Boston Comcast Responds to Playing Politics by Yanking MSNBC from Standard Cable
Political Move?
Yesterday I posted a discovery I had made about one of the Comcast executives behind the yanking of MSNBC from Standard Cable to the “digital only” tier in the Boston television market.
Specifically, the Comcast’s Vice President of Public Relations here in the northeast is a woman by the name of Shawn Feddeman, who prior to running PR for Comcast, was the Press Secretary for former GOP Presidential Candidate Mitt Romney while he was Governor of Massachusetts. She was also a campaign contributor to to Romney’s failed presidential bid while serving as head of PR for Comcast in New England. I felt that this revelation was further evidence that Comcast’s decision to pull the network from its analog package was politically motivated.
Well, apparently my post made the rounds and not long thereafter I received a response from another executive at Comcast. While I appreciate the attempt to provide some clarity on the issue, the executive’s response only sparked further questions on my part.
Below I will provide that executive’s response, as well as my follow-up questions to him. Hopefully we will soon receive some answers that make some sense.
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.
And below, you will find my response to Jim Hughes:
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 viewersP2+ Prime Time
FNC – 1,033,000 viewers
CNN – 657,000 viewers
MSNBC – 548,000 viewers
CNBC – 262,000 viewers
HLN – 270,000 viewers25-54 Total Day
FNC – 169,000 viewers
CNN – 145,000 viewers
MSNBC – 213,000 viewers
CNBC – 68,000 viewers
HLN – 103,000 viewers25-54 Prime Time
FNC – 178,000 viewers
CNN – 167,000 viewers
MSNBC – 288,000 viewers
CNBC – 134,000 viewers
HLN – 101,000 viewersAgain, 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.
August 6th, 2008 at 2:23 pm
Thanks for your follow-up email, Paul. To keep things simple, I’ll respond here. The number of channels that moved varied slightly from community to community. I don’t know where you live, so I can’t say for sure what channels moved in your community, but you can find this out through a zip code search here — http://www.comcastdigitalworld.com. (There is more information on this general subject there as well, if you’re interested.) As for how we selected the channels that moved, these kinds of decisions are always based on a combination of customer input and our contractual obligations with programmers.
I’m glad you brought up the federal government’s Feb. ‘07 Digital Broadcast Transition, though, because there is a fair amount of confusion over this. This mandate, because it applies only to the publicly owned and federally regulated broadcast spectrum, will have no effect on self-contained networks operated by companies like Comcast. Literally, this will be a non-event for TVs connected to our network. I don’t think any other providers here in Mass. will be offering analog services for much longer, but we will — we’ll receive digital signals from programmers and “down-convert” them to analog for our remaining analog customers. Those customers will not need a box — whatever Comcast service they have today will continue to be operational. Unless they have other TVs that are not yet connected, Comcast customers really don’t have to worry about this. For more information on this subject, check out the FCC’s website (www.dtv.gov) or ours (www.comcast.com/dtv).
Anyways, I hope this has been helpful. Thanks again.
August 8th, 2008 at 10:14 am
Jim,
Thanks again for your quick reply, but in your attempt to “keep things simple,” it seems like you missed the most important question.
I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt because it was the third and final question, so here it is again:
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?
With the ratings numbers I showed you, MSNBC outperforms CNBC hands down, all the time, outperforms FoxNews and CNN in certain demographics, and only trails CNN in the main demo by a few percentage points.
In other words, what I’m getting at is the fact that in your attempt to deliver the “maximum” benefit, you are shutting out a huge audience, and you’re not doing the same to the analog viewers of FoxNews, CNN, or CNBC.
August 10th, 2008 at 11:02 pm
Paul, sorry for the delay, I’ve been traveling. I had this question in mind as I explained how these kinds of decisions are driven by a combination of customer input and contractual obligations with programmers. Sorry for any confusion if I didn’t make that clear enough.
August 20th, 2008 at 12:43 pm
I can’t believe removing MSNBC from analog is creating such a fuss. Who cares !!! Get rid of them all, I want more HD !!! Those that think this is politically motivated are nuts, this is all about dollars and cents. MSNBC’s contract was probably the first one to come up. The rest will follow.
In Chicago where all analog have already been eliminated they have 16 more HD channels than we have locally. Bring it on !
-Ken
August 21st, 2008 at 6:09 pm
Paul etal.,
Since you have such a good relationship with Jim Hughes at Comcast, perhaps you could get more information than I have been able to gather from efforts to communicate with Comcast.
After the removal of MSNBC and other channels from analog, I have been asking for RFD and ESPNU. I am a Comcast subscriber in Salem MA.
RFD is a channel with rural roots, but is heavily promoting itself. What I want to watch on RFD is “Imus in the Morning”. Comcast already has a national agreement with RFD, but each Comcast system needs to make decisions regarding the addition to its channel linup.
ESPNU is a college sports offering from ESPN. Comcast and ESPN have been in a tug of war for over 3 years regarding the addition of ESPNU to Comcast channel lineups. Neither of these two bullies will blink.
Can you find out from your friend Jim when subscribers in the Boston area may be offered these two channels ?
Thanks,
David.