Losing Fox45 in Baltimore?

[LumpyG]

I just saw a crawl come across Fox45 here in Baltimore, saying that Verizon FiOS is in danger of losing it. I only caught the second half of it, but found this on-line:

Verizon Fios' current contract to carry this station expires on December 31, 2011, and based on the current status of negotiations we do not believe they will be carrying this station after that date.

Really?!?

[PEARLat32]

I never gave any credence to the commercials Fox 45 has been airing, but seeing that crawl and also the message at the top of their website (foxbaltimore.com) has me concerned. I don't get it either, but Fios is definitely going to get calls from me. I watch Fox Morning News every day and enjoy a few tv shows here and there...guess when I call I'll see how serious it is. Red tape stinks.

[Dutch421]

Would we lose the national broadcast also...NFL football on Fox. If thats the case they will be hearing it from alot of people.

[prisaz]

Isn't Fox 45 a local broadcast channel in Baltimore? Under FCC regulations Fox must provide the channel. Now that same rule does not apply to the national cable channels, if Verizon has a dispute. Now if Verizon tries to use the dropping the local broadcast as leverage in a contract dispute, I believe they will be in violation off FCC regulations.

[Caps09]

I think that "must carry" rules only apply if the broadcast channel is asking for nothing in return. In this case, we all know that FOX station owners are demanding more and more for systems to carry them. They know they can get a lot based on the programming they have, right or wrong. If systems had to carry broadcast stations under any terms, then the stations could simply set any price they wanted.

[prisaz]

---

@Caps09 wrote:

I think that "must carry" rules only apply if the broadcast channel is asking for nothing in return. In this case, we all know that FOX station owners are demanding more and more for systems to carry them. They know they can get a lot based on the programming they have, right or wrong. If systems had to carry broadcast stations under any terms, then the stations could simply set any price they wanted.

---

I thought the local broadcast channels must provide the channels to the "local" cable companies at no cost as a public service, and the networks cable only channels charged fees. Perhaps I misundersand the rule.

[Caps09]

Nope, the local stations can charge for retransmission. This whole thing happens to be stations owned by Sinclair, which includes my local FOX station in Richmond, so I will lose it too if no agreement is reached. The problem in the United States is that local stations have way too much leverage because cable and satellite providers are prohibited from showing stations from another market. It's either your local affiliate or nothing.

While I know the landscape is different, cable companies in Canada carry CBC affiliates from across the country. You can watch any regional NHL game on Saturdays on TV, and if you can't manage that, CBC shows it online for free. Quite a difference from MLB on FOX, where you're stuck with the game selected for your city, like it or not.

I still expect Verizon to reach a deal with Sinclair, even if it's at the last minute.

[prisaz]

I guess I will need to connect my ATSC TV input back to the antenna in the attic. I am actually close enough to D.C. where it was better than the retransmission. IMHO.

[threehummers]

Switched to Verizon a couple of months ago.  If you drop Fox 45 and CW I will switch back to Comcast!  This would really be a dumb move by Verizon and your customers don't really care what reasons you may **bleep** us with!

[Schlemdinger]

I JUST switched to Fios this week and I'm not very happy to find out that Fios may drop WBFF Fox 45 and WNUV CW come 1 Jan. I live less than 5 miles from the city of Baltimore and I'm not going to get these two local channels? In addition to missing out on Ravens football,  there's the morning traffic and weather. Not Cool.