Monday, October 13, 2008

Two sides: KXAN vs Time Warner







I have been hearing a lot about the disputes between KXAN and Time Warner Cable that has ultimately resulted in the loss of KXAN in Time Warner's cable line up.  What a bummer!  Say goodbye to Heroes, 30 Rock, The Office, and Law and Order: SVU.  Most importantly, say goodbye to the SuperBowl!!!  Ouch.
So what happened?  If you are like me, you have heard or seen commercials that Time Warner has been advertising.  It directs you to a website to see facts about the dispute.  Time Warner says that KXAN wants to charge customers for the free signal they are receiving.  Because Time Warner really "cares" about their customers, they decided to pull the channel.

But we all know, there are always two-sides to a coin.  So, what's KXAN's story?

KXAN's general manager, Eric Lassberg,  told 
The Austinist in an interview their side of the
 story.  Lassberg states: "Our dispute is about fair and equitable treatment. Time Warner charges its cable subscribers a fee to provide KXAN-TV in its channel line-up. It also charges its cable subscribers a fee to provide cable networks, which cable subscribers may or may not watch. Time Warner shares that fee with the cable networks; however, it does not share that fee with us. In essence, it takes our signal for free and resells it for a profit."

This changes the story a bit, huh?  I think KXAN has a right to be upset, even though I am upset with the decision to pull the channel.  KXAN could have done a better job of advertising their point of view if they had commercials or a website like Time Warner did.  So, the question remains... who's side are you on?

3 comments:

sallreen said...

It appears to be all-too representative of Suddenlink's lack of customer regard that it would think that a Temple, Texas station reporting on news in Temple and Waco will be regarded by the folks in Georgetown and other communities it serves in the Austin market as an adequate substitute for one of the strongest Austin news stations. It is also a far more expensive and wasteful proposition for Suddenlink than the modest license fees sought by KXAN.
-----------------------
Sally
Viral Marketing

sallreen said...

It appears to be all-too representative of Suddenlink's lack of customer regard that it would think that a Temple, Texas station reporting on news in Temple and Waco will be regarded by the folks in Georgetown and other communities it serves in the Austin market as an adequate substitute for one of the strongest Austin news stations. It is also a far more expensive and wasteful proposition for Suddenlink than the modest license fees sought by KXAN.
-----------------------
Sally
Viral Marketing

Jessica Mosley said...

Ah yes, Time Warner. This is some messed up stuff going on with this particular debacle. I don't agree with how either party is handling this. KXAN should have allowed more viewing time for the channel and should have put more information on their side out there and made it easy to find. Time Warner also cannot argue to me that they are concerned about charging me more money, that has never been concern before. It is obvious that their concern is that the extra money would not go to them but to KXAN. That is what they concerned about.

Privacy Policy

All visitors to this site refer to the privacy policy of SEU.