newsmax

Hello there. DIRECTV's negotiation with Newsmax is simply economic, not political. We are doing everything we can to keep prices low for all of DIRECTV's customers while continuing to offer content that reflects all political views. We added The First to our channel lineup and continue giving DIRECTV and DIRECTV STREAM, customers a diverse lineup of perspectives without the financial burden. Luna, DIRECTV Community Specialist.

Then get rid of msnbc and cnn..that will save money for newsmax

@saveourchannels25 

DirecTV doesn't want to pay what Newsmax requested during negotiations. They are willing to listen if Newsmax wants to start talks again.

Your requesting two other news channels (that are from a different viewpoint) be removed just to fund money towards your preferred one is more playing politics then what DirecTV and Newsmax are doing. Seem a bit hypocritical.

Perhaps this will give you clarity: https://www.directv.com/tvpromise/

They have already removed OAN and newsmax and not one liberal news channel..tell me the hypocrite that it's not political

Those are two different situations. Yes OAN was removed with NO negotiations. Announced months before that carriage agreement would end with no chance of returning. This one the info was kept private, with some reasons (political or not) that it could have been. 

With Newsmax, they were negotiating. And they are willing to have Newsmax back but need to find a deal that both can agreee with.

DirecTV added in another conservative network (The First). So there is another option.

The hypocricy is you didn't want channels removed because you viewed the reason as political but then said you wanted other networks removed seemingly for political reasons.

Newsmax was removed for non-political reasons. A channel that is a conservative viewpoint got added in. So for that channel, I don't find political reasons to hold water.

I suspended my service a couple weeks ago to give AT&T a chance to negotiate.  I was going to give them a week to negotiate, ended up giving them more than 2.  But today Newsmax isn't coming back and I closed my account permanently.  I had been a Directv customer so long my equipment wasn't worth returning.  No Newsmax for me, no $128/month for AT&T.

It's not hypocrisy to ask for parity.  If there are 22 liberal news channels, there should be 22 conservative news channels.  But since there is now only one conservative news channel, there should be only one liberal news channel.

DirecTV doesn't have to adjust their business decisions so that there is an exact equal number of "conservative" to "liberal" channels. They are not required to have any of those networks. When carriage agremeent came up, Newsmax wanted a deal that was more profitable to them that DirecTV disagreed with. DirecTV shouldn't be forced to say yes to a higher cost they don't want because of perceived political balance.

The hypocrasy discussed wasn't parity. They wanted several news channels they didn't like removed to fund a single channel, with the add and removal seemingly for their political beliefs.

In any case, pay TV is entertainment. There is no right (constituation or otherwise) they must have parity in their news channels or any other channel. They can carry what they want. If you don't like it then it is your right to seek another provider.

Not impossible that Newsmax could come back. The door was left open so it is up to Newsmax if they decide to provide a new offer. But DirecTV is not going to chase after them and give into their demands like some customers want.

DirecTV LIES!!!!   They said they are "still in negotiations" but the very next day they had reassigned the channel to another network.     

DirecTV LIES!!!!   They said they were still negotiating but the very next day they had already reassigned the channel to a different network.   The way they are "negotiating" is like me saying this to them:  I'm not going to pay you anymore for your services, but you should keep sending me your signals for free :-)     No NewsMax = No Direct TV  = CANCEL SERVICE

Signals are free. Same free live content available on their streaming service and several other streaming services - it's FREE. Why pay - go watch it!

And yes, of course we watch their FREE streaming when not home.   I’m just addicted to old school DVR and a resistive to change I guess

@SwitchToDISHnetwork 

DirecTV WAS in active negotiations. That has since stalled. DirecTV remains open to accepting Newsmax back, but it is now up to Newsmax to resume negotiations with a fresh offer.

For their updated info regarding the situation: https://www.directv.com/tvpromise/

If this is a channel you absolutely cannot live without, then you either wait for Newsmax to bring an offer that DirecTV finds acceptable or go to another provider that currently has the channel.

Also, being in negotiations is not a guarantee of keeping the exact same channel number. Though not impossible that "The First" is holding the number temporarily to give viewers an alternative until Newsmax comes back with a lower cost offer.

To say DIRECTV is still willing to negotiate isn’t really accurate. NewsMax must agree to not get paid normal fees for remaining on the DIRECTV lineup or leave. DIRECTV has already stated it is not willing to pay NewsMax a single penny per subscriber. Meanwhile, over 20 leftist news channels remain on the DIRECTV lineup and enjoy getting paid normal fees by DIRECTV. Dropping half of these leftist channels would allow DIRECTV is save money from paying fees, and pass that savings to customers without really affecting it's overall customer base at all. DIRECTV customers affected by a dropped leftist channel who want the same leftist information could move to another leftist channel because they provide the same information. This is purely a political decision.

DirecTV is willing to keep Newsmax if the terms are acceptable. Doesn't matter how good you feel those terms are or that you don't like CNN.

Guess you just will go somewhere else to watch TV then huh?