Welcome to the DIRECTV Community Forums

New to the Community? Visit the Community How-To and Guidelines to get started.

4 Messages

Sunday, February 9th, 2025 4:49 PM

DirecTV is cheating subscribers and Nexstar is cheating their advertisers

Cable and satellite providers are required to provide local stations to viewers.  This is also an inducement to subscribe and pay for the service.  Accordingly, service providers like DirecTV pay local stations and affiliates for their programming.  Local affiliates recover their cost by charging advertisers for the larger viewing audience.  

Nexstar owns many Fox affiliates and has been in a contract dispute for years.  In the meantime, all of the Fox affiliates have been off the air on DirecTV.  This has deprived DirecTV subscribers of the local programming that was promised and for which they have paid.

The way I see it,  DirecTV is saving money by not paying Nexstar and Nexstar is depriving their advertisers of viewers for which they may think they are paying.  Subscribers and advertisers are both losing on this arrangement.  DirecTV and Nexstar are both gaining by their cheating.  At a minimum, DirecTV is dealing with subscribers in bad faith.

Fox affiliates receive a national feed from Fox, like PBS and other network affiliates receive a national feed.  Why can't DirecTV buy the national feed and bypass the disagreeable local affiliate owners.  Subscribers would not receive the local programming and advertising but at least would get shows of national interest such as the Super Bowl, Daytona 500 and Indianapolis 500.

Another alternative would be for DirecTV to find an agreeable Fox affiliate in another city and make the contract with them.  Subscribers will not mind local advertising not local to them if they can receive the main programming for which they have been promised and paid for in good faith.

ACE - Expert

 • 

14.1K Messages

1 month ago

The FCC will not allow direcrv to get the national feed or "import" it from another affiliate. Your local affiliate has an exclusive to this programming

ACE - Expert

 • 

6.3K Messages

1 month ago

You have options. Either use an over-the-air antenna or subscriber to another service that offers your local broadcaster. You are more than welcome to rant your displeasure, but nothing will be accomplished from an open community forum.

ACE - Sage

 • 

46.4K Messages

1 month ago

If only the FCC would allow providers like DirecTV to do this. Congress considered this a few years back but did nothing. 

ACE - Expert

 • 

21K Messages

1 month ago

TV providers are not required to provide local channels, DTV now allows you to drop them.  When DTV first started they didn't have local channels, their receivers where made to use an OTA antenna and switched between them.

4 Messages

1 month ago

Search Labs | AI Overview
The FCC requires cable and satellite providers to offer local channels. This is done
through retransmission consent agreements with local broadcast stations. 
Cable
  • Cable operators must set aside a certain number of channels for local stations 
  • Cable companies must offer a basic tier of programming, which includes local broadcast stations. 
  • Cable operators must obtain retransmission consent from local broadcast stations to carry their signals. 
Satellite
  • Satellite carriers must carry local broadcast stations' signals upon request 
  • Satellite carriers must maintain a "good signal quality" standard 
  • Satellite carriers must have a reasonable basis for rejecting a broadcast station's request for carriage 
Retransmission consent agreements 
  • These agreements are usually extended or renewed before they expire.
  • If the contract expires, the pay TV service provider must stop carrying the station until an agreement is reached.

The consent agreement is where we have the problem.  It gives DirecTV an out to cheat their subscribers.  DirecTV should be required to reduce their monthly charge to subscribers if they cannot provide the local programming promised in their contract, in my opinion.  That would give DirecTV a financial incentive to reach an agreement.  If DirecTV can provide a discount for all local channels, they can provide a discount for one holdout.

ACE - Expert

 • 

21K Messages

1 month ago

What contract? DTV provides channels by satellite and per the TOS you agreed to when ordering the service, channels and programing are subject to change at anytime.

ACE - Sage

 • 

46.4K Messages

1 month ago

Of course, it doesn't state that the provider must lower their price during a dispute. Nor does it dictate what the charge to customers should be. Usually, upon request, DirecTV will provide a billing credit. 

4 Messages

1 month ago

A slick lawyer should come up with a class action lawsuit for a DirecTV billing credit for millions of Nexstar owned Fox local affiliate viewers for the three years they have been billed for programming they are not receiving.  The damages should amount to tens of millions of dollars.  

ACE - Sage

 • 

46.4K Messages

1 month ago

Yeah, that's not going to happen. 

ACE - Expert

 • 

21K Messages

1 month ago

Per the TOS DTV customers are limited to binding arbitration.

ACE - Expert

 • 

22.9K Messages

1 month ago

DirecTV providers locals in general. They are NOT required to provide you any specific local channel at all times. This is the same as other TV providers. Nobody owes you the Nexstar channels.

So when Nexstar increases the cost beyond what the TV provider (not just DirecTV) thinks is reasonable, they are not obligated to just roll over accept the cost.

DirecTV is not allowed to provide you a different Fox affiliate. Those local affiliates lobbied congress so that they may only be provided to who is in their Designated Market Area (DMA). Even if another Fox affiliate is in your DMA (unlikely), there still is no requirement they get a carriage agreement.

When DirecTV started, locals weren't available. Years later they provided them as an optional add-on, and then eventually included them in all packages by default. Now because of carriage agreements with locals, particularly Nexstar being one of (if not THE) worst, they have reinstated having locals be optional. Still not a pick and choose of course, it is whatever locals they have permission for where you live or no locals at all.

Bill only goes down if you have NO locals at all. They are not itemized per area or per local, it is flat rated to all. As long as you get one local channel then you get exactly what you are subscribed to. It is up to you to decide if that is a good value, and if not go where you find better value.

Sorry but you cannot force a TV provider to pay for all locals under the sun and give them to you. Not how it works.

https://www.directv.com/legal/directv-residential-terms-of-service/#otnotice-section-02764f76-0273-4582-8cbe-d4d0542ce909

c. Programming Changes. We have the right to change, add, or remove Our programming packages, their Content, selections, prices, and any Service We offer (including the technology used to deliver them).

The ToS gets refreshed every so often, but boils down to the same clause. Channels/content may change at any time. Just a reality of the TV industry. They do not owe you any local in particular. If you absolutely cannot live with out it than either plug in a regular antenna and get the free broadcast or go with an option that has it. Just remember any other provider can go through the same thing and local affiliates have been pulling their channels more often in recent years.

So there is no cheating. Everyone is working within the rules. Problem is you think the rules work differently and that you are owed something you are not. Perhaps you should complain to Nexstar for their unreasonable demands? Others don't want to pay more for you to get your specific show/sports fix on.

New Member

 • 

13 Messages

1 month ago

You're making the mods angry, OP.  How dare you say anything negative about DirecTV.  Your thread will be closed shortly.  As an FYI, there ARE lawyers currently working on a lawsuit over this and you should see something shortly.  

We shouldn't have to 'inquire' about a bill credit for something we're paying for but not receiving.  

(edited)

4 Messages

1 month ago

Thank you, thebigeasy88.

ACE - Sage

 • 

46.4K Messages

1 month ago

@thebigeasy88 

Keep us posted. 

ACE - Expert

 • 

36.9K Messages

1 month ago

Satellite carriers must carry local broadcast stations' signals upon request 

Satellite carriers must maintain a "good signal quality" standard 

Satellite carriers must have a reasonable basis for rejecting a broadcast station's request for carriage 
The bugaboo here is "upon request."  The the local stations are not requesting carriage, they're demanding a fee for it, an ever increasing fee.
This has been structured by Congress and the FCC to benefit the local stations and until Congress and/or the FCC act, it's going to stay like it is.  If you can find a lawyer willing to take this on, have fun.  There are probably worse wasteful pursuits.

NEED HELP?