Time Warner Pulls ABC

May 1, 2000 7:20 AM

Time Warner Pulls ABC Get used to this kind of thing, as mega corp. 1 takes on mega corp. 2 to control what you see.
posted by alana (9 comments total)

I really dislike this type of cat-and-mouse.

On a similar note, our area used to be served by Time Warner, which used to be MetroVision, but it's now AT&T. AT&T said, "We won't increase your rates!" They gave us Disney Channel as part of basic cable. Then the rates went up $2. It's $38/mo., for *just basic cable* and no movie channels.

I dislike the fact that I have no choice when it comes to cable. I could get a dish, yes.

Paul
posted by hijinx at 10:24 AM on May 1, 2000

I thought problems like this were solved before this cat and mouse game. I thought something about the deals, when the major TV networks ended up buying and covering sports franchises, for example when Disney/ABC/ESPN bought the Angels, were worked out before hand. The same thing was happening in New York with Warner and the cable company that covered the Yankees. Maybe I have two seperate items confused. But as far as the practice is concerned, I wouldn't be surprised if a suit was filed that the huge cable companies are "harming" consumers.
posted by brent at 10:41 AM on May 1, 2000

It's interesting that the link for this story comes from one of the interested parties. Admittedly, I don't see a whole lot of bias here, or from the other side.
posted by harmful at 11:14 AM on May 1, 2000

Yeah most of that ABC News article is AP anyway.
posted by bvanveen at 12:16 PM on May 1, 2000

It's all abnout greed! Wait, isn't that a _Fox_ game show?
posted by camworld at 1:34 PM on May 1, 2000

Here is Time Warner's offical line on the matter.
posted by mathowie at 4:00 PM on May 1, 2000

Well, responding to Brent, part of the issue here seems to be an attempt by Disney to get better deals on its cable properties in addition to the broadcast rights issue.
posted by dhartung at 5:11 PM on May 1, 2000

Yeah I understand Disney's view, but the item I had in mind is the dispute FOX had some time ago in New York. Here again is company v. company which is why I thought the two normally dealt with contracts before things turned ugly. I wonder how Disney will handle the situation and yield to Warner or if the FCC will step in.
posted by brent at 9:32 PM on May 1, 2000

AT&T won't increase your rates, but the content providers certainly will jack up the costs of content to the point where the cable company will have to raise rates to maintain the level of profit they were getting before the cost increase.

Disney/ABC properties are really getting expensive. I used to work for a cable company, and a constant topic of conversation was about the higher costs of carrying ESPN, and having to carry all their other little sports networks, and all those new projects Disney is throwing out there.

ABC was not cut off in Minneapolis. The reason given in the Star Tribune seems to imply that the cutoff was only done to Disney-owned stations. The ABC affiliate in St. Paul is owned by another company, which has a separate contract with Time Warner apart from the contracts to carry other Disney properties.

posted by Electric Elf at 10:21 PM on May 2, 2000