×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

CES Ditches CNET After CBS Scandal Over Dish's Hopper

samzenpus posted about a year ago | from the take-that dept.

Television 123

An anonymous reader writes in about the latest fallout from CNET's parent company, CBS banning Dish Network's hopper from reviews and award lists. "The Consumer Electronics Association has not only today bestowed its Best in Show title upon the same Dish Network product that started this whole mess in the first place — in the same release, the group says it will no longer work with CNET. CES has enjoyed a long and productive partnership with CNET and the Best of CES awards,' said Karen Chupka, the CEA's senior vice president for events and conferences. "However, we are concerned the new review policy will have a negative impact on our brand should we continue the awards relationship as currently constructed. We look forward to receiving new ideas to recognize the 'best of the best' products introduced at the International CES.""

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

123 comments

Quick (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42757381)

Someone add this to the list of examples on Wikipedia's "Streisand Effect" entry.

Re:Quick (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42757473)

I'm not sure what you think this has to due with the Streisand Effect. That's when you try to censor something to keep it secret but instead cause more people to know about it than if you had not censored it. That has nothing do do with this story. They didn't refuse to acknowledge dish in hopes that nobody would learn about it. They were simply refusing to recognize the product because their parent company felt the product went against their interests. Kind of like how some refuse to shop at Walmart, Chick Fill-A, or other companies because they don't like their corporate practices. That aren't doing that in hopes that nobody will learn Walmart exists.

Re:Quick (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42757497)

A group of nerds being told they have to change their "Best in Show" award because their corporate overlords dislike the winner they chose isn't censorship?

Re:Quick (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42757523)

I didn't say it wasn't censorship. I said it wasn't the Streisand Effect. Those are 2 different things. The Streisand Effect implies censorship, but censorship doesn't imply the Streisand Effect. The Streisand Effect had absolutely nothing to do with this story.

Re:Quick (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42757567)

Tired of Techdirt and that guys (can't remember his name) stupid blog.

"Everyone should give away their stuff for free, just like we do!" That's because Techdirt content took five minutes to write and is not worth anything.

Re:Quick (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42760933)

proving you have not read more than an article or two if you maintain that he wants everything 'free'...
your ignorance -and/or spitefulness- is showing, sparky...

Re:Quick (5, Informative)

hawguy (1600213) | about a year ago | (#42757699)

From the Wikipedia page [wikipedia.org] :

The Streisand effect is the phenomenon whereby an attempt to hide or remove a piece of information has the unintended consequence of publicizing the information more widely, usually facilitated by the Internet.

Isn't that exactly what happened? CBS didn't want the product to earn the award (thus giving it greater recognition and popularity), so they told CNet not to grant it the award, thereby causing extra press attention focused on the product.

If that's not enough to sway you, how about an article from the guy who is widely recognized as starting the phrase "The Streisand Effect", where he also says that this is an example of the effect?

http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130111/00145421637/just-how-dumb-is-it-cbs-to-block-cnet-giving-dish-award.shtml [techdirt.com]

by Mike Masnick

Hello Streisand Effect. There were approximately one gazillion articles this week about products coming out of CES, and the place was wall to wall with journalists -- probably half of whom were coming up with their own "best of" lists. Most people were completely saturated with CES stories and would barely glance at such a story. Except... now, tons of people are suddenly finding out about this awesome Dish DVR, the Hopper with Slingbox.

I think that when the guy that coined the phrase calls it the Streisand Effect, you pretty much have to go with what he says.

Re:Quick (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42757985)

Well hey. You know, every creator is entitled to ruin their own creation. If this guy wants to do it too, then who am I to argue, but I'll always know that Barbara files suit first.
Originally the Streisand Effect was about trying to keep something from becoming public. That's not what's going on here. This was a product from a nationally known brand at the top of their field. A company that nearly every American is familiar with. And they've been publicizing the heck out of this product/feature. This product has been all over the news for the better part of the last year. It was WAY to late to attempt to suppress knowledge of this thing. And really, if that's what CBS wanted to do, they went about it the wrong way:

http://www.theverge.com/2013/1/14/3874682/exclusive-cbs-forced-cnet-editors-to-recast-vote-after-hopper-win [theverge.com] :

CBS Interactive representatives told The Verge...that the ban on coverage is limited only to specific products implicated in ongoing litigation with CNET's parent company; and that the ban only applied to product reviews and that news coverage would be exempt.

So they supposedly wanted to suppress knowledge of this product but then said "oh, but it's alright to cover news stories about it"?

Sorry, but this isn't Streisand Effect unless you mangle the meaning of the term.

Re:Quick (2, Interesting)

Dahamma (304068) | about a year ago | (#42758631)

This isn't s freaking law of physics, it's an Internet meme. It's meaning is what people say it is, and everyone except you seems to say otherwise.

Re:Quick (1)

Agent0013 (828350) | about a year ago | (#42761149)

Originally the Streisand Effect was about trying to keep something from becoming public. That's not what's going on here. This was a product from a nationally known brand at the top of their field. A company that nearly every American is familiar with. And they've been publicizing the heck out of this product/feature. This product has been all over the news for the better part of the last year. It was WAY to late to attempt to suppress knowledge of this thing.

This is the first I have heard of this awesome new box, the Hopper. I guess it's possible that I would have heard of it also if it won the award. But then it would not have a nice stick-it-to-the-man story attached to it and I may have just skimmed over an announcement of a device that can't touch what my MythBox already does. So to me it looks like they drove attention to a device they wanted people not to notice. A perfect example of the Streisand Effect, different from the original, but still the same effect.

Re:Quick (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42760963)

Agreed.

This furore has me looking at Dish and the Hopper when I had not been to keen to go with Dish. I would do this just to spite CBS. And to skip their commercials.

I do like CBS. I watch 2 of their shows. Which is more than I watch from ABC, NBC and Fox combined.

Re:Quick (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42759897)

This was a bit more than a "dislike". There is a massive lawsuit that CBS/CNET is in with DISH. Les Moonves decided, in his infinite wisdom, to pull any of the reviews because of said lawsuit.

http://www.denverpost.com/business/ci_22436602/cbs-files-amended-lawsuit-against-dish-network-over

Re:Quick (4, Insightful)

Daetrin (576516) | about a year ago | (#42757613)

They may not have believed that no one would learn Dish Network existed, but i'm pretty sure the intent of blocking the award was to prevent endorsing it and advertising it further. Now however more people know that the geeks at CNET wanted to give the product an award than would have known if the management at CNET had just kept their mouths shut and let Dish Network have the award in the first place.

Re:Quick (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42758071)

They're in a legal dispute with Dish over this. Don't you think it would have been a bit damning to their case for Dish to say in court "but you even gave us awards for how great and innovative of a product it is"?

Re:Quick (5, Insightful)

gargleblast (683147) | about a year ago | (#42758281)

It wouldn't be a bit damning to their case. CBS would simply have to tell the judge "CNet has editorial independence".

The current situation is far more damning.

Re:Quick (1)

1u3hr (530656) | about a year ago | (#42760469)

They're in a legal dispute with Dish over this. Don't you think it would have been a bit damning to their case for Dish to say in court "but you even gave us awards for how great and innovative of a product it is"?

Quite irrelevant, since the court isn't deciding if the product is "great and innovative". It's deciding if it's legal. It's easy to think of products that would be great to use, but are arguably illegal.

Re:Quick (5, Insightful)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | about a year ago | (#42757621)

"Kind of like how some refuse to shop at Walmart, Chick Fill-A, or other companies because they don't like their corporate practices."

Dubious analogy: It would be more like a restaurant critic being ordered not to praise Chick Fil-A's food because Zagat doesn't approve of them.

The story here isn't that CBS dislikes the Dish Hopper; but that the alleged 'journalists' at Cnet have neither the editorial independence nor the integrity to act in the interests of their customers instead of their owners.

Re:Quick (1)

MightyMartian (840721) | about a year ago | (#42757849)

Indeed. In a proper journalistic enterprise the editors would resign in protest.

Re:Quick (1)

AK Marc (707885) | about a year ago | (#42758039)

No, better to stay and make them fire you for having integrity. Often they'll back down before that, so you'll get to report accurately and keep your job (while starting to look for another, if you wish).

Re:Quick (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42758193)

You can expect that one of these two things will happen, for editors and/or journalists. People within CNET are ready to jump after their strenuous attempts to get CBS to reverse its position were rebuffed at the last moment.

Re:Quick (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42758033)

Well, if we're criticizing analogies, is Zagat in a legal dispute with Chick Fil-A?

Re:Quick (1)

saleenS281 (859657) | about a year ago | (#42758393)

I wouldn't go that far. The journalist in question resigned over CBS's refusal to allow him to issue his best of show. What more did you expect him to do? It's not like he can force them to publish his choice...

Re:Quick (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42758439)

CNET's customers are its advertisers not the people who read the articles for free.

Screw c|net (5, Insightful)

MrEricSir (398214) | about a year ago | (#42757411)

The company had zero integrity before the Dish scandal happened. Why would anyone work with them in the first place? Weren't their scammy download site and payola-based game review sites damning enough already?

Re:Screw c|net (4, Interesting)

Nethemas the Great (909900) | about a year ago | (#42757461)

C|Net? They're so 2002. Do lay-users even consider these folks relevant any more? I figured everyone thought of them as they do other DotCom bubble era companies like Geocities and Tripod.

Re:Screw c|net (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42757607)

Kinda like slashdot?

Re:Screw c|net (1)

Nethemas the Great (909900) | about a year ago | (#42757971)

I'm starting to wonder that myself. There's far too much pandering to lay-users and at the expense of "News for Nerds". Maybe it's just me but it seems to be sliding ever more rapidly now that Dice is running things.

Re:Screw c|net (4, Insightful)

EzInKy (115248) | about a year ago | (#42758363)

Insightful point. Even on slashdot it's becomming harder and harder to find news for nerds that you might have missed elsewhere. I've always expected a few "infomercials" here, but recently it has become more and more blantent. And the war against anon posters here is totatally ridiculous. You can't speak free if you are worrying about having a job.

War against Anonymous? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42760997)

Well fuck you too, buddy!

(Seriously though, what did you mean?)

Re:Screw c|net (1)

drinkypoo (153816) | about a year ago | (#42762093)

Most of the posts from Anonymous Cowards are crap. All you need to get a Slashdot account is a throwaway email address. Logging in lets people keep track of your reputation. It's annoying to have to slog through AC comments for the gems. Surely, under one of these squishy treats...

Re:Screw c|net (2)

Zontar The Mindless (9002) | about a year ago | (#42757619)

You're telling me? I almost went to work for them in 2002... Fortunately they DotBombed (got eaten up by ZDNet and what was to be my position 'put on hold pending restructuring' 2 days before I was supposed to start), and my career path took a more circuitous route.

Still... It was a very near thing. *shudder*

Re:Screw c|net (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42758127)

Do lay-users even consider these folks relevant any more?

Not to burst the Slashdot bubble, but yes, they are still very relevant to the "lay-user".
- Top 5 HDTV
- Top 5 Tablet
- Top 5 Smartphone
etc.

Trying I'm feeling lucky on any of those. The average layer-user isn't going to spend hours scouring technical forums for detailed knowledge. They'll take the top site Google recommends and provide a decent summary in a 1-2 pages, and possibly look at Amazon for user reviews.

I don't agree with the crap their overlords pulled, but give credit where credit is due.

Re:Screw c|net (1)

DirePickle (796986) | about a year ago | (#42758561)

They're still one of the best places to go for things like TV reviews, for all of their faults.

Re:Screw c|net (1)

sincewhen (640526) | about a year ago | (#42759109)

Problem is, can you trust those reviews, especially now knowing that they don't have editorial independence?

Re:Screw c|net (2)

dywolf (2673597) | about a year ago | (#42760685)

Certainly, you can trust their reviews, if you have a brain in your head. A review about a product owned by CBS that they gush over is ovbiously suspicious. But really, the whole hopper thing is just because of a fued between Dish and the major networks. The overwhelming majority of CNETs reviews, being things like routers, printers, and TVs, are going to be unaffected. But its also good to remember that reviews sites are rarely totally unbiased (showing my age, but i remember PCGamer when they were still "relevant" getting caught cheating with reviews of big advertisers) and as the reader its your job to engage the brain and realize when someone is pandering.

Re:Screw c|net (1)

CohibaVancouver (864662) | about a year ago | (#42761089)

Do lay-users even consider these folks relevant any more?

CNET is one of the pre-eminent tech reporting sites, with a huge readership. If you have a tech company then your PR firm will work hard to get you on CNET because your product will get in front of a lot of eyeballs.

Product awards from a commercial site compromised? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42757437)

Wow, this is shocking. And I'm still reeling from the news about the Tour de France, I haven't decided what to do with my chest full of Lance Armstrong memorabilia.

Re:Product awards from a commercial site compromis (3, Interesting)

penix1 (722987) | about a year ago | (#42757753)

And I'm still reeling from the news about the Tour de France...

I know this is way off topic and I will try and bring it back on in the end... No promises though...lol

It always amuses me the kerfuffle raised when sports athletes get caught using performance enhancing drugs yet people don't say shit about beauty pageant contestants who have had cosmetic surgery just to win those titles.

It all comes down to "follow the money". It is the same with this C/Net / CBS / Dish story. Follow the money. To CBS Dish is cutting off a revenue stream it sees as essential. Dish is seen by them as cheating the system just as much as Lance did. Dish OTOH doesn't see ads as essential since their service is subscription based. So much like Lance, they don't think they did anything wrong.

How's that for trying to bring it back?

Re:Product awards from a commercial site compromis (1)

Ambassador Kosh (18352) | about a year ago | (#42758463)

It works the same in every area of life. You get what you incentivize not what you profess to believe or support.

It is why people cheat in college classes. Many are memory based classes and are designed to encourage cheating regardless of what the professors claim to support.

Anywhere in society you see behavior other than what you want or think the system should have it is because you are giving an incentive for that behavior and no amount of rule changing is going to fix that.

That is why we have can harsh anti-drug laws, anti-cheating codes of conduct, laws about what companies can do etc but as long as the reward is greater than any penalty and the odds of being caught are low people will do what makes the most sense.

Some people do learn though. I see less cheating in engineering classes where the exams are open book, notes, calculator, previous exams etc because it does not do any good. The exams are purely about understanding.

For memorization based classes I see people using Adderall and other drugs to do well in the class and damned be any future consequences. Universities can even say it is bad that people use drugs to pass those classes but nothing they say will really stop it. Mostly the problem is that in the short term the drugs work, you do better in class and people don't care about long term damage.

Most chemistry departments might as well be sponsored by Adderall given how much memorization I see in them. The sad things is so many people studying to become doctors while they damage their brains to do well in tests in the short term.

Re:Product awards from a commercial site compromis (1)

theedgeofoblivious (2474916) | about a year ago | (#42757863)

Do what Lance Armstrong did with his chest full of "Lance Armstrong memorabilia": Go out and win the Tour de France.

Good (4, Funny)

irving47 (73147) | about a year ago | (#42757471)

How do you like them apples, CBS?

Re:Good (1)

schwit1 (797399) | about a year ago | (#42757741)

So true. Didn't CBS legal consider that by doing this they would be harming one of there own properties?

Scorpion and the frog I guess.

Re:Good (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42757975)

CBS has long been the bully protecting antique media monopolies.

This happens everywhere on all levels (5, Insightful)

GodfatherofSoul (174979) | about a year ago | (#42757579)

Business relationships color the news for all outlets; even NPR and PBS now have "sponsors." About 10 years ago I was watching I think CNBC when RFK Jr. started talking about poor environmental practices of GE, the parent company. The hosts actually shushed him and they immediately cut to commercial. When they came back, RFK Jr. was gone...

Re:This happens everywhere on all levels (2)

hduff (570443) | about a year ago | (#42757767)

Business relationships color the news for all outlets; even NPR and PBS now have "sponsors."

The local paper beagn to run a series of articles giving advice on how to negotiate the purchase of new and used cars. After the first installment ran, the local car dealers called the paper and threatened to withdraw all their advertising. No more articles about how to negotiate buying a car.

Happens all the time, but mostly out of the public eye because those corporate guys know what kind of asshats it makes them look like.

Re:This happens everywhere on all levels (1, Interesting)

webmistressrachel (903577) | about a year ago | (#42758155)

Hi!

I must be honest, the only reason I'm posting a reply is that I can't believe I'm seeing a Dogbert reference in someone's sig on Slashdot - wow, I am pleased! Yes, this is off-topic, and yes, they can Mod me down all they like, but that couldn't possibly compare with knowing there's a fellow reader of the Federation's rag on here! Hi from the GMP area! (adds Friend...)

ps Mods, give me a break. Posted with no Karma Bonus, and this is a very specialised, very rare, meeting of minds happening here, completely accidentally. If you can be bothered to research who Dogbert is, and the "Federation" which I refer to, you'll find a rare combination of "Member of News for Nerds Site" and another profession.

I tip my Pathfinder to you, there's very few geeks in the uniform (although one of our ACCs is a declared geek!)

Re:This happens everywhere on all levels (2)

Paradise Pete (33184) | about a year ago | (#42758751)

Dogbert is a character in the Dilbert comic.

Re:This happens everywhere on all levels (1)

webmistressrachel (903577) | about a year ago | (#42759231)

Oh damn. Dogbert is also a regular character, in a cartoon sketch, in the Police Federation magazine (UK)! I honestly thought he was only Dogbert until you posted that...

Yes, Dogbert is a plod in the cartoon. It's meant to be a tongue-in-cheek look at day-to-day police work. The quote above is definitely something he'd say!

Re:This happens everywhere on all levels (1)

jittles (1613415) | about a year ago | (#42760677)

I think the quote was from Dilbert, though. That is definitely something that Dogbert would say in Dilbert, as well. I kind of remember reading that somewhere and I don't read anything from the UK, except BBC News.

WebmistressRachel... (1)

webmistressrachel (903577) | about a year ago | (#42758207)

...spends ages writing a reply, making lots of assumptions based on a sig... clicks submit... goes to read "slashdot.org/~hduff" page, facepalm!

No reference whatsoever to the line of work referred toby me (and the sig), no topics or posts related to it, just a good quote in the sig, from the Police Federation's (UK) magazine for members of the Fed. Yep, a it's a union for frontline (below Inspecter rank) Police officers.

Boy, did I get the wrong end of the, er, baton... (winds neck back in, reminds herself why she was taught "Never assume - ASS U ME makes an ASS of U and ME", straightens hat, whistles, "Move along, nothing to see here folks...")

ps I'll probably get modded Offtopic for the other post, and Insightful for this one - for self-revelation and the ASSUME thing - it's a useful one, that. Remember it - I should have! ;-)

Re:WebmistressRachel... (1)

Prune (557140) | about a year ago | (#42758701)

Please tell me what devilish mixture of banned substances you injected in your veins before you set out to write these last two posts.

Mods, I dare you to read the parent post without your heads exploding.

Re:WebmistressRachel... (1)

mekkab (133181) | about a year ago | (#42759769)

now, to bring this all in line; Scott Adams should sue to silence the Federation's Dogbert (which 'Mericans have never heard of), which would spurn a cavalcade of 'news' articles, which would bring a UK police rag to prominence, which would have pedants coming out of the woodwork to claim how this was not the Striesand effect.

Good times!

/Yeah, this got a chuckle from me... schadenfreude is the schönste freude!

Re:This happens everywhere on all levels (1)

Dorkmaster Flek (1013045) | about a year ago | (#42760707)

But you have to wonder how much good will, especially in the Internet age, said paper would receive if they then publicized the fact that the local car dealers were trying to strongarm them. That right there might give them a nice boost in readership, which means the other companies advertising in their paper get more eyeballs. I think community and (digital) word of mouth are the new advertising currency.

Why the surprise? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42757883)

Americans don't want to pay for quality news. Cheap, mediocre news is good enough, and corporate sponsorships pay for those expensive reporters. So what if a particular news site supports their parent company in corporate legal infighting? There are other news sites out there. Use one of them instead.

hopper? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42757689)

What is a dish's hopper?

Re:hopper? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42757905)

i knew this was going to happen, i posted the article with the words "hop hop hop" after the title, it was removed and there you go, it's a thing that goes hop

since im complaining, R i think you spent more time on /. than paying attention to the presentation by the other R, i left soon after

Re:hopper? (2)

sjames (1099) | about a year ago | (#42757939)

A multi-channel DVR with a commercial skip feature. I'm guessing the latter would be the part CBS hates so much.

Re:hopper? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42758263)

... or they at least have to pretend that they (CBS) didn't know about it.

Were they (CBS) lied to? Was Hopper a DVR that was designed to enforce watching commercials? Did Dish tell CBS that this was supposed to be the one independant DVR that didn't? The consumer pays extra for it so they don't have to watch commercials, right? I mean they(CBS) did their due dilligence, made sure that their paying customers (the advertisers) were getting their air time, so they(CBS) must be clean. /s

ALSO I'm not bitching at sjames directly. This has more to do with who gets paid and lawyers getting paid as a result. I don't know what the guys that made the Hopper did. I can build my own DVR tyvm.

Re:hopper? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42758491)

We have three VCRs (yes, we're all analog here) with fast-forward. Does the same thing, one even can skip forward a preset amount, just like a 30 second or programmable skip feature on DVRs.

We've been skipping personally undesired content (e.g. skipping or fast-forwarding past commercials or for some, objectionable content like 'OMG boobies') ever since the first VCRs hit the market. Just because technology advancements allow that previously-manual task to be handled automatically, at the discretion and direction of the user, doesn't mean it should be treated any differently.

Same applies to place shifting (you can take tapes with you) and lending/sharing/copying content you've personally recorded for non-commercial private sharing (which is permitted). No one should give a fuck that technology simply makes those things a little easier.

___

I believe that ANYTHING that has aired on ANY channel you've had the opportunity to watch or record (i.e. shown on an OTA broadcast or on a paid-for subscription service) at a time you've possessed equipment able to do so, you should have the right to obtain a copy of, regardless of whether you actually recorded it yourself, from whatever source you choose. Same goes for music off the radio.

CES Ditches CNET After CBS Scandal Over Dish (4, Funny)

guttentag (313541) | about a year ago | (#42757829)

In other news, the Confederation of Companies that Rely on Acronyms starting with the letter C (C-CRAC) has revoked the CES's membership for siding with a "D" company that doesn't even understand the value of an acronym over its fellow "C" members. C-SPAN will be carrying live coverage of CNET's appeal.

anyone hiring tech reporters? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42757891)

in other news......

the 40 CNET journalists had unanimously decided that the Hopper Sling was the most innovative product at the 2013 International

Forty tech journalists are looking for work.

In English, please!! (2)

haruchai (17472) | about a year ago | (#42757931)

I read the title 5 times and still have no fucking idea what it's about.

Re:In English, please!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42757949)

It's a TV that watches multiple channels simultaneously and skips commercials.

Came to post the same thing. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42757977)

It's gibberish. Can't /. afford real editors, for crying out loud?

Re:In English, please!! (3, Informative)

irving47 (73147) | about a year ago | (#42758197)

In a nutshell, CNET liked the Dish Networks DVR (digital video recorder) and publicly said so.
CBS (Used to stand for Columbia Broadcasting System) is suing Dish.
CBS owns CNET, and said, you can't say nice things about someone we're suing!
So now CES (Consumer Electronics Show) says CNET can no longer have input to decide the winner of the "Best of Show" award because they have a clear (mandated from their parent company) bias.

Re:In English, please!! (1)

Spamalope (91802) | about a year ago | (#42759097)

CBS owns CNET, and said, you can't say nice things about someone we're suing!

And CBS released a statement saying 'CNET maintains 100% editorial independence, and always will'

BUT

that's 'in terms of covering actual news,', i.e. only when we say they can.

http://www.theverge.com/2013/1/14/3874682/exclusive-cbs-forced-cnet-editors-to-recast-vote-after-hopper-win [theverge.com]

Re:In English, please!! (1)

idontgno (624372) | about a year ago | (#42761565)

Yeah. I noticed that too.

Dirty little disclaimers like that are proof of who will be the first up against the wall when the revolution comes.

Re:In English, please!! (1)

LVSlushdat (854194) | about a year ago | (#42761247)

CBS (Used to stand for Columbia Broadcasting System)

Now known as the CBS section of the US Department Of Propaganda, a new cabinet-level department created by Mr Obama...

Re:In English, please!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42758245)

it's a pissing match between CBS and CNET wherein CNET is telling CBS to get off their lawn.

Dish Networks incorporated ad skipping software into their PVR. CBS doesn't want it lionized even though the rest of the world does.

CNET told CBS that it's they can't control the awards process and kindly take the bus home.

Re:In English, please!! (1)

haruchai (17472) | about a year ago | (#42758361)

Thank you all for the explanations but the Slashdot editors could easily have done a better job.

Re:In English, please!! (2)

MozeeToby (1163751) | about a year ago | (#42758573)

The Consumer Electronics Show has ended their relationship with the review site c|net as a result of said site's elimination of a new product from award consideration. The product was removed from consideration on orders from c|net's corporate overlords at CBS (one of the "Big 3" American broadcasting corporations) either because CBS is currently involved in litigation over said product or, for the more cynical/realistic, because said product threatens CBS's bottom lime.

To summarize the explanation of the summary, c|net has lost whatever appearance of journalistic integrity they had left (which was already not much) by demonstrating exactly why broadcast corporations shouldn't own news publishers.

CBS has no integrity, why would a subsidiary? (4, Insightful)

jcr (53032) | about a year ago | (#42757969)

Not sure how long ago it happened, but I became aware of CBS's complete lack of journalistic standards when Dan Rather tried to scuttle the Bush campaign with forged documents.

-jcr

Re:CBS has no integrity, why would a subsidiary? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42758165)

Wait, what? Despite everything else you still want to defend George W. like as if he was a good president?

The authenticity of the papers in question aside, he very neatly avoided service in Vietnam.
He may be a born again evangelical but lets not pretend he wasn't a sinner.

Re:CBS has no integrity, why would a subsidiary? (2)

ageoffri (723674) | about a year ago | (#42758467)

The Bush defense is old and played out. The OP never said anything about defending Bush. Just that CBS flat out lied to discredit him on a specific issue.

Re:CBS has no integrity, why would a subsidiary? (2)

jcr (53032) | about a year ago | (#42759183)

> you still want to defend George W.

When did I say anything of the kind?

-jcr

Re:CBS has no integrity, why would a subsidiary? (0, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42758563)

And that's one way we can tell you're a right-winger. The bad journalism angle was just a smokescreen to hide the many legitimate claims made against Bush. Rove really was at the top of his game under Bush, considering how many awful things he managed to get almost completely ignored by the public at large.

Re:CBS has no integrity, why would a subsidiary? (4, Interesting)

jcr (53032) | about a year ago | (#42759197)

>you're a right-winger.

Not everyone fits into one of the two boxes in your tiny little mind, sunshine.

Like any other Libertarian, I'm no fan of GWB, and as it happens my distaste for the current teleprompter-in-chief is due to his failure to reverse any of Bush's power grabs.

-jcr

Re:CBS has no integrity, why would a subsidiary? (2)

MickyTheIdiot (1032226) | about a year ago | (#42759729)

I totally respected you until the "teleprompter" reference. The teleprompter screaming is totally asinine.

Bush couldn't even use a teleprompter. He READ his speeches out of a 3 ring binder. Go look one up!

There is tons criticize Obama for that aren't imagined or silly. You can do better.

Re:CBS has no integrity, why would a subsidiary? (2)

operagost (62405) | about a year ago | (#42760875)

I think the space of a post on Slashdot is a little too small to rattle off the shortcomings of Obama.

Re:CBS has no integrity, why would a subsidiary? (1)

ThatsNotPudding (1045640) | about a year ago | (#42759903)

In retrospect, a noble cause.

Re:CBS has no integrity, why would a subsidiary? (1)

DNS-and-BIND (461968) | about a year ago | (#42761275)

"While Dan Rather attempts to rationalize the network's heartless decision to air this despicable 'terrorist propaganda video,' it is beyond our comprehension that any mother, wife, father or sister should have to relive this horrific tragedy and watch their loved one being repeatedly terrorized," the family said.

"Terrorists have made this video confident that the American media would broadcast it and thereby serve their exact purpose [wikipedia.org] . By showing this video, CBS or any other broadcaster willing to show it proves that they fall without shame into the terrorists' plan."
-- Mariane Pearl, May 15, 2002

I need sleep (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42758051)

I need sleep because it looked like "The CIA surrounded CES since seeing CNET on CBS and served seven scientific sequestrations so somebody sensing a sacking stalls statistical scribes."

CNet (1)

Chrondike (1010159) | about a year ago | (#42760639)

...is nothing but a rag these days. Spouting pro-Apple gibberish all over the place and discounting other, more promising tech. Doesn't surprise me their lack of independence went so far as to fully censoring a product that 'the company' didn't like. It's ridiculous and no one should take this from a 'news' source. There's better sites out there anyways. Cnet writing is garbage.

Hopper is kind of a joke (1)

cdrguru (88047) | about a year ago | (#42761937)

The Dish Hopper is somewhat of a joke, It is a way to convert satellite broadcast into streaming - you see, it isn't a DVR at all but a device that requests something be saved for you at Dish Network HQ. Then, later you can have it streamed to you over the Internet. They claim the device is limited to 2000 hours, but this would appear to be an entirely arbitrary number. Since your "saved" content is likely shared with everyone else, why would there be any limit at all?

Do you really think that they are saving a unique copy of Two Broke Girls rather than simply having one that everyone shares?

Unfortunately, it is going to suffer the same fate as all streaming - congestion. We are starting to see streaming degrading because of Internet congestion now and it is only going to get worse as time goes on. Having a faster link from the "head end" to the home isn't going to fix it as long as we have a node configuration where a node feeds a neighborhood - both FIOS and every cable and DSL system utilizes this sort of configuration.

Cox in Phoenix is trying to be forward looking and reducing the number of homes per node from 1000 to 500 and that may help somewhat. But with higher and higher bandwidth expectations (see Netflix recent announcement [engadget.com] ), once we move into a point where streaming is being done by a large number of households it would have to be more like 100 homes per node - and that isn't going to happen without major restructuring. Major, as in when we moved cable from RF to digital distribution.

Most other cable networks are at 1000 homes per node and maybe 1Gb feed to each node. That means if homes are hoping for 10Mb/sec streaming only a 1 in 10 is going to get it. When we get past 1 in 10 streaming, that is about the end for streaming as a distribution technique.

So how long could the Hopper possibly last? Maybe three years. Maybe. Converting from satellite broadcast to streaming is a silly thing for Dish to be doing as there is no impending collapse of satellite distribution. Sort of like Netflix dropping,or thinking about and quickly forgetting about dropping DVD distribution.

I have three Roku boxes and an Apple TV box. I expect them all to be paperweights in 1-2 years.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...