Time Warner Cable Drops Current TV Upon Sale To Al Jazeera

[Tempest]

Source: Huffington Post

Time Warner Cable pulled the plug on Current TV just hours after news of the cable channel's sale to Al Jazeera became official.

"This channel is no longer available on Time Warner Cable," read an on-screen message where Current TV used to be found.

A Time Warner Cable spokesman said in a statement that "our agreement with Current will be terminated and we will no longer be carrying the channel."

"Time-Warner cable shows abject political and journalistic cowardice by dropping Current because of Al Jazeera deal," tweeted Dan Gilmor, a technology writer and founding director of the Knight Center for Digital Media Entrepreneurship at Arizona State University.

Read more: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/02/time-warner-al-jazeera-current-tv_n_2399370.html

[JohnnyRingo]

1. damn it

I'm hooked on Stephanie Miller in the mornings.

No word in the article about the deal between Al and al-.

bastards

[judesedit]

19. KTNF Eden Prairie Minnesota. You can still hear her and many other progressives

[liberalmike27]

73. I Was On Other Thread

One suggestion if you've got an old computer is to repurpose it for a computer radio. Steph can still be found on the Internet. It's the only place I ever actually listen to her, as I live in Mobile, AL, and "liberal radio?" What's that?

The other thread mentioned ROKU, increasingly becoming an option. It has Democracy Now, and Free Speech TV. And on one of the links to listen at Steph, I even found Thom Hartmann from 5-8--I used to listen to him all the time, but when he moved from 2-5 it put him at a bad time for me.

Podcasts are available, if you pay by the year, at $5 a pop for Steph, and Hartmann has them too.

There was talk of "Under-performing networks," on the other thread. There is this myth that huge corporations only care about what works. This myth is started, and maintained by the HUGE NETWORKS. Clearly they bury MSNBC deep, and Current more deeply, as to keep viewership to the minimum. If they wanted more viewers, they'd offer Current on the same tier as FOX.

I might add, they bury Bill Maher, and a lot of liberal programming like Oliver Stone documentaries, on Showtime. So the people who need to see these channels, and shows the most, usually don't have that much money to spend on cable. Is anyone wondering why FOX News has the ratings?? It's like the movies opening in all of the theaters, rather than in a few hundred--you can't compete.

So yes, corporations do have a right-wing agenda. If it were true that they would cancel people who didn't perform, we'd be asking "Rush who?" Instead, they carried him for 5 years, profit free. If you don't think corporations have an agenda, to tinker with your thinker, you're being duped, you are post-tinkered.

[Fuddnik]

2. Drop Time Warner cable.

And, if DirecTV drops them, I'll be dropping them also.

[valerief]

27. +1

[leftynyc]

28. That will do nothing

except make you feel better. Do you really think there's a silent groundswell of support in this country for Al Jazeera? You'd probably have more people dropping any cable that carries it.

[just1voice]

35. It would save al least $100 a month in the D.C. area

Cable TV is pure propaganda with 37% commercials.

[leftynyc]

38. Like I said

it would only affect you. Time Warner will suffer no repercussions from this decision.

[crim son]

48. That's the attitude

that ensures no change, ever.

[leftynyc]

55. I live in the real world

Not the one I wish it to be.

[think]

51. From a business perspective it may be wise for DirecTV to KEEP Current

and let Time Warner be the company known for censorship and intolerance for alternative points of view.

Just a thought....

[liberalmike27]

74. Dropping Time Warner

Is a great idea I think--you should.

I just lowered my cable tier, sadly losing Steph and Cenk, but from what I hear they won't be around too much longer.

No, I don't think people will cancel their cable because Al Jazeera America comes on--if they wanted to, they can keep the same name. My guess is, it'll be far more accurate than the weekend millionaires' clubs that appear on our network channels now, where they sit up and talk, average incomes in tens' of millions.

By the way, I think had Current actually tried to go with the talk, more liberal format from the start, Al Gore might have made even more money, and may have not sold. The reporting isn't clear on this subject, most are left to believe the network was liberal talk for the whole 6-7 years of its existence, which is NOT true. It was mostly weird, and idiosyncratic.

[go west young man]

3. Hence the reason media consolidation is never a good thing.

No matter how you slice it this is censorship and prejudice. The irony here is America is screwing itself more than any muslim caliphate ever could.

[abelenkpe]

4. +1000 nt

[onenote]

53. What does this have to do with media consolidation?

I'm very concerned about media consolidation, particularly among local broadcast stations. But how does media consolidation have anything to do with this, unless you're upset that Al Jazeera, which already is in the media business, is being allowed to purchase Current from its owners?

[yurbud]

60. and Al Jazeera is no more interested in the mythical caliphate than the average American is

[CreekDog]

15. you wouldn't like it

though most of us would.

[Judi Lynn]

62. You betcha! n/t

[SunSeeker]

6. Ugg. I guess I should not be surprised.

Maybe Al Jazeera can sue Time Warner, although I am not sure under what theory.

I don't get it. Doesn't a Saudi dude own half of NewsCorp with Rupert Murdoch? No one gives a crap about that so long as they're spewing right wing drivel I guess.

[think]

52. Saudi Prince Alwaleed Bin Talal also invested heavily in Twitter

Should Twitter fear Saudi prince?

By Douglas Rushkoff, Special to CNN
updated 2:35 PM EST, Tue December 20, 2011

(CNN) -- The social media universe has been aghast this week after the revelation that Prince Alwaleed bin Talal of Saudi Arabia has invested $300 million in Twitter. The shock and awe seems to center around the notion that Twitter has been at least partly responsible for the Arab Spring uprisings that directly threaten the Saudi royal family's grip on power. On the surface, anyway, this seems like a contradiction.

Why would the king's nephew be investing in the medium of his family's enemy? Will he attempt to influence the development of the network or try to make it more susceptible to censorship in a regime-threatening emergency? And what of Twitter?...

~snip~

http://www.cnn.com/2011/12/20/opinion/rushkoff-saudi-prince-twitter/index.html

[christx30]

68. Al Jazeera can't sue

Current TV was sold to new owners, so the agreement that TWC had with Current was terminated. TWC didn't have that agreement with Al Jazeera.

[Tarheel_Dem]

7. Expect other carriers to follow suit. nt

[SemperEadem]

42. so far, RCN hasn't dropped it

I was just watching Bill Press this morning.

[Populist_Prole]

8. Well that'll sure give righties some ammunition they'll delight in using

[Trillo]

9. That's an In-Your-Face manipulation, eh?

If they will do this to a contractor, just imagine what they will do, probably have been doing, to mere consumers.

[MADem]

10. Cowardice....stupidity, certainly. That channel is going to be pretty good, I think.

It will have a perspective, but they're going to put some cash into it--I think it will be quality.

[MrModerate]

11. But doesn't Time Warner carry Al Jazeera itself?

I'm not in their market area so I'm not sure. This could be a purely commercial decision.

[LTR]

16. Al Jazeera English has had problems getting on to American cable systems

They wouldn't touch them with a ten foot pole. Ironic, considering the seemingly hundreds of useless, obscure channels already present on their digital systems. AJ bought Current so they could actually get their foot in the door with cable and satellite providers. Smart move, but perhaps they should have waited to see if Tribune was willing to unload WGN America. Now THAT would really raise eyebrows!

[dipsydoodle]

34. Don't even need cable or Sky satellite in the UK

Just an aerial - its a free-to-air channel.

[snot]

12. Terrible. In too many areas, we're allowing near-monopolies of basic infrastructure

without adequate regulation.

It's ridiculously easy for banks to financially throttle Wikileaks or anyone else who might inconvenience them, for Google to force us to relinquish all privacy in exchange for 'net access essential to virtual life, for Time-Warner et al. to censor all we see.

[melm00se]

31. cable TV

has been granted near monopolistic status usually by localities.

local governments started granting cable franchises as far back as the 70's. The reason for this was that pole space was (and still is) a finite commodity and localities didn't want multiple cable strings from multiple providers cluttering up the distribution poles.

[leftyohiolib]

33. they said the same thing about the phone companies but they were still broken up

modualte the different companies on different frequencies and send them down the same pipe

[TheMadMonk]

41. Um, exactly how do you think they cram 500+ channels...

...down the pipe already?

[snot]

64. The point is not that we should never allow monopolies

but that when we do, they must be either directly answerable to the people by being government-owned, or very tightly regulated, to make sure they don't abuse the power that monopoly confers.

What we really don't want is monopoly of essential infrastructure, goods, or services in the hands of an entity the people have no meaningful control over.

[TheMadMonk]

71. You won't get any argument from me there. /nt

[christx30]

69. SDV: Switched digital video

There is a finite amount of bandwidth. So the digital channels are turned off until someone tunes to them. That's why if you don't watch a channel for a long time, it might take a few seconds for it to pop on.

[onenote]

58. Local governments are legally barred from granting exclusive franchises

and have been for more than 20 years. And if cable is such a "monopoly," how is it that I can get pretty much the same content from at least four different providers in my community: Cox Cable, Verizon Fios, Dish, and DirecTV?

[movingviolation]

13. I plan on dropping time warner.

I love watching stephanie millers show in the morning, this move totally pisses me off.

[LTR]

14. Well, Time Warner does own CNN and HLN

Guess they don't want to run the risk of their news operation possibly being embarrassed by Al Jazeera. Might remind viewers of a distant time when CNN aired hard news, as opposed to the bullshit they currently run.

[onenote]

54. No they don't.

Time Warner Inc. owns CNN and HLN. Time Warner Cable and Time Warner Inc are completely separate and independent companies and have been for 3 years. Time Warner Cable still uses the Time Warner name under a license from Time Warner Inc, but the companies have entirely separate management and ownership.

[LTR]

63. I stand corrected

The cable business was spun off a few years ago.

[TeamPooka]

17. Direct TV will keep it.

[CheapShotArtist]

18. So what does this mean?

Will people still be able to get Current TV if we have Comcast?

[shenmue]

20. Not good

Doggone it.

[judesedit]

21. Current TV was one of the only things I watched. Nothing else on so I got rid of cable altogther. I

listen to WTNF Eden Prairie Minnesota.

[defacto7]

22. Al Jazeera has

some of the best news reporting in the world right now. It's a lot less biased than the RW news monopoly in the US.

[just1voice]

32. So true, along with RT

People whom bash both should try watching both. As you said, they blow the doors off of the bleach-blond propaganda networks posing as news in the U.S.. Plus, both are free here in the D.C. area, no need to waste $100 a month on some corrupted cable TV monopoly.

[SemperEadem]

43. I find myself watching

more foreign press on my cable than I do American. I watch CCTV, NHK, and France24 because their coverage is balanced and they discuss regions on the world that American news will never deign to be important enough to cover... because kim kardashian's pregnancy is far more important than what is happening on the other side of the world.

[defacto7]

72. I'm with you...

I look at US news as the last choice in my lineup. It is necessary at times to read or watch US media, but I do my best to not make it my first impression. There's a lot of information out there and you have to get outside the box to find it. It's a sad reflection on US media news.

[liberalmike27]

75. Just added

RT America, and Al Jazeera on my Roku. If you haven't, you should look into one of these devices.

I think most of Current's programming will be canceled, but I'm hoping Cenk (Turkish, so maybe) and Stephanie will continue. I'm not sure if their jocular show will be appreciated on their network, but who knows. We'll see.

I keep hoping they might make an agreement to stream it on a Roku channel.

By the way, I just adjusted my cable down and internet speed, and saved $20 on my bill.

[burrowowl]

70. Yes it does!

[MissNostalgia]

23. My hopes are high but....

Al Jazeera English Ive watched in the past, off and on, online and on LinkTV and they are pretty credible and give content that is hard to come by from regular US News outlets. With that, Im afraid they will be targeted more so than this example in the future. I feel real American journalism is sabotaged over and over again when it comes to radio and TV, and this network will become no better than CNN MSNBC or FOX, in the end going about explaining nothing and conjuring distractions if they aren't careful.

I need AJ English to be like this video below for Current, from 2008 this was the first AJ segment I ever watched, and it was the most authentic raw thing I saw that entire year journalism wise.

[Volaris]

40. How the fuck did we never see THAT on Nightly News brodcasts?????

(OHHHH wait THAT'S right)...

I know we kind of got the Hate-LITE version, but JEZUS...
Do they think this country can't handle it's own idiocy and hatred?

It's like thinking your children are still virginally-minded, and therefore can't talk about the dirty/FUNNY thing you saw on the internet, even though your kids are grown, married, and have kids of their OWN.

Seriously, WTF is WRONG with this Country?

[MissNostalgia]

50. they rarely show Americans.

I feel the more American see who they are and how the rest of the world is they will be shamed into improving. This is one thing I HATE about the cable and network news organizations here in America, they rarely show Americans.

[PFunk]

24. Well Current's still on in columbus, Oh as of this post.

BUT. It's now no longer on their Columbus/Delaware channel line up on the web (it was 226, but now there's a blank space between 225, and 227). So I'm watching to see when it finally goes bye-bye here (probably by weeks end IMO).

And folks wonder why internet TV viewing is becoming more popular.

[PFunk]

39. Well, Current's now off Columbus TWC as of this post.

I only see the 'not in service' screen now. Crap.

[LawnKorn]

25. Does this mean Keith Olbermann now works for Al Jazeera?

[leftynyc]

29. Keith's gone from Current TV

Don't remember if fired or quit but I know he was very unhappy with the production end of his show.

[Bette Noir]

45. He was fired for complaining about the crappy production.

I've lost track of him, but he was initially planning to sue for breach of contract.

[Occulus]

67. He was right to do so

I don't get the network from my provider- it simply isn't on the list- but the clips I saw had production values far below what I expected.

[liberalmike27]

77. I Love Keith's Ideology

And maybe his troubles stemmed from losing his mom and dad fairly close together. But he's left many bridges burning in his rear-view mirror.

He was in on choosing the building, from what I hear--he had editorial control, and he knew it was going to be low definition, he knew it was going to be a new network. Considering they gave him 50 million, if anyone has a case for a lawsuit, it's Al Gore, and Joel Hyatt.

At any other network, if any announcer had taken the open and obvious verbal jabs at his own network and people working for him, he took, they'd be gone quickly. He had many chances. Personally, I wish he'd stuck it out, improved with his staff, and as a regular watcher, they improved steadily.

Personally I think it was him letting his failures to get along with people come out onto television, in blaming others for his own faults. He could've helped make them into a special network. I didn't watch Spitzer, as he's a bit much of a corporate clone, and Granholm never caught on either. I think I would have gone younger for both of those slots. Stephanie, Bill Press in the morning were great slots, and Cenk I followed from MSNBC. I still think it was brave of him to stick up for his principles and move, when they wanted to move him to the weekend show. I like Chris on UP anyway.

Current isn't doing as well as FOX, because FOX is available, even on Extended Basic, without even having the digital tier. If you make it more cheaply available, more people will watch. It is why FOX is the favorite channel, as everyone has it, even people who can't afford to splurge to see liberal programming.

[skeewee08]

26. It's still on Uverse

[JuveDem]

30. CurrentTV is off here

I sent Time Warner an email asking why this was done. This is quite pathetic.

[Liberalynn]

47. Mine is gone too

They could have at least waited until the present line up was replaced.

[RandiFan1290]

36. They are making room for Glenn Beck's channel

[Tempest]

59. Turns out Beck tried to purchase Current TV. n/t

[Joe Bacon]

37. It's gone from my Time Warner box

Came home from work last night, turned on the box to watch Cenk and I get a black screen with "THIS CHANNEL IS NO LONGER IN SERVICE".

Thanks, AIPAC!

[obamanut2012]

44. Me too

I emailed and called this morning.

[NorthCarolina]

46. We were able to watch Cenk and Elliot last night

however, this morning Current TV was gone. I wrote TWC of my displeasure over their cowardice. Aside from Dish, our only cable alternative in Charlotte is AT&T. Not too happy with our limited choices, but will be checking into switching over to AT&T service soon.

[crim son]

49. I've never had cable

so won't miss it. I am curious as to TW's motives, however.

[Ash_F]

56. Haven't owned a TV in 7 years. /nt

[Lydia Leftcoast]

57. AlJazeera has its own smartphone/iPad app, and if your cable system carries MHz Worldview

(it may be hidden as a "public access channel," as it is in Minneapolis), you can at least get Al Jazeera's flagship newscast.

As for Current, I cancelled cable at the point where it was just a bunch of amateurish videos, so I have not seen its present incarnation.

However, by creating Current, Al Gore destroyed one of the best news sources on cable, Newsworld International," which used mostly Canadian content but carried other foreign news programs as well. It was THE best source of information during the early stages of the Iraq War, because Canada wasn't participating and so had access to both sides.

[RebelOne]

61. It is still here on Comcast in Atlanta. n/t

[intheflow]

65. HuffPost now reporting TW will consider keeping Current

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/03/time-warner-cable-al-jazeera-america_n_2404879.html

Blowback must have been hard for them to have this kind of turn-around in so short a time.

[onenote]

66. Pretty much what I suspected (and predicted) might happen

Time Warner Cable had made no secret of the fact that it wanted to get rid of underperforming networks -- a category that included arts network Ovation (which TWC dropped at the end of the year when its contract ran out) and Current. Current was still under contract, but the sale to Al Jazeera gave TWC the opportunity to drop the network. By treating the existing contract as terminated, TWC put itself in a much stronger position to negotiate a new carriage deal with respect to Al Jazeera.

Its business, not politics.

[christx30]

76. From what I understand

Ovation wasn't very popular, but it was expensive. And a lot of the programming wasn't related to the arts at all.

"One 7-day period in November 2012 shows that 70% of their schedule was old movies that are repeated, numerous repeats of the PBS show Antique Road Show, Infomercials that are unrelated to the arts, and repeats of TV shows from broadcast networks."

When broadcasters raise their rates, TWC has to look at how each channel performs and decide whether it's worth it. I guess they didn't think Ovation was worth it.