IBJNews

Tribune Broadcasting says no DirecTV deal

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Tribune Broadcasting said there's been no settlement with DirecTV Inc. in their contract negotiations, which means DirecTV subscribers in 19 U.S. markets, including Indianapolis, have lost access to certain programming.

In a statement late Saturday, Tribune Broadcasting said that without a deal in place, by federal law DirecTV cannot carry the signal of Tribune's local television stations after midnight, when the agreement expires.

In Indianapolis, WXIN (Fox59) and WTTV Channel 4 were blacked out starting Sunday.

Other affected markets include New York, Chicago, New Orleans and Philadelphia.

Tribune president Nils Larsen called the situation "extremely unfortunate."

In its own statement, DirecTV said it had hoped Tribune would allow its programming to remain up while negotiations continue. But as it struck midnight in each time U.S. time zone, Tribune channels carried by DirecTV were set to go blank.

Earlier, DirecTV said that it had accepted the financial terms that Tribune's management offered it by telephone two days ago. But Tribune came out with its own statement shortly after, saying that it had not reached a deal or come to terms with DirecTV on any aspect of the contract.

DirecTV fired back, saying in another statement that it had a handshake deal with Tribune on Thursday with an agreed upon rate for their channels.

"Their actions are the true definition of 'bad faith' in every sense of the term," DirecTV said.

The satellite television provider also wondered whether Tribune was having difficulty negotiating because of its bankruptcy process.

"Threatening station blackouts to extract an exorbitant fee for all of Tribune's content may provide an improved return for certain banks and hedge funds, but is not in the interest of its viewers and is not a cure for bankruptcy," DirectTV said.

Negotiations have been ongoing for months.

DirecTV subscribers in the markets where Tribune owns the local Fox affiliate could lose access to programs such as "American Idol" and Major League Baseball. Where Tribune owns the local affiliate of The CW Network, DirecTV subscribers will be unable to see shows such as "Gossip Girl" and "Vampire Diaries."

Larsen said in a statement on Thursday that if an agreement is not reached, DirecTV subscribers will still be able to watch programs on broadcast stations for free in high definition with a TV antenna or by signing up with an alternative pay-TV provider.

Tribune's broadcasting group owns or runs 23 television stations, WGN America on national cable and Chicago radio station WGN-AM. Its publishing arm includes daily newspapers such as the Los Angeles Times, Chicago Tribune and The Baltimore Sun.

DirecTV serves 32 million people in the U.S. and Latin America.

ADVERTISEMENT

  • It's free
    Tribune programming is up 24/7 and it's free. If you're in NW Indy you probably won't even need an antenna to receive it, plus you'll get a higher quality, un-compressed HD picture when you get it over the air.
  • Wish more would drop Direct TV and they'd go out of business.
    Worst company I ever had to TRY to deal with. ZERO customer service. Direct TV should be in the dictionary under the definition of Bad Faith.
  • DirecTV v. Tribune
    Might as well settle right now. Come September we're talking the NFL.

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. John, unfortunately CTRWD wants to put the tank(s) right next to a nature preserve and at the southern entrance to Carmel off of Keystone. Not exactly the kind of message you want to send to residents and visitors (come see our tanks as you enter our city and we build stuff in nature preserves...

  2. 85 feet for an ambitious project? I could shoot ej*culate farther than that.

  3. I tried, can't take it anymore. Untill Katz is replaced I can't listen anymore.

  4. Perhaps, but they've had a very active program to reduce rainwater/sump pump inflows for a number of years. But you are correct that controlling these peak flows will require spending more money - surge tanks, lines or removing storm water inflow at the source.

  5. All sewage goes to the Carmel treatment plant on the White River at 96th St. Rainfall should not affect sewage flows, but somehow it does - and the increased rate is more than the plant can handle a few times each year. One big source is typically homeowners who have their sump pumps connect into the sanitary sewer line rather than to the storm sewer line or yard. So we (Carmel and Clay Twp) need someway to hold the excess flow for a few days until the plant can process this material. Carmel wants the surge tank located at the treatment plant but than means an expensive underground line has to be installed through residential areas while CTRWD wants the surge tank located further 'upstream' from the treatment plant which costs less. Either solution works from an environmental control perspective. The less expensive solution means some people would likely have an unsightly tank near them. Carmel wants the more expensive solution - surprise!

ADVERTISEMENT