just to quickly say that while News Corp does own BSkyB in the UK, it is my understanding that the particular set up of News Corp and its media and print outlets in the UK would not be legal in the US.

Hopefully it won’t be legal here much longer as News Corp/Murdoch regularly abuse the constraints on public broadcasters by using press outlets to attack the BBC (and sometimes Channel 4). As it is not common knowledge that one company owns both outlets, the public is unaware that these “news” stories are in fact designed to turn viewers against the public broadcasting system and hence to BSkyB which is also the only widely available private broadcaster (having unsuccessfully tried to drag Virgin’s cable service, the fact that cable itself is not widely available in the UK ensures that BSkyB does not lose its advantage).

Its like people watching Fox News talking about how evil and greedy NBC, ABC and CBS are without knowing that Fox News is in fact owned by FOX.

TW spun off its (coaxial) cable TV service providing company in mid 2009 as Time Warner Cable. They might get a sweetheart deal on Time Warner’s properties, but TWC does not own them.

Fox isn’t pushing for high dollars for Fox News Channel or Fox TV network (tackle football, American Idol, etc. is controlled on a local level via affiliates except where News Corp owns the affiliate.) They want more money per user for crap few people watch, like Fuel, Fox Soccer Channel (football in most of the rest of the world), Fox Reality (which is different than Fox “News”) etc.

I’m sure it is ok for a service provider to own the neworks when it is News Corp owning Sky TV in England and/or NBC/Comcast in the US, right?

In life, your post is known as “fail”.

Fox News is not part of the negotiations.

I think Murdoch is challenging TW’s corporate assets & business structure, and asking them to pay for Fox (which has the highest news ratings). Fox removing it’s channel from the TW line-up is a very smart move. And the FCC intervention makes this interesting. It speaks volumes once you look at TW’s portfolio.

TW not only operates its cable outlet, the company also owns many of the channels fed through that cable. *Channels & Media outlets owned by TW are; New Line Cinema, Time Inc., HBO, Turner Broadcasting System, The CW Television Network, TheWB.com, Warner Bros. Entertainment, Kids’ WB, The CW4Kids, Cartoon Network, Boomerang, Hanna-Barbera, Ruby-Spears Productions, Adult Swim, CNN, DC Comics, and Warner Bros. Games…

So why is the FCC involved and what gives them any right to “urge”? This is a private issue, and it’s not adversely affecting people’s daily lives.

Maybe Murdoch knows this and Obama too well. Maybe Murdoch knows the FCC can’t really do anything here without bringing into question TW’s antitrust issues. In Chess, this move is called “Check”.

Just a thought…

This spat is likely to drive people to over-the-air broadcasts and Internet content sites, but it is also likely to speed up the move to a la carte pricing for cable service.

Alfred Poor
HDTV Almanac

Who knows? This my be be worth the initial loss if any.