SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
In many ways it’s a rite of passage in America: being ripped off by your cable company and trying to figure out how they did it. Now a lawsuit against Charter Communications is seeking to uncover just that.
The biggest scam of all – pressuring or forcing subscribers to “rent” the clunky, technologically outdated cable box at a greatly inflated price – is still in place, despite a brief effort by the FCC in 2016 to shut it down.
And then there are hidden costs – such as “broadcast TV fees” and “regional sports fees” – raking in tens of millions of dollars in pure profit for unscrupulous cable companies, despite Consumer Reports focusing on the topic for a number of years, and now Congress even starting to pay attention.
But although we have all grown used to our cable fees rocketing the second you are off the special two-year contract rate, requiring you to call up the company and threaten to move to a competitor until you are offered the next incredible special deal, Charter may have pushed things too far with its latest special offer: a two-year flat fee deal that somehow, it is claimed, grew more expensive every month.
Five Charter Communications customers, based in Ohio and Kentucky, have formally accused [PDF] the company of a bait-and-switch scam for its cable TV service. The biz advertised a fixed monthly rate, they say, but far from being fixed, every few months it cost a little more.
Are the cable companies to blame, or the sports and movie channels that are charging more?
(Score: 4, Interesting) by mcgrew on Friday May 29 2020, @01:52PM (1 child)
I've been using a rabbit ear ever since TV went digital, digital TV wiped out every reason to subscribe to cable (I understand it's necessary in certain regions because of topography). Then they changed some frequencies and cut power for 5G (which only helps the phone companies, not you or me) and half my stations are now gone. I'll have to buy an outdoor antenna.
Odd that the government paid TV stations with my tax money to do this with The Cable Guy in charge of the FCC. And people wonder why I detest the guy who appointed him.
mcgrewbooks.com mcgrew.info nooze.org
(Score: 5, Interesting) by stretch611 on Friday May 29 2020, @03:48PM
If you are fairly close to a major city, rabbit ears can work out... But in almost every case a good outside antenna is best.
When I lived out Portland, ME, rabbit ears (actually a small 12" x 8" x 3/4" wall mounted indoor antenna) got me all of about 2 or 3 large stations.
At my house 20 miles outside of Atlanta, those same rabbit ears got me about 6-8 stations.
I bought an outside antenna for about $100 and placed it on my roof. I went from 6-8 stations to about 25-30, many with multiple subchannels giving me over 50 different channels.
One thing though... I tried the same antenna for my mother... who actually lives a few miles closer to Atlanta than I do. The indoor antenna was horrible on only got 1 or 2 stations, the outside antenna only did slightly better in pulled in about 10 stations. But, she lives in a subdivision with a ton of old growth trees. Even though she lives closer to the broadcasting stations and should have a much stronger signal, all the trees cause the signal to bounce around and cause ghosting and makes it harder to get without interference. It should be noted that her subdivision is so bad that most people there, including her, can not even get satellite TV (either DISH or DirecTV) due to the number of large trees.
So bigger is always better with antennas... But you really need a clear view of the sky in order to get the best bang for your buck.
Now with 5 covid vaccine shots/boosters altering my DNA :P