TV Answer Man, I love Newsmax and I love DIRECTV and I can’t figure out who’s telling the truth in this thing. Did DIRECTV get rid of Newsmax because it’s a conservative channel? True or not? What is the truth here? — Ellie, Laramie, Wyoming.
Ellie, on January 24, DIRECTV lost the conservative news channel, Newsmax, in a carriage dispute between the companies. (The blackout also affects DIRECTV Stream and U-verse.)
The TV provider has repeatedly claimed that Newsmax wants “significant” carriage fees to stay on the three TV services. The channel previously provided its signal for free, DIRECTV says.
But Newsmax disputes DIRECTV’s contention, saying the satcaster dropped it because it’s a conservative channel. Noting that DIRECTV dropped OAN, another right-leaning news channel, last year, Newsmax and its chief supporters, congressional Republicans, say DIRECTV has a liberal bias.
See Amazon’s best-selling electronics!
Since the dispute began, Newsmax, which is still available on distributors such as Dish as well as for free online, has used its airwaves to hammer DIRECTV for refusing to carry it. Countless Republican officials have appeared on Newsmax to charge that the satellite company is engaging in censorship by removing the two conservative channels.
But DIRECTV has continued to say that the decision is a financial one. The company notes that economic and industry trends have forced pay TV operators to cut costs, including carriage fees. They have to be more judicious in deciding which channels they can carry and how much they can pay. Otherwise, programming acquisition costs will soar, and they will have to pass them along to the subscriber in (even) higher bills.
So who’s telling the truth here?
From this reporter’s perspective, it’s impossible to say. Newsmax and its Republican supporters say DIRECTV’s decision is political, but they have produced no documents to support that charge. The only evidence to support the accusation is that DIRECTV has removed two conservative channels in the last year. But countering that evidence is the fact that DIRECTV added another conservative news channel, The First, just days after removing Newsmax. If DIRECTV was trying to rid the world of conservatism, why would it immediately add another conservative channel?
See Amazon’s best-selling electronics!
Newsmax’s supporters have also charged that DIRECTV is biased towards conservatives because it carries several ‘liberal’ news channels. The definition of what makes a news channel a ‘liberal’ one is in the eye of the beholder. But it should be noted that DIRECTV had a three-week carriage dispute with Bloomberg News just 16 months ago, which would seem to counter the argument that it’s only going after conservative news channels.
On the other hand, while DIRECTV says this is just about money, it has failed to produce any documents showing that Newsmax’s fee demands are now ‘significantly’ higher. Until it does, we can’t assume they are telling the truth, either.
Bottom line: Unless Newsmax and congressional Republicans produce an internal DIRECTV document showing company officials expressing a desire to ‘censor’ conservative news, their claim of liberal bias is not a strong one. Likewise, until DIRECTV releases a document proving its financial argument, its claim also can not fully accepted.
See Amazon’s best-selling electronics!
House Republicans have threatened to hold hearings on the dispute, and we might get some answers there. We’ll see.
Ellie, hope that helps. Happy viewing and stay safe!
Have a question about new TV technologies? Send it to The TV Answer Man at swann@tvanswerman.com Please include your first name and hometown in your message.
— Phillip Swann
@tvanswerman
Liberal Bloomberg is getting paid by DirecTV. Conservative NewsMax isn’t. Is that complicated?
Fake News dissemination?? You mean like CNN, MSNBC, CBs, NBC, ABC, WPost, NY TImes, etc etc etc disseminated fake news for over three years about Trump Russian collusion. And about emoluments and Chinese business deals. Amazing how libs always cry about misinformation when it is the libs who are most guilty about doing it.
Truthiness is the main theme for Fox News, Newsmax, OAN and others like them. It is becoming a $1.6 billion problem for Fox since they have admitted in court that they lied incessantly so they could pander to their gullible viewers. Telling the truth would have been so liberal. Meanwhile Newsmax, also dealing with a lawsuit for lying, asked for an absurd amount of money from DTV even though their ratings are in the toilet. So DTV said “Not!”. Yup, the truth and reality can hurt.
Bloomberg reports financial news not politics. Flagging them as liberal is a common attack vector from the conversative right when it goes against their delusional narratives or imaginary conspiracies. Newsmax is a truthiness mill with very low ratings. They asked for a ridiculous rate increase that was rejected by DTV as it did not make financial or logical sense. No politics there. A business decision. Skewing the engagement for political reasons is common fair for conversative media. Create controversy where none exists. Got $1.6 billion?
Could it be that a so-called news network that is proven to lie consistently with an extreme bias, may not be the best choice for carriage in the news tier?
Follow the Fox lawsuit, which helps you discern news from propaganda which can be dangerous. People get killed.
Perhaps DTV doesn’t want blood on their hands?
Life’s lesson is knowing when you’re being played.
Just ask the Proud Boys.
FYI: Bloomberg is financial news, with no opinion shows about politics. Every financial firm in the WORLD has a Bloomberg terminal, that’s why the boss is wealthy.
Point taken. But – I think everyone has the capacity to learn something new, or something that had never occurred to them. I give everyone the benefit of the doubt. We’ve all been fooled by persuasive arguments. Con men are everywhere, many with very refined skillsets designed to deceive. Roger Ailes anyone? Profit is a powerful motivator. Lies travel faster and have more impact than truth. Until one day…
Sometimes it’s a matter of showing there’s more than 1 side to a story, LKM continues harping on crimes invented by democrats to villify republicans and spouts off CNN figures HaHa! Funny Dish has no problem carrying not only newsmax but other conservative news even though it’s a maine fact, Charlie Ergin is the biggest penny pincher in the entire system. Direct wanted an excuse to drop them and did, Idiots like LKM (who shouldn’t care less, since he wouldn’t watch) is happy one less voice of truth is removed
Direct TV drops stations all the time. For me it was all the ABC channels, a major network. They blame it on Mission Broadcasting. I don’t give a s%@t whose fault. Direct is still charging the same amount though even when they take stations away. It’s all about blame and greed. They don’t give a crap about their customers.
All Pay TV providers lose stations when they cannot agree on rate increases from the related content providers when expiring contracts have to be renegotiated. The providers don’t drop stations. They cannot broadcast stations without a signed contract. The content providers falsely claim that the provider “dropped” the station in order to dupe the viewers into thinking it’s the providers fault. When a new contract is agreed to, your bill goes up to cover the increased rate. The biggest culprits are the local station groups. They actually charge a re-transmission fee for something that is actually free. The collective re-trans tab is now approaching $13 billion. This usually appears as a “Broadcast Fee” on your bill. We can thank the 1992 United States Cable Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act which gave any broadcast station (or its affiliated/parent broadcast network) the right to ask for monetary payment or other compensation, such as carriage of an additional channel. If the provider rejects the broadcaster’s proposal, the station can prohibit the cable/sat/stream operator from retransmitting its signal. Hopefully the streaming revolution will some day make re-trans fees obsolete.
There’s no doubt in my mind that DIRECTV dumped Newsmax because of political bias. They say that they replaced Newsmax with another conservative channel, The First. The First is not a news channel, it’s merely a podcast with different hosts that run on loop.
LKM you lying liberal ass!
All i’m saying is you, personally don’t want newsmax on Direct because it’s another channel that dares to tell the facts! Since you don’t watch it, you wouldn’t know. You only want your point of view shown
If you believe that Fox News, Newsmax, OAN and others like them “tell the truth” and everyone else is delusional that is your right as a member of the human race. You can believe what you want along with those that subscribe to similar perspectives and narratives. You do have to show caution though when you challenge “fact” with attack labels (i.e. Fake News, Liberal, Communist, Traitor, etc.) because that can diminish your standing amongst those in your social realm that adhere to reality and norms. The deposed Fox News anchors that admitted in court that they were lying because they were told to do so by their bosses, should give you pause. It is no different than what Newsmax, OAN and similar operations engage in. They all want to one-up Fox News as they are on the top of the mountain in their category. DTV made a financial choice. Since Newsmax’s low viewership and ratings did not justify their massive requested rate increase, DTV, correctly said, “we pass” because accepting Newsmax’s demands would have forced DTV to raise their customers’ bill substantially. Simple business decision. Now, if you want to spin that with a political tinge, that is also your right. Reality does teach us one very important lesson. If you slap water, all you are going to get is wet.
Agreed LKM. We do have to realize that getting those that disagree and/or dismiss reality to “rearrange their mental furniture” is a monumental task when they have “sipped from the chalice of truthiness”. Even presenting indisputable facts will tempt most of them to “toss you to the curb without the benefit of clergy” via social labeling. Getting them to do homework like reviewing public court fillings for logical clarification is not going to happen. DTV did what they had to do based on the business ask presented to them. Every Pay TV provider has to go through the same process when contracts expire and rate increases are proposed. It’s the business of business. When the parties disagree and the contract in question expires, the content owner pulls the channel, lies to the viewing public by saying that the provider pulled the channel, then blames the provider for not accepting their new rate(s) which will eventually increase the viewer’s bill once an agreement is reached. This is why so many folks are engaging the vast ocean of free content available via FAST/AVOD services. Going hard-core (OTA antenna for locals, internet, and free channels) is becoming a thing. All the big SVOD services (NetFlix, Disney+, WBD, Paramount+, Peacock) are dipping their toe into FAST/AVOD because common folk are experiencing wallet scorching subscription fatigue. Further, the majority of the SVOD providers are not profitable. Pass the nachos and the remote. Going to watch Mallegan TV Now for free on Roku Live TV.
Through all the BS you’re throwing, the Fact is Direct dropped newsmax because of political reasons, If Dish can keep it and they are cheaper than Direct in every way, then Direct can keep it if they chose to do so.
LKM,,, I’ve asked you several times why do you care???????
example, I’ve seen many conservatives lobby for this one or that one to be taken off cnn, or the tv show the View, I ask them, why do you care? you don’t and won’t watch anyway
Let’s deal with facts and not made-up right-wing conversative fantasies.
Since 2014 DTV offered Newsmax at no cost to programmers or customers. As part of the deal, DTV gave up its typical right to sell two minutes per hour of Newsmax ad time, and enabled Newsmax to generate more revenue with its ad-supported model, while also still agreeing it could be distributed on streaming platforms for no charge, even to those without a pay TV subscription.
Nielsen data showed that Newsmax’s average household audience was 101,000 households nationwide, representing less than 0.1 percent of total TV households. That is 92 percent lower than Fox News.
Newsmax proposed a new model. If DTV and other Pay TV operators will pay it the fees it wants, then it would cease transmitting its current channel to the 55 million US households that don’t have a Pay TV service. In other words, 55 million US households would no longer be able to access Newsmax in its current form unless they acquire a Pay TV subscription.
Bottom line, you have to be on some powerful meds if you think a Pay TV service is going to pay a substantial per-subscriber rate for a channel with ratings that low.
There are no politics here. It is math and money, unless the conspiracy theory machine is turned up to 11, thus allowing one to make up delusionary anti-conversative scenarios out of thin air. We apologize. That’s what OAN, The Pillow Guy, Rudy Giuliani, Sidney Powell and Kari Lake do.
I quit! since you obviously are only concerned with shutting down a conservative station, and refuse to admit it,
I’ve read yr hs article in Delaware, Delaware?? ya fuck Delaware and you too, I’m out
LMK, you nailed it. Facts are facts and reality is reality. If you chose Truthiness you will always attack those who bring verifiable information to the table. The congressional clowns who are questioning DTV’s dropping of Newsmax are probably the same ones who voted against verifying the electoral results. At the end of the day nothing will come if it. DTV made a business decision. End of story.