I need your help with Comcast in Ma.

montyfishing

Ok so I live in Bristol county in Massachusetts and have Comcast as my cable provider. The FCC considers Bristol county part of Rhode Island and therefore all of our major HD tv channels like ABC, CBS, NBC, FOX ect are now actually from Rhose Island.

I have called the cable company and they told me it was because the FCC mandated that our DMA is based out of RI and not MA. Everyone in Bristol county is effected by this dumb rule. Personally I dont really care what news is going on in RI, I do however care whats going on in Boston, but I can no get that information in HD I can only get it in SD.

There is a proposal of a law called "Television Freedom Act of 2009" that will allow "orphan" counties to receive in-state TV signals. We are calling Cong. Barney Frank to push for this bill to become law, and that the bill should MANDATE in-state channels, not just give cable/satellite the option.

If this effects you we need you help please call Cong. Barney Frank and voice you concerns. Any help you can lend would be greatly appreciated!

Sorry for the long post and thanks for reading it!

WestDC

The only way Barney looks at this if it's located in the Men's room- I can't understand way you keep sending the same dummy's back year after year, it must be the cold weather.

__________________
'Demcorats spreading your wealth around since 1932'

oblioman

Welcome to the forum Monty, and never mind westdc, he/she tends to be negative at times and is not representative of a majority of forum members. have you spoke with the county or city providers, the ones that actually have the contract with your cable provider?? If you can get things changed on a local level your results would be a lot quicker.

tcarcio

Switch to Dish network..........

__________________
Pioneer Elite Vsx 81txv as pre amp
Behringer EP 2500 for 15'' TC 2000 sonotube
Mackie FR2500 for mains
Crown XLS 402d for center
2 Crown CTs 600's for surrounds
2 B52 MX1515's for l+R speakers
Boston Acoustics VR-12 center
Cambridge Soundworks S-300 surrounds x 4
Samsung bd-p1500 BD player
Toshiba HD XA2 HD dvd player
Optoma HD-72 720p PJ for movies
Benq PE-7800 PJ for TV, 106'' screen

montyfishing

I have gone to the town and that is how I found out all this information. The town has no power until the Comcast contract is up for renewal. Currently FIOS is building the backbone in Easton, and they have mandated that they must carry local channel in HD and if they must carry RI. they will carry that in at least in SD or HD if they so choose, but give the customers a choice. I guess the situation with WFXT (fox)is a little differant, the FCC see that channel from back in the 70's when it was a religious channel, so it considered a not significantly viewed channel and so it actually gets blocked so we have to tune in to the RI channel.

The real issue I have with Comcast is they try to sell the fact that they have no choice in the matter, but that's a lie. After a long time of digging the laws state they must carry stations that our DMA is listed under, however it does not state it must be carried in HD. If you live in Ma. or anywhere that this type of situation effects you I urge you to call your representatives and make you voice heard.

Thanks again for your time!

Monty

bicker

The fact is that Comcast must carry Providence stations. That's the law. Comcast has no choice in the matter.

That doesn't preclude them from carrying Boston stations as well, but essentially they'd be carrying duplicate programming much of the time, and if you read threads in forums all over the web customer are complaining much more about wanting more HD channels for cable networks than wanting duplicate affiliates for network broadcast channels. It is basically one set of consumers' needs versus another set of customers' needs, in the context of limited bandwidth, and so one set of customers must win while another set of customers will lose. Up until recently, the customers who wanted the duplicates were the ones who won; now there are so many more customers driven by the number of HD channels for cable networks, so now that set of customers wins.

thesaint

comcast sucks i want verizon

montyfishing

I understand that Comcast must carry the RI stations because of the DMA (dumb in my opinion). There is no law that requires them to carry them in HD and not the Boston channels in HD when the entire cape (served by Comcast) get boston channels in HD and not RI thats just plane stupid. I have called Comcast several times regarding this, and every time I get a different answer. Most of the time they tell me they did not even know about it.

I could understand that answer coming from a normal customer rep. however when you have the head customer relations tell you the same thing, thats pretty bad. All I can say is that as soon as I get the chance I will switch to FIOS but that does not look to be an option until sometime at the end of the year. The contract that Verizon has signed with the town mandates that they carry Boston channels in HD not the RI channels. I am sure Comcast would change the tune if a lot of the customers started calling and complaining about this, but from this thread it does not look like that is going to happen.

bicker

That's a good point, but also a point of contention: Forget about Bristol County, for a minute. Can Comcast, here in Burlington, provide the Boston OTA channels in SD only -- no HD? Based on one reading of the law, I think they can (since the FCC refused to impose the "all content bits" requirement), but other folks disagree (sometimes vigorously). Given that disagreement, providing just SD downconverts for the local OTA broadcast channels is likely way too (politically) dangerous an approach for a service provider to take; there is simply too much risk of that sort of thing prompting regulatory retaliation, or at least some very nasty bad PR.

No, not at all. It just is something that some reasonable people disagree with you about, and there are enough of them that they got their way and you didn't get your way. Nothing more nefarious than that.

You're asking customer service reps about FCC regulatory policy? That's strange. I'm sure they each try to help you as much as they can, but you're really aiming your inquiries at the wrong people.

Even beyond the issue that you're talking to customer service reps for a cable company: Comcast has nothing to do with these rules. If anything, they'd rather that they would not exist at all! So asking them to justify rules that they feel shouldn't exist is off-target. If you really want to get an explanation, you need to either get some face time with an FCC commissioner, or corner someone from one of the Rhode Island stations that benefits from this, and get them to defend it.

Or you can ask here. There are folks here, myself included, who could explain why things are the way they are. But! Ask yourself first, are you really looking for an explanation? Do you really want to understand why? Or really, are you just trying to find a way to somehow get your preference to prevail over that of those reasonable folks who disagree with you?

For the record, I believe that the regulations that effectively impose Rhode Island stations on you shouldn't exist at all. I think cable companies should be able to provide whatever local channels they can negotiate retransmission consent with, even from halfway across the country if desired.

Why? You're still talking to the wrong person.

Precisely. Most people really don't care about television as much as we do. That really puts a lot of our personal preferences in a context where they are a lot less important than they seem to us.

montyfishing

This issue has nothing to do with reasonable people disagreeing with me! So I am not reasonable to be able to choose what stations I want to watch? Here is evidence that its not just me trying to get what "I" want. Here is some background information for you bicker:

"Hi Folks,


I have been informed by my cable colleague in Easton that Cong. Barney Frank has signed on to the "Television Freedom Act of 2009" allowing "orphan" counties to receive in-state TV signals.


This is step in the right direction, but it doesn't MANDATE in-state coverage; it still allows cable and satellite companies some wiggle room not to broadcast the in-state signal. However, according to articles I have read on the issue, the cable and satellite lobbying organizations are in support of this bill and that is a good sign.


If you are so inclined, let Cong. Frank or Cong. Stephen Lynch know that you are pleased that this bill is moving forward but that you would like to see that in-state stations MUST be carried, and not to just "make it possible."





Here is Cong. Frank's press release:


Frank Cosponsors Bill to Help Massachusetts Cable and Satellite Television Subscribers Receive Local Stations
July 14, 2009


Congressman Barney Frank today announced that he has become an original cosponsor of a bill that would help make it possible for all Massachusetts cable and satellite television customers to receive local programming from in-state stations.

Current law specifies that cable and satellite service providers are able to carry signals from local television stations within their media market. These “designated market areas (DMAs) often cross state lines, so some viewers in Massachusetts currently get Providence but not Boston stations. Viewers in Taunton, Raynham, Easton, Mansfield and Norton are all affected.

The new legislation, the Television Freedom Act of 2009, would allow cable and satellite companies across the country to provide in-state local television programming to their customers. The bill is targeted to affect only “orphan” counties in which residents cannot receive television programming from stations in their state.

“I am pleased to join in signing this bill in response to a large number of requests I have received from people in the Fourth Congressional District which I represent,” said Congressman Frank. “The best source of information for members of Congress in matters of this sort is the opinion of those who are most directly affected. I believe that the views of the people in Taunton, Raynham, Easton, Mansfield and Norton deserve a favorable response.”



Thanks,

Jerry Gibbs

Raynham Cable Advisory Committee"

http://www.house.gov/frank/pressrele...ellite-tv.html


But you are right I must not be reasonable!

oblioman

Monty,,,looks as if barney Frank is not a big fan of comcast http://www.house.gov/frank/issues/telecom.html

keep doing what you are doing and hopefully, things will get changed to the way they should be. keep us posted.

bicker

What makes you think that just because you and they disagree that you both cannot be reasonable?

Why do you think that anyone suggested that it was just you?

I think you're arguing against something that nobody said.