DIRECTV dropping OANN?

I respect that there are people who greatly disagree with DirecTV not renewing the carriage agreement with OANN. And certainly it is understandable why people take issue with what appears to be the reason for the decision (though AT&T/DirecTV have only said it was from "an internal review", which I feel should have been a more direct transparent answer from them).

I do find it annoying when someone throws their "loyalty", time with the service, or amount they have paid. That gives the perception they believe that gives them direct power over how AT&T/DirecTV must do things and doesn't comprehend there are millions of other customers and that it is the company's decision in the end.

To be clear, I have nothing derogatory about being a "Patriot". My only issue is when the term seems to get thrown around more as a buzzword to rile up people in a frenzy, or injecting parts of the Pledge or such into a discussion which adds no facts or standpoint but only serves to be an adrenaline inducer instead of something of substance. So yes, it does feel like the terms and quotes get abused just because they sound good at the time. And related, that includes trailing the OANN conversation off into religion/beliefs/faith which would be a discussion for another medium.

It seems strange they now have a "win back department" trying to keep or recover the customers they are loosing.

DirecTV has had a "winback" department for years, before the acquisition by AT&T. Unknown what their conditions are to contact those who have chosen to cancel (directly or simply by a mailed offer). It would be expected they have no control over the OANN decision, but try any additional specials they have that might be enough to continue service even without the channel (even possibly with getting it from another source alongside their DirecTV).

It will be interesting to see how this affects them long term. Without access to the hard, it is unknown how much the leaving consumer base will influence them going forward. But it would be reasonable to expect they planned that the group of those who decide to leave would be within acceptable losses for them and that it was still more valuable to no longer pay for OANN.

Again personally, I have no strong desire of OANN staying or leaving. I have not tethered myself to a single news source or any given channel. Regardless of the outcome, I do hope people reduce (ideally stop) their toxicity, veiled insults, and false claims about others.

@Juniper

Your comment: 

"I do find it annoying when someone throws their "loyalty", time with the service, or amount they have paid. That gives the perception they believe that gives them direct power over how AT&T/DirecTV must do things and doesn't comprehend there are millions of other customers and that it is the company's decision in the end."

Is a bit condescending to customers. All businesses are there to serve the customers. A lot of customers dont have a lot of choices because of their local environment.  On the other hand many of do have options. When a business makes choices based on political reasons it will disenfranchise one side or the other. I thought that in the Untied States of America, the people have the choice to watch or not watch programming. If it was shown that honest numbers of viewership was the cause there would not have been a discussion. Showing the cost of the program was not conducive to keep but, on a political choice will cause amanous for people that dont like being told they dont matter.

So, to belittle the "loyalty" of a customer is truly demeaning. Remember that the Customer is the reason for the business. Providing a service to meet the customer should come ahead of PC culture. I choose to watch the channels I watch. I dont select many of the far left (and I do mean far left) programming. I never wrote to remove programming I dont like and disagree with. I just dont watch and even exclude from the channel listing. 

All businesses are there to serve the customers.

They provide a service to make a profit. They are not there to serve the customer as if they were a serf to their master. Yes, that is an exaggerated comparison, but I wanted to be clear on that point as I have observed many times the average consumer doesn't seem to perceive the differences.

No condensation intended. I just feel some place too much value on the value of their individual account.

Yes, people have the choice to watch or not what they want. Just like a TV provider has the choice on what channels to have available to choose from. Our choices cannot mandate what DirecTV's choices are, though certainly they might influence them.

Providing a service for something like TV is not primarily for the benefit of the customer, but for profit. Their bottom line, individual values, or outside influence can be more important than the customer depending on their "big picture". The customer doesn't always reign supreme in such matters. Based on their decision, the other factors were larger to them than the value of the sub-group of customers who are upset about the loss of OANN.

We are fortunate that Patriots have historically defended freedoms which include: 

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

This forum is focused on ensuring DIRECTV is aware that their customers do not agree with the Government officials from California (Representatives Anna G. Eshoo & Jerry McNerney), Rep Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, and others who are attacking the Freedom of Speech to institute State Run Television.    We also feel that power from far left wing media outlets like Reuters, or extremist political organizations like Media Matters of America, NAACP, and others should not be left unchecked. 

We applaud the state Attorney Generals and Senators who are getting involved in the matter and have heard the petition to “redress the unchecked influence and power“ which is attacking the basic freedoms our forefathers made great sacrifices to bless future generations with. 

To that end, we should all applaud the use of the word patriot (the word ultimately derives from Greek patrios, meaning "of one's father,") which is defined as “one who loves and supports his or her country”.  Constitutional patriotism is the idea that people should form a political attachment to the norms and values of a constitution rather than a national culture or cosmopolitan society.   Constitutional Patriotism is primarily based on two documents: The Constitution and the Declaration of Independence.

Those individuals who attack the word patriot are the greatest inside threat to America.  Reject culture for the North Star Constitutional Truths which guide us.  

@ahwhite 

I did not know about RFD. 

Where we live we cannot benefit from a digital antenna. All the stations are too far away and there are too many hills in the way. If we could we would have gone that way a long time ago. 

@Juniper 

"They are not there to serve the customer"

I'm sorry Juniper, but I disagree. They are a service and as such they do serve us.

True, they have only certain packages that we must choose from but when they stop serving, they stop getting paid. 

The distinction is in what "serve" means in context. Yes, they provide a service, that we pay for. But they do not "serve" us in the context that they must abide by what we say and have no choices of their own. They are not indentured to us, nor are they a public service provided by the government for necessities.

In the end, they are a private business that they can run as they see fit (within established rules and regulations of course), even if it is against some customer objection. They survive or not based on the outcome of the decisions they make. Naturally, they believe they don't need OANN and can move on without it.

They are not indentured to us, nor are they a public service provided by the government for necessities.

In the end, they are a private business that they can run as they see fit (within established rules and regulations of course), even if it is against some customer objection.

hmmm…

 
Sounds like DIRECTV is going wish they served their customers rather than bring far left extremist ideologies into their Board Room.  A lot has happened since they first totally ignored those customers who were paying attention.  

Beyond their customers they are going to have fun in court with respect to those “rules and regulations” which include;

(1) breach of contract (confidentiality provision); (2) breach of contract (non-disparagement provision); (3) breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing; (4) intentional interference with business expectancy; (5) violation of California’s Unfair Competition Law, Business and Professions Code §§ 17200, et seq. (“UCL” (unlawfulness); and (6) violation of the UCL (unfairness). 

If they cared about their customers, they would address every point in the highly recommended read below: 

https://dzm0ugdauank9.cloudfront.net/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/OAN_Complaint_Against_ATT_DirecTV_and_ATT_Chairman_William_Kennard.pdf 

All TV providers have a clause that channels/programming may change at any time.

They are not dropping OANN during the current carriage agreement. But they are choosing not to negotiate a new agreement and instead part ways upon the current agreement ending.

As such, there is no breach in contract. Regardless of their reason, the decision was made within the rules. If they had chosen to drop OANN's broadcast during the agreement, without just cause (as allowed by the agreement or outside regulations that govern it), then such a claim would have merit.

All TV providers have a clause that channels/programming may change at any time.

That’s a perfect example of fakes news and it’s from a DIRECTV volunteer at that… diversion with misleading information.  Read the California court document and letters from multiple attorney generals and members of congress defending us all on the OAN website.  Also read the Eshoo / McNerney letter posted in this forum and other places. 

Not "fake news". Here is that exact clause.

DIRECTV Residential Customer Agreement - Legal Policy Center

(d) Our Programming Changes. Many factors affect the availability, cost and quality of programming and may influence the decision to raise prices and the amount of any increase. These include, among others, programming and other costs, consumer demand, market and shareholder expectations, and changing business conditions. Accordingly, we reserve the unrestricted right to change, rearrange, add or delete our programming packages, the selections in those packages, our prices, technologies used to deliver the Service, and any other Service we offer, at any time. 

Nothing knocks down empty charges of “fake news” like FACTS.

Not "fake news". Here is that exact clause.

Most of us are well aware that clause exists.  However, if one does the research and educates themselves using the many good sources of information in this forum, it will be apparent there is a high probability / degree of certainty that the decision had little to do with cost, availability, or quality.  

Note they are keeping CNN which has some of the lowest ratings amongst new outlets.  I’d be willing to bet that if AT&T exposed the financials for CNN (which they have at their finger tips as an owner) it would become apparent that OAN is more than competitive on the cost front.  AT&T illegally exposed OAN financials to extremist activists but will probably do everything they can do to protect CNN. 

@bherber Completely agree.  There is plenty of factual evidence to shed light on the motives behind DirecTVs “Internal Review” and it has little to do with cost, availability, or quality.  

Note that Kennard became chairman of AT&T’s board right after the 2020 election and has deep ties with the Democratic Party as well as substantial financial ties with Dominion Voting systems.  

1) Appointed 1997 as Chairman of the FCC by President Bill Clinton and in 2009 as the U.S. Ambassador to the European Union by President Barack Obama.

2) As an Executive Board member of Dominion’s majority owner, Staple Street, Kennard is invested in helping to make Dominion succeed and become as profitable as possible. This includes ensuring Dominion defeats its opponents such as Herring in Dominion’s defamation litigation.