backtop

Print 28 comment(s) - last by mindless1.. on Jul 28 at 11:03 PM

  (Source: tvweek.com)
The only way to watch recently-aired episodes before the eight-day waiting period is to be a DISH Network subscriber

Fox Broadcasting has announced that its new episodes will no longer be available for free on the Web until eight days after they debut. 

According to Fox, the only way to watch recently-aired episodes before the eight days is to be a DISH Network subscriber. Other cable/satellite providers will be added to the list over time. 

For those of you who use Hulu to watch new Fox episodes of shows like "Family Guy" and "Glee," you must have Hulu's paid subscription service in order to watch them before the eight-day waiting period as well. 

Non-cable/satellite subscribers can watch the new episodes online for free after eight days post-debut. 

According to Fox, DISH Network is the first provider to release this feature, but "more are coming soon."

"We're concerned that cord-cutting is going to be a problem," said Fox President of Affiliate Sales, Mike Hopkins. "The more you enable it by putting content out there for free without any tether to a pay-TV subscription, the bigger that danger becomes."

"We understand that there may be consumers that are unhappy. If this works, you're going to see a lot more content online," Hopkins added.

This new feature will take effect August 15, 2011.

Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
Noooooo!!!!
By CrazyBernie on 7/27/11, Rating: 0
RE: Noooooo!!!!
By quiksilvr on 7/27/2011 10:07:11 AM , Rating: 2
*resists urge to punch CrazyBernie in face*

Anyways, I'm getting sick and tired of cable, satellite and networks running how we watch our shows. Why do I need to spend $30 a month for a few dozen channels just to watch one?

Yes, I know that technically Fox, ABC, NBC and CBS are free in HD over the air, but I think it would be a great idea just to have live streams online for each individual channel. Keep the commercials you show over the air on there too, just don't force people to get cable or satellite just to watch it!


RE: Noooooo!!!!
By tng on 7/27/2011 10:17:36 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Keep the commercials you show over the air on there too, just don't force people to get cable or satellite just to watch it!

Putting all of the commercials online might cause the same kind of problem that internet radio faced several years ago.

If you notice internet radio has different commercials normally than the broadcast shows. This is because when the union that controls the people who voice most of the commercials found out that the commercials were being streamed out on the internet, they demanded up to 4 times the fee for the internet than for broadcast. Most radio stations just cut them out of the loop and do separate commercials now.


RE: Noooooo!!!!
By aharris02 on 7/27/2011 2:58:34 PM , Rating: 2
As they should have! The internet is capable of transmitting in an incredible manner, but a voice-actor's talent doesn't suddenly improve 4x because their voices are being transmitted in binary.

And internet commercials provide so much more room for interactivity; this industry needs to really treat online video as a blank slate which they can use to completely redesign the way they monetize their content.

We'll see if they actually use it that way...


RE: Noooooo!!!!
By MrBlastman on 7/27/2011 10:22:29 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
just don't force people to get cable or satellite just to watch it!


You said it yourself--you don't have to because you can watch these channels via HD antenna. They probably won't push the video over the internet due to... *gasp* internet service providers (Comcrap, Arsehole T@T, dim Horizon etc.) trying to crack down and find ways to cap or bill for usage.

It would cost them potentially an exceedingly large sum of money in the future to stream boatloads of content, live. Not to mention they'd be losing out on the subscriber fees.

Don't try and make the system change for you--they don't care. Just get an antenna and win. :)

As for the 8-day wait--it effectively forces people to be two episodes behind to watch an episode online. I see exactly what they are trying to do.


RE: Noooooo!!!!
By mcnabney on 7/27/2011 2:17:13 PM , Rating: 2
I know. That 2-3 cents per GB is really going to kill them...


RE: Noooooo!!!!
By ianweck on 7/27/2011 4:36:41 PM , Rating: 2
I cut the cord a week ago and got an antenna. F'em.


RE: Noooooo!!!!
By Solandri on 7/27/2011 5:23:34 PM , Rating: 2
If you get Internet via cable modem, a lot of times they transmit the OTA (over the air) local channels unencrypted over the cable. Just hook up a splitter and run the extra cable to a TV or standalone box (like HD HomeRun) with a QAM tuner. You should be able to get those local channels without an antenna. The OTA signal will probably be more detailed (less compression), but signal reception can be dodgy if you're far from the transmitters.


RE: Noooooo!!!!
By mindless1 on 7/28/2011 11:01:31 PM , Rating: 2
This is true, but in many areas if you don't have (pay for) both services, they put a high or loss pass filter on the line so what you haven't paid for doesn't even make it to to any portion of the equipment that you own... meaning tampering with their equipment is illegal in itself and sooner or later they might find out.

Obviously anyone who has decided to switch to OTA, does so accepting which channels they can get OTA.


RE: Noooooo!!!!
By *kjm on 7/27/2011 5:24:13 PM , Rating: 2
Did that about 1.5yrs ago so I'm about $1224 ahead of ya:)


RE: Noooooo!!!!
By AMDftw on 7/27/2011 10:49:32 AM , Rating: 5
...or you could just wait one day and wait for someone to upload it. lol.


RE: Noooooo!!!!
By rburnham on 7/27/2011 1:49:35 PM , Rating: 2
Or you could stop writing redundant words that are not needed.


RE: Noooooo!!!!
By mindless1 on 7/28/2011 11:03:16 PM , Rating: 2
On the more popular shows it's closer to an hour wait than a day.


In a related story....
By Souka on 7/27/2011 2:50:13 PM , Rating: 5
quote:
Fox to Implement 8-Day Waiting Period for Online Viewing of TV Shows


In other news.... Torrent activity of FOX TV shows jumped dramatically this week....




RE: In a related story....
By aharris02 on 7/27/2011 3:41:01 PM , Rating: 2
+1 if I hadn't already commented :o

The sooner they realize that limiting access to content increases torrent demands, the better off they'll be.

That said, 8 days is a relatively short period of time compared to what they've been doing. It almost seems like they're experimenting with finding a balance between delayed content (30 days, anyone?) and their shows being pirated by all of the potential internet users (whom they essentially lose ad revenue to by demanding that access to their shows be limited).


8 days..
By GuinnessKMF on 7/27/2011 12:08:36 PM , Rating: 5
What this means is if you're watching an episodic TV series and you miss an episode, you will now have to stop watching it live if you want to stay in order (if you DVR you'd only have to stop watching it live for one episode to fix things, but either way, you'll then skip the commercials).

The length of the delay will just encourage people to stop watching their live programming, if it were 4 or 5 days it'd still be a "painful" delay to those who really don't want to miss out or have something spoiled for them, but would allow you to "return to the fold".

They just didn't think this through.




Like Everything Else
By ilkhan on 7/27/2011 3:13:37 PM , Rating: 5
Like everything else that content providers do, this doesn't apply to pirates.
Go networks!




Not lik*@*
By tng on 7/27/2011 10:06:26 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
"We understand that there may be consumers that are unhappy. If this works, you're going to see a lot more content online," Hopkins added.
Yeah right, it is obvious that you did this so that places like Hulu (pay service), Dish and other content distributors could make money off of recent episodes, instead of people watching them for free online.

He should have been honest and said "If this works, your going to have to pay to see content online"




RE: Not lik*@*
By tng on 7/27/2011 10:09:03 AM , Rating: 2
Not lik*@*.... WTF? Second time that has happened to me and I have seen this several times. Should have been "Not likely"


RE: Not lik*@*
By FITCamaro on 7/27/11, Rating: -1
RE: Not lik*@*
By tng on 7/27/2011 1:44:39 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
Not to make money or anything.
No, didn't say that I was against them making money. I didn't know that there were no commercials while viewing online, so there you go. I still watch a honest to god TV most of the time still, dark ages I tell you.

Really it sounds like a scheme to get more money from places like Hulu and other distribution points.


I could have sworn...
By dayanth on 7/27/2011 10:34:13 AM , Rating: 2
That most shows that are on Hulu right now show up at a delay of 8 days. Some of them are even 30 days. There's a tiny few that will have a show online the day after broadcast. While I'm sure the networks think they can get more out of advertising online and at broadcast, I'm still going to watch a show I like regardless of when it's put online.

But as for trying to give DISH and Hulu+ subscribers early viewing for paying for the service? That's just crazy that anyone would bother paying for just the extra effort to watch that latest episode of House before anyone else can.




RE: I could have sworn...
By Uncle on 7/27/2011 2:42:31 PM , Rating: 2
I don't give two hoots how long they delay. I can't watch all the programing out their as it is. Iv'e come accross shows I've never heard of and I'll grab an epesode here and their and if I rally like it then I d/l .


Double dipping
By zenom11 on 7/27/2011 11:05:30 AM , Rating: 2
we all know all these braodcasting company like to double dip. get paid from ads and force viewer to pay subcription. sure the OTA antenna is free, but lots of people pay for cable/sat anyway. honestly, i don't mind paying for cable/sat IF there is no ads, or you can put ads but free for me. they can only have it one way or the other and i refuse to let them have it both way.




The Solution?
By tng on 7/27/2011 11:08:14 AM , Rating: 2
It is called a DVR!




Cord cutting is a danger?
By KnightBreed on 7/27/2011 12:24:46 PM , Rating: 2
"We're concerned that cord-cutting is going to be a problem," said Fox President of Affiliate Sales, Mike Hopkins. "The more you enable it by putting content out there for free without any tether to a pay-TV subscription, the bigger that danger becomes."

Heaven forbid.




Cancel and send a message.
By Uncle on 7/27/2011 12:55:19 PM , Rating: 2
I've saved $1650.00 in the last two years. I told my cable company since your in the digital age, you can supply the channels I want and you don't want to then take me off your cash flow. As it is I can d/l any show I want when I want, so if I can do that now without thier help and fees, I'm sure they could accommodate me if they wanted to. Their to pig headed in the bean counter department to see that their not making a single dime from me, when they could get a few dollars, better then nothing I would say. If the bean counter can't see that then he should be fired.




By CharonPDX on 7/27/2011 3:21:43 PM , Rating: 2
I'm looking at you, "House". :-(

It's basically the only Fox show I watch, but I do know that other Fox shows have been only one day, while House has been 8 days for a while. (Oh, Sarah Connor Chronicles was 8 days, too, when it was on.)




"Game reviewers fought each other to write the most glowing coverage possible for the powerhouse Sony, MS systems. Reviewers flipped coins to see who would review the Nintendo Wii. The losers got stuck with the job." -- Andy Marken











botimage
Copyright 2012 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki