Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2007 17:25:53
From: Sheila McCreven
Subject: Re: Program Schedule/Incentive Program
To: Thomas Castelot
Thanks, Tom. I will take a look at your summary and get back to you with any comments.
My fellow Commissioners and I will be putting together our proposal for the town-specific "narrowcast" schedule to be seen by Woodbridge residents in the next few days. After first discussing with Ed Sheehy, our First Selectman, we hope to have this proposal to you by January 31st.
Thank you very much for attending our meeting last week. Your presence and the information you and your team conveyed was very helpful to us. We are hopeful that Woodbridge and Sound View will come to a mutual agreement on scheduling in a timely manner.
Best regards,
S.
In reply to Thomas Castelot:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Dear Sheila,
Thank you for allowing Sound View Community Media, Inc. to participate at the commission meeting of January 23, 2007. John Ecay, Wyland Dale Clift, and I felt this meeting set the stage for a positive and productive partnership between Woodbridge and Sound View in enhancing the community access television assets for the Cablevision subscribers within Woodbridge and our franchise area. Our discussion focused on the following.
Narrowcasting/Town-Specific Program Schedule
In our attempts to maximize local programming on the government access channel and develop an acceptable narrowcasting programming schedule from Woodbridge to Woodbridge subscribers, it will be most helpful and appreciative to us to receive your narrowcasting or town-specific weekly programming schedule request and the number of time blocks you are seeking as soon as possible, hopefully by January 31st.
It will also be helpful to us to gain a picture of what a typical and current Woodbridge 24/7 cablecast schedule looks like. Sound View does not now have access to Woodbridge narrowcasting. Please include the following:
1) A most recent 24 hour program cablecast schedule for a one-week period (Sunday through Saturday) that is typical in nature during the course of a one-month period. The cablecast schedule should include the following:
a) The beginning day (i.e. Monday thru Saturday)
b) Starting time of the first original program (i.e.12:00AM, 12:30PM)
c) Program title (i.e. Board of Selectmen, Finance Committee)
d) Total run-time (length) of program (i.e. 60 minutes, 120 minutes)
e) Videotape or "Live"
f) List repeat program schedule for that same day.
g) Community calendar/event announcement schedule, total length of original schedule, and when repeat or rotating schedules are cablecast.
Duplicating Local Programs for Sound View Cablecasting
When Sound View reaches a mutual agreement integrating the narrowcasting and franchise-wide programming, Sound View will give prior notification to Woodbridge before the switching occurs. Sound View will require a copy of all programs that are cablecast on the community access channels (77, 78 and 79), whether transmitted from Woodbridge or from Sound View's facilities. To make this necessity transparent to the viewer, Sound View will seek access to the Cablevision I-Net that will make Woodbridge’s work effortless and cost effective.
Sound View is hopeful that Woodbridge will support our efforts to gain access to the I-Net and encourage such a recommendation to Woodbridge’s cable advisory council representatives. Absent that recommendation, making a copy of the local programming will not take much effort and not be costly as Sound View will provide Woodbridge with the necessary technology to accomplish that task.
Sound View Incentive Program 2007
We thank the commission for making suggestions to Sound View’s draft "Incentive Program 2007.” It makes good sense to incorporate in the Incentive Program to allow the incentive award participant to choose whether Sound View will select, purchase, hold ownership and be responsible for the equipment maintenance and repair of the access-related equipment, or whether the award participant selects, purchases, holds ownership, and be responsible for the equipment maintenance and repair of the access-related equipment. We will also incorporate archiving local programs at the desire of the municipality or organization. Where archiving local programs are desired, Sound View will commit to completing that function in a timely manner, and not later than 14 days from receipt of the program. Your continued suggestions are welcomed.
I hope I have captured the main discussion points from the commission meeting, and please add any points that I may have missed. Please don't hesitate to contact me, John, or Wyland Dale Clift if needed.
Sincerely,
Tom Castelot
President
Now we'll have to think about our proposal... stay tuned!
3 comments:
Control or manage ? The use of the term is the fulcrum of the CAP position and I think if anybody is going to go to arbitration this should be sorted out.
"Control" implies something that is not always simpatico for partners. The CAP president uses the word specificaly. He offers it as a form of "management"... "We control the channels." he will say more than once.
I find this interesting as they do not own them.
"Management" is a different term than "control". "Management" implies that there are other interests that need to be addressed such as the equitable use that the towns are looking for in "Town Specific" or "narrow casting" applications, which as everyone involved in this issue knows is a rather simple format to execute.
Further what harm does it do to the CAP if the towns narrow cast at will? Well not at will but by a design that allows this to occur which is not as complex as the CAP seems to be making it.
This system is called an "access system".
The gatekeeper mentality that the CAP is offering is cumbersome and problematic as witnessed in the Woodbridge Meeting and the general termoil that has arisen.
If it is the DPUC' intention to create a subliminal form of censorship by inserting the CAP as the "Controller" of the Access Channels then it has defeated the very purpose of PEG Access.
By "controling" the Channels they have done nothing but create anymosity and distrust.
By addressing this desire in a non confrontational position they would have served the towns. Which is their job. Nobody wants to be controlled, this kind of term is best used for those who break the law. No laws have been broken here and the two channels that have been broadcasting over these years have never been cited for having done such.
In my last remark I used the word "channels" I meant to say "towns" as in "the towns that have been broadcasting in a town specific or narrow casting format."
Excellent point, g man! You will see that in its own proposal back to Sound View, Woodbridge begs this question exactly by outlining the town's plan to continue our narrowcast here (what we call WGATV).
Stay tuned for that text...
S.
Post a Comment