UPDATE, 2:24 PM: Time Warner Cable’s response to Hearst: “Negotiations are ongoing,” it says. That’s it. But the American Cable Association, an industry trade group, was more outspoken about the broader dispute over retransmission consent rules. “Broadcasters support the status quo because it allows them to leverage monopoly market power and friendly federal regulations to slam viewers with sudden signal blackouts that don’t end until targeted pay-TV providers surrender outrageous amounts of cash, driving up monthly bills,” it says. “The evidence is convincing that the market is broken and that rules and regulations that pre-date Netscape’s IPO need to be modernized to reflect current market conditions.”
PREVIOUS, 12:15 PM: There’s something fishy about the negotiations to resolve the week-long contract dispute between Time Warner Cable and Hearst Television, according to the broadcast company’s president David Barrett. His stations in 13 communities went dark on the No. 2 cable company’s systems last week in a disagreement over how much TWC should pay to carry their programming. But peace should be at hand: Hearst told TWC yesterday that it could accept a deal that’s just 5% higher than the offer the cable company made on July 9. The dispute “is ripe for settlement – today,” Barrett says. What’s the hang-up? Hearst says that TWC hasn’t responded to its proposal. Barrett thinks he knows why. TWC, he says, is ”acting as the conductor of the public relations bandwagon” to persuade Congress to step in and change the laws governing retransmission disputes. Pay TV providers want the flexibility to continue transmitting broadcasters’ programming during a negotiation — which would weaken TV stations’ bargaining power. TWC, Barrett says, “has decided to hold its subscribers hostage in the hope that it can pressure Congress to intervene.” The National Association of Broadcasters took a similar position in a statement this morning about the disputes stations have had with TWC, DirecTV, and Dish Network: “Rather than negotiate in the free market for the most popular programming on TV,” the lobby group said, “this cozy pay TV cabal is manufacturing a phony crisis in hopes that Congress will fix a ‘problem’ that these companies are creating.” We’re waiting for Time Warner Cable’s response, and will update when it lands.
Related:
Nexstar Sues Time Warner Cable After It Drags Broadcaster Into Fight With Hearst
Hearst Stations Go Dark On Time Warner Cable In Contract Dispute


All I want is WLKY back!
I was excited that Time Warner was taking over Insight and possibly bringing lower prices and more channel diversity. Little did I realize they like to come in and butcher the smaller stations and try and bully their way into lower prices by hurting the local stations.
Here in New Hampshire we have only one local station. That is WMUR-tv. We now have no local news or weather,no emergency broadcasting. I would think TWC should take this into consideration and put WMUR back on the air. With that said, what about all the local advertizers that have paid to get out to X# of viewers? And what about not having any ABC programming?TWC said they have no plans to reimburse us for any inconvience this blackout has caused. I just want my local station back.
Hey morons it’s called an antenna… You plug it into your tv and magically those broadcast channels are no longer blacked out.
Hearst is holding subs hostage. Hearst was the one who pulled the plug. TWC has agreed to leave the station on unitl negotiations were completed. Hearst refused this offer
Congress gave the broadcasters the right to “charge” cable companies back in 1992. However up until recently (~2009) they’ve seemed to understand and appreciate the “mutually beneficial” aspect of being carried on cable systems…….but recently (again ~2009) something “new” has pushed them over the edge and since then they’ve played super-hard-ball on retransmission-consent fees (the thing that …is at the center of this issue). Perhaps the “model” is breaking for advertising-support broadcast and they need the money (certainly appears so with the levels of increase they ask for) being “watered down” in the ever-changing media environment; certainly the networks themselves (who must be feeling all the same pressures) are pressing the affiliates like WDRB and WLKY to hammer out these seeemingly “greedy” deals. And yes, that ultim……ately (and ironically, since broadcast is FREE over-the-air) means that each and every one of us pays more, regardless of the subscription service to which we subscribe, be it Dish, DirecTV, U-Verse.
Futher, there is the broadcast perception that the cable operators built their business on their backs and now they want what’s fair (relative to the ESPNs and Turners of the world). Being a small player in the cable side of things, I happen to be privvy to some of the “behind-the-scenes” issues going on here, but I can see both sides…… but if the cable subscriber would take a breath and think about it, they might see their operator (Time Warner/Insight in this case) standing up for rate increases, up to the point of being willing to drop a station and take the customer heat, as a good thing.
All that said, anyone’s best bet would be to call their Senator or Congressman and demand retransmission-consent reform………..that’s what’s behind it all. So, don’t be too hard on either TW or WLKY. They are just playing the game Congress subjected us all to many years ago. Plus, WLKY isn’t as much the master of their own destiny as trhey’d like since they are owned by Hearst……..two NYC companies duking it out with us caught in the Congress-allowed crossfire. Call your elected representative and let them know this is out of control! I feel the braodcasters have forgotten that they command FREE use of the airwaves.