CBS owned stations currently dropped from DISH

[Meriweather]

Your station must not be owned by CBS.

It is CBS, is CBS not owned by CBS?

 

[bcla]

I can't speak to Altanta, but generally all the transmission towers are in the same place in a city. In what the FAA called antenna farms. They do that so that you don't have 2,000 foot antennas all over that aircraft have to watchout for.

I'm pretty sure you'd know about the Mt Sutro Tower in San Francisco. That doesn't actually broadcast all the major TV stations in the area. I remember when KNTV was purchased by NBC, but they are located and then transmitted from San Jose. That station was kind of odd as an ABC affiliate when there was also one in San Francisco. Apparently KGO-TV in San Francisco paid them to drop their ABC affiliation so they'd have it all to themselves.

There were worries about the 2002 Winter Olympics broadcasts not being received because the signal strength wouldn't reach most of the area. I think they boosted their signal, but eventually moved transmission South San Francisco.

 

[sam_gordon]

It is CBS, is CBS not owned by CBS?

No. Just like the McDonalds you go to is owned by someone else, most affiliates are NOT owned by the network. The local station pays the network for the rights to carry their programming.

 

[Meriweather]

It's only channels that are OWNED by CBS. In addition to some local CBS affiliates, Pop, Smithsonian, and CBS Sports Network are also off of Dish.

I don't watch any of those any way, so guess I am good to go
As long as CBS is on with the TV shows I watch, I am good

 

[bcla]

It is CBS, is CBS not owned by CBS?

Nope. Local TV stations aren't always owned by the networks themselves. I think the news stories said that CBS only owns 18 local stations broadcasting CBS programming. These tend to be in the biggest markets, as they're limited in how many stations they can own and the parent company has deep pockets (i.e. they want the biggest ones).

I remember here in the San Francisco Bay Area, our longtime CBS affiliate was owned by Westinghouse as part of the "Group W" broadcasting division. It became CBS owned when Westinghouse and CBS merged. A lot of times when there are mergers, they run into these limits on how many stations a company can own and end up selling stations.

 

[sam_gordon]

From Wiki: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_CBS_television_affiliates_(table)

City of license/Market Station Channel
TV (DT) Year of affiliation Owned since
Los Angeles KCBS-TV 2 (43) 1951 1951
San Francisco - Oakland - San Jose KPIX[n1 1] 5 (29) 1948 1995
Stockton - Sacramento - Modesto KOVR 13 (25) 1995 2005
Denver KCNC-TV 4 (35) 1995 1995
Miami - Fort Lauderdale WFOR-TV 4 (22) 1989 1989
Chicago WBBM-TV 2 (12) 1953 1953
Baltimore WJZ-TV[n1 1] 13 (13) 1995 1995
Boston WBZ-TV [n1 1] 4 (30) 1995 1995
Detroit WWJ-TV 62 (44) 1994 1995
Alexandria, Minnesota KCCO-TV
(satellite of WCCO-TV) 7 (7) 1982 1992
Minneapolis - St. Paul WCCO-TV 4 (32) 1949 1992
Walker, Minnesota KCCW-TV
(satellite of WCCO-TV) 12 (12) 1982 1992
New York City WCBS-TV [n1 2] 2 (33) 1939 1941
Philadelphia KYW-TV[n1 1] 3 (26) 1995 1995
Pittsburgh KDKA-TV[n1 1] 2 (25) 1957 1995
Fort Worth - Dallas KTVT 11 (19) 1995 1999

 

[vacationer1954]

What's your definition of "the sticks"? It all depends how far out from the transmission towers you are, and what direction. If the towers are on the east part of town and your home is on the west if you put an antenna in a west facing window, you're not going to pick much up.

Yes, and it may get worse. I don't understand all technical mumbo jumbo in this article http://www.tvtechnology.com/resources/0006/unanticipated-interference-after-repack/281737 but it seems that without installation of an extra filter there's going to be more noise and more interference making getting a good over the air signal more difficult for those living outside the center city area.

 

[Nayan]

I'm telling you, it IS true. Sure, if you're in the city of license, within about a 10-15 mile radius of the transmitter, a $9 antenna will work. But that's not everyone's situation. Saying the $9 antenna will work for someone without knowing ANYTHING about their situation is irresponsible.

As far as the waivers back in the day, I remember those too. I also remember people within 5 miles of the transmitter asking for waivers. For them, the cheapy antenna will work fine. Was the antenna your engineer took out directional (probably)? Did he have an amplifier he could put in line? Possibly. Did he have a small mast so he could raise the antenna more than 6' off the ground? Also possible.

The best thing to do before spending ANY money is to go to the websites I specified earlier. Now, if you happen to have an antenna sitting around, sure, plug it in and see what you get.

Exactly and that's why I too send folks to those sites. I can pull in two stations with rabbit ears, but to get the ones I actually watch I needed a UHF/VHF behemoth mounted outside.

 

[Hikergirl]

Exactly and that's why I too send folks to those sites. I can pull in two stations with rabbit ears, but to get the ones I actually watch I needed a UHF/VHF behemoth mounted outside.

When I was thinking about cutting the cord on my cable I checked one of those sites that somebody here had posted and found out that I would not be able to get any stations unless I did the same.
I don't live in the sticks, but I do live too far to get any signal. I can get a very local religious channel but that is about it.

 

[sam_gordon]

Yes, and it may get worse. I don't understand all technical mumbo jumbo in this article http://www.tvtechnology.com/resources/0006/unanticipated-interference-after-repack/281737 but it seems that without installation of an extra filter there's going to be more noise and more interference making getting a good over the air signal more difficult for those living outside the center city area.

To TRY to simplify...

Local TV currently uses channels 2-13 (VHF) and 14-49 (UHF). This channel probably does NOT coincide with how you identify your station. You local NBC may claim it's "channel 22", but it actually broadcasts on channel 41. There is data in the signal that tells your TV what "virtual channel" you're watching.

The government has decided to sell channels 38-49 to broadband (read: cellular) companies. That means any TV channels in that range need to move. That means all stations that will continue broadcasting (those affected had the option of taking a lump sum payment from the government to simply shut off) and are in that range need to move below channel 37. The FCC has done studies that are supposed to move the affected stations to a new channel that a) won't affect someone else and b) won't be affected by someone else.

Now we get to the article. According to the author, not only can you have direct interference, but you MIGHT have indirect interference, either from TV stations or from the entities that purchased the spectrum between channels 37-49. From what I could read, it's not definite there will be problems, but there might be. And it could vary by market. The "repack" (moving everyone from above channel 37) is supposed to be complete in July 2020. I guess we'll know then. Personally, I'm not going to worry about yet.

 

[tvguy]

From Wiki: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_CBS_television_affiliates_(table)

City of license/Market Station Channel
TV (DT) Year of affiliation Owned since
Los Angeles KCBS-TV 2 (43) 1951 1951
San Francisco - Oakland - San Jose KPIX[n1 1] 5 (29) 1948 1995
Stockton - Sacramento - Modesto KOVR 13 (25) 1995 2005
Denver KCNC-TV 4 (35) 1995 1995
Miami - Fort Lauderdale WFOR-TV 4 (22) 1989 1989
Chicago WBBM-TV 2 (12) 1953 1953
Baltimore WJZ-TV[n1 1] 13 (13) 1995 1995
Boston WBZ-TV [n1 1] 4 (30) 1995 1995
Detroit WWJ-TV 62 (44) 1994 1995
Alexandria, Minnesota KCCO-TV
(satellite of WCCO-TV) 7 (7) 1982 1992
Minneapolis - St. Paul WCCO-TV 4 (32) 1949 1992
Walker, Minnesota KCCW-TV
(satellite of WCCO-TV) 12 (12) 1982 1992
New York City WCBS-TV [n1 2] 2 (33) 1939 1941
Philadelphia KYW-TV[n1 1] 3 (26) 1995 1995
Pittsburgh KDKA-TV[n1 1] 2 (25) 1957 1995
Fort Worth - Dallas KTVT 11 (19) 1995 1999

CBS has duopolies with CW stations in most of these markets, and the CW stations are part of the dispute too.

 

[tvguy]

After rereading, I wanted to follow up some more...
What's "not true"? That a $9 antenna may not work? Um, yes, that's true. It may work or it may not.
Actually not true. RF is RF is RF. The main difference between digital and analog (from a reception standpoint) is while an analog signal will degrade "linearly" (you'll get some static, then some more static, then more, then more, until you have no picture), on a digital signal, it will look perfect until it doesn't. You'll get freezing, "macroblocking", or no picture. But if you have a signal that's good enough, you get all the quality. You can compare it to driving a car into a ravine. With analog, you go down a slope. With digital, you drive off a cliff.
What's your definition of "the sticks"? It all depends how far out from the transmission towers you are, and what direction. If the towers are on the east part of town and your home is on the west if you put an antenna in a west facing window, you're not going to pick much up.

And I don't think people are risking a lot of money buying rabbit ears for $8 to find out if that is an option. I have one, and I live 42 miles from the transmission towers in Walnut Grove, and it works fine.

 

[tvguy]

I'm telling you, it IS true. Sure, if you're in the city of license, within about a 10-15 mile radius of the transmitter, a $9 antenna will work. But that's not everyone's situation. Saying the $9 antenna will work for someone without knowing ANYTHING about their situation is irresponsible.

As far as the waivers back in the day, I remember those too. I also remember people within 5 miles of the transmitter asking for waivers. For them, the cheapy antenna will work fine. Was the antenna your engineer took out directional (probably)? Did he have an amplifier he could put in line? Possibly. Did he have a small mast so he could raise the antenna more than 6' off the ground? Also possible.

The best thing to do before spending ANY money is to go to the websites I specified earlier. Now, if you happen to have an antenna sitting around, sure, plug it in and see what you get.

No amp. It directional (since all the TV towers here are in the same place ) andwas on a 6 foot mast.

 

[tvguy]

Yes, some markets have transmission towers in the same place. That's usually done to take advantage of topography (like a mountain top), NOT because of the dangers to aircraft.

Also, not every tower is 2000 feet.

It's flat here, and the towers here are all near sea level. Aircraft issues were the reason here I am told for the towers being restricted to the Antenna Farm area, however, with Travis, Beale, McClellan, Mather and Sacramento Airport in in this area, this was (when all AFBs were open) a congested air traffic area.

 

[sam_gordon]

And I don't think people are risking a lot of money buying rabbit ears for $8 to find out if that is an option. I have one, and I live 42 miles from the transmission towers in Walnut Grove, and it works fine.

Personally, even if it's only $8, I'd like to spend money on something that I think will work. Now granted, I've wasted much more than that on items that didn't pan out like I thought they would, but if a quick internet search shows I need a $50 (or $150) antenna, why would I go buy an $8 one?

It's flat here, and the towers here are all near sea level. Aircraft issues were the reason here I am told for the towers being restricted to the Antenna Farm area, however, with Travis, Beale, McClellan, Mather and Sacramento Airport in in this area, this was (when all AFBs were open) a congested air traffic area.

Since it's flat there, that explains why you get good reception 42 miles from the transmitters. I never doubted it worked for you. The problem (and you've done this in many threads over the years) is you use YOUR situation and make statements that it must be like that in ALL situations. Prime example...

I can't speak to Altanta, but generally all the transmission towers are in the same place in a city.

It's definitely the case in some markets, possibly even the larger ones. But I doubt it's the case in most. If you can find some listing that shows antenna locations for all transmitters in all 210(?) markets, I'd love to see it.

ETA: If you're 42 miles from the transmission antennas around here (and they are in three different locations), you better have an outdoor antenna, amplifier, and probably a tower.

 

[tvguy]

The problem (and you've done this in many threads over the years) is you use YOUR situation and make statements that it must be like that in ALL situations. .

Of course I can only comment from my situation. I have never ever ever ever said all situations. Just offered a possible inexpensive solution.

 

[bcla]

Actually not true. RF is RF is RF. The main difference between digital and analog (from a reception standpoint) is while an analog signal will degrade "linearly" (you'll get some static, then some more static, then more, then more, until you have no picture), on a digital signal, it will look perfect until it doesn't. You'll get freezing, "macroblocking", or no picture. But if you have a signal that's good enough, you get all the quality. You can compare it to driving a car into a ravine. With analog, you go down a slope. With digital, you drive off a cliff.

Even if it's noisy, there are ways to overcome the noise and reproduce an exact bitstream. Some of the places I thought of working at did DSP processing on the RF input to clean it up. Even if there's loss of data, there's often a little bit of extra data to allow for error correction. But once all of that is exhausted of course that's when the picture turns into a mass of pixels or just disappears until it comes back.

Still - the temptation when dividing up the frequency spectrum for digital TV was to pack as much into as little bandwidth as possible and let the technology clean it up.

 

[wgeo]

We got rid of cable and went with an OTA antenna. It was not easy to get it set up - tried a few different models and the best we can do is to get the majority of stations that come from the larger city 40 miles to the north of us. However, to do that we have to have the antenna set up in one place and one place only and again the set up was not easy or cheap. In order to get the majority of stations we are then not able to get the one local news station from our city because their tower is in a completely different direction than all the other towers.

Still totaly worth it to us to not have cable, but setting up the OTA antenna was not an $8 rabbit ears easy fix.

 

[vacationer1954]

And I don't think people are risking a lot of money buying rabbit ears for $8 to find out if that is an option.

I agree that if that's all people are risking it isn't a big deal. Something tells me though that for some people there's more at stake than just $8. How many cable company DVRs will allow you to connect an antenna and record some programming from cable and other programming from the antenna? So switching to antenna means, for many people, losing the advantage of DVRs.

 

[tvguy]

I agree that if that's all people are risking it isn't a big deal. Something tells me though that for some people there's more at stake than just $8. How many cable company DVRs will allow you to connect an antenna and record some programming from cable and other programming from the antenna? So switching to antenna means, for many people, losing the advantage of DVRs.

I did ask about that when Dish pitched me on buying an antenna instead of paying for locals and they said it will work with the DVR. However, I have not seen that with my own eyes to know for sure.