Focus on the Logo
Jun. 30th, 2005 10:16 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
eggwardsWhile Spain has their gay marriages (Roger, see, I do care) Houston does not have Logo.
It's no surprise. Logo, the cable channel from Viacom, features gay and lesbian programming and would feature commercials, so it would be on regular or extended cable, like TVLand or Bravo - the almost gay channel. For most of the US, this channel might be a little too hot to handle, even though it's promised that the programming will be as tame as a kitten. Still, put the work gay in front of anything and watch people's blood pressure rise.
Of course I already knew that our cable system, Time Warner, wouldn't be carrying it, and there's very little reason for them to take it up. Time Warner is the only player in town - well, the only cable company. There's always satellite TV, but the city of Houston long ago gave the city contract to Warner, and that's the way it's always been.
I called Time Warner a couple of days ago to ask about the channel. After finally being connected to a human (once being dropped by the menu service three times) I asked her if they would carry Logo, but hey, what a surprise, the operator had never heard of it. When I told her it was a new gay and lesbian channel, she asked me if I meant Here! - one of the pay-per-view channels currently available. Those channels are not only easier for Time warner to swallow, since they are only accessible after they are requested. They also make Time Warner extra money.
I understand the problem, to an extent. Just a few years ago, living at home, our local cable system took off MTV, siting that those oh-so-naughty videos were too controversial. There had been some complaints that had come in to the company, so they took it off.
We lost MTV for several months, and I remember we complained for quite some time (this was back when my sister and I were young and we though MTV was worth watching). Eventually the cable company - don't worry, they've been sold a couple of times and are now a part of Cox cable - brought back MTV due to the continued outrage of teenagers who just had to know what tattoos Cher had added to her butt.
When they brought it back though, the person on the account had to request the channel specifically. It's still an "electable" channel in my hometown of Conroe. I don't suspect that they'll be seeing Logo anytime soon.
Properly informed, the polite Time Warner woman took my information that I wanted the channel, and maybe someday i'll be contacted about it. Consider me not holding my breath. I'm sure that in conservative Texas, Time Warner is way too worried about having mom and dad see little Johnny flip between Cartoon Network and Boomerang and pass by two men kissing.
Of course just the knowledge that there's a gay channel would be enough to send some people fleeing. I know that there are people who won't buy Sirius because of OutQ. Of course, it just may open a new market - a new company that will provide service that doesn't have offending programming. It's happened in many other entertainment venues, why not television distribution? Of course Time Warner could just offer a non-offensive package (surprising that they don't).
Still, I don't even know what Logo's showing. Their website is surprisingly vague. I'm not sure I'd even watch it, despite hearing that a livejournaler that I've met works for it (![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
umkinda). I guess I want to support it just to support the community. One day, perhaps we won't need channels like Logo.
Surprising for a channel I can't see, and I'm not sure I'd watch, I just wrote a lot about it. Still it's about our continuing visibility, and it's more important to be next to Fox News on the dial, and not near the spice channel to really make an impact on people's lives. It's all about not being put away in the closet.
I see that Direct TV is carrying Logo, so this weekend at Chris' I guess I'll be on the couch changing channels between the Live 8 broadcast and finding out what's on Logo - as long as real life doesn't take me away.
It's no surprise. Logo, the cable channel from Viacom, features gay and lesbian programming and would feature commercials, so it would be on regular or extended cable, like TVLand or Bravo - the almost gay channel. For most of the US, this channel might be a little too hot to handle, even though it's promised that the programming will be as tame as a kitten. Still, put the work gay in front of anything and watch people's blood pressure rise.
Of course I already knew that our cable system, Time Warner, wouldn't be carrying it, and there's very little reason for them to take it up. Time Warner is the only player in town - well, the only cable company. There's always satellite TV, but the city of Houston long ago gave the city contract to Warner, and that's the way it's always been.
I called Time Warner a couple of days ago to ask about the channel. After finally being connected to a human (once being dropped by the menu service three times) I asked her if they would carry Logo, but hey, what a surprise, the operator had never heard of it. When I told her it was a new gay and lesbian channel, she asked me if I meant Here! - one of the pay-per-view channels currently available. Those channels are not only easier for Time warner to swallow, since they are only accessible after they are requested. They also make Time Warner extra money.
I understand the problem, to an extent. Just a few years ago, living at home, our local cable system took off MTV, siting that those oh-so-naughty videos were too controversial. There had been some complaints that had come in to the company, so they took it off.
We lost MTV for several months, and I remember we complained for quite some time (this was back when my sister and I were young and we though MTV was worth watching). Eventually the cable company - don't worry, they've been sold a couple of times and are now a part of Cox cable - brought back MTV due to the continued outrage of teenagers who just had to know what tattoos Cher had added to her butt.
When they brought it back though, the person on the account had to request the channel specifically. It's still an "electable" channel in my hometown of Conroe. I don't suspect that they'll be seeing Logo anytime soon.
Properly informed, the polite Time Warner woman took my information that I wanted the channel, and maybe someday i'll be contacted about it. Consider me not holding my breath. I'm sure that in conservative Texas, Time Warner is way too worried about having mom and dad see little Johnny flip between Cartoon Network and Boomerang and pass by two men kissing.
Of course just the knowledge that there's a gay channel would be enough to send some people fleeing. I know that there are people who won't buy Sirius because of OutQ. Of course, it just may open a new market - a new company that will provide service that doesn't have offending programming. It's happened in many other entertainment venues, why not television distribution? Of course Time Warner could just offer a non-offensive package (surprising that they don't).
Still, I don't even know what Logo's showing. Their website is surprisingly vague. I'm not sure I'd even watch it, despite hearing that a livejournaler that I've met works for it (
umkinda). I guess I want to support it just to support the community. One day, perhaps we won't need channels like Logo.Surprising for a channel I can't see, and I'm not sure I'd watch, I just wrote a lot about it. Still it's about our continuing visibility, and it's more important to be next to Fox News on the dial, and not near the spice channel to really make an impact on people's lives. It's all about not being put away in the closet.
I see that Direct TV is carrying Logo, so this weekend at Chris' I guess I'll be on the couch changing channels between the Live 8 broadcast and finding out what's on Logo - as long as real life doesn't take me away.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2005-07-01 03:50 am (UTC)I thought the way that the cable companies had been dealing with the gay channels so far (at least from how I've read their sites and correlated to the cable sites) was that the ones that have carriage were being offered on a pay-per-view basis through Digital Cable service, or as Time Warner likes to put it (so they can up the charges) “on demand.” Even here! was programming on request for Dish Network and Direct TV.
I'm frustrated as hell about it too, because one of those networks has the exclusive on the next Margaret Cho stand-up movie rather than Showtime or Sundance.
no subject
Date: 2005-07-01 04:52 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-07-01 05:15 am (UTC)no, I demand to STAR in a bear show!
no subject
Date: 2005-07-01 06:45 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-07-01 11:58 am (UTC)We subscribed to them for a full year, then dropped it cause it sucked. I wanted to show my support and show the cable company that there was an audience for this channel. What a crappy channel. There were two or three things that were worth watching and the rest was stuff you could see on other channels or just pathetic locally made shows.
Well PrideVision is no more....it went into hiding for a year and came out as OUTtv (channel 269, and no porn) and Hard On PrideVision, all porn for $8/mon and Male Filxxx, porn 24/7 for $20/mo
I haven't watched any of them...cause it's still boring and there is better crap on. :P