mistake.

AT&T found usage caps anger customers, but got away with implementing a 2GB monthly wireless usage cap tied with the introduction of the wildly popular newest iPhone (and helped by grandfathering existing unlimited customers until their next phone upgrade.)

“If I had a baby in my hand and my iPhone and I had to drop one, I’d drop the baby,” laughed Dallas iPhone owner Luisa Benton.  But Benton’s love for her Apple phone does not extend to AT&T’s network, noting she has dropped calls and had poor reception in certain areas.

Many iPhone owners retain their cable or DSL broadband service because AT&T’s wireless usage cap limits what they can manage online, and the company’s network problems only adds insult to pocketbook injury.  With many locked into two year contracts, few are going to brave early termination fees to find an alternative.

As providers upgrade their networks, they are also upgrading their prices.  Verizon’s new LTE network, for example, carries a premium price tag for those wishing to use it.

Customers looking for a faster wireless experience will pay $50 for 5 GB or $80 for 10 GB of data on Verizon’s new network.  Run over those limits and an overlimit fee of $10 per gigabyte kicks in.

“People are never going to use wireless networks the way you see them on the commercials,” writes Stop the Cap! reader Jo-Anne in Seattle.  “They are always watching movies or TV shows — services you absolutely don’t want to risk at those prices.”

J0-Anne asked a Verizon representative if new 4G smartphones would be permitted to use unlimited data plans.

“‘Don’t bet on it,’ was the reply I got — Verizon may keep unlimited around for 3G network users only,” she said.

If true, Verizon will deliver overpriced, inadequate service for any customer looking to leave their home broadband account behind.  As soon as multimedia gets involved, usage caps rapidly become a dealbreaker.

Verizon recently contracted with Bridgewater Systems Corporation to supply it with data management software.  Bridgewater is also a major supplier of network throttling solutions to ferret out heavy users and impede their speed, as part of “fair use policy” regimes.

Some wireless companies are trying to have their cake and eat it too — selling “unlimited” wireless broadband service hampered by an aggressive “policy control” network management scheme.  You’ve seen the ads promising unlimited access, but probably missed the fine print warning the provider will throttle your wireless broadband speed to something comparable to dial-up once they deem you a data hog.

Cricket and Clear are both notorious for throttling customer speeds and delivering disclosures of the practice more impenetrable than North Korea.

A Clear blog entry tried to simplify the legalese:

During times of high network utilization our network management system may limit speeds, but we never limit the amount of data a customer with an unlimited data plan may use. The algorithm in place reviews several factors including long and short-term usage, current network capacity, and network demand to determine if network management needs to be applied.

The end result is that a few heavy users temporarily give up some speed during limited times of high demand so that everyone can have a good experience. A majority of customers are having a positive experience and experiencing faster speeds during times of greatest demand since these enhancements were enacted.

The “positive experience” Clear’s blogger reports may be wishful thinking, however, after reading the company’s support forums.  They’re overloaded with thousands of angry customers and probably many more ex-customers.  An “unlimited” broadband experience is meaningless if customers endure speeds well below the minimum acceptable definition of “broadband,” often for days on end.

Cricket is no better:

Cricket sets usage levels on the amount of data a customer can upload and download within stated periods of time. If you exceed your rate plan usage levels, Cricket will temporarily reduce the speed at which you can send and receive data over the Cricket network. You will still be able to use the service but your speed will be slower. Cricket may use other traffic management and prioritization tools to help ensure equitable access to the Cricket network for all customers. Your service speed is not guaranteed and is subject to this Fair Use Policy.

Cricket has set a data usage level (“Usage Level”) per customer. As shown in your rate plan brochure or on www.mycricket.com, this Usage Level varies based on the rate plan you’ve selected. Every day, we measure your upload and download data usage (“Actual Usage”) to determine if your total Actual Usage, as aggregated over your bill cycle (“Usage Total”), exceeds the Usage Level for the rate plan you selected. During hours of operation, you can inquire about your Usage Total versus your monthly Usage Level by calling 1-800-Cricket and speaking with a Care representative.

Once you begin a new bill cycle your rate plan Usage Level upload and download speeds will be restored.

The average Cricket customer is unlikely to grasp anything beyond the fact their speed sucks if they are targeted by Cricket’s throttle.  It’s not as simple as breaking through your monthly usage allowance.  Cricket can and does throttle customers who seem like they could exceed the limit, based on their daily account activity.

In the end, most wireless customers pay more for less service.  The primary benefit is portability, and carriers consider that worth the premium prices charged.  But as the Internet’s love affair with all things multimedia continues, none of these providers will provide a suitable alternative to the traditional home-wired broadband account.

[flv width=”432″ height=”260″]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/WFAA Dallas iPhone Frustration 11-30-09.mp4[/flv]

Last year like this year, WFAA-TV in Dallas reports frustrations continue with AT&T’s wireless data network.  The company’s response?  Limit customers’ use of it and push more of them off to Wi-Fi alternatives.  (2 minutes)