GOP Plot?: Comcast Pulls MSNBC From Standard Cable in Boston Area
No Longer a Viewing Option
As a left-leaning political junkie, MSNBC constitutes my sustenance, my entertainment, and my candy, especially during election cycles. As the only network with progressive commentary (i.e. Keith Olbermann on Countdown), along with other entertaining, informative, and engaging programming, to include Joe Scarborough’s Cup of Joe, Dan Abram’s Verdict, and Chris Matthews’ Hardball, MSNBC is literally the only channel that my wife and I watch together on TV (I also watch football during season and occassionally some Comedy Central stuff before going to bed).
As parents of a two-year old, watching Chris and Keith during the primaries was not only our source of information and news, but it was also our entertainment – our little guilty pleasure that we shared together. We felt like we knew Chris Matthews (my wife did meet and interview him during the making of our documentary film, Swing State Ohio, during the Presidential Election in 2004), and watching his show, along with the others was familiar, comforting, and relaxing. We even liked MSNBC featured conservatives Tucker Carlson, Joe Scarborough, and even Pat Buchanon, because they are all charming, wildly intelligent, and provided their views in a fair and reasoned manner.
So given our affection for this network, this lonely island in a sea of mindless wing-nuttery and mediocrity, we were shocked, dismayed, and disgusted when found out that our beloved MSNBC was being moved from standard cable to the “Digital Tier” on Comcast in the Boston area.
Thanks to the “magic of the internet” I did some looking around and found that this was happening all over the country. I found the timing to be odd, considering this network is 99% dedicated to political programming (besides their disturbing late-night prison documentary series “Lock Up”), and we are fewer than 100 days away from a kinda important political event. I also found it odd that among the cable news channels, only MSNBC, the “left-leaning” channel, was tapped to move to the digital tier, forcing its customers to cough up extra cash for the extra service.
Some further digging ensued and the Monkey and I found a comment on a blog that seemed to provide some explanation from Comcast (bold added by me):
This is Shawn Feddeman from Comcast in Boston and I wanted to address your posting about some recent channel changes we have made locally.
As you mention, Comcast did in fact move MSNBC and several other channels (what other channels?) to our digital lineup this week. This is not a more expensive tier of service, but it does require a digital cable box (which is more expensive). Most of our customers in the area aren’t impacted by these moves because they already have digital cable service. However, for the analog customers who want to continue watching MSNBC and the other channels, we are offering them a free cable box for a year (after which you will have to pay for it, proving that it is more expensive).
We made these changes to our lineup so that we could launch more HD programming – which our customers have been asking for (what, just the progressives were asking for it? – no conservatives want to see O’Reilly in HD?). In the coming weeks, we will be adding many new HD networks o respond to the demand.
Finally, I would also like to point out that there were absolutely no political motivations behind the recent channel moves. (Except for one little thing which you will find out by reading below). We have been communicating with our analog customers about these programming changes for more than a month through postcards, e-mails, calls, channel crawls and more to ensure they knew about the changes. Thanks for letting me clarify.
First of all, Shawn Feddeman is not correct about this tier not being more expensive. Many people have standard cable; digital cable costs about $40 more per month. In addition, many people (like me) also get standard cable paid for with our condo fees. In order to upgrade to digital I would have to buy my own service, an additional cost on top of my condo fees.
But I do have a question for Ms. Feddeman regarding Comcast’s motivations behind making this change: If you want to provide more HD programming, why didn’t you tap FoxNews for HD broadcast? Wouldn’t FoxNews viewers appreciate seeing their right-wing blowhards in full digital glory?
And finally, Ms. Feddeman asserts that there is no “political motivation” behind the decision to pull the left-leaning channel from the standard lineup. That would be a lot easier to believe if there wasn’t one little interesting tidbit about Ms. Feddeman’s employment prior to running the PR shop at Comcast.
Shawn Feddeman a Former GOP Operative
Former Romney Spokeswoman Feddeman
Through the “magic of the internet,” I discovered that Shawn Feddeman served as Governor Mitt Romney’s Press Secretary prior to working for Comcast. Obviously she is a Republican who was at one time actively involved in politics, working for a future Republican presidential candidate. It just doesn’t pass the sniff test that there were no political motivations in this decision. Her credentials alone indicate that certainly politics played a role in this decision to move MSNBC off basic cable.
My wife is considering poneying up for the digital tier but my intention right now is to boycott that move out of principle. I know in a way I’ll just be punishing myself, as I won’t have my favorite channel during what will be a historic and exciting Presidential campaign. I plan on writing a letter to Shawn Feddeman and will provide updates on the situation in these pages at Monkeyinmymind.com.
Hi Paul. Jim Hughes from Comcast’s Boston office here. As a fan of Hardball and Countdown myself, I can tell you for sure that this was not about politics — it was about ensuring that our network is able to deliver the maximum benefit to the maximum number of customers. And as you may have seen in the press, we’ve already started delivering the benefits — we announced the launch of seven new HD channels here in Mass. — Disney HD, ABC Family HD, TLC HD, AMC HD, Science Channel HD, TMC (The Movie Channel) HD and Showtime 2 HD — last week, and more are on the way. A single analog channel takes up as much space on our network as 10 digital channels, or 3 HD channels, and this change is allowing us to strike an appropriate balance between our analog and digital offerings. As for the price issue you bring up, you’re right — digital cable service requires a box-rental fee. This is the fee that we waived for a year for affected customers. And while other TV providers here and elsewhere in the country are seeing the growing consumer preference for digital TV and dropping analog service altogether, we are committed to delivering a low-cost analog option for our remaining customers who want it.
Hi Jim,
Thanks for reading and writing in to Monkeyinmymind.com.
While I appreciate you laying out Comcast’s plans to deliver more HD programming, and also explaining how analog channels occupy more “space” than their digital counterparts, your response still doesn’t quite answer exactly why MSNBC was chosen out of all the cable news channels to be ejected from analog into digital-only format.
To provide some context to this issue, I am aware that if one receives a digital programming package, one still generally receives access to analog versions of those digital programs (now excepting MSNBC, of course). For example, I was over at another Comcast subscriber’s home this weekend and noticed that while they had access to ESPN HD, HBO HD, and CNN HD, this person still had access to the analog versions of those channels. Why doesn’t this hold true for MSNBC?
I love the picture and quality of HD programming as much as anyone else, but I wasn’t aware that this was a “choose or lose” proposition when it comes to mainstays on the cable programming spectrum like MSNBC. As of today (and until February 17, 2009), the default television format is not yet digital so consumers like myself and many thousands of others shouldn’t be forced into converting to digital prematurely.
To that end, I was hoping you could provide additional clarity on the following questions:
1) What other channels besides MSNBC were removed from analog format in order to be digital only (I haven’t noticed anything else missing from the lineup)?
2) What type of Nielsen ratings did these other channels earn?
3) If Comcast’s motivation was not political, but instead to “ensur[e] that [y]our network is able to deliver the maximum benefit to the maximum number of customers,” why do CNN, FoxNews, and CNBC remain available in analog format?
This move smacks as a double standard, especially when one compares the ratings that each of these channels earn. Please note the following ratings numbers over this last weekend, comparing all of the cable news networks:
You will notice that while MSNBC trails FoxNews and CNN (only slightly) in one demographic, it outperforms Fox and CNN in the 25-54 demographic, and outperforms CNBC in all demographics.
Live + Same Day Weekend Ratings
Cable News Ratings August 2, 2008
P2+ Total Day
FNC – 699,000 viewers
CNN – 467,000 viewers
MSNBC – 420,000 viewers
CNBC – 132,000 viewers
HLN – 263,000 viewers
P2+ Prime Time
FNC – 1,033,000 viewers
CNN – 657,000 viewers
MSNBC – 548,000 viewers
CNBC – 262,000 viewers
HLN – 270,000 viewers
25-54 Total Day
FNC – 169,000 viewers
CNN – 145,000 viewers
MSNBC – 213,000 viewers
CNBC – 68,000 viewers
HLN – 103,000 viewers
25-54 Prime Time
FNC – 178,000 viewers
CNN – 167,000 viewers
MSNBC – 288,000 viewers
CNBC – 134,000 viewers
HLN – 101,000 viewers
Again, thanks for your forthright answers.
In order for many of us to believe that this decision was NOT politically motivated, answers to questions like mine would be sincerely appreciated.
[...] monkeyinmymind.com quiet the monkey. live a better life. « GOP Plot?: Comcast Pulls MSNBC From Standard Cable in Boston Area [...]
The fact that Shawn Feddeman was Mitt Romney’s press secretary explains it all, doesn’t it? The far right wing doesn’t do ANYTHING that isn’t politically motivated. Thanks for offering that bit of info.
[...] the addition of my new penpal and frequent blog commenter, Jim Hughes of Comcast. Since I posted my first comment on Comcast’s decision to pull MSNBC from its Standard lineup in the Boston area, Jim has been [...]
I’m to the right and I’m in your area and actually I kinda like msnbc…the format that they have is different and doesn’t seem more of the alert thing that cnn does or fox does.
“For example, I was over at another Comcast subscriber’s home this weekend and noticed that while they had access to ESPN HD, HBO HD, and CNN HD, this person still had access to the analog versions of those channels. Why doesn’t this hold true for MSNBC?”
Because there’s no plans for a MSNBC in HD. The ratings aren’t there. You are confusing HDTV with digital cable there’s a difference.
“I love the picture and quality of HD programming as much as anyone else, but I wasn’t aware that this was a “choose or lose” proposition when it comes to mainstays on the cable programming spectrum like MSNBC. As of today (and until February 17, 2009), the default television format is not yet digital so consumers like myself and many thousands of others shouldn’t be forced into converting to digital prematurely.”
That’s the default for over the air tv…not digital cable or analog cable. There’s quite a bit of confusion that companies are trying to imply. I personally walked out of a circuit city because they tried to tell me that over the air hdtv did not exist!
“3) If Comcast’s motivation was not political, but instead to “ensur[e] that [y]our network is able to deliver the maximum benefit to the maximum number of customers,” why do CNN, FoxNews, and CNBC remain available in analog format?”
That’s because the content producer hasn’t made a hdtv version of msnbc. CNBC is getting competition now with the fox business channel and also from bloomberg (which also was moved onto the digital cable) CNN used to compete with cnnfn but it was dropped because the ratings were so low. MSNBC’s ratings are pretty low so NBC which controls both msnbc and cnbc is putting the station on a lower rung.
This move smacks as a double standard, especially when one compares the ratings that each of these channels earn. Please note the following ratings numbers over this last weekend, comparing all of the cable news networks:
You will notice that while MSNBC trails FoxNews and CNN (only slightly) in one demographic, it outperforms Fox and CNN in the 25-54 demographic, and outperforms CNBC in all demographics.
http://www.heraldnews.com/entertainment/x1346882663/Comcast-phasing-out-its-analog-television-stations
EWTN was dropped to go the digital, court tv, oxygen, boston catholic television…these were the ones in my area.
There’s plenty of liberal television out there though…Current I find to be liberal and if you do get a HDTV the PBS world is actually pretty good.
In a nutshell let me sort of explain a bit of the industry. the cable industry didn’t take satellite seriously until the mid 90’s dispite the fact that they get programming from dishes. analog cable vs satellite there’s no dispute that satellite wins. so they created digital cable which gives just about the same picture. Anything satellite can do cable can do…but it clearly costs more money! So from the cable companies perspective people are getting some hdtv but there’s still some on regular analog. The space of one analog I think they can get three hdtv channels. So that msnbc analog might have been dropped to say add A&E, FUSE, IFC, Oxygen etc in hd. I’ve gained maybe eight or so stations in the past few months and lost about five or so analog.
What companies are hoping for is that some might be scared and just get a hdtv this holiday season and that pretty much nullifies analog cable.
If I were you though I’d be more angry on where the market is going for the cable access. Cable access is the only way for some to broadcast to their locality. If analog eventually dies out there’s no digital segment to pick it up.
Supposedly in plymouth if you just wanted to get cable analog isn’t even offered anymore it’s just digital. If you were grandfathered in that’s fine but everyone is on the digital. Years ago they dropped the pay per views and dropped the pay channels. So gradually they are taking away either things very popular or unpopular. If there’s a hd version they’ll drop it…if it’s not in hd they’ll still drop it…all to make room.
Thanks for reading and thanks for your perspective and insight on this whole thing.
My hope is for one day to have “a la carte” programming, in which subscribers will be able to pick out the channels they want to see and discard the rest.
I personally watch just a handful of stations and have no use for the other 100.
All the best,
Paul
http://Www.monkeyinmymind.com
I don’t watch MSNBC very often, but I just wanted to watch Countdown, for Keith Olbermann’s coverage of the DNC and I just went through the guide about five times, looking for that channel. Then a google search trying to find out which channel MSNBC is in Bosto brought me here.
I can’t believe Comcast would pull MSNBC. WTF? Even Jim’s explanation there doesn’t explain it well enough. They should have pulled another channel.
I couldn’t agree with you more, JoMaMa! Jim Hughes is a nice enough guy to respond to my queries but the answers amount to little more than circumlocution. If you look at the next couple of posts, I followed up with him and asked him directly why FoxNews and CNN remained on cable and he didn’t have a real answer.
I do want to add one thing, though…I also reached about to about a half dozen people at MSNBC to see what their view of the situation is and they are oddly silent. Perhaps they don’t want to damage a business relationship? Or perhaps this is some kind of money thing for them. Whatever the case, none of the answers are adequate so I think one can assume some kind of collusion between MSNBC and Comcast.
Check this post here: MSNBC to Digital Tier on Comcast: Conspiracy or Cash Grab
Pavler
While I understand Mr Hughes argument about digital vs analog bandwidth, there is one other thing to note:
If you have a CableCard system (like a TivoHD) then you automatically get a bunch of digital channels as part of “Standard Cable”. The CableCard allows you to get digital channels without renting a box from Comcast. However, you don’t get MSNBC. You have to pay extra for their “Digital Starter” package.
If this move was simply a matter of analog vs digital bandwidth savings, why also put the channel in a tier that prevents many customers with digital tuners from receiving it? I am left very concerned that this move, done in a critical election year, was politically motivated. Not a pleasant thought for democracy.
I couldn’t agree with you more, Eric, and thanks for writing in. There is something missing here in the explanations as to why this happened.
It is also important to note that MSNBC themselves are notably silent on the issue as well. I sent over a half dozen emails to several different outlets within the network and received no responses. I discussed the notion that MSNBC may be “in” on the move in a separate blog post here.
I do think it’s political but it’s also one of those times when politics may coincide with economic advantage. Perhaps in someway MSNBC is making more money with this arrangement, similar to the NFL Network’s demand for higher fees, which resulted in it being jettisoned from basic cable as well.
Again, great to hear your comments!
Good post, thanks Monkey. I’m having a suspicious Comcast/MSNBC experience that I haven’t seen reported anywhere else. I have a digital cable box and a “Digital Classic” subscription package and I can’t get MSNBC either on its original analog channel or its new digital channel. After two calls to customer support, I got the representative to agree that I had the equipment and the subscription that I needed to get MSNBC, but wasn’t getting it for some reason. The representative suspects a faulty cable box, but I get all of the other analog and digital channels that I’m paying for, as far as I can tell. I don’t think I’m important enough to be specifically targeted by this vast right-wing conspiracy, so I’d be curious to hear if anyone else is having this problem.
- Patrick
(Cambridge, MA)
That is absolutely fascinating, and thanks for commenting, Patrick.
This is first case I have heard of like this…have you been able to resolve it?
I recently moved and purposely chose not to go with Comcast for my cable service. Instead, Verizon FIOS was in my area and I am now happily receiving MSNBC without having to pay Comcast for it.
I did a quick search for FIOS in Cambridge and it may not be available. You can go to their website here and punch in your address to verify. Even if it’s not available, I’d still call and threaten to quit the service unless they restore full accessibility to all of the available channels, including MSNBC.
Keep us posted!
I just happened on this, after finally having time to call Comcast to ask why the MSNBC channel changed and then disappeared from the bedroom television that has no digital box. Imagine my surprise to find that Comcast is disgustingly political (instead of just incompetent and greedy). If the Democrats get back into office, they had better return the telecommunications industry/FCC back to competitive status. The idea that I have no other alternative but Comcast is, um, I think they call it unAmerican and am, communist – or is it fascist? What happened to healthy competition? As it is, Comcast can do whatever it wants to do and reap profits so high that even they don’t know what to do with. I will move next summer. I will only choose a place that offers an alternative to Comcast. Any alternative.
Has anyone contacted MSNBC about this? Elected official? Wednesday would be a good day to start that…
Comcast shifted Bloomberg Television over to Digital Cable an then placed it in a higher cost premium package. I believe this tactic is commonly known as ” Bait and Switch” an therefore illegal. They get your municipality to sign a contract while offer certain progrmming to residents then pull a Bait and Switch to get you to pay more!
Many people complaining about the removal of MSNBC analog channel but it’s even worse and here’s why: MSNBC analog channel was pulled to leave more room for other digital channels. No problem with that. But WHY did they make it a premium digital channel that requires the cable companies cable box and/or cable card? I have a TV with a digital tuner so in theory I could get the digital MSNBC channel but for some reason the cable companies feel they have to “scramble” a “basic cable” channel.
I just stumbled onto your website, Mr. MonkeyMan. I live in Memphis and the move of MSNBC just occurred in early August. The postcard I got from Comcast gleefully announce the move to upward dial channels. They FAILED to post that I’d have to shell out $96.40 more a year for a box. My little TV in the kitchen is FULLY DIGITAL. I have what’s called a DigiPac for $46.00 a month, plus another $12 for HBO – so my DIGITAL TV in the living room is all set. But without a box in the kitchen, for heaven’s sake, is boiled down to CNN drivel, or that CNN morning thing and CNBC (puhleeze spare me) and Fox–which I would rather choke than watch.
I contacted MSNBC – because Comcast rep. told me that MSNBC “requested” to be moved. Why? So I can see Mika’s pores more closely? They just lost thousands, if not millions of us who are already paying through the nose and their ratings are sufficient enough to drop us either! Perhaps Scarborough has been fed too much ego juice. I don’t miss Morning Blow, but Keith & Rachel were essential. So, I have written Comcast to protest. Without any competition here (can’t use satellite for the trees), I am so screwed. Did anything get resolved there and why aren’t more people screaming at MSNBC?
Well in short it is about money and MSNBC although has some profit is not as profitable as FNC, CNN, etc. The demand goes by what channels have the highest ratings. Today MSNBC was moved to the extended tier, simply because they are increasing HD programming and the demand for MSNBC on basuc is just not high enough. It is no conspiracy, no Mitt Romeny politics – it is simply about viewers and money. MSNBC is just not yielding enough to be more profitable on the basic tier then the other cable news networks.
Hey Janette,
Thanks for weighing in. I now believe that MSNBC is totally in on this deal. I think that they wagered a bet, it’s actually more like mathematical revenue calculus, in which they weigh the opportunity costs of the following factors: projected revenues from the high-income demographic that orders premium everything, the loyal viewers in mostly middle-income bracket who just might be willing to shell out the extra dough for the extended cable lineup as long as it includes Rachel and Keith, and the ancillary markets against the immediate loss of revenue due to pissed off viewership in their primary, low-to-mid-income range demographic. The key thing here is that the majority of these people are directing their anger at Comcast, an entity that while clearly aligned with the Romney wing of the Republican Party, happily facilitated this migration but was most likely not the progenitor of the idea. I believe the idea was spawned in the minds of people very high up in the executive food chain, possibly originating at MSNBC’s parent company, GE.
Whatever the cause and whatever the reason, the internet is abuzz with this story but MSNBC is mum. To me, that’s a sign of complicity because if MSNBC were truly a progressive organization (and it’s not) they would at least respond to and investigate the issue. The point is here is that everybody is owned by somebody and MSNBC sure as heck disappointed me.
I still don’t like Comcast, due to their blatantly political connection, so I am overjoyed to now receive Verizon FIOS, a service I really enjoy. MSNBC? It comes on the basic package. Oddly enough, I would be surprised if I watched an hour a month of MSNBC now. Although I would be lying if I told you I didn’t lose a lot of respect for the network over the incident, my reasons for watching less of MSNBC now stem from a lack of interest in basically everything their doing right now. Although I am not a hardcore follower of Colbert and Stewart, I probably watch 2 or 3 episodes a month of either program, gather the news I need from the internet, and go about my day without time or patience for the blather currently emanating from MSNBC.
Perhaps it has more to do with money than politics. You know, money, the stuff you and your leftist pals want to redistribute. By pulling shows to digital tier Comcast can charge more. Something you mentioned briefly, but ignored the remainder for your post. They recently moved SyFy and EWTN to the digital tier in my location. Does Comcast have a hidden anti-Catholic nerd agenda? Nope. The cable companies want to eventually move everything off of analog so they can charge more and possibly make more thru PPV and other for fee products they wouldn’t otherwise be able to on analog. Besides MSNBC has such a tiny market share you and your wife make up 12% of their viewing audience. So who cares.
Hey John,
You obviously cared enough to take the time and write into monkeyinmymind!
And thanks for doing so. In fact, you bring up an excellent point. A point that the Monkey and I delved into in great detail in our post here: MSNBC: Conspiracy or Cash Grab?. And more recently: here: The MSNBC/Comcast Digital Conspiracy.
Also, I am not sure where you are getting your Nielsen data about ratings, but MSNBC is not only the #2 cable network, but is also the number #1 cable network among the most sought after television demographic of 18-34 year olds. After working in television for five years, I can tell you that MSNBC is a resounding success and will be around for a long time.
Fox News, on the other hand, is a ratings juggernaut, growing at a rate of 70%. This isn’t terribly surprising as there is typically a growth in media outlets that offer an oppositional view to the Party in power. MSNBC was born from the Bush Presidency. So was Air America, even though many would consider its existence a misfire. Moveon.org came to be during the Lewinski scandal, urging Congress and the country to “move on” from diversions like this character assassination when the American public might be better served by a focus on governance and solving societal problems and international concerns. During the Bush Presidency it morphed into the mouthpiece of the American progressive movement.
Finally. We detected a note of anti-liberal sentiment in your words and would ask that we all attempt to lose ourselves of labels and just come together in this conversation as thinking, conscious beings. We are by no means Democratic apologists in the pages of monkeyinmymind.com, while it may appear so due to the progressive nature of our political philosophy.
Thank you for writing. You are a friend of these pages.
100% political, if they dont put these channels back i will create a boycott in my town for comcast and I personally will recomend other services. There will be no way to cover this up for them.
I was just remembering when Richard Clark, Clinton and Bush’s terrorism expert, was giving his congressional testimony about how the white house ignored all warnings of 911, COMCAST (at least here in southern Florida) completely blacked out the screen and audio for almost the entirety of his testimony. it was so obvious. it was creepy. its’ the same thing china, etc. does. Now COMCAST/republicans have NBC, and Olbermann is gone in less than a week.