NEW BHN Channels

[FTBoomerIII]

I went into the guide tonight and noticed that they have added the following:

WUSFD 616
WUSFA 617
WUSFU 618
WUSFK 619

They are currently broadcasting but nothing in HD, anyone know what these are?

[wallinbl]

It's the USF public TV channel http://www.wusftv.usf.edu/

[FTBoomerIII]

What a waste of bandwidth!

[bdraw]

Thanks for another PBS station, and 4 more SD channels.

I don't care if they wast their bandwidth, but atleast let me edit my guide so I don't have to browse over them constantly as I am flipping through. How irritating, one step closer to D*.

Didn't take them long to pick this one up either, it has only been OTA for like 2 weeks.

It seems that whoever said that BHN carried the sub channel was because it was not for profit TV was rigth how else could you explain they adding all 4 channels.

I have a feeling this is going to make things worse for getting NBC.

I never thought I would be so angry at getting new channels.

[teampozer]

That's one hell of a "stroke" by Bright House for USF-TV. Don't get me wrong, I'm never against any of the services adding channels but this is just absurd. What next? The 4 channels of WXPX, Channel 66? Hell (pun inteneded), WCLF channel 22 should fire up a couple more subchannels and maybe they can find their way on the BHN lineup too! So let me see if I've got this right.... They've got the bandwidth to add all 4 SD digital channels from WUSF (and very quickly following the sign on mind you) but don't want to add the 1 HD and 2 SD channels from WFLA or the digital signals from 38 or 44. I continue to find it hard to believe these guys can't come to some kind of agreement with these stations. God bless you cable subs... I feel for ya.

[kevinsnewmatrix]

There is a requirement for cable providers to carry all local off air channels. They do not have a choice but to add these channels.

This is important because Bright House Networks is required to allow a customer to view any off-air signal without additional charge. As a result, any local off-air network that provides a digital signal over-the-air, must be available to a customer with no requirement other than the Limited Basic service.

[FTBoomerIII]

There is a requirement for cable providers to carry all local off air channels. They do not have a choice but to add these channels.

This is important because Bright House Networks is required to allow a customer to view any off-air signal without additional charge. As a result, any local off-air network that provides a digital signal over-the-air, must be available to a customer with no requirement other than the Limited Basic service.

But why stick them right in the middle of the HD600's?

[millerman101]

They stick them there because that s where the rest of the local stations are at.

[dprice]

WUSF radio (89.7 of course) is crowing about WUSF-DT and something about the "best picture quality possible". Me thinks they know more about sound than picture...

Don

[emmis]

If these are the same as the OTA 66.x stations, the Rays games are broadcast on 66.1..

[OccamMD]

If its a requirement then why don't we have the rest of the OTA HD (digital) channels yet?

I just noticed on VOOM's latest regional OTA download that they have WFLA adding subs.

[Bschneider]

There is a requirement for cable providers to carry all local off air channels. They do not have a choice but to add these channels.

This is important because Bright House Networks is required to allow a customer to view any off-air signal without additional charge. As a result, any local off-air network that provides a digital signal over-the-air, must be available to a customer with no requirement other than the Limited Basic service.

This is not true for digital stations. You have to have a re-transmission agreement. Two words "must carry". Right now it only applies to the analog stations. This would be true if the analog station went off the air and only the digital station is broadcasting.

And if this was true you would have all the local digitial stations on BHN.

[kevinsnewmatrix]

You are correct in the statement of "re-transmition agrement" If that channel request's us to carry. we MUST carry. An example of this not working for the off air viewer would be;
Bright House Networks has offered to place the high definition feed of WFLA NBC on the channel lineup as it has with other local broadcast stations. At this time, they have not accepted that offer. We regret their decision will prevent us from providing the Olympic Games in high definition for 2004. At this time, we do not have a launch plan for WFLA HD

[Max_Gator]

Got a kick out of the Tribune's article today (or yesterday) in the sports section about how the olympics won't be avail in HD locally on BHN because of the dispute.

Talk about trying to help out your affiliate. Of course they didn't have BHN's position. I think they said they were unable to contact them - what does that mean - they called at 6:00 the night before the story ran and no one was there? LOL.

[wallinbl]

As far as I'm concerned, both sides are wrong. I could care less about whether the subchannels are carried or not. I'm not getting to watch the Olympics in HD because of their squabbling. The issue is relatively minor, and it's nuts that either side cares enough to create the impass.

[teampozer]

Cable customers should have learned who they're dealing with after the Sunshine Network fiasco in 2003. Time Warner... Bright House... whatever. This is absurd and they should be picking up UPN-44 and WB-38 too. Wait till WB and UPN start running HD in primetime. More bitchin' on the way!!

[bdraw]

Anyone have a link to the article?