San Diego, CA - July 1985

[GEDA1990]

Source: The Tribune (12/07/1985)

Cox Cable
2. USA Network
3. ESPN
4. KNBC (NBC) Los Angeles / EPG / KCOX (local cable channel)
5. KTLA (IND) Los Angeles
6. XETV (IND) Tijuana
7. KCST (NBC) San Diego
8. KFMB (CBS) San Diego
9. KUSI (IND) San Diego
10. KGTV (ABC) San Diego
11. KTTV (IND) Los Angeles
12. KPBS (PBS) San Diego
13. KCOP (IND) Los Angeles
14. KMEX (SIN) Los Angeles
15. Galavision (premium)
16. Nickelodeon / The Nashville Network
17. Cinemax (premium)
18. The Disney Channel (premium)
19. Showtime (premium)
20. HBO (premium)
21. Pay Per View (premium)
22. Playboy TV (premium)
23. The Learning Channel
24. Public Access / Community Channel
25. C-SPAN
26. CCN
27. WTBS (IND) Atlanta
28. Lifetime
29. VH1
30. MTV
31. CNN
32. Headline News
33. A&E
34. CBN
35. KSCI (IND) Los Angeles
36. KTTY (IND) San Diego

Southwestern Cable
1. Pay Per View (premium)
2. KSCI (IND) Los Angeles
3. KTTY (IND) San Diego
4. CBN
5. KTLA (IND) Los Angeles
6. XETV (IND) Tijuana
7. KCST (NBC) San Diego
8. KFMB (CBS) San Diego
9. KUSI (IND) San Diego
10. KGTV (ABC) San Diego
11. KTTV (IND) Los Angeles
12. KPBS (PBS) San Diego
13. KCOP (IND) Los Angeles
14. A&E
15. Public Access / Community Channel
16. WTBS (IND) Atlanta
17. Showtime (premium)
18. The Disney Channel (premium)
19. ITVS
20. Playboy TV (premium)
21. HBO (premium)
22. Cinemax (premium)
23. Headline News
24. Nickelodeon
25. Lifetime
26. ESPN
27. CNN
28. USA Network
29. MTV
30. C-SPAN
31. The Weather Channel

 

[rparky54]

I had Southwestern Cable before it was Spectrum or even Time Warner Cable back then. They also carried FM Cable which included Los Angeles Stations and College Radio. It would be interesting to see what the Cable Radio Lineups were back then before they were replaced by Music Choice.

 

[IM42A]

Got to wonder if KNBC was a holdover from when UHF was still considered second-tier, and KCST, even though NBC, would have been considered less desirable. Perhaps KCST had lower ratings and a lower-quality news operation, hence KNBC was carried as a "better" NBC station with higher-quality news programming and other non-network offerings. I don't know, I'm just guessing.

The XETV situation was weird enough, but was a consequence of Tijuana's having gotten the third VHF channel in that area. It is since, of course, fully Mexican now.

 

[newsmark]

Got to wonder if KNBC was a holdover from when UHF was still considered second-tier, and KCST, even though NBC, would have been considered less desirable. Perhaps KCST had lower ratings and a lower-quality news operation, hence KNBC was carried as a "better" NBC station with higher-quality news programming and other non-network offerings. I don't know, I'm just guessing.

The XETV situation was weird enough, but was a consequence of Tijuana's having gotten the third VHF channel in that area. It is since, of course, fully Mexican now.

That may be closer to the truth than I initially thought.

I found this court case from 1983. Apparently up until that point, the FCC did not require the cable system to black out duplicated programming (network or syndicated) on KNBC, even though it was no longer considered to be "significantly viewed" in San Diego. The reasoning was the FCC did not want to disrupt established viewing patterns.

https://casetext.com/case/kcst-tv-inc-v-fcc

The court remanded the case back to the FCC. I haven't found the commission's later ruling.

 

[IM42A]

That may be closer to the truth than I initially thought.

I found this court case from 1983. Apparently up until that point, the FCC did not require the cable system to black out duplicated programming (network or syndicated) on KNBC, even though it was no longer considered to be "significantly viewed" in San Diego. The reasoning was the FCC did not want to disrupt established viewing patterns.

https://casetext.com/case/kcst-tv-inc-v-fcc

The court remanded the case back to the FCC. I haven't found the commission's later ruling.

There's something wrong with the link you provided. Looks like it's taking in the text from above, though that's not apparent from just the blued-in link itself. I searched on "KCST casetext" and was able to get to it. Interesting reading, if you like that sort of thing (and I do).

 

[powers]

mistake

 

[powers]

Got to wonder if KNBC was a holdover from when UHF was still considered second-tier, and KCST, even though NBC, would have been considered less desirable. Perhaps KCST had lower ratings and a lower-quality news operation, hence KNBC was carried as a "better" NBC station with higher-quality news programming and other non-network offerings. I don't know, I'm just guessing.

I moved to San DIego to go to SDSU in 1989. My grandparents had lived in the area before then and I would visit frequently. Before KUSI came along, Mission Cable TV (Cox's predecessor) carried KHJ-TV Channel 9 from Los Angeles (now KCAL). When I moved here Channel 4 had the same arrangement - it was called The Rainbow Channel and listed KNBC as a shared channel like what was listed above. Most of the time it was kind of like a public access channel, filled with San Diego-centric programming on a low budget, and also infomercials. However, at 6 PM and 11 PM they would flip to KNBC just for local news from LA. Other than that, they carried no other programs from KNBC. I think it was a holdover because KNBC had a top notch newscast at the time so Cox wanted to offer their news for viewers here. During its final years as carriage on Cox, KTLA/5 was carried on Channel 14. Because of the Syndex rules, it was always listed as KTLA, but ran about 85% informercials. It got to the point where only a few overnight movies and all KTLA news programming were the only things that actually were broadcast from KTLA.

 

[IM42A]

I moved to San DIego to go to SDSU in 1989. My grandparents had lived in the area before then and I would visit frequently. Before KUSI came along, Mission Cable TV (Cox's predecessor) carried KHJ-TV Channel 9 from Los Angeles (now KCAL). When I moved here Channel 4 had the same arrangement - it was called The Rainbow Channel and listed KNBC as a shared channel like what was listed above. Most of the time it was kind of like a public access channel, filled with San Diego-centric programming on a low budget, and also infomercials. However, at 6 PM and 11 PM they would flip to KNBC just for local news from LA. Other than that, they carried no other programs from KNBC. I think it was a holdover because KNBC had a top notch newscast at the time so Cox wanted to offer their news for viewers here. During its final years as carriage on Cox, KTLA/5 was carried on Channel 14. Because of the Syndex rules, it was always listed as KTLA, but ran about 85% informercials. It got to the point where only a few overnight movies and all KTLA news programming were the only things that actually were broadcast from KTLA.

That sounds kind of like what Cox does with WSB and WSOC. WSB news is carried that way on cable in Macon (I imagine Macon stations are keen to carve out as much of their own market as they can, lest they be overshadowed by Atlanta) and WSOC does something similar with their Roku channel. WSOC on Roku carries generic non-network programming, pretty dull stuff, and cuts in for news in real time.

I really have to wonder what harm there would be, in just allowing all local stations to stream their entire programming schedule, including network shows, online. I doubt there would be a huge amount of in-market viewers, jumping through the hoops of Roku or website streaming to get out-of-market stations, rather than just watching their local network affiliates either OTA or via the various cable or satellite local-into-local lineups. At one time, KTVQ Billings MT ran their entire broadcast feed via Roku, but I didn't quit watching local WIS for NBC in favor of KTVQ (though the time-shifting capability was kind of neat).

 

[newsmark]

There's something wrong with the link you provided. Looks like it's taking in the text from above, though that's not apparent from just the blued-in link itself. I searched on "KCST casetext" and was able to get to it. Interesting reading, if you like that sort of thing (and I do).

Here's the corrected link for anyone else who's interested. Sorry for the slipup.

KCST-TV, Inc. v. Federal Communications Commission, 699 F.2d 1185 | Casetext Search + Citator

Read KCST-TV, Inc. v. Federal Communications Commission, 699 F.2d 1185, see flags on bad law, and search Casetext’s comprehensive legal database

casetext.com

 

[powers]

I really have to wonder what harm there would be, in just allowing all local stations to stream their entire programming schedule, including network shows, online. I doubt there would be a huge amount of in-market viewers, jumping through the hoops of Roku or website streaming to get out-of-market stations, rather than just watching their local network affiliates either OTA or via the various cable or satellite local-into-local lineups. At one time, KTVQ Billings MT ran their entire broadcast feed via Roku, but I didn't quit watching local WIS for NBC in favor of KTVQ (though the time-shifting capability was kind of neat).

I would think it has a lot to do with local market revenue as well as syndication and network clearance not being allowed outside of each local market. When I was a kid it was a big deal for cable systems in small and medium markets (and even in larger markets like San Diego) to carry network affiliated stations from bigger markets as a draw to giving viewers more choice. However even when I was a kid, the distant stations were blocked out during network prime time and other program blocks because local stations held the rights to carry those programs and keep the advertising dollars local. In the late 1980s, the syndex rules meant that local stations could even claim rights to syndicated and rerun programming, which meant that distant stations were now blocked a substantial amount of time, and for that reason, ultimately dropped from cable systems in favor of more cable only channels. Now local stations can demand retransmission fees from cable operators which I'm sure would discourage streaming online outside of the local market, especially now that services like Sling and other live TV services can charge to essentially stream cable-like services to you on your Roku and online. If more stations did what KTVQ did, there would probably eventually be all kinds of demands and lawsuits from the networks, program providers and stations from outside the Billings market (and probably even within the Billings market by cable operators). A few years ago there was a private service on Roku called XTV which was awesome. They had live feeds from stations in the UK and other countries, cable channels (big ones), premium services for free and a handful of local stations streaming live and a huge on-demand library, all for free/donations. Roku cracked down on them and similar services and once that happened they died a painful death. But it was great for the few months to a year that they lasted!

 

[IM42A]

I would think it has a lot to do with local market revenue as well as syndication and network clearance not being allowed outside of each local market. When I was a kid it was a big deal for cable systems in small and medium markets (and even in larger markets like San Diego) to carry network affiliated stations from bigger markets as a draw to giving viewers more choice. However even when I was a kid, the distant stations were blocked out during network prime time and other program blocks because local stations held the rights to carry those programs and keep the advertising dollars local. In the late 1980s, the syndex rules meant that local stations could even claim rights to syndicated and rerun programming, which meant that distant stations were now blocked a substantial amount of time, and for that reason, ultimately dropped from cable systems in favor of more cable only channels. Now local stations can demand retransmission fees from cable operators which I'm sure would discourage streaming online outside of the local market, especially now that services like Sling and other live TV services can charge to essentially stream cable-like services to you on your Roku and online. If more stations did what KTVQ did, there would probably eventually be all kinds of demands and lawsuits from the networks, program providers and stations from outside the Billings market (and probably even within the Billings market by cable operators). A few years ago there was a private service on Roku called XTV which was awesome. They had live feeds from stations in the UK and other countries, cable channels (big ones), premium services for free and a handful of local stations streaming live and a huge on-demand library, all for free/donations. Roku cracked down on them and similar services and once that happened they died a painful death. But it was great for the few months to a year that they lasted!

As to your comment which I've bolded, I don't see how that would discourage such streaming. Streaming services such as Sling wouldn't be offering local stations outside of their markets in the first place, and even a station streaming its entire feed in live time on Roku would still require a viewer to be motivated to go through several clicks. Roku is smoother than it used to be, but it's still a pain compared to other options. There are small TV stations here and there, not affiliated with major networks, that do 24/7 linear streaming, WBON-LD Richmond KY is one example (they carry AMGTV, which is about as low-rent as a network gets).

But it's not going to happen, the major networks would never stand for it. I have to suspect that the linear KTVQ feed, which lasted only a few months, may have been a case of "someone left the cat door open" and wasn't done on purpose. And then there was that service on Roku (name escapes me at the moment) that streamed a few local stations nationwide, including the Kentucky and Maryland state PBS networks. That got squashed like a bug (but, as with XTV, it was nice while it lasted).

One little-known source for linear feeds of international stations is the Haitian TV Network (HTN) on Roku. They carry all five major networks from France, such that the morning news from Paris can be seen at 1 am EST/EDT. I also get the French CBC news channel from Canada that way. Too bad such a service doesn't exist for channels from the UK, Germany, and so on. I feel a bit guilty about taking advantage of a free service that is intended for poor Haitians (Haitians are poor almost by definition) who just want to watch French TV, but so far they haven't geofenced it. That service may eventually get axed by Roku as well.

 

[IM42A]

I moved to San DIego to go to SDSU in 1989. My grandparents had lived in the area before then and I would visit frequently. Before KUSI came along, Mission Cable TV (Cox's predecessor) carried KHJ-TV Channel 9 from Los Angeles (now KCAL). When I moved here Channel 4 had the same arrangement - it was called The Rainbow Channel and listed KNBC as a shared channel like what was listed above. Most of the time it was kind of like a public access channel, filled with San Diego-centric programming on a low budget, and also infomercials. However, at 6 PM and 11 PM they would flip to KNBC just for local news from LA. Other than that, they carried no other programs from KNBC. I think it was a holdover because KNBC had a top notch newscast at the time so Cox wanted to offer their news for viewers here. During its final years as carriage on Cox, KTLA/5 was carried on Channel 14. Because of the Syndex rules, it was always listed as KTLA, but ran about 85% informercials. It got to the point where only a few overnight movies and all KTLA news programming were the only things that actually were broadcast from KTLA.

There looks to be a similar arrangement on Charter Spectrum in Palm Springs, where a local origination cable channel with paid programming clears KNBC news in certain time slots.

This could work in "orphan counties" at far reaches of a given state, that are part of out-of-state TV markets. I have in mind Garrett County, Maryland, which is in the Pittsburgh market. Comcast had a similar arrangement by which news from WJZ and WMAR Baltimore was available on-demand, which seems like a Rube Goldberg-type setup --- a local origination channel with Baltimore news cut-ins, in linear time, would be far more user-friendly:

Delaney says deal brings Maryland TV news to Garrett County

Viewers with Roku could get the same thing from free via NewsOn, as well as the Roku apps for the various Baltimore and DC stations.

 

[ftballfan]

There looks to be a similar arrangement on Charter Spectrum in Palm Springs, where a local origination cable channel with paid programming clears KNBC news in certain time slots.

This could work in "orphan counties" at far reaches of a given state, that are part of out-of-state TV markets. I have in mind Garrett County, Maryland, which is in the Pittsburgh market. Comcast had a similar arrangement by which news from WJZ and WMAR Baltimore was available on-demand, which seems like a Rube Goldberg-type setup --- a local origination channel with Baltimore news cut-ins, in linear time, would be far more user-friendly:

Delaney says deal brings Maryland TV news to Garrett County

Viewers with Roku could get the same thing from free via NewsOn, as well as the Roku apps for the various Baltimore and DC stations.

In 2017, I stayed at a hotel in Troy, OH and the lineup (provided by Spectrum - may have still been Time Warner at this point) included a split channel that was mostly EWTN, but carried local newscasts from WLIO in Lima, OH (EWTN was carried fully on another channel).

 

[IM42A]

In 2017, I stayed at a hotel in Troy, OH and the lineup (provided by Spectrum - may have still been Time Warner at this point) included a split channel that was mostly EWTN, but carried local newscasts from WLIO in Lima, OH (EWTN was carried fully on another channel).

Hard to see the point of that, first of all, carrying EWTN (or most of it) on one channel while it's carried fully on another channel, and secondly, what interest that news from Lima would have been, in what is basically an exurb of Dayton. Nothing against Lima, but it's a small town. If they were going to carry news from another market, you'd think it would be either Columbus for state government and sports, or Cincinnati simply because of its size and relative proximity.

If the cable company were a local mom-and-pop operation, rather than corporate-owned, I'd be tempted to think they were Catholics from Lima

(I am allowed to make a joke like that, I'm Catholic myself, and go to the Latin Mass every Sunday)

 

[ftballfan]

Hard to see the point of that, first of all, carrying EWTN (or most of it) on one channel while it's carried fully on another channel, and secondly, what interest that news from Lima would have been, in what is basically an exurb of Dayton. Nothing against Lima, but it's a small town. If they were going to carry news from another market, you'd think it would be either Columbus for state government and sports, or Cincinnati simply because of its size and relative proximity.

If the cable company were a local mom-and-pop operation, rather than corporate-owned, I'd be tempted to think they were Catholics from Lima

(I am allowed to make a joke like that, I'm Catholic myself, and go to the Latin Mass every Sunday)

I found it odd as well. If I were expecting a part-time OOM station in the Troy area, I would have expected WBNS (historically dominant in Columbus and does appear to be carried at least part-time in Piqua and north along the I-75 corridor to Lima) or WCPO or WKRC

 

[IM42A]

I found it odd as well. If I were expecting a part-time OOM station in the Troy area, I would have expected WBNS (historically dominant in Columbus and does appear to be carried at least part-time in Piqua and north along the I-75 corridor to Lima) or WCPO or WKRC

Yes, and WBNS is also pretty much dominant any place out-of-market in Ohio that carries Columbus stations in the first place. It doesn't get out-of-state except for a handful of places south of the Ohio River, such as South Shore KY (gets Portsmouth cable), and possibly Point Pleasant and Parkersburg in West Virginia --- I say "possibly" because I can't tell what effect WIYE-LD has had on out-of-market CBS in that area. (You can't go by TVTV.com, it's notoriously inaccurate.) Bizarrely, it also appears that WBNS and WSYX are carried on cable in Vanceburg KY, downriver from Portsmouth, in lieu of Cincinnati and Lexington stations which would be far more welcomed in Lewis County. They may now get Portsmouth-based Spectrum cable as does South Shore.

Portsmouth still gets in-state network TV via cable, but Ironton lost its last Ohio station when WBNS was pulled from cable there a few years ago. Lawrence County is a "orphan county" if ever there were one, though technically speaking, WQCW is an Ohio station.

 

[w00t]

Here's the corrected link for anyone else who's interested. Sorry for the slipup.

KCST-TV, Inc. v. Federal Communications Commission, 699 F.2d 1185 | Casetext Search + Citator

Read KCST-TV, Inc. v. Federal Communications Commission, 699 F.2d 1185, see flags on bad law, and search Casetext’s comprehensive legal database

casetext.com

Media General actually cited this case a few years ago in petitions to remove out of market stations in N.C. that they competed with.
WRAL (then CBS, on behalf of WNCT), WECT (on behalf of WNCN, then NBC), and then after WRAL and WNCN swapped networks they petitioned to remove WFMY from Durham and Orange County cable systems.

They were successful in removing WRAL from eastern N.C. Not sure about the others.

 

[IM42A]

Media General actually cited this case a few years ago in petitions to remove out of market stations in N.C. that they competed with.
WRAL (then CBS, on behalf of WNCT), WECT (on behalf of WNCN, then NBC), and then after WRAL and WNCN swapped networks they petitioned to remove WFMY from Durham and Orange County cable systems.

They were successful in removing WRAL from eastern N.C. Not sure about the others.

Did the WECT petition refer to cable carriage in Fayetteville (and possibly Dunn)? I know that cable in those two cities carried WECT, no doubt from when WECT billed itself as "Wilmington-Fayetteville" and had its transmitter far enough inland to cover both cities. There is really no reason to carry a Wilmington station in either city.

 

[w00t]

Did the WECT petition refer to cable carriage in Fayetteville (and possibly Dunn)? I know that cable in those two cities carried WECT, no doubt from when WECT billed itself as "Wilmington-Fayetteville" and had its transmitter far enough inland to cover both cities. There is really no reason to carry a Wilmington station in either city.

I remember Fayetteville being one of them, not sure about Dunn. WECT is still present on Spectrum Fayetteville but I assume they’re blacking out NBC programming which is what the petition was about.

 

[IM42A]

I remember Fayetteville being one of them, not sure about Dunn. WECT is still present on Spectrum Fayetteville but I assume they’re blacking out NBC programming which is what the petition was about.

I have to imagine that WECT is a holdover from when markets (ADI/DMA) were not as clear-cut as they are now, when out-of-market stations were seen as desirable due to schedule diversity and because that's all there was as an alternative to local stations (no satellite delivery yet), and when, as I noted, WECT billed itself as covering both cities with a somewhat centrally-located signal. There may also be historic viewing habits that die hard.

WECT shows up in the FCC's significantly viewed stations list, which is horribly outdated, for both Cumberland and Hartnett counties. It really doesn't matter, though, as cable is a dying industry, satellite and OTT providers typically don't offer out-of-market stations, and local newscasts can be pretty much had on demand online, either live or recorded.