May 2010
Multichannel News;5/17/2010, Vol. 31 Issue 20, p28
Several letters to the editor are presented in response to articles in previous issues including "Supremes Conferences on Must-Carry Challenge," in the May 3, 2010 issue, and "NAB: Retransmission Consent Regime Is Working," in the May 10, 2010 issue.


Related Articles

  • TALKBACK.  // Multichannel News;11/21/2011, Vol. 32 Issue 44, p34 

    Two letters to the editors are presented in response to articles in previous issues including "No End in Sight to Escalating Sports Rights: Financial Analysts" in the November 14, 2011 issue and "Noise Picks Up on Hushing Loud Ads" in November 16, 2011 issue.

  • High court upholds `must-carry' rules.  // Advertising Age;4/7/1997, Vol. 68 Issue 14, p40 

    This article reports that the United States Supreme Court ruled as constitutional Congressional rules forcing cable television systems to carry local broadcast television stations.

  • Talkback.  // Multichannel News;9/27/2010, Vol. 31 Issue 36, p42 

    Several letters to the editor are presented in response to previous articles including "TV Everywhere: Sony's Singer Sets Bar High For Content Distribution's Future" in the September 23, 2010 issue, "AT&T: Pre-emptive Strike on Paid Prioritization Could Hurt Broadband Plans" in the September 17,...

  • MIB warns MSOs, LCOs against removing mandatory channels.  // Indiantelevision.com;6/18/2015, p7 

    The article reports on the Indian government's warning to multi-system operators (MSO) and local cable operators in not carrying required channels Doordashan, Lok Sabha TV, and Rajya Sabha TV as notified by the Information and Broadcasting Ministry. Topics discussed include Cable TV Networks...

  • MMDS (wireless cable): A capital ideal. Brown, Rich // Broadcasting & Cable;5/1/95, Vol. 125 Issue 18, p16 

    Reports on the financial prospects for multichannel, multipoint distribution service (MMDS) wireless cable companies in the United States. Merger plans between wireless cable companies; Wave of public offerings in industry; Impact of Cable Act of 1992; Comparative data on industry's growth. ...

  • Loss of must carry doesn't worry broadcasters. McAvoy, Kim // Broadcasting & Cable;5/23/94, Vol. 124 Issue 21, p58 

    Reports on the reaction of television broadcasters on the possible rejection of the must-carry provisions of the 1992 Cable Act by the Supreme Court. Use of retransmission consent to gain long-term carriage agreement; Types of broadcasters that will be affected by the rejection of the...

  • Broadcaster: Keep Must-Carry As Is. Hearn, Ted // Multichannel News;3/22/2004, Vol. 25 Issue 12, p24 

    Reports on the stand of Spanish broadcaster Entravision Holdings Inc. on broadening the carriage rules for digital television. Demand of several television stations in the U.S. for a U.S. federal rule to require cable systems to carry their multiple digital-programming services in an expansion...

  • D.C. FOLLIES: MARTIN'S FLIP-FLOP. Paskowski, Marianne // Television Week;6/26/2006, Vol. 25 Issue 26, p12 

    The article discusses issues concerning multicast must-carry broadcasting in the U.S. as of June 2006. Presently, under must-carry law, TV stations that opt for mandatory cable carriage get it for only one signal. But broadcasters have been pushing for years for multiple-signal must-carry that...

  • Feds declare Tucson suburb part of Phoenix. Hatfield, David // Inside Tucson Business;5/8/2006, Vol. 15 Issue 48, p3 

    The article discusses the problems of satellite subscribers in view of a proposal suggesting SaddleBrooke, a Tucson suburb, to be considered as the part of Phoenix, Arizona. It is noted that DirecTV Inc. is demarcating the local cable television markets using the boundaries defined by the...


Read the Article


Sorry, but this item is not currently available from your library.

Try another library?
Sign out of this library

Other Topics