Would you pay to watch CNN,Fox etc. ?

Let's say cable/satellite companies came out with a plan where you get 10 stations of 'your choice' for one basic low price.----The rest of the stations you would have to pay extra for.---Would you pay to have CNN,Fox or any other 24 hour "so-called" news stations?Even if the amount of money is very little for example 25 cents a month per station.----------------As for me I would NOT even pay 1 penny,as it is I rarely view them.

 

No I would not pay for any new channel.

I can get all the propaganda, lies, and company press releases for free on the Internet.

 

i dont own a tv. does that answer your question??

 

No fucking way!!!

 

Yeah, I'd pay 25 cents a month for Fox news, all the women on there are

HOT !!

Ok not all of em
Peace

 

Well that's the other extreme.There's about 4 tv stations I view,if not for those stations I would not have much use for a tv either.--It's funny when US tv 'just' had the networks and PBS there was always something good to watch.

 

I own a small tv, & a vcr/dvd combo that'll play cdr's...If I'm desperate to see something I'll download it.
I'm not paying for cable... Fuck that, that's weed money!

 

i would be interested in a per-channel charge for a customized cable package, but fox news would NOT be in the lineup.

i'd want it strictly for entertainment reasons. comedy central, cartoon network, discovery, history channel, travel channel, sci-fi, etc.

but i doubt this would ever happen. the companies know more people would want things like this instead of the big bundled packages they already provide. they would lose money if they started doing this kind of thing, because most people who have cable watch maybe 10% of the channels they get

 

I think whether one has cable or not,most intelligent people would agree with that and not pay.---The reason I also asked this question is I think the "rating systems" that are supposed to let the tv stations know how many viewers they have are NOT accurate anymore.--These stations ie:CNN/Fox and so on have alot less regular viewers than they think they have.

 

If more people demanded it,I think it would happen. Maybe a few proper regulations thrown in would help too.--There is no valid reason why anyone(well most people) would want or need bundled packages of in most cases useless stations.

 

Neither
Both are corporate media liars,
get your news from independent sources on the net.

Try www.infowars.com

 

i don't watch those channels anyway, so i would certainly not pay extra for them.

well, i occasionally do watch fox, but i'm assuming you meant foxnews.

 

Yep I meant Fox news,but since Fox and CNN are not really news stations as far as I'm concerned I deliberately left the word "news" out.

 

Satellite TV is ridiculously overpriced already thro that bitch Murdoch.

I might pay for CNBC and Bloomberg if they were took off a package.

Paying for Fox and CNN is a bit like paying for someone to shit thro your letterbox.
Except less pleasurable...

 

Maybe so. I may disagree some. just about every tv in any office complex and airport, hell even most bars have tv's set to some 24 hour news channel. We are pumped so full of news. I took em off my presets. too much!!!

 

I think in some of those places they are under some kind of rediculous contract(they get paid) to show these stations.Case in point some places only show CNN,others only show Fox.--Not sure though.--As far as bars go,no doubt a few people watch them--maybe for background noise,who knows.---I still maintain that these stations over-all have very low home viewership.--And BTW I also deleted them from my remote-control,so I don't even accidentally stumble upon those stations.

 

This.
Here in Britain you have to pay to own a TV, never mind cable/satellite/whatever..

 

-However in Britain very few of the stations show commericials/adverts.Or commercials are kept to a minimum.-----In the US it's got to the point that regular tv stations have become UNviewable because of the very high amount of commercials shown.--So in effect people "pay" in the US to 'avoid' commercials,by using a DVR etc. or having non commercial tv stations like Turner classic Movies,Western Channel etc.---So I'd happily pay for a tv license if it meant good tv in combination with very little/no commercials.

 

why I dont have cable..

 

For CNN prolly... and that was if I was willing to pay for TV anyway.

If you had a 'C-band' dish it's really not too bad for services...