Skip to main content

Bill O'Reily 'Talking Points Commentary': 'The Far Left Running Wild: There are entire media operations that exist today solely to promote ideology. This is a bad situation that is getting worse.'
Most of you are helping pay his salary.
I ran into this researching something else:
If you’re a cable subscriber, you pay roughly 89 cents per month for the Fox News Channel, based on 2012 estimates provided by the industry research firm SNL Kagan. Cable channels generate much of their revenue from “license fees” they receive from cable companies in exchange for carriage in households. Those fees are passed along in subscribers’ monthly cable bills. Fox has aggressively negotiated its license fees, and now claims one of the highest average rates per subscriber. Only six non-premium cable channels command higher fees than Fox. CNN, by contrast, is estimated to average 57 cents per subscriber per month and MSNBC, 18 cents.
Let's call this the "Fox News Tax," because it's a forced levy on anyone who wants cable or satellite service. Kinda socialistic, actually. Why is Fox News afraid to compete in the free marketplace, where only people who watch the channel pay for it?

And what does the Fox News Tax get you? Shit content and falling viewership. Not only was 2013 their worst year since 2007, but 2014 isn't looking much rosier:

like the rest of cable news, their numbers continue to fall compared to the previous year. In total viewers, the network was down 20% in total day and 16% in primetime compared to Q2 2013 [...] In the demo, the network had its lowest quarterly performance since Q2 2001.
If it wasn't for sports, I would've cut the chord a long time ago. This makes me doubly wish I could.

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

    •  a la carte would never work (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      satrap, BlueKS, Mannie, bryduck

      The cheap channels would be the most popular, which are the channels people complain about on the internet. Fox News, TLC, History, etc. Meanwhile the channels showing quality scripted programming like AMC, FX, etc would probably cost as much as your current cable bill since they are being subsidized.

    •  I've been begging for a la carte... (5+ / 0-)

      ...since the mid-nineties.

      I'm rather in Kos' predicament. Were it not for sports, there'd be no reason under the sun for me to have cable television.

      •  It's possible to get packages without Fox News... (4+ / 0-)

        In my case, I have no interest in sports,, but my wife demands HGTV, so I can't cut the cord, much as I would like to.

        We compromised on FIOS Select HD.

        No sports channels and ALSO no Fox News, Fox Business News, or CNBC as a bonus!

        Barack Obama and Jeremiah Wright, April 2008:
        BO: ‘You know what your problem is?’
        JW: ‘What is that?’
        BO: ‘You have to tell the truth.’
        JW: ‘That’s a good problem. That’s a good problem.’

        by tbetz on Mon Jul 28, 2014 at 05:21:47 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Getting HGTV online (0+ / 0-)

          isn't a complete substitute, but their website is making more and more material available.  Maybe the two of you could investigate it, if she is comfortable getting content that way.

          •  Last time I checked... (0+ / 0-)

            HGTV's web site was pretty much useless. Old programs, and only excerpts, not full episodes.

            Barack Obama and Jeremiah Wright, April 2008:
            BO: ‘You know what your problem is?’
            JW: ‘What is that?’
            BO: ‘You have to tell the truth.’
            JW: ‘That’s a good problem. That’s a good problem.’

            by tbetz on Wed Aug 06, 2014 at 08:03:23 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

      •  we'd drop it if we had reliable internet (0+ / 0-)

        but we don't so we keep it.

        Dawkins is to atheism as Rand is to personal responsibility. Russia Today=FoxNews, Seralini=Wakefield. yadda yadda.

        by terrypinder on Tue Jul 29, 2014 at 04:36:37 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  This again? A la carte is bad for every reason. (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      satrap, madronagal

      First off, you aren't paying for 100 channels (or whatever), you're paying for the ten you watch. If you pay for cable and watch 10 channels, you're telling the cable company that you're willing to pay $80 to watch ten channels. Guess how much you'll be charged a la carte? And that day when you want to see something elsewhere? too bad.

      •  Huh? If someone wants to expand their a la (0+ / 0-)

        carte menu, what's to stop them from simply adding the content to their lineup, especially in this day and age?  Hasn't pay per view been around for like 2 decades now?  The whole point of a la carte is that you pick the program that you want to watch when you want to watch it.  You aren't locked into a single channel offering -- that is an archaic cable-tv centric concept.

        Overall, a la carte through cable doesn't matter because cable tv is a dinosaur of a business model -- kind of like the music industry in the late 1990's just prior to Napster.  Newer, more nimble services from Apple, Google, and NetFlix will continue to refine and expand their own a la carte offerings and eventually at prices that will give the cable companies strong competition.

        •  Generally, when I've heard the term a la carte (0+ / 0-)

          used in terms of cable tv, it's usually been meant to buying cable per channel rather than per program. What your talking about is, as you seem to grock, something outside of the cable TV model.

          As far as pay-per-view (as distinct from on demand) that usually runs around $60 a pop.

      •  Internet (8+ / 0-)

        When you talk about a la carte you're missing the forest for the trees. The idea of a la carte channels was a valid argument in say, 1995. In today's world the concept of "channels" is becoming irrelevant. What you really want in a la carte content that could, in theory, be delivered over a true high speed internet connection that's at least 20 Mbps or faster. The problem is that most people get their residential internet connection from the same company that provides their cable TV service and that leads to an enormous conflict of interest. Service providers like Comcast have an incentive to stick residential customers with an expensive, slow (10 Mbps or less) internet connection so that those same customers continue to "need" their expensive TV service. More importantly, providers need customers to need that expensive TV service to watch local MLB, NHL and NBA games because local sports are the true cash cow in cable TV. If sports fans were able to legally watch local sports in HD via a high speed internet connection, the cable TV business model would collapse  

        We need to get to a point in this country where true high-speed internet is thought of as a basic utility like electricity or water; not as an add-on luxury on our cable TV invoice.

        "For all those whose cares have been our concern, the work goes on, the cause endures, the hope still lives and the dream shall never die." --Senator Ted Kennedy

        by Blue Silent Majority on Mon Jul 28, 2014 at 05:51:46 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Cable internet is reasonably fast (0+ / 0-)

          but it is true the cable companies have no incentive to give you a radically different technology (fiber) that would provide state of the art bandwidth. They have a huge investment in copper wire and that is always going to have limitations.

          Also, Comcast and Time Warner Cable own or have exclusive licenses to a lot of content, especially sports. They have no incentive to unbundle that content, or allow any alternative delivery system (such as satellite, or fiber if that ever takes off) to do so. In some cases they'd rather not license it at all for delivery outside their subscriber base, so that competitors have less to offer their customers.

          Short of a real anti-trust assault on them I don't see a way out of this.

          •  Agreed (0+ / 0-)

            I live in Philly and Comcast has a stranglehold on local sports. They own most of the cable systems in the area and they also own the local regional sports network, Comcast Sportsnet, that carries most Phillies, Flyers, and Sixers games. Comcast Sportsnet is a monry printing factory for Comcast and they do not allow Directv or Dish Network to carry the channel (Verizon Fios does have it) giving Comcast a near-monopoly on local sports.

            "For all those whose cares have been our concern, the work goes on, the cause endures, the hope still lives and the dream shall never die." --Senator Ted Kennedy

            by Blue Silent Majority on Wed Jul 30, 2014 at 03:04:02 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

      •  Thank you for parroting the cable industry line... (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        cville townie

        ...but I don't buy it from you any more than I have the previous 6000 times that I've heard this claim.

        The reality is that the cable industry is scared to death of a model where cable networks would actually have to compete for subscriber dollars because, and it isn't because they're worried about viewers.  It's because they think that their profits will drop...

        If Democrats proclaim the the Earth is round and Republicans insist it is flat, we will shortly see a column in the Washington Post claiming the the earth is really a semi-circle.

        by TexasTom on Mon Jul 28, 2014 at 08:51:45 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  If they went to a la carte (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      JeffW, cville townie

      You probably still wouldn't be able to get some channels individually.  To get your local Fox Sports network, you'd probably have to buy a bundle that includes Fox News, FX, etc.  They might include Fox Sports 1, Fox Sport 2,and the big Ten Network in an expanded sports package.

    •  I heard the CEO of AERO (3+ / 0-)

      Is filing to have his company licensed as a cable company and then he is going to sue content providers under the antitrust laws for forcing him to buy bundles.  I'm very interested to see how this goes.

    •  If cable was a la carte (0+ / 0-)

      my decision wouldn't be which channels to drop. It's be which ones to keep.  The only thing I watch on actual TV with any regularity is hockey, and unfortunately my local team is carried almost exclusively by FoxSports (in one variant or another). The national networks almost never broadcast the Hurricanes, and NHL Network is no help because they won't deliver in-market games. Sure I make occasional visits to other channels, but if my TV were to blow up and I could never buy another one, the NHL is all I'd miss.  Except for maybe every 4 years when there's Olympic hockey on.

      I suppose I could just go back to the radio for my fix like I did for so many years in the 90s.  Chuck Kaiton is legend.

      I'll believe corporations are people when one comes home from Afghanistan in a body bag.

      by mojo11 on Tue Jul 29, 2014 at 11:13:48 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Another reason (21+ / 0-)

    I'm happy to have cut the cord!

    Conservatives believe evil comes from violating rules. Liberals believe evil comes from violating each other.

    by tcorse on Mon Jul 28, 2014 at 04:32:21 PM PDT

  •  #ThanksObama #Impeach (8+ / 0-)

    Just trying to get my money's worth.

  •  It's 'cut the cord' unless (4+ / 0-)

    you're talking about unplugging the mike of that woman who sings the Titanic theme, who/which is sheer auditory torture.

    I think this is Kos' weakest diary in a long time.  I would never watch Fox, and they're semi-doomed in the long run, but they have a shitload of (dumb, well-off) viewers....

    From Neocon to sane- thanks to Obama- and Kos.

    by satrap on Mon Jul 28, 2014 at 04:34:32 PM PDT

  •  See, that's the thing. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    satrap, Rashaverak

    I watch the Simpson's and sports. Fox sports broadcasts the San Diego Padres and does a great job. I get NFL in season and I watch NASCAR. I wish I could just buy a package for those items.

    •  They would charge you an absolute (4+ / 0-)

      fortune for just those two or three channels.  It wouldn't be like "Oh, that'll be 1.50/month, John".

      I mean, cmon, it's American Business we're talking about here!!!

      From Neocon to sane- thanks to Obama- and Kos.

      by satrap on Mon Jul 28, 2014 at 04:41:29 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Drop Fox, but keep Fox and Fox? (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      turnover, IB JOHN, llywrch, cville townie

      Yeah I know they're separate - sorta, but it all goes into Murdoch's pockets.

      Seems to me that Bart Simpson is just Rupert Murdoch's friendly face to the world.

      I finally dropped cable a while back. I have WiMAX internet from a local company.

      For my sports fix I got NBA Game Time this past season. Worked out pretty well. (I'm not the biggest sports fan anyway but I've been following the NBA for the past several years.)

      It turns out that the skill set required to get elected is completely different than the skill set required to effectively govern.

      by VictorLaszlo on Mon Jul 28, 2014 at 04:49:34 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I considered NBA Game Time this past season... (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        IB JOHN, VictorLaszlo

        ...but I read a few horror stories re: service, picture quality, etc. But it worked for you?

        •  Yeah, it worked really well. There were (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          turnover, IB JOHN

          occasional problems, but not sure if that was the NBA or my ISP.

          Either way though, not any major problems. I'd recommend it.

          It turns out that the skill set required to get elected is completely different than the skill set required to effectively govern.

          by VictorLaszlo on Mon Jul 28, 2014 at 05:02:02 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  NBA Game Time = games over the internet, (5+ / 0-)

        just to be clear. I bought it halfway through the season and got the ~$100 half-season price. Shows maybe 60% of all games live (local games are blacked out, but I was away from 'home' anyway).

        And all games, or nearly so, become available to watch in replay a couple hours after the game ends.

        It turns out that the skill set required to get elected is completely different than the skill set required to effectively govern.

        by VictorLaszlo on Mon Jul 28, 2014 at 04:54:29 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  I'm constitutionally unable to (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          VictorLaszlo, turnover, IB JOHN

          watch a sporting event which is not live (and that I care about).  I can't watch a replay after knowing the score, and I a can't go without knowing the score.

          It sucks.

          From Neocon to sane- thanks to Obama- and Kos.

          by satrap on Mon Jul 28, 2014 at 04:59:22 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Yeah, I know what you mean. I rarely watched (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            IB JOHN

            the replays, but still a nice feature.

            Also, the games that aren't shown live can be followed through live boxscore updates through the service.

            And near the end of the season I finally realized that radio play-by-play is also available for many/most/all (not sure TBH) games.

            The radio part didn't always seem to work properly, but the problem might have been on my end. Or not. But all in all, yeah, I thought it was worth it.

            It turns out that the skill set required to get elected is completely different than the skill set required to effectively govern.

            by VictorLaszlo on Mon Jul 28, 2014 at 05:07:31 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  I regularly wake at 6AM... (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            IB JOHN

            ...on weekends only to watch Formula 1 racing, despite the fact that F1's US broadcaster (NBC Sports Network) generally rebroadcasts the race a few hours later.

            I. Can't. Not. Watch. It. Live.

    •  I am pretty sure you can get The Simpsons (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Rashaverak, IB JOHN

      through Apple iTunes or Amazon's streaming service, to name two.  What I would do is look at how much those will charge you for a whole season and then compare it to what you pay in cable for a whole year.

      •  Simpsons on Amazon on demand? (0+ / 0-)

        $29 for the first season up to $38 for the latest (25th, which I think is the latest.) That's for one show. Plus the cost of whatever device you want to watch it on. True, it's a one-time payment, but around $850 for that one show is a whole lot of $.

        "Lone catch of the moon, the roots of the sigh of an idea there will be the outcome may be why?"--from a spam diary entitled "The Vast World."

        by bryduck on Tue Jul 29, 2014 at 08:12:37 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  You can get NFL games (0+ / 0-)

      with an antenna and digital TV set in most places. Simpsons too, and probably some Nascar. Probably won't help you with the Padres, though.

  •  Ditched cable eons ago (12+ / 0-)

    I have Roku though, and it rocks!

    … the NSA takes significant care to prevent any abuses and that there is a substantial oversight system in place,” Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-California), said August 23.

    by mosesfreeman on Mon Jul 28, 2014 at 04:37:48 PM PDT

  •  That's why I DON't have cable (6+ / 0-)

    watching TV is way overrated anyway.

    Ecology is the new Economy => Kosonomy

    by citisven on Mon Jul 28, 2014 at 04:40:12 PM PDT

  •  Not I (7+ / 0-)

    I refuse to pay for cable.  It costs me $15.98 for Netflix and I can see pretty much everything, just not immediately, plus I don't pay for shit I don't like.  Recently got a new free channel in my area called Get TV; it has old (30's - 50's) movies, including a lot of film noir.  There are over 40 free channels, about 20 of which are worth a look (the rest are snake oil preachers of one kind or another) so I see no reason.  

    •  Really? Netflix streaming (0+ / 0-)

      for my tastes is closer to worthless. Documentaries and some foreign flicks, ok, but straight-up American movies? Not much there. Some TV, too, but mostly for my kid.

      "Lone catch of the moon, the roots of the sigh of an idea there will be the outcome may be why?"--from a spam diary entitled "The Vast World."

      by bryduck on Tue Jul 29, 2014 at 08:16:13 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Why is Fox News Afraid? (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    tcorse, BluejayRN, llywrch, MJB
    Why is Fox News afraid to compete in the free marketplace, where only people who watch the channel pay for it?
  •  No cable here. (5+ / 0-)

    Netflix, Hulu, YouTube, various news sites and news feeds. That right there is more than enough. No one here cares much about pro sports. So we're good. No $$ for Fox.

  •  Sports and Cordcutting (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    satrap, untorqued, cville townie

    Many NFL games are broadcast over the air, in HD, for free. But it's true, sports is the only thing keeping a lot of people on cable/satellite.

    Sports streaming is getting better though. I watched most of the World Cup streaming from the BBC for free. Watched the USA games and the last few games at the bar, but I would have done that even if I hadn't cut the cord.

    [Terrorists] are a dime a dozen, they are all over the world and for every one we lock up there will be three to take his place. --Digby

    by rabel on Mon Jul 28, 2014 at 04:44:26 PM PDT

  •  Why is Fox News Afraid? (5+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    MyMy, Losty, llywrch, JeffW, Metric Only
    Why is Fox News afraid to compete in the free marketplace, where only people who watch the channel pay for it?
    Because they're foisting an inferior product on a gullible public.

    If the wingnuts were smart enough to connect the dots on how Faux News manipulates them they would hang the entire cast and crew of Fox News from the nearest tree.

  •  Is this weird, or is it just me: (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    lgmcp, howabout

    I never EVER watch anything on my Dish account (my wife and kids do) but if I was single, I'd definitely have it for fear of a generally naked feeling.  So I'd have it and never watch it.

    Do others feel this way?

    From Neocon to sane- thanks to Obama- and Kos.

    by satrap on Mon Jul 28, 2014 at 04:46:16 PM PDT

    •  If it wasn't for daughter (4+ / 0-)

      I'd ditch Dish in a heartbeat. I'm trying to find an alternative that she can get her shows on, think she watches things like Walking Dead, and weird zombie crap. Me: the only thing I watch is Rachel, Lawrence and a few others on MSNBC.
      Lately I've not had the time to follow them closely.
      I usually catch Rachel on Podcast, which is actually better, as it doesn't have adverts.
      The only sports I watch is occasionally a OR Ducks football game, but I can live without that.
      College Football/B ball are just farm teams for the pros, so I've mostly lost interest in them, and I lost interest in pro sports long ago.

      Severely Socialist 47283

      by ichibon on Mon Jul 28, 2014 at 05:01:36 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  I only have it for the (big) kids. (0+ / 0-)

      My son has to watch all the sports all the time.

      I watch Rachel, etc., early mornings on my computer.

      The last time I tried to renegotiate with Charter, I wanted to not have TV, just internet and phone. They made it so expensive, I just might as well have TV.

      It is not weird. Except for i before e, except after c. Weird is a weird word. ;).

  •  occassional sports (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    but hbo and showtime are my main reasons for remaining connected.

    The cold passion for truth hunts in no pack. -Robinson Jeffers

    by Laurence Lewis on Mon Jul 28, 2014 at 04:46:44 PM PDT

  •  Perhaps there's a "religious" exception? (6+ / 0-)

    Why should I pay for something that so definitively offends my moral compass?

    (If I could choose which channels/networks I want to actually watch, there would fewer than 20. As telecom consumers we have virtually zero leverage. I'm considering just switching back and forth between Comcast and Verizon every two years, because I can't decide which company is worse.)

    Occupy the Internet- protect net neutrality!

    by Polacolor on Mon Jul 28, 2014 at 04:47:02 PM PDT

  •  John Prine sang the answer: "Blow up your tv.." (7+ / 0-)

    Resist much, obey little. ~~Edward Abbey, via Walt Whitman

    by willyr on Mon Jul 28, 2014 at 04:48:09 PM PDT

  •  Those infamous Comcast retention specialists (7+ / 0-)

    keep purporting to demonstrate to us that our cable internet and voice service, means that the TV channels aren't costing us a dime and in fact our rates would go UP if we didn't have them.

    I am very skeptical of this claim but the well-known difficulties of arguing with the rep have caused us to give up.

    We don't want the TV service and barely use it -- a little Turner Classic Movies once in awhile is hardly sufficient reason to subscribe.

    "The extinction of the human race will come from its inability to EMOTIONALLY comprehend the exponential function." -- Edward Teller

    by lgmcp on Mon Jul 28, 2014 at 04:48:15 PM PDT

  •  like Corporate subsidies .... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    the channel of the 1% makes its money taxing the 99%.

    Hey.  Meet The Press , more right winger headed your way.
    oh forgot ... their ratings are going to down too , for booking the same folks as FOX (for balance).

    Keep It Real Folks  

  •  My husband and I dropped cable a year ago. Seem... (6+ / 0-)

    My husband and I dropped cable a year ago. Seemed silly to pay good money for 200 or so channels that we never watched.

  •  Ditched cable and life is SO much better! (11+ / 0-)

    I skim right past the diaries about what the latest RWNJ has said because they are of no interest to me.

    DK is a better site than that, has excellent diaries that cover topics far more interesting than Bill O'Reilly et al, and doesn't need to convince anyone here that these people are nuts.

    Cable = 100 channels and nothing to watch.

  •  I pay for Fox but I don't watch it--EVER! (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    lgmcp, Aunt Pat, cville townie

    I have it deleted from my channel listings, so I never even catch a glimpse of it.

    You do know that ratings for channels come from measuring who is watching what and for how long. (They can do that these days, without a phone call from Nielsen.) So if you want to lower Fox News ratings, don't watch.

    I live a bit far out, so only have one internet wifi provider. I do have great satellite DirecTV, but ATT is about to buy it so...

    •  Back in the days when you could still (0+ / 0-)

      get cable in analog, about 4 years ago, one of my coworkers bought a new flat-panel screen and hooked it up to the cable system where I work. Trouble is, this particular individual is a Republican, who would listen to Rush Limbaugh all day if the boss would let him (he wouldn't).

      The analog tuner on a newer digital set has some interesting options, one of which is to adjust reception for specific channels. I "adjusted" Fox News by about 500 kHz. You could punch in the channel number directly after that and all you'd get was snow. I still don't know if he ever noticed, though.

  •  I would Not pay ANYTHING for sports. Never watc... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Aunt Pat

    I would Not pay ANYTHING for sports. Never watch it. You will find your ESPN prices go through the roof. But yeah, bring it on. I will buy two or three channels and that's it.

  •  I think you met 2013 was their worst Year not Mont (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
  •  Good, it's about fucking time (0+ / 0-)

    I hope all the old white folks full of hate just implode somehow.  

    Someone needs to post on Billo's page that he is really starting to look OLD!!!

  •  so few media companies (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    hard to avoid giving murdock money.  watch fx ? watch american idol?  i don't but lots do i assume.  when murdoch decided news was entertainment, he pretty much destroyed the american political system.  that is one former immigrant i wish we could deport.

    President Obama needs to be more liberal.

    by jimgilliamv2 on Mon Jul 28, 2014 at 04:54:51 PM PDT

  •  Cutting the chord is easier than you think (10+ / 0-)

    You simply need a very good reason, and now you have one.

    I cut the chord with the last baseball strike.  I went cold turkey from baseball (my favorite sport) and since I was doing that I said "what the heck" and did it for all the others.

    The benefits were and still are enormous.  Suddenly I had time to read books, work on projects, work out some, and a whole bunch of stuff.  It was then that I realized just how much time I had been wasting on sports.

    Today, all that time goes into reading and writing on Daily Kos, but that's worth it.

    Go for it!  Just think how much better Daily Kos would become if you put more time into it!  (lol)

    You matter to them IF YOU VOTE!

    by nuketeacher on Mon Jul 28, 2014 at 04:55:12 PM PDT

    •  Cord, not Chord (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      satrap, Elizaveta, Rashaverak, CatFelyne

      Cutting out singing Chords also adds to one's available spare time.

      You matter to them IF YOU VOTE!

      by nuketeacher on Mon Jul 28, 2014 at 04:56:15 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Here's what I hate about doing (0+ / 0-)

        what you did (and I don't really 'hate' it).

        So i don't watch tv, other than whatever's on in the background, etc.

        So I used to read a TON TON TON of foreign policy stuff after 9/11.  I had a rightwing perspective, so it was constantly stressful and demoralizing, thinking the world was going to end tomorrow,etc.

        But what's worse about knowing so much about something on an amateur level is that there's no payoff: your peers don't know the stuff well enough to talk about, I didn't blog, there just wasn't enough 'there' there.

        So, my point is being too productive is not all it's cracked up to be :)

        From Neocon to sane- thanks to Obama- and Kos.

        by satrap on Mon Jul 28, 2014 at 05:03:44 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  I would love to. (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Ree Zen, cville townie

      But my internet service comes from Comcast. DSL around here is sketchy and too slow. There are no other providers. If FIOS were here, I would sign up in a minute - but Verizon is too busy violating the promises they made when we were considering moving here.

      And, just for grins, call Comcast and tell them to cut your TV and just leave you with your internet - turns out to be more expensive.

      The township where I live is one of the most densely populated townships in the state - but nobody will offer non-Comcast internet connections sturdy enough to let me stream the stuff I can get off the 'net. Seems to me like there's one hell of a business opportunity sitting here.

      •  No, it does not. I did it a few months ago. (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        llywrch, cville townie

        Internet charges went up 13 dollars a month, but the ~$100/month charge for cable television simnply disappeared.

      •  No, it won't be more expensive. You have to look (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Rashaverak, cville townie

        very closely at the absolute bottom line of those bundle deals that they are offering you over the phone, especially with all the dinky cable tv related surcharges and device rental fees that get tacked on but not included in that rate they quoted you.  Furthermore, why not cut the cable and then sign up again as a new subscriber (using the name of a different person in your family) -- to internet only?  In some areas Comcast offers a $25/month internet only deal for the first 6 months.

        •  Even without those fees (0+ / 0-)

          you will always pay more for TV, unless if you live outside a big city and you pay only for Limited Basic (retransmitted broadcast and public service channels). TV is the most expensive service they offer relative to the value delivered, and has the fewest available bundle discounts.

          Sometimes Limited Basic is actually effectively free when bundled, though not in big cities anymore. The broadcast channels collect their rent too, and Comcast is only too happy to give it to them. Comcast and Cablevision of NY are the two most aggressive carriers nationwide in taking advantage of the FCC now allowing them to encrypt retransmitted broadcast channels; not at all coincidentally, Comcast and Cablevision have seen Limited Basic rates double in many areas. Time Warner's have stayed flat in that graph, though that data is also for a small market (Rochester) with no network owned-and-operated broadcast stations.

          I work in the telecom industry, and Comcast's pricing structure is not as opaque to me as they'd probably wish. Just looking at Comcast's "best offers" in my area on their website, using only the following packages (generally the most common in their class): Digital Starter for TV, which is what used to be called Expanded Basic Cable (at least $70/mo standalone); Performance Internet (10-25 Mbps; $60-70/mo standalone); Unlimited Nationwide Voice ($40/mo standalone):

          Triple Play is $100/mo for 1 year, then $125/mo for the next 2 years, then goes up to at least $145/mo. That can be reduced with a 2-year contract to $80/mo for 1 year, $115/mo for the second year, then $125 and $145 as before.

          Internet and Voice alone (with no TV) are $50/mo for 1 year, then $75/mo for the next year, then $90/mo after that. So to add TV, you pay $50/mo more the first year ($30 with ridiculous contract), $50/mo the second year ($40 with contract), $35/mo the third year (the only real deal), then up to $55/mo (which is still a discount off the TV-only rate).

          Without voice service, the offer for just TV and Internet is $90/mo for 1 year, then $120/mo thereafter. With a 2-year contract you can drop that to $80/mo for 1 year, $100/mo the next year, then $120/mo as before.

          Internet alone (no voice nor TV) is $40/mo for 1 year, then $55/mo for the next year, then $65/mo. So adding the TV service will cost you $50/mo more the first year ($40 with ridiculous contract), $65/mo more the second year ($45 with contract), then $55/mo thereafter.

          These are just prices in my area, but this is actually one of the cheaper Comcast areas for TV service at least partly due to the broadcast stations not demanding a big cut (they want audience share to sell local ads, mostly). Limited Basic is still $10/mo here, as opposed to $30 in big cities, and the other TV packages are also still somewhat cheaper.

          They are new-customer offers, though; if you are already signed up for TV and you're still within the 2-year promo period, it's quite possible the TV could be effectively free for the next little while since they won't give you the new-customer offer on Internet alone. After the promo period expires, you'll certainly be paying more to have TV than not.

    •  Baseball (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      Are you going to see whatever your local baseball team is, instead of watching baseball on TV? That's what I do.

      •  I'd love to go see the Giants (0+ / 0-)

        or the A's on a regular basis... I could BART to either quite cheaply.  However, decent seats start about $50 a whack, and even bleachers are
        $12-$15, and that's only on some kind of special offer.  Ridiculous.

        I thought of going to Arizona last spring to see some pro baseball cheaply.  The seats for Giants games were about as much as seats in SF during the season.

        Sports is going the way of all other commercial ventures -- for the rich only.

        College may be a better deal, I  should check that out... but college isn't at the same level.

        How children dance to the unlived lives of their parents. Rilke

        by ceebee7 on Mon Jul 28, 2014 at 06:41:19 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  College ball in SF Bay area (0+ / 0-)

          U. of SF was playing pretty good ball a few years back. You've also got Cal, Stanford, and Santa Clara.
          For minor league ball (which, hopefully, means inexpensive tickets), you have the San Jose Giants and the San Rafael Pacifics. (Damn, the Pacifics are charging $20 for reserved seats. The Dons are probably better bang for buck.)

  •  >THIS< Is Exactly Why I Won't Take Cable! (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    bongojazz, Byblis, ceebee7, cville townie

    As is have not since Bill Clinton's first term.

    "The Democrats and the Republicans are equally corrupt where money is concerned. It's only in the amount where the Republicans excel." ~ Will Rogers

    by Lefty Coaster on Mon Jul 28, 2014 at 04:57:19 PM PDT

  •  Conservatives are AFRAID of "free market" they... (6+ / 0-)

    …don't control.

  •  I love hearing so much self-congratulation (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
  •  FOX has higher ratings than other cable news (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    lorell, cville townie

    The rate cable subscribers pay for any given channel is a complex formula. MSNBC is part of the larger NBC network system, if it were a stand alone channel the cost would be different.  FOX has higher ratings and can command a higher price.  It's a business decision made by the cable companies and advertisers.

    There are better reasons to go after FOX.  IMO.

  •  Fox News Tax!!!! Ha Ha. Can't wait to share that (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Elizaveta, roberb7, llywrch, cville townie

    fact with my tea bagger neighbors!  Have not had tv in my house for 10 years.  Livestream NetFlix, Hulu,  Livestream free most bike races, track meets. If it's NFL,'s down to the local bar...not a bad way to spend an afternoon...If i could pick and pay for only 5 tv stations i'd get satellite.  

    I'm just wasting a great big Corporation and the entire fund. The girders of Wall Street And the temples of money. And the high priests Of the expense account. And Im wasting the whole thing. J. Strummer

    by bongojazz on Mon Jul 28, 2014 at 05:03:32 PM PDT

    •  Have a relative in San Fran (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      who watches sports events like the World Cup at a local corner coffee shop. So if you're not into bars and want to take the kids....

      •  I'm in a very small town. The coffee shop (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        is part of the bar/restaurant!  It's a pretty nice spot.  Non-smoking too.

        I'm just wasting a great big Corporation and the entire fund. The girders of Wall Street And the temples of money. And the high priests Of the expense account. And Im wasting the whole thing. J. Strummer

        by bongojazz on Mon Jul 28, 2014 at 05:44:33 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  cut th cord! (4+ / 0-)

    I after Super Bowl.   its kind of a relief not to go down the mindless rathole of TV sports [not that i can't waste tons o time on the intertubes...]

    But the ads are less obtrusive or at least it seems i can ignore them.

    i did stream some NBA final action- but w/o the convenience of a remote, i discovered my heart wasn't in it... so more actual life got lived 'round here!  I have made some progress on my resolution to read more books/lengthy articles. Fishing/camping/boatbuilding/business were paid attention..

    NFL season will be tough- [might need a 12 step program come regular season ] but so far i'm stayin' 'clean'

    You can do this.....!

  •  Holy John D. Rockefellar! (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Legitimate corporations would never be that underhanded.

    We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for victims of our nation and for those it calls enemy.... --ML King "Beyond Vietnam"

    by Gooserock on Mon Jul 28, 2014 at 05:05:10 PM PDT

  •  Unfortunately I would still have to buy it. I h... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Unfortunately I would still have to buy it. I have to watch faux enough to know what to expect when I see mom for debunking!!!

  •  my daddy always sed (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    chopping wood was good exercise.

    "... If it wasn't for sports, I would've cut the chord ..."

    > coff auto-correct coff <

    TRAILHEAD of accountability for Bush-2 Crimes? -- Addington's Perpwalk.

    by greenbird on Mon Jul 28, 2014 at 05:07:18 PM PDT

  •  Its precisely why I wont get cable (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    I have an overpriced internet connection now, and the cable provider periodically calls me with a "good deal" for cable.  I'm pleased to tell them I refuse to subsidize Faux news.  I can pick up a few channels with a digital antennae, but seldom watch tv anyway.

    I do hate waiting an extra 8 months or so to see Game of Thrones, though..

    Democrats give you the Bill of Rights; Republicans sell you a bill of goods!

    by barbwires on Mon Jul 28, 2014 at 05:08:22 PM PDT

  •  I severed my cable long ago. (4+ / 0-)

    I don't subscribe to any television services. I watch almost no television at all. I get a few over the air channels with a digital antenna, but even that is not worth watching.

    I don't miss watching television.

    If music be the food of love, then laughter is its queen, and likewise, if behind is in front, then dirt in truth is clean.

    by glb3 on Mon Jul 28, 2014 at 05:08:50 PM PDT

  •  Too funny (0+ / 0-)

    I'm such a sting progressive. I only watch.....

    You best believe it does

    by HangsLeft on Mon Jul 28, 2014 at 05:10:10 PM PDT

  •  If a sports junky like me can quit (5+ / 0-)

    Anyone can. Feels great. I'm reading more too.

  •  I've already go a la carte (5+ / 0-)

    No cable!

    If I want to see sports, I go to a LOCAL sports venue.   Here we have a greate soccer team, a not so good hockey team and a professional college team (hahaha).   I could drive to see one of two baseball/football teams that are with 2 hours of me, or I could go to a local sports bar and add some money to the local economy instead subsidizing  Faux News.  

    If I want to watch movies on demand, I have netflix and amazon instant video.   Also still have a video store up the street and my local Library has movies for loan.

    If I want PBS/CBS/NBC/ABC/CW plus some Spanish channels, I got it over the air for FREE!

    Cable TV?  Meh.

    The Republican party has become the politburo of capitalism. It seeks to direct the direction this country is going NO MATTER WHAT WE THE PEOPLE THINK.

    by tarminian on Mon Jul 28, 2014 at 05:13:50 PM PDT

  •  I kinda' like what you do with chords, tho. :o) (0+ / 0-)

    Dance lightly upon the Earth, Sing her songs with wild abandon, Smile upon all forms of Life ...and be well.

    by LinSea on Mon Jul 28, 2014 at 05:15:56 PM PDT

  •  The hospital my family uses (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    JeffW, cville townie

    Blocks MSNBC and Comedy Central. Those channels are replaced by in house medical education channels.

    St. John Health System in the Tulsa area.

    They do allow FNC on their TVs though.

    The Senate has no guts. The House has no brains.

    by gossamer1234 on Mon Jul 28, 2014 at 05:18:51 PM PDT

  •  Fux Noise has artificially inflated ratings.... (6+ / 0-)

    ...from all the businesses that have the shit blaring from every teevee in the place, regardless of who's watching or not.

    The other day a truck driver called Joe Madison and described his personal pushback against the Fux Noise Truck Stop Assault-he bought a self-programming Universal Remote (probably got it in the truck stop store!) and he goes around changing all the teevees to something other than Fux Noise!  

    "Ronald Reagan is DEAD! His policies live on but we're doing something about THAT!"

    by leftykook on Mon Jul 28, 2014 at 05:28:53 PM PDT

  •  It's Much More Than TV (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    slampros, Metric Only, cville townie

    Welcome to one of the biggest cans of worms in politics today.  Telecoms are hard at work making a mess of civilization as we know it; capturing news outlets, bundling what they want you to view, attacking net neutrality to kill off alternatives, pushing for trade agreements such as TPP to turn copyright law into a weapon for maximizing their grip on what the world can access.

    I would suggest making sure there's an internet worth hooking up to, whether or not you feel the need to cut the cable TV cord.

    Moyers & Company /  Susan Crawford Interview. Feb 08, 2013

    "After the (job losses) and (austerity) they won't be the same human beings you remember. Slaves?. . let's just say, they'll be satisfied with less" -Naomi Klein's Shock Doctrine, as explained by Ming the Merciless.

    by Softlanded on Mon Jul 28, 2014 at 05:30:55 PM PDT

  •  If I had a nickel... (5+ / 0-)

    for every time I'd heard someone say, "If it wasn't for sports, I would've cut the cord a long time ago," I'd start my own sports-only cable company!

  •  You're also paying to watch commercials (7+ / 0-)

    Lots and lots of them.  We cut the cord a little over a year ago and it's been fine.  You just have to get pissed off enough at the BS that cable and satellite TV has become and you realize it's not worth it.  

    •  I remember hearing an anecdote (maybe on (6+ / 0-)

      NPR?) of some woman whose daughter had only watched programs through Netflix for the first 4 years of her life.  Then one day the kid watched a real tv for the first time and started screaming when the ads came on because she couldn't make them stop or go away!  I consider this to be a harbinger of future viewing preferences, even here in ad saturated America.   Right now through NetFlix, iTunes, Amazon streaming, and the occasional torrented file, it is incredibly rare for me to come across a commercial.  It is nice not having to pay the cable company to watch ad infested programming.

  •  If I had the choice (0+ / 0-)

    I'd leave the Fox and jettison the effing sports—now that's a tax.

  •  I cut the cord three years ago for TV. Still use (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Miggles, Rashaverak, cville townie

    Comcast for internet due to lack of a real alternative, but they sure do suck.

    When I dropped the TV part, I was willing to pay for a few channels of my choice, but of course they won't offer a bare bones package like I want.  Internet costs me about $50/month and I use digital over the air broadcast and Netflix for the tiny amount of TV I watch.

    Hearing this makes me glad I made the choice I did.  All I miss is watching my favorite baseball team, but have found listening on the radio to be almost as good, plus I can be doing other stuff.

    "Don't buy upgrades....ride UP grades." -Eddy Merckx

    by Delta Overdue on Mon Jul 28, 2014 at 05:40:28 PM PDT

  •  Sports? You can watch it all online. (3+ / 0-)

    Maybe not HD because of shit bandwidth, but fucking the man to me is way more important than some dumb game.

  •  People are just too addicted to their TV. (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    bongojazz, ceebee7, Rashaverak

    I don't have the TV hooked up.

    "It's no measure of health being well adjusted to a profoundly sick society"

    by buckshot face on Mon Jul 28, 2014 at 05:41:37 PM PDT

  •  Wow! (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    One of the few times that you get what you pay for.

    Fox 89 cents
    CNN 57 cents
    MSNBC 18 cents

    •  Wow !!!! (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      cville townie

      89 cents per month
      $10.68 per year
      There are approximately 100 million subscribers in US
      Fox is making $1.068 Billion per year from subscriptions
      Advertising more than doubles this

      If cable were A la carte, then Fox would have less than 4 million subscribers (probably less)
      4 million * $10.68 = $42.72 million per year
      Advertising revenue would also be significantly reduced.

  •  excuse me (0+ / 0-)

    fox & news are oxymorons.

  •  I haven't (0+ / 0-)

    read through all the comments, so this has probably been mentioned in some form.  But you pay something for all the stations on cable.  The most is ESPN which I believe is around 5 dollars a month per subscriber.  The 89 cents for Fox is actually pretty cheap  There is a web site where you can find out what the subscriber fees are.  Like the author of this blog if It wasn't for sports I would cut the chord too.  How ever there are shows on HBO and Showtime I like so I don't know what I would do about those  Ala Carte would be nice, but there are pros and cons about that as well.  I have read where it could be just as costly as it is now.  

  •  I agree with kos! (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    If it wasn't for sports, I would've cut the chord a long time ago. This makes me doubly wish I could.
    My reasons for not cutting the cord...

    1) See quote above, I like watching sports

    2) I need my BBC America (Doctor Who)

    3) trying to convince the wife she can still see her Lifetime and Hallmark via streaming

    I would love to tell time warner to shove it!

    Never underestimate stupid. Stupid is how reTHUGlicans win!

    by Mannie on Mon Jul 28, 2014 at 05:57:00 PM PDT

  •  How about cable cos offer 12 slot, 25 slot, 100... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    How about cable cos offer 12 slot, 25 slot, 100 slot etc 'channel plans' and you can pick 'em?

    Cable cos. are truly 1 of the evilest of evil industries.

  •  cutting the cord (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    ceebee7, Rashaverak, cville townie

    I cut the cable cord a year ago.  Put up a hd antenna (about $50) and back-wired the house (very easy to do) so that I use the various cable lines installed by (evil) Comcast to now watch the major networks and 3 pbs stations (and and a couple other obscure stations) for free -- and I get better internet service since the internet stream comes in on a line without competing with tv feed.  

    Also, when cable company tries to tell you that if you drop tv and just keep internet that your rate will increase, that is almost always only true for some 6-12 month special deal, after which your rates will go up above the internet-only rates.

    AT&T just started offering internet service in my area at about 37% less cost than Comcast.  I threw a party the day I could finally cut all ties with Comcast.

  •  Fox tax (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    ceebee7, Rashaverak, cville townie

    I've never paid for cable in my 64 years, and I don't plan to start.  I have to admit there are some sports and shows like Cosmos that would be nice to watch.  My strict policy with Fox is I won't watch it unless I can download a commercial free bittorrent.  If I'm at someone else's house and they have Fox on, besides complaining, I add every advertiser onto my boycott list.  If I'm at a bar or restaurant, I politely ask them to change the channel, and if that fails, I leave.  No Fox content is that important to me...

  •  Fox's Demographic Six Sense (0+ / 0-)

    Dead People  see them

    I want 1 less Tiny Coffin, Why Don't You? Support The President's Gun Violence Plan.

    by JML9999 on Mon Jul 28, 2014 at 06:30:31 PM PDT

  •  this is EXACTLY why I cancelled cable... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    about 5 years ago. My money was going to support Fox, as well as other crap (like CNN). Yeah, there are some things I miss, but it's just not worth it to me, and I couldn't stand the idea of my money going to those people.

  •  Another reason I ought to check out (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Amazon Fire TV.  I've been hesitating on closing out my Directv account, but maybe it's time to do so.  Why should I subsidize junk tv?

  •  So it isn't that big a deal after all? (0+ / 0-)
    "If it wasn't for sports, I would've cut the chord a long time ago. This makes me doubly wish I could."
  •  You could always take mescaline (0+ / 0-)

    and just watch the walls or look out the window.

    Just a thought.

  •  I cut DirecTV last week. Listen to Rachel via p... (0+ / 0-)

    I cut DirecTV last week. Listen to Rachel via podcast. I will go to a pub for the big Patriots games, if I really need to.

  •  A Correction (0+ / 0-)
    Not only was 2013 their worst year since 2007, but 2014 isn't looking much rosier
    That statement implies that 2014 is about the same or a little bit better than 2013. However, the link he provides says
    In total viewers, the network was down 20% in total day and 16% in primetime compared to Q2 2013 [...] In the demo, the network had its lowest quarterly performance since Q2 2001.
    In other words it should actually read

    Not only was 2013 their worst year since 2007, but 2014 is already looking worse.

    Not a huge deal, but worth mentioning.

  •  No TV. I have internet; which gives me streamin... (0+ / 0-)

    No TV. I have internet; which gives me streaming movies, amazing podcasts, and Daily Kos, what else do I need?

  •  proposals for plans similar to (0+ / 0-)

    congestion pricing for bandwidth might eliminate a Fox News Tax and allow a more equitable pricing structure as well as reducing any argument against Net Neutrality, as well as making is a more competitive (but never a "Free") market in the face of corporate dominance

    Warning - some snark may be above‽ (-9.50; -7.03)‽ eState4Column5©2013 "If we appear to seek the unattainable, then let it be known that we do so to avoid the unimaginable." (@eState4Column5)

    by annieli on Mon Jul 28, 2014 at 07:39:40 PM PDT

  •  I've noticed (on my Fox supporting cable) (0+ / 0-)

    that  ads for specific Fox shows are starting  to crop up.  O'Reilly and one of the blondes are two shows  I remember seeing ads for.  Yesterday, Fox Business "sponsored" a showing of Moneyball on a cable  station, with them having little vignettes of business info  with Cavuto (I think) during some of the commercial breaks.  I presumed the ratings  for Fox News and Fox Business must have gotten really bad!

    I may pay to have Fox News pumped into my house, but I promise it is NEVER watched here.  If we  ever get al la carte cable, it won't come into this house any more!

    My cable has never carried Fox Business, thank goodness.

  •  Goggle Fiber (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    cville townie

    Next year my area becomes eligible and I will cut the cable cord for good. I really only use the internet and with the speed of 1GB a second, there will not be any buffering/lagging no matter how many live streams or downloads are going.

    Even now I can get all the shows I want to watch off youtube, Hulu, Netflix, Amazon and any number of alternatives. I actually like watching a whole season at a time on my schedule without commercials. Even paying for cable internet and the shows individually is cheaper than the whole cable bundle.

    It will be great, unless the FCC gives cable and cell phone companies the internet.

    "How did you ever learn to talk with that brain? - Walsh to Jayne, Firefly.

    by WTFurious on Mon Jul 28, 2014 at 08:27:35 PM PDT

  •  If it wasn't for sports (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    cville townie

    Go outside and shoot some hoops, or organize a flag football game.

    Organized sports are part of the problem, are you not entertained*?

    *$24.99 a month with a two year minimum and penalty for early cancellation.

    I would tell you the only word in the English language that has all the vowels in order but, that would be facetious.

    by roninkai on Mon Jul 28, 2014 at 08:28:59 PM PDT

  •  I Would Pay an Extra $5 for Sports (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    cville townie

    If Directv would eliminate Fox News Channel from my service.

    We will never have the elite, smart people on our side. - Rick Santorum

    by easong on Mon Jul 28, 2014 at 09:28:09 PM PDT

  •  No Need for Cable when you have the internet (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    cville townie

    I cut cable 4 years ago and don't miss it. I watch all of my sports (out of market, since I am a Seattle fan living in Arizona) via various live streaming websites and watch MSNBC occasionally via hulkus. With the internet and NPR, who needs to pay $100/month for cable?

  •  I'm not paying for Fox (0+ / 0-)

    Verizon has a package that includes MSNBC but not Fox. I switched to that about 6 months ago when searching for a way to cut my cable bill. By negotiating with Verizon and dropping to that package, I ended up saving almost $2000 over two years. The only thing I miss is the Comedy Channel, but Hulu pretty much takes care of that. That's my "Drunk History'.

  •  We'd cut the cord if our DSL service was (0+ / 0-)

    reliable enough for constant streaming. As it's not, we remain with Dish.

    We briefly considered switching to Comcast but after I priced it out, Dish was (amazingly) the cheaper deal.

    Dawkins is to atheism as Rand is to personal responsibility. Russia Today=FoxNews, Seralini=Wakefield. yadda yadda.

    by terrypinder on Tue Jul 29, 2014 at 04:47:19 AM PDT

  •  I already cut the cord. (0+ / 0-)

    Almost three years ago, I cancelled Directv, bought a Roku and  have never looked back.  I have Netflix and Hulu Plus and the internet provides a wide range of options. I do miss live UK basketball games, but friends fill in the holes or I listen on the radio.  And I miss HBO. What I don't miss is a monthly bill of $117.

    "This isn't for the ones who would gladly swallow everything their leaders would have them know". Mary Chapin Carpenter

    by malenda on Tue Jul 29, 2014 at 05:32:54 AM PDT

  •  Tried to end it- (0+ / 0-)

    Had a contract written for a dedi IP stating Internet svc only, and that is looking like a year and a half ago n o w

    I KNOW if I fire up tivo there will be no prollem cruising the bile that infects folks thru the subtle vibrations that enhance a perception of suggestive awareness...

    That is correct- Doesn't matter if your in cog diss or a Maharishi type; that device and the lurid content projecting and flashing one way, in paced voicings is attempting to implant suggestions in the sub-conscious mind...  ALL PR does it; and no, NPR is knot excluded; they, by far are the WORST offenders aka ethically deprived 1% monsters...

    Anyway; tried and didn't fail because the source of negativity and falsehood is OFF aka no power allowed-


    Oh and the "sports" excuse is so very lame...  

    Free some space in the falsehoods that steal real life in any given  n o w , and Go run 9 miles or ride 54 miles, or hike straight up a hill path; kayak down a river, ANYTHING but the stereo-typical bile output device with 57 channels and nothing good true or beautiful on-

    Evidence that contradicts the ruling belief system is held to extraordinary standards, while evidence that entrenches it is uncritically accepted. -Carl Sagan

    by RF on Tue Jul 29, 2014 at 06:16:36 AM PDT

  •  ESPN (0+ / 0-)

    is just as bad.  I don't know the numbers, but have repeatedly read articles on how I am paying a ton for ESPN, even though I never watch it, and would dump it if possible.

    I am not religious, and did NOT say I enjoyed sects.

    by trumpeter on Tue Jul 29, 2014 at 07:58:20 AM PDT

  •  ... (0+ / 0-)

    Which sports?

    Its not perfect, but you can get most through a combination of an Antenna, MLB online, DirectTV NFL Sunday ticket package, and NHL Game Center.  It's of course not perfect, but it does go a long way.  NBA is terrible with their offering though, so there is an issue.

  •  I cut the cable.. I didn't know I was subsidizi... (0+ / 0-)

    I cut the cable.. I didn't know I was subsidizing fox... I just realm hate sports. Most of your bill goes to crap like espn

  •  I'd drop Fox and all the sports channels (0+ / 0-)

    if I could pick a la carte. I can't cut satellite completely because where we are if you don't have it or cable you get exactly 2 channels through the air because of the hills around here.

  •  should this be a DailyKos fundraiser? (0+ / 0-)

    if you're a cable subscriber you should match your Fox subsidy with a DailyKos subsidy - just 89 cents a month to DailyKos!

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site