Dropping channels from a bundle

Nope. Channels are based on your subscription package. Of course you can setup a favorite list and use as your channels of choice.

Yah the only thing you can do, for now, is not put them on your favorites list. Would be nice if those channels were replaced with channels that don't spread dangerous conspiracy theories. Of course ATT funded OAN and helped get them going that's why they are on the Dtv platform. Newsmax has to go as well. It's OAN lite. Hopefully after all the defamation lawsuits from Smartmatic and Dominion these two 'networks" won't exist. 

Geez guys get a life. Just ignore them. You may not like them but others may. You have choices you know!

I don't think there is any one person who likes every channel in their package, we all have channels we have no interest in. So do as we all do just ignore them.

@Ludwick577 

From Reuters, who published the story about AT&T funding OANN:

"After this story was published, AT&T issued a statement saying it has “never had a financial interest in OAN's success and does not 'fund' OAN.”

Newsmax is growing and in fact has a larger audience and higher ratings than CNN and MSNBC.

@Catskills_Dan 

Are you implying that @Ludwick577 was possibly spreading misinformation?

@chasf00 

I'm being careful how I answer. I don't want to get booted off again.

@Catskills_Dan 

Been there. Have to take that chance sometimes when it is hard to hold back from some dumb statements made by the likes of HSN1958.

@chasf00 

I didn't realize you got blocked too. What type of egregious statement did you make? You didn't mention something about a um l.e.t.t.e.r. did you?

@Catskills_Dan

More than once. I do question the wizards sometimes. Still trying to figure what causes blockage and who has that authority to block.

@chasf00 

Yeah, me too. 

And Elmer has to sit in the corner again until he can behave himself. 

@Catskills_Dan 

What sins against the forum were performed. Can't see the last posts to determine my sins due to posts scrubbed.

@chasf00 

I noticed that, too. 

They were pertinent to the conversation so I wonder why they were pulled. All I  find is a 404.

AT&T/DirecTV didn't "fund" OANN more than any other channel. They paid for it like any other carriage agreement. Though some might perceive even paying for it as funding it. or that opportunity for them carrying the channel was helping to get them started.

I think the difference is that AT&T/DirecTV decided to try a new channel on the lineup as it had a chance to be popular enough, not that they as a business were supporting what the channel was about.

Suggesting someone is providing misinformation (knowingly or not) doesn't seem like something to cause an issue. Should be fine as long as people aren't toxic in how they go about it. If you got edited or blocked for such a statement, but were civil about it, that would be wrong.

@Juniper 

"AT&T/DirecTV didn't "fund" OANN more than any other channel. They paid for it like any other carriage agreement. Though some might perceive even paying for it as funding it. or that opportunity for them carrying the channel was helping to get them started.

I think the difference is that AT&T/DirecTV decided to try a new channel on the lineup as it had a chance to be popular enough, not that they as a business were supporting what the channel was about."

From what i've read that was their intention.