[OT] Al Jazeera podcasts dropped once they got on cable

[l***@democrat.com]

I noticed a number of podcasts I used to download from Al Jazeera are now geographically blocked. But the XMBC stream still works. Of course the damn cable companies are to blame.

"The blocking, which began on Thursday, is part of a concession that Al Jazeera made to get pay TV operators to carry its new Al Jazeera America network, which is scheduled to launch next Tuesday. With the launch, Al Jazeera will also start to block U.S. viewers from accessing its international live stream. Al Jazeera had previously said that it was going to disable access to the live stream, but many viewers will likely be surprised by this extending to news clips on YouTube as well – especially because these clips have been a big reason that people are intrigued with Al Jazeera’s take on TV news in the first place."

http://gigaom.com/2013/08/16/al-jazeera-youtube-videos-livestream-blocked/

[TV Viewer]

IIRC, they're on KCSM 60.1 International TV.

[James Duncan]

Post by l***@democrat.com
I noticed a number of podcasts I used to download from Al Jazeera are now geographically blocked. But the XMBC stream still works. Of course the damn cable companies are to blame.
"The blocking, which began on Thursday, is part of a concession that Al Jazeera made to get pay TV operators to carry its new Al Jazeera America network, which is scheduled to launch next Tuesday. With the launch, Al Jazeera will also start to block U.S. viewers from accessing its international live stream. Al Jazeera had previously said that it was going to disable access to the live stream, but many viewers will likely be surprised by this extending to news clips on YouTube as well – especially because these clips have been a big reason that people are intrigued with Al Jazeera’s take on TV news in the first place."

This was annoying and sad. I still access the original "english" site
via their Twitter feed - @AJEnglish. The textual content is there as
always, but the videos are inaccessible. So that's a halfway solution
at least.

We got stuck with this highly watered down America site now. It's
like they think we're stupid or something. Reminds me a little of the
old Soviet Union where external content was actively blocked. Then as
now there are workarounds, but it's annoying.

[Patty Winter]

Post by l***@democrat.com

Post by l***@democrat.com
"The blocking, which began on Thursday, is part of a concession that Al

Jazeera made to get pay TV operators to carry its new Al Jazeera America
network, which is scheduled to launch next Tuesday. With the launch, Al
Jazeera will also start to block U.S. viewers from accessing its
international live stream.
This was annoying and sad. I still access the original "english" site
always, but the videos are inaccessible. So that's a halfway solution
at least.

Word to the wise: proxy server.

I wrote them a note last week to point out that some of the stories
on the AJAM website include videos that are hosted on the AJE website
and thus unavailable in the U.S. I just tried one of those stories
again (about an adorable white tiger cub in Baghdad), and there's still
no play button for a video, just a static image. (If I switch to a proxy
server outside the U.S. and reload the page, the video appears.)

Post by l***@democrat.com
We got stuck with this highly watered down America site now.

I was chagrined when I heard a few weeks ago that they had dropped
their original plan of having 40% international news. Actually,
the first few days they were on the air, they were running AJE in
the mornings and early afternoons. But now they have live U.S. news
plus reruns of some of the previous day's feature shows, so goodbye
to that. :-(

They're doing a decent--if not inspired--job on U.S. news. For example,
yesterday AJAM and C-SPAN were the only ones carrying the Senate Foreign
Relations Committe hearings. But they don't quite have that spark yet
that makes AJE so compelling.


Patty

[James Duncan]

Post by Patty Winter
. (If I switch to a proxy
server outside the U.S. and reload the page, the video appears.)

Do you have a particular favorite for a proxy server? I tried that
once a while back for other content, and it failed to work right for
me. But I didn't pursue it.

[Patty Winter]

Post by James Duncan

Post by Patty Winter
(If I switch to a proxy
server outside the U.S. and reload the page, the video appears.)

Do you have a particular favorite for a proxy server? I tried that
once a while back for other content, and it failed to work right for
me. But I didn't pursue it.

Yes, NetShade:

http://www.raynersoftware.com/

Very, very easy to use; you can click it on and off whenever you
need without restarting the program or--even worse--the computer.
They support public proxy servers, but I use their private servers
for a small annual fee to ensure safety and reliability. They have
proxy servers in seven different countries now. NetShade also supports
VPN servers, but I haven't used that part of the program.

The proxies don't fool everyone. Because of a fan website I run,
I'm always trying to find out when certain actors or actresses
will appear on TV in Canada or the U.S. I can't connect to HBO
Canada's website from a U.S. IP address, and HBO quickly
discovered Rayner's proxies that began in Canada several months
ago and blocked those. But for the most part, NetShade works great.

It's available for OS X and iOS systems.


Patty

[James Duncan]

Post by Patty Winter
http://www.raynersoftware.com/

No Apple stuff here, only Windows and Linux. So this wouldn't work
unfortunately.

Post by Patty Winter
The proxies don't fool everyone. Because of a fan website I run,
I'm always trying to find out when certain actors or actresses
will appear on TV in Canada or the U.S. I can't connect to HBO
Canada's website from a U.S. IP address, and HBO quickly
discovered Rayner's proxies that began in Canada several months
ago and blocked those. But for the most part, NetShade works great.

Oh I see, the providers catch on to this trick. I failed to be able
to watch CBC content as if a Canadian in my earlier tries, so I was
curious about alternatives. It wasn't a priority so I gave up
quickly, but I was still curious.

[l***@democrat.com]

Post by James Duncan

Post by Patty Winter
http://www.raynersoftware.com/

No Apple stuff here, only Windows and Linux. So this wouldn't work
unfortunately.

Post by Patty Winter
The proxies don't fool everyone. Because of a fan website I run,
I'm always trying to find out when certain actors or actresses
will appear on TV in Canada or the U.S. I can't connect to HBO
Canada's website from a U.S. IP address, and HBO quickly
discovered Rayner's proxies that began in Canada several months
ago and blocked those. But for the most part, NetShade works great.

Oh I see, the providers catch on to this trick. I failed to be able
to watch CBC content as if a Canadian in my earlier tries, so I was
curious about alternatives. It wasn't a priority so I gave up
quickly, but I was still curious.

There is no shortage of VPN providers. This one advertises on TWIT.
http://proxpn.com/
I think the secret code for a discount is SN20 with SN for security now and 20 for 20% off. If not, you can probably find the discount code via an internet search.
http://vpncoupons.com
Linux has decent tools for openvpn, so you don't need an app. They do provide one for windows. I've use openvpn on windows and linux, but haven't used it to appear like I am out of the country, but rather just for secure links. But I suppose I will have to start looking like a non-American. It is really annoying to get notices of new podcasts on Al Jazeera, only to get the message "No podcast for you!"

Note none of these vendors will really go to bat for you if the feds come a knocking. You would probably have to find a VPN vendor in a country where Romney keeps his money if you want one that will actually hide your ass.

[James Duncan]

Post by l***@democrat.com
There is no shortage of VPN providers. This one advertises on TWIT.
http://proxpn.com/
I think the secret code for a discount is SN20 with SN for security now and 20 for 20% off. If not, you can probably find the discount code via an internet search.
http://vpncoupons.com
Linux has decent tools for openvpn, so you don't need an app. They do provide one for windows. I've use openvpn on windows and linux, but haven't used it to appear like I am out of the country, but rather just for secure links. But I suppose I will have to start looking like a non-American. It is really annoying to get notices of new podcasts on Al Jazeera, only to get the message "No podcast for you!"
Note none of these vendors will really go to bat for you if the feds come a knocking. You would probably have to find a VPN vendor in a country where Romney keeps his money if you want one that will actually hide your ass.

I'm seriously checking out VPN4ALL http://www.vpn4all.com/. It gets
good reviews. I'd be fine with the 50 GB/month plan which varies from
$10/mo to $7/mo. annual. I'm getting tired of "this content not
available in your country".

[l***@democrat.com]

Post by James Duncan

Post by l***@democrat.com
There is no shortage of VPN providers. This one advertises on TWIT.
http://proxpn.com/
I think the secret code for a discount is SN20 with SN for security now and 20 for 20% off. If not, you can probably find the discount code via an internet search.
http://vpncoupons.com
Linux has decent tools for openvpn, so you don't need an app. They do provide one for windows. I've use openvpn on windows and linux, but haven't used it to appear like I am out of the country, but rather just for secure links. But I suppose I will have to start looking like a non-American. It is really annoying to get notices of new podcasts on Al Jazeera, only to get the message "No podcast for you!"
Note none of these vendors will really go to bat for you if the feds come a knocking. You would probably have to find a VPN vendor in a country where Romney keeps his money if you want one that will actually hide your ass.

I'm seriously checking out VPN4ALL http://www.vpn4all.com/. It gets
good reviews. I'd be fine with the 50 GB/month plan which varies from
$10/mo to $7/mo. annual. I'm getting tired of "this content not
available in your country".

On my list is
https://www.express-vpn.com/
However I will check out vpn4all. I want to use the same vpn for my cellphone. I see vpn4all supports ipsec.

You do need to look at where these companies are located. I found one VPN based in Panama, another in Romania. I suppose there is some value in working with a company in a country where Romney hides his money, but I think I rather still to "old Europe" or the US. Vpn4all is a Dutch company, but hides behind a holding company in the Seychelles.

If you don't have a VPN, then your isp knows everything. So you get a VPN, well then they know everything. So you need some faith in the cut out.

[Neil]

Post by l***@democrat.com
If you don't have a VPN, then your isp knows everything.
So you get a VPN, well then they know everything. So you
need some faith in the cut out.

Or you assume that everyone's reading/listening to everything you
write/say, and you don't write/say anything you wouldn't want to defend
in court, at least not online or in other electronic communications open
to the NSA. Save your bigotry/prejudices/extreme political
views/masochistic support of the New York Mets (oh wait, that's me!) for
one-on-one situations with people you trust, where there's no microphone
or camera pointed at you.

Or as your mother probably told you, always wear clean underwear just in
case you have to go to the hospital.

[David Kaye]

Post by James Duncan
We got stuck with this highly watered down America site now. It's
like they think we're stupid or something.

Well, they only have evidence to go by....

[Bhairitu]

Post by l***@democrat.com
I noticed a number of podcasts I used to download from Al Jazeera are now geographically blocked. But the XMBC stream still works. Of course the damn cable companies are to blame.
"The blocking, which began on Thursday, is part of a concession that Al Jazeera made to get pay TV operators to carry its new Al Jazeera America network, which is scheduled to launch next Tuesday. With the launch, Al Jazeera will also start to block U.S. viewers from accessing its international live stream. Al Jazeera had previously said that it was going to disable access to the live stream, but many viewers will likely be surprised by this extending to news clips on YouTube as well – especially because these clips have been a big reason that people are intrigued with Al Jazeera’s take on TV news in the first place."
http://gigaom.com/2013/08/16/al-jazeera-youtube-videos-livestream-blocked/

Given the possible coming events we may want to get up to speed on proxy
servers etc to get the real news. I did note that flipping through
channels on Comca$t that al-Jazeera is available there but on the
Preferred tier that I canceled recently.

[James Duncan]

Post by Bhairitu
Given the possible coming events we may want to get up to speed on proxy
servers etc to get the real news. I did note that flipping through
channels on Comca$t that al-Jazeera is available there but on the
Preferred tier that I canceled recently.

I wondered if they were going to carry it. You can get RT on any
tier, but I guess RT paid Comcast more money to carry them.

[Patty Winter]

Post by James Duncan

Post by Bhairitu
Given the possible coming events we may want to get up to speed on proxy
servers etc to get the real news. I did note that flipping through
channels on Comca$t that al-Jazeera is available there but on the
Preferred tier that I canceled recently.

I wondered if they were going to carry it. You can get RT on any
tier, but I guess RT paid Comcast more money to carry them.

Yes, RT is on a leased channel on Comcast. I don't recall any other
stations in the Bay Area that have that relationship with Comcast;
anyone know of others?


Patty

[James Duncan]

Post by Patty Winter
Yes, RT is on a leased channel on Comcast. I don't recall any other
stations in the Bay Area that have that relationship with Comcast;
anyone know of others?

Al Jazeera could broadcast any content they want if they'd done it
like RT did. So we see the two different approaches.

[Patty Winter]

Post by James Duncan

Post by Patty Winter
Yes, RT is on a leased channel on Comcast. I don't recall any other
stations in the Bay Area that have that relationship with Comcast;
anyone know of others?

Al Jazeera could broadcast any content they want if they'd done it
like RT did. So we see the two different approaches.

I'm not following you. It seems like you're suggesting that AJ is
not currently broadcasting the content they want to.


Patty

[Neil]

Post by Patty Winter

Post by James Duncan

Post by Patty Winter
Yes, RT is on a leased channel on Comcast. I don't recall any other
stations in the Bay Area that have that relationship with Comcast;
anyone know of others?

Al Jazeera could broadcast any content they want if they'd done it
like RT did. So we see the two different approaches.

I'm not following you. It seems like you're suggesting that AJ is
not currently broadcasting the content they want to.
Patty

I think he means RT buys time, or cut some financial deal.

(As Charlie Greer used to say on WABC, "Money talks and nobody walks.")

[Patty Winter]

Post by Neil

Post by Patty Winter

Post by James Duncan

Post by Patty Winter
Yes, RT is on a leased channel on Comcast. I don't recall any other
stations in the Bay Area that have that relationship with Comcast;
anyone know of others?

Al Jazeera could broadcast any content they want if they'd done it
like RT did. So we see the two different approaches.

I'm not following you. It seems like you're suggesting that AJ is
not currently broadcasting the content they want to.

I think he means RT buys time, or cut some financial deal.

Yes, as I mentioned, RT *is* leasing a channel from Comcast.

James' comment suggests that AJAM is somehow being restricted
in the content the air because they *aren't* leasing a channel.


Patty

[James Duncan]

Post by Patty Winter
James' comment suggests that AJAM is somehow being restricted
in the content the air because they *aren't* leasing a channel.

I'd have to research to find references links, but that's what I read.
In order to be carried along with all the other news channels we get,
AJ had to look like the other news channels and block its
international English feeds to the US. These are conditions that were
imposed by American distributors. This is at least annoying, if not
disturbing.

[Patty Winter]

Post by James Duncan

Post by Patty Winter
James' comment suggests that AJAM is somehow being restricted
in the content the air because they *aren't* leasing a channel.

I'd have to research to find references links, but that's what I read.
In order to be carried along with all the other news channels we get,
AJ had to look like the other news channels and block its
international English feeds to the US. These are conditions that were
imposed by American distributors. This is at least annoying, if not
disturbing.

AJE had been carried on a few cable systems, and MHz Networks
(carried in this area on KCSM) aired a few hours of it each
day. Naturally, AJ had to pull those feeds; it couldn't very
well have two competing channels running in the U.S. So it's
only logical that they're making AJAM the default website for
the U.S., too.

(BTW, the web folks have told me that they're working on getting
the international videos onto the U.S. website. They obviously
intended that from the start, because the pages for the stories
are already there, it's just having the videos hosted on the AJE
site that's causing technical problems.)

But I have read *nothing* to indicate that AJAM "had to look
like the other news channels" or in any way modify its content.
On the contrary, AJ executives ignored suggestions to give AJAM
a name that didn't have "Al Jazeera" in it; that's hardly kow-
towing to U.S. cable systems.

If you've seen anything from a reputable news source that says
AJAM is pulling its punches to appease American distributors,
I'd really like to see it.


Patty

[James Duncan]

Post by Patty Winter
But I have read *nothing* to indicate that AJAM "had to look
like the other news channels" or in any way modify its content.
On the contrary, AJ executives ignored suggestions to give AJAM
a name that didn't have "Al Jazeera" in it; that's hardly kow-
towing to U.S. cable systems.

A few too many articles seem to have expressions like "due to cable
provider-imposed restrictions".

But here's the first article in a Google search:
--------------
As Al Jazeera America Launches, Concerns Over Corporate-Driven Agenda
Persist

http://goo.gl/bSMzP8

In preparation for AJAM’s launch, Al Shihabi met with "members of the
business community" as well as political figures such as Chicago mayor
Rahm Emanuel and Senator Carl Levin (D-MI), and promised that AJAM
would be "the voice of Main Street"; another Variety article reported
that "Al Jazeera has also spent time making its case to advertisers,
reaching out to ad-buying concerns to dispel any notions that the
network may be biased or have an anti-American lens."
---------------

The possibility of an acquired "America can do no wrong" bias to
please advertisers and Comcast may tend to distort one's confidence in
the new channel. The possibility of AJAM watering the news (as
expressed in the block quote above) to please Comcast, Time-Warner,
and Ford Motor Company is daunting. Might as well watch Rupert
Murdoch's Fox News.

There's the claim that AJE's free content distribution would compete
with the new American cable channel scenario, but almost all of the
restricted AJE stuff I've tried unsuccessfully to look at online would
never be broadcast on AJAM anyway, mainly because it would be deemed
totally irrelevant content for their American channel. That doesn't
seem to be a real competition issue.

So now a little bit more than ever, Amercians will be less able to see
how things are really done in the rest of the world if AJAM becomes
just another American news echo chamber. As you know, most Amercians
are woefully backward about worldwide news, events, and structures,
and now here's yet another blinder going up. Having AJE and whatever
other media content blocked seems a little like the old Soviet Union
where they did the very same sort of thing. The names and places are
different, but the net result in the same. I'm totally put off that
AJE content suddenly had to be blocked.

[Patty Winter]

Post by James Duncan
--------------
As Al Jazeera America Launches, Concerns Over Corporate-Driven Agenda
Persist
http://goo.gl/bSMzP8
In preparation for AJAM’s launch, Al Shihabi met with "members of the
business community" as well as political figures such as Chicago mayor
Rahm Emanuel and Senator Carl Levin (D-MI), and promised that AJAM
would be "the voice of Main Street"; another Variety article reported
that "Al Jazeera has also spent time making its case to advertisers,
reaching out to ad-buying concerns to dispel any notions that the
network may be biased or have an anti-American lens."
---------------

That's just Al Shihabi telling people what AJ's approach to journalism
is, not changing anything for the American audience. As the article said,
he was "dispelling notions." In other words, correcting wrong impressions.
Not indicating any changes to AJ's approach.

Post by James Duncan
The possibility of an acquired "America can do no wrong" bias to
please advertisers and Comcast may tend to distort one's confidence in
the new channel.

Good heavens, they certainly haven't been doing that! Is that really
your impression of their first couple of weeks??

Nor, unlike RT, have they taken an "American can do no right" position.
They really are good journalists overall. (Although I'm not quite seeing
the quality yet on AJAM that AJE has. Maybe the British accents on the
latter help. :-) )

Post by James Duncan
The possibility of AJAM watering the news (as
expressed in the block quote above) to please Comcast, Time-Warner,
and Ford Motor Company is daunting.

Again, I see no comments indicating any "watering" down. Al Shihabi
was saying, "Here's who we are, contrary to what you may think," not
"Here's who we're going to become to please you."

Please provide some examples of how AJAM has "watered" the news
thus far.

Post by James Duncan
There's the claim that AJE's free content distribution would compete
with the new American cable channel scenario, but almost all of the
restricted AJE stuff I've tried unsuccessfully to look at online would
never be broadcast on AJAM anyway, mainly because it would be deemed
totally irrelevant content for their American channel. That doesn't
seem to be a real competition issue.

What do you consider "totally irrelevant content"? You don't think
that AJAM only airs stories about the U.S., do you? Didn't you see
all the documentaries about other countries over the weekend?

Post by James Duncan
I'm totally put off that
AJE content suddenly had to be blocked.

I'm frustrated about the loss of the livestream, too, but a lot
of the individual stories and documentaries are being copied over
to the AJAM website so they'll be available in the U.S.


Patty

[James Duncan]

Post by Patty Winter
What do you consider "totally irrelevant content"? You don't think
that AJAM only airs stories about the U.S., do you? Didn't you see
all the documentaries about other countries over the weekend?

I'm really happy to hear that AJAM turns out to be developing well. I
can't watch it on TV and frankly just checked it out in the beginning.
All my links take me to AJE where all the things I used to peridocally
watch are blocked including even little feature pieces about worldwide
cultures that they'll never air here anyway.

I got a bad first impression but just checked out the AJAM website
content. Seems to be developing. I'll check it out daily from now
on. However, I still miss all the sundry features I used to watch and
see no valid reason for that blockage. They are not voluntarily doing
that.

[Patty Winter]

Post by James Duncan
I got a bad first impression but just checked out the AJAM website
content. Seems to be developing. I'll check it out daily from now
on. However, I still miss all the sundry features I used to watch and
see no valid reason for that blockage. They are not voluntarily doing
that.

No, they aren't doing it "voluntarily;" that implies intention.
They're doing it because the videos haven't been moved over to
(or aliased from) the AJAM site. It's a web developer glitch. Or
more likely, not a glitch, just a matter of there only being so
many web staff people and so many hours in the day. Drop them a
note as I did and nudge them about moving the videos.

They still haven't fixed the tiger-cub story, but that was a one-off
story that I'm sure isn't a high priority for them. If you're talking
about ongoing shows such as Witness or The Frost Interview or Fault
Lines, then by all means, nag them about that. The placeholder text
is there; they just need to get their act together and put the videos
onto servers that are available from U.S. IP addresses. I may send
them a nag message about it, too. They told me on August 26, "We are
in the process of archiving all video content to the website," but
those three programs I mentioned don't seem to have migrated yet.


Patty

[Bhairitu]

Post by James Duncan

Post by Patty Winter
James' comment suggests that AJAM is somehow being restricted
in the content the air because they *aren't* leasing a channel.

I'd have to research to find references links, but that's what I read.
In order to be carried along with all the other news channels we get,
AJ had to look like the other news channels and block its
international English feeds to the US. These are conditions that were
imposed by American distributors. This is at least annoying, if not
disturbing.

Back during the start of the Afghanistan war in 2001 the best coverage
was on the Sky News channel out of the UK. It was carried on Dish
Network. They were reporting things that CNN, MSNBC wouldn't report.
Then those broadcasts particularly the late night ones (early morning in
the UK) disappeared.

We have about as corrupt a media as Hitler did during his regime.
Fascism is alive and well in the US.

Good site to read:
http://watchingamerica.com/News/

[l***@democrat.com]

Post by Bhairitu

Post by James Duncan

Post by Patty Winter
James' comment suggests that AJAM is somehow being restricted
in the content the air because they *aren't* leasing a channel.

I'd have to research to find references links, but that's what I read.
In order to be carried along with all the other news channels we get,
AJ had to look like the other news channels and block its
international English feeds to the US. These are conditions that were
imposed by American distributors. This is at least annoying, if not
disturbing.

Back during the start of the Afghanistan war in 2001 the best coverage
was on the Sky News channel out of the UK. It was carried on Dish
Network. They were reporting things that CNN, MSNBC wouldn't report.
Then those broadcasts particularly the late night ones (early morning in
the UK) disappeared.
We have about as corrupt a media as Hitler did during his regime.
Fascism is alive and well in the US.
http://watchingamerica.com/News/

The BBC doesn't censor the news. GHW Bush supposedly listened to the BBC shortwave North American broadcasts on a Sony worldband radio. As most people know, the staff prepares news "reels" for POTUS. They even clipped articles from the dead tree edition of the press, er before we started to call it the dead tree edition. I assume today the create an electronic document. Anyway, while not a fan of GHW Bush, I give him a bit of credit for at least attempting to get out of the "bubble." Of course the bar code scanner incident kind of proved a sitting POTUS can never go back to reality.

[David Kaye]

Back during the start of the Afghanistan war in 2001 the best coverage was
on the Sky News channel out of the UK.

Which is odd in itself, because Sky is part of Rupert Murdock's Fox empire.

[l***@democrat.com]

Post by David Kaye

Back during the start of the Afghanistan war in 2001 the best coverage was
on the Sky News channel out of the UK.

Which is odd in itself, because Sky is part of Rupert Murdock's Fox empire.

I have the Fox News App on my phone. While it is hard to defend anything from Murdoch, their print media isn't as biased as the FNC station. It may be there is little tolerance in the EU for the kind of nonsense FNC puts out on say Fox and Friends. After all, Murdoch is all about money.

Now if FNC had some page 3 girls, I'd watch it.

[Bhairitu]

Post by l***@democrat.com

Post by David Kaye

Back during the start of the Afghanistan war in 2001 the best coverage was
on the Sky News channel out of the UK.

Which is odd in itself, because Sky is part of Rupert Murdock's Fox empire.

I have the Fox News App on my phone. While it is hard to defend anything from Murdoch, their print media isn't as biased as the FNC station. It may be there is little tolerance in the EU for the kind of nonsense FNC puts out on say Fox and Friends. After all, Murdoch is all about money.
Now if FNC had some page 3 girls, I'd watch it.

Back in the 1990s I read an interview with Murdoch in Esquire magazine.
He's doesn't care about the content of his media just so long as they
are profitable. FOX TV and FX both try to push the envelope and they
also tried to get rid of the FCC rules that make US TV so backward
compared to other countries (not to mention additional production costs).

[Phil Kane]

Post by Bhairitu
they
also tried to get rid of the FCC rules that make US TV so backward
compared to other countries (not to mention additional production costs).

Which rules are they, perchance?

Phil Kane
Beaverton, OR

[Bhairitu]

Post by Phil Kane

Post by Bhairitu
they
also tried to get rid of the FCC rules that make US TV so backward
compared to other countries (not to mention additional production costs).

Which rules are they, perchance?
Phil Kane
Beaverton, OR

The indecency rules which apparently the FCC is prepared to drop. I
recall that FOX tried to persuade it several years ago but decline in
viewers has all networks lobbying for it.
http://www.deadline.com/2013/06/broadcasters-tell-fcc-that-audiene-decline-makes-indecency-rules-archaic/

[James Duncan]

Post by Patty Winter

Post by James Duncan
Al Jazeera could broadcast any content they want if they'd done it
like RT did. So we see the two different approaches.

I'm not following you. It seems like you're suggesting that AJ is
not currently broadcasting the content they want to.

I'd guess that was the case. They were evidently forced to restrict
their content and appearance in many ways as a condition for carriage
on US cable systems. That's why it looks mostly just like any other
American news channel.

[l***@democrat.com]

Post by l***@democrat.com
I noticed a number of podcasts I used to download from Al Jazeera are now geographically blocked. But the XMBC stream still works. Of course the damn cable companies are to blame.
"The blocking, which began on Thursday, is part of a concession that Al Jazeera made to get pay TV operators to carry its new Al Jazeera America network, which is scheduled to launch next Tuesday. With the launch, Al Jazeera will also start to block U.S. viewers from accessing its international live stream. Al Jazeera had previously said that it was going to disable access to the live stream, but many viewers will likely be surprised by this extending to news clips on YouTube as well – especially because these clips have been a big reason that people are intrigued with Al Jazeera’s take on TV news in the first place."
http://gigaom.com/2013/08/16/al-jazeera-youtube-videos-livestream-blocked/

I see the stream is Al Jazeera America. It seems to be lower quality as well.