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.

@chasf00 

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

@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?

@chasf00 

Yeah, me too. 

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

@chasf00 

I noticed that, too. 

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

@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. 

@Juniper 

You have been here a lot longer than me. In fact this is the first forum that I've been this active in. I see new threads popping up all the time around the same subject line,  whether for or against. Have you ever seen this much controversy in these forums? Is this one unique?

The real issue is rooted in people trying to control what others are able to watch / hear in support of certain political ideologies.   

If everyone simply changed the channel on content they did not agree with, there would be no disagreements.  People simply need to follow the “You do what’s good for you, and I’ll  do what’s good for me” philosophy.  Support freedom of press / speech and simply ignore what you don’t agree with. 

As for the editing, blocking, booting…. it’s a fact that very respectful and factual posts were removed or people were blocked simply because someone did not agree with them.  It’s called censored / silenced and very anti-American. 

We will have to agree to disagree… the circumstances involve more then DIRECTV simply deciding to not pay for a channel.  It’s well documented and not a conspiracy. 

I agree with what others have said on respectful posts being removed / blocked…. If one does some research they will find several posts citing factual data which was relevant to the conversation were removed.  Posts containing links to documents on government letter head are far from toxic.  I saw another thread (opposite from OAN / Fox / Newsmax requests) get removed, yes not closed but removed.  I’m so certain about what I have seen that if given the opportunity, I’d testify under oath.

Again… do research…. Links and images completely removed… not a spam issue…. It’s a deciding what one sees issue.

Fact, OAN sued DIRECTV for a violation of contractual obligations in the California Supreme Court.  It will be up to the lawyers and judges to decide if there was a violation and what was in AT&T’s purview.  In additional, Congress has sent an inquiry demanding answers to questions.  This is not a conspiracy and has only been validated by the remarks of main stream media. 

It will sure be interesting to see what happens in the end.  My bet is this whole situation with drag on for years and will definitely be resolved when powers shift and government leadership has an opportunity to finally address the public’s grievances with respect to several attacks on freedom of speech / press. 

Juniper, please read the entire lawsuit to familiarize yourself with the details.  It was posted In main forum but I believe the link was removed.  It will become readily apparent the issue was not as simple to renew a contract. 

It’s hard for many news channels to “pay” TV providers for fair access to distribution when the TV providers are also the media Giants that own many of the news channels. AT&T owns WarnerMedia, which owns CNN.  AT&T owns 70% of DIRECTV.  Comcast owns NBC, CNBC, and MSNBC. Charter Communications owns Spectrum News, a slate of regional cable channels, including  NY1.

In the near future, FCC rules which state TV distributors cannot give preferential treatment to the channels they own will get tested.  It will be interesting to see what happens.