or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPad › Time Warner pulls MTV, FX from iPad app to placate broadcasters
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Time Warner pulls MTV, FX from iPad app to placate broadcasters

post #1 of 44
Thread Starter 
After complaints from the three big media companies Viacom, Discovery Communications and News Corp., cable operator Time Warner has agreed to stop providing several channels from its iPad app.

Time Warner had been distributing its cable programing to its paid subscribers via the iPad app as a convenience, but the media companies want more money from the cable operator for providing the same content to the same customers via iPad in addition to their conventional TVs.

Time Warner said it believed it had every right to carry the programming on our iPad app," according to a report by the New York Times.

"But, for the time being," the cable operator said in a statement today, "we have decided to focus our iPad efforts on those enlightened programmers who understand the benefit and importance of allowing our subscribers and their viewers to watch their programming on any screen in their homes. In the meantime, we will pursue all of our legal rights against the programmers who dont share our vision.

It added, "the enthusiasm of our customers and the programming partners who have embraced the app, rather than those who are solely focused on finding additional ways to reach into wallets of their own viewers, has convinced us more than ever that we are on the right path."

The operator said it would replace the blocked channels with new programming from different sources. Time Warner's iPad app had been carrying 32 channels, representing a small portion of its entire cable lineup.

Cablevision separately said it would also offer an iPad app that mirrored all the content available to its TV watchers, including video on demand. It hasn't yet reported any complaints from media companies, according to the Times report.
post #2 of 44
Just get a slingbox and screw 'em.
post #3 of 44
The Time Warner app is pretty nice, I've been testing it for a few days, ever since I got my iPad2. It's not like streaming youtube crap, it's basically realtime live cable TV on your iPad, and it's been working flawlessly with good quality.

I'll side with Time Warner on this VS the broadcasters. It's none of their business if somebody chooses to watch a channel on a Television hooked up to a cable box or through an iPad.

And yeah, they did pull a whole bunch of channels on the app. Yesterday there were about 32, now it's around 20. Time Warner should offer all their channels on the iPad. I want HBO, Showtime, Cinemax, Starz, Encore and more!
post #4 of 44
TW app was simple. The Slingbox requires a lot more stuff.

Quote:
Originally Posted by phxdoc View Post

Just get a slingbox and screw 'em.
post #5 of 44
Viacom, Discovery Communications and News Corp., all claim to be embracing technology and looking out for their customers. What happened here? How big of a deal did News Corp make out of The Daily iPad app? Nut jobs all.
post #6 of 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by Landcruiser View Post

Viacom, Discovery Communications and News Corp., all claim to be embracing technology and looking out for their customers. What happened here? How big of a deal did News Corp make out of The Daily iPad app? Nut jobs all.

Time Warner must not have listened to News Corp, because Fox News is still working.
post #7 of 44
The contracts for basic cable stations aren't as strict or binding. Fox has long been attempting to squeeze as much as it can out of cable providers. They would want to make streaming a specific item in contract negotiations.

Pay cable contracts are an entirely different story. Pay cable stations like HBO strictly prohibit any unauthorized transmission of its content. HBO has set up its own streaming service that cable operators have to pay an addition fee to offer to their subscribers.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple ][ View Post

And yeah, they did pull a whole bunch of channels on the app. Yesterday there were about 32, now it's around 20. Time Warner should offer all their channels on the iPad. I want HBO, Showtime, Cinemax, Starz, Encore and more!
post #8 of 44
You do have to sympathize with the broadcasters, to some extent.

After all, youre already paying for cable twice: your monthly bill plus a ton of ads. Shouldnt you be paying a third time based on which screen youre using? Seems only fair
post #9 of 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post


Pay cable contracts are an entirely different story.

Sure, I realize that. I already pay for every single premium channel, including every movie channel. I meant that they should offer those channels on the iPad to those people who pay for them.
post #10 of 44
That's the whole point TW can't without permission from those networks. Premium channels won't give that permission because they are setting up their own streaming services.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple ][ View Post

Sure, I realize that. I already pay for every single premium channel, including every movie channel. I meant that they should offer those channels on the iPad to those people who pay for them.
post #11 of 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post

That's the whole point TW can't without permission from those networks.

Ok, I understand now.
post #12 of 44
There must be something I'm missing here.

Isn't the television industry all about getting as many eyes as possible on your programming?

Doesn't this mean anything to get more eyes on the programming (including the iPad streaming) would be a GOOD THING for broadcasters?

More eyes = more people see ads = more revenue, right?

Or did I miss something? I've always been confused by the way big media acts when it comes to issues that *should* be obvious.
post #13 of 44
The issue here is not that those companies don't want you to be able to watch those channels, the issue here is that they don't want TW to pocket the benefit of that. Yes right now the app is free but the reality is that it will quickly become a 'bundle' from TW in the eyes of customers - you pay $X a month to watch TV + watch on iPad, and TW pocket all the money while the channel companies only pocket money based on the TV-only deal they originally signed with TW.

This case is different from the Amazon cloud thing because technically you don't 'own' the TV programs based on the monthly subscription, so it's not clear whether you've the right to just 'watch it on any form of hardware'.
post #14 of 44
This is greed incarnate!
The program providers are double dipping. The advertisers already pay for the programming and that is why it seems like we get it for free from our local stations.Now when those programs go through cable, it is another tax on the consumers. We already pay for American Idol when we buy toilet paper and dog food. Now the programers want us to pay again because we are cable subscribers.F*** them!!!
As a matter of fact, my cable bill has gone up twice in the past one and a half years b/c the networks keep asking for more money from the cable people!!!
So when you head off to the store to buy that coke zero(cherry!) you pay for House. And when you go home to pay your bills online you pay the cable people money AGAIN, for House.
Now, imagine 30 million cable users paying the cable people an additional $1.80 per month to the network providers. That is $54 million dollars a month of pure effing tax!!!!!!!!!!! And now multiply that by 12 months and you get a whopping $648 million dollars of mother****** slack money.
post #15 of 44
Just another example of old media fearing new media because the advertising and ratings numbers aren't measured the same, and in some cases, can be bypassed by people who know how to jailbreak and edit a hosts file.

People want to consume content but not pay to be annoyed with ads. Make a subscription rate that is reasonable for what is offered (and hopefully ad-free) and people will easily subscribe.
post #16 of 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple ][ View Post

Time Warner must not have listened to News Corp, because Fox News is still working.


Faux News is provide free via Murdock to indoctrinate and brainwash the population. That is why they did not request TW to remove it.
post #17 of 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

It added, "the enthusiasm of our customers and the programming partners who have embraced the app, rather than those who are solely focused on finding additional ways to reach into wallets of their own viewers, has convinced us more than ever that we are on the right path."

And TW is not focused on my wallet? Boy that is some 100% pure, unadulterated F.U.D.
post #18 of 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnwhite1000 View Post

Faux News is provide free via Murdock to indoctrinate and brainwash the population. That is why they did not request TW to remove it.

Murdock didn't pull Fox News, because he is a smart business man who understands that more eyeballs is more eyeballs. That's why he beats his competitors.
post #19 of 44
This isn't all that different than Sony saying Amazon had no right to offer cloud storage/streaming services for your already bought and paid for Sony music is it? There's a whole lot of content providers that don't have a clue how to market themselves in mobile services. "Oh Yeah, look there's money over there. Let's get some" is as close as they come to marketing plans.
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #20 of 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnwhite1000 View Post

Faux News is provide free via Murdock to indoctrinate and brainwash the population. That is why they did not request TW to remove it.

I'm glad that my iPad2 has Fox News. It sure beats the hell out of lying, leftist propaganda crap channels like MSNBC, which hardly anybody even bothers to watch, besides a few ignorant liberals.
post #21 of 44
It makes sense that networks should want as many people watching as they can get, and the iPad will probably help with that. It's my understanding though that a major part of their complaints is that there isn't a way of measuring Nielsen ratings through views on an iPad app.
I don't know enough about the technical side of Nielsen ratings to give any opinion about how apt that excuse is (it's my understanding that their methods are somewhat outdated and flawed to begin with), but I think that networks are wanting to have a better solution for that before this newer way of viewing their content becomes more popular.

There may or may not also be something about different unions and guilds being compensated for what might constitute a new type of content distribution, but that's probably not an issue.
post #22 of 44
Next you'll be trying to say that Rachel Maddow doesn't offer "fair and balanced" news either.
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #23 of 44
The ad revenue is dwindling and not what it used to be.

Programmers are looking to squeeze more money directly from the consumers.

Quote:
Originally Posted by zorinlynx View Post

There must be something I'm missing here.

Isn't the television industry all about getting as many eyes as possible on your programming?

Doesn't this mean anything to get more eyes on the programming (including the iPad streaming) would be a GOOD THING for broadcasters?

More eyes = more people see ads = more revenue, right?

Or did I miss something? I've always been confused by the way big media acts when it comes to issues that *should* be obvious.
post #24 of 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

Next you'll be trying to say that Rachel Maddow doesn't offer "fair and balanced" news either.

She was a lot more attractive before she became a lesbian.
post #25 of 44
More proof that the old guard media just DOES NOT GET IT. This is why innovation is stifled and consumers are annoyed and frustrated with the lack of options -- time to create NEW media to replace the tired old dinosaur media!
post #26 of 44
Cue "Born this Way"
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #27 of 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by nagromme View Post

You do have to sympathize with the broadcasters, to some extent.

After all, you’re already paying for cable twice: your monthly bill plus a ton of ads. Shouldn’t you be paying a third time based on which screen you’re using? Seems only fair

Thats not the real issue with cable. Magazines and papers have ads too. The difference is the man at the news rack doesn't demand I buy a copy of every other magazine on the rack. I want sports illustrated and the economist, I don't have to buy woman's world and highlights for kids. Cable is too damn expencive because you are forced to pay for hunderds of bullshit channels for the dozen or so that are worth paying for.
You can't quantify how much I don't care -- Bob Kevoian of the Bob and Tom Show.
Reply
You can't quantify how much I don't care -- Bob Kevoian of the Bob and Tom Show.
Reply
post #28 of 44
I am taking the plunge and dropping "TV" altogether.

Put some of the money you were paying to upgrade your bandwidth for streaming.

The sheer quality of your content will be greatly improved.

The content creators will go to the Web when they realize the audience is leaving "TV".

You may miss a few things, but at least you are being causative over the situation.
post #29 of 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by batjam View Post

I am taking the plunge and dropping "TV" altogether.

Put some of the money you were paying to upgrade your bandwidth for streaming.

The sheer quality of your content will be greatly improved.

The content creators will go to the Web when they realize the audience is leaving "TV".

You may miss a few things, but at least you are being causative over the situation.

I dropped cable tv in January, just after NFL Redzone went off the air for NFL Week 17. I do not at all regret the move, but I dont watch much TV at all anyhow. netflix and hulu+ is enough for me (too much in fact cause I watch maybe 2 - 3 hrs of hulu a month), but the downside is sports, its nearly impossible to watch local pro sports without cable, so go to a few games, and for the rest that you care about go to a pub and enjoy some nachos and a cold one.
You can't quantify how much I don't care -- Bob Kevoian of the Bob and Tom Show.
Reply
You can't quantify how much I don't care -- Bob Kevoian of the Bob and Tom Show.
Reply
post #30 of 44
Kept pausing and rejected my login often.... my experience with it was awful. I deleted it.

That said, the TV networks are being short-sighted here.

I also don't watch that much TV anymore, but I have a sling box so I can watch channel 1 in New York while not at home. They have on demand and an iphone app but it's just not the same... I'm a loser I know!
post #31 of 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple ][ View Post

I'm glad that my iPad2 has Fox News. It sure beats the hell out of lying, leftist propaganda crap channels like MSNBC, which hardly anybody even bothers to watch, besides a few ignorant liberals.

ROTFLMAO!!


Here in America one is free to have poor taste, low IQ, and the desire to watch right wing propaganda from a FOREIGNER. Enjoy Faux!!!
post #32 of 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnwhite1000 View Post

Here in America one is free to have poor taste, low IQ, and the desire to watch right wing propaganda from a FOREIGNER. Enjoy Faux!!!

And here in America, one is also free to have impeccable taste, a higher than average IQ and a desire to watch News that is not terribly tainted by leftwing morons and ignorant baboons who get thrills up their legs.
post #33 of 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple ][ View Post

And here in America, one is also free to have impeccable taste, a higher than average IQ and a desire to watch News that is not terribly tainted by leftwing morons and ignorant baboons who get thrills up their legs.

so other news channels have "ignorant baboons who get thrills up their legs." Did MSNBC hire Rush Limbaugh?
You can't quantify how much I don't care -- Bob Kevoian of the Bob and Tom Show.
Reply
You can't quantify how much I don't care -- Bob Kevoian of the Bob and Tom Show.
Reply
post #34 of 44
Justintv app
It's in the app store
Check it out sometime
Maynot be everything cable is but check it out.
(Video quality various quite a bit though)
[center] "Hey look, it's in the center. I am SO cool!"[/center]
Reply
[center] "Hey look, it's in the center. I am SO cool!"[/center]
Reply
post #35 of 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by nagromme View Post

You do have to sympathize with the broadcasters, to some extent.

After all, youre already paying for cable twice: your monthly bill plus a ton of ads. Shouldnt you be paying a third time based on which screen youre using? Seems only fair

Don't forget about the hours of the day and days of the week and oh yea months of the year. I'm sure they'd like to up-charge us on whatever they think they can get away with and then just a smige more.

Also doesn't anyone else find it mildly interesting that not a single (popular) cable channel exists that isn't owned by... One of the major networks and or one of the major cable franchises... The entire industry one great big incestuous orgy of money grabbers
Apple Fanboy: Anyone who started liking Apple before I did!
Reply
Apple Fanboy: Anyone who started liking Apple before I did!
Reply
post #36 of 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by nagromme View Post

You do have to sympathize with the broadcasters, to some extent.

After all, you’re already paying for cable twice: your monthly bill plus a ton of ads. Shouldn’t you be paying a third time based on which screen you’re using? Seems only fair

while I know you are making a joke, it is possible that the contracts with TW actually do have some kind of per screen clause in them. And if so, the networks could see this app as the company trying to play semantic games to avoid paying some kind of fee by saying that the ipad is not really 'a screen' because that was meant for TV sets and it's not a TV.

Not to mention, imagine if one or more of those folks was a Nielsen viewer and choose to watch something in her ipad and not the TV. So now there's a view that wasn't counted (that would have been with the TV) and it could cost the network money in "make good" because that one person is like 100k viewers in the ratings


In the end what we need is a way for all views regardless of live on a tv, live on an ipad etc, DVR, itunes rental/purchase, network site streaming and so on to count for budget make good. Even if it is done on a volunteer basis. I'm sure someone can figure out a way to make the demos work to a decent amount. Or stick with a better box and a bigger sample and add the rest into the mix as well even if done on a literal penny for penny basis. Then perhaps the networks would get the sticks out of their butts about tech. I know a lot of folks, for example, that would happily skip their cable company and pay HBO, Showtime etc directly to subscribe to a computer/ipad viewing system even with next day viewing. Either the whole network or a la carte for shows.


Quote:
Originally Posted by zorinlynx View Post

There must be something I'm missing here.

Isn't the television industry all about getting as many eyes as possible on your programming?

yes but the catch is that they don't literally count everyone. They use a sample. And anything that could possibly affect that sample is evil in the eyes of the networks. Including online streaming, itunes etc
post #37 of 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple ][ View Post

I'm glad that my iPad2 has Fox News. It sure beats the hell out of lying, leftist propaganda crap channels like MSNBC, which hardly anybody even bothers to watch, besides a few ignorant liberals.

post #38 of 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by Julio View Post

Murdock didn't pull Fox News, because he is a smart business man who understands that more eyeballs is more eyeballs. That's why he beats his competitors.

Which explains why he pulled his FX and National Geographic channels.

Also still available: CNN, MSNBC and CNBC.
Please don't be insane.
Reply
Please don't be insane.
Reply
post #39 of 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple ][ View Post

And here in America, one is also free to have impeccable taste, a higher than average IQ and a desire to watch News that is not terribly tainted by leftwing morons and ignorant baboons who get thrills up their legs.


Your jealous of "liberals" because they have normal size "apparatus"? LOL!!
post #40 of 44
You know what, I've been avoiding bit torrent lately. But shit like this makes me think I should just pirate all my content.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPad
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPad › Time Warner pulls MTV, FX from iPad app to placate broadcasters