On Mon, Feb 28, 2022 at 8:33 AM Adam Bowie <[email protected]> wrote:
> PGage wrote: > > "I admit to not having a good understanding of what a streaming-dominant > television world will look like. I am not sure how linear news divisions > could be maintained without a critical sized audience. aBC can always have > talking heads and broadcast video it gets from others, but whatever vestige > remains of an actual news gathering operation could not be maintained if it > only had sizable numbers of viewers during intermediate crises. Maybe > streaming networks will be able to support real news divisions in the > future, but my experience with Netflix like operations has not included > many live programs. Lives sporting events is the exception, but those are > set pieces, relatively passive. Will a day come when one of the options on > Amazon or Netflix or Disney is a live Newscast?" > > This is an interesting question. Currently channels like CNN and Fox News > are profitable because they create appointment to view programming in > primetime that can be sold to advertisers, but also those cable bundle > revenues. As the cable audience declines and everyone moves to streaming, > at some point that becomes a significant challenge. > > I do think that at some point bundles will be become bigger and slightly > less fluid than they are now. It's really not in, say, Disney's interest > that I can subscribe for a month, binge the latest series and then cancel. > If that churn becomes a major problem, then I can see it becoming more like > traditional cable contracts where you have to subscribe for a year or more, > and can't cancel at a moment's notice. On the other hand, it's entirely > likely that Disney will eventually push you to a Disney/Hulu/ESPN combo, > just as Warner-Discovery push you to an HBO Max/Discovery+/CNN combo. > > The question is whether everyone will do news, and what we've seen in > recent years is that with a few exceptions, news isn't all that profitable. > Local news outlets have gone, and even the local TV news operations which > are perhaps profitable right now, rely on network TV to maintain their > position. When those viewers go, where does leave those who can't pay or at > least subsidise local news? Big regional US papers seem to be in the hands > of asset-stripping hedge funds who probably aren't looking more than a > handful of years forward. And then there are a few who are in much better > positions and are cleaning up. The New York Times busily growing a powerful > subs business, and the Washington Post having a benign billionaire owning > it (benign in that I don't believe he interferes editorially). Globally, > beyond CNN and some specialist financial news players like Bloomberg and > CNBC, you have state funded outlets. The BBC is paid for directly via UK > licence fees by citizens (although some of it is ad-supported). See also > Deutsche Welle, Al Jazeera and many others. There are agencies like > Reuters and AP, but they require subscribing services to stay afloat. > > Lack of news means a challenge to democracy. If you don't know what's > happening then anything could be happening. > > Kevin wrote: > > "The vaccine coverage illustrates why counting on a network to filter your > information doesn’t work anymore. Yes, it’s more convenient, but when the > filters available are deeply flawed, viewers ultimately have to do it > themselves anyway. And let’s be honest, the anti-vax people aren’t > interested in even basic research; they are merely seeking those whose > opinions align with their baseless beliefs. " > > And this is why we do need filters. A CNN or a NY Times telling me about > Covid is vastly more useful, informative, and likely right, than a Twitter > or Facebook stream. Viewers *won't* do it themselves. Sure - some > anti-vaxers would say whatever to support their beliefs. But they mostly > weren't born that way, they got information from rogue "sources." If we > don't have trusted sources to provide information then we'd be looking at > carnage. Most people won't look at a tweet, chase down who the person is, > work out what else they've said, Google them to find out what expertise > they might have in the subject, and then come to a decision about whether > what they're saying is accurate. > > Certainly, Fox News presents blatant falsifictions and misinformation, but > does NBC News, ABC News or CBS News? Does NPR or PBS? Does the NYT or LAT? > Does Axios or Puck? I might not like or agree with everything everyone > says, but they have an editorial process that does indeed filter the > firehose of "content" gushing out of the internet. And we need that. > The issue isn’t just of misinformation; it is that the networks all have specific political/partisan positions, meaning those who disagree with the politics of a network will by default disagree with the experts of a network. In short, legitimate information will be tainted because the source network is not trusted. The news outlets fail to inform the public when they alienate half (or more) of the public. > > > Adam > > On Mon, Feb 28, 2022 at 3:07 PM Kevin M. <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> >> On Mon, Feb 28, 2022 at 6:55 AM PGage <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Early this morning CNN’s Matthew Chance did get out and about, and had a >>> riveting video report on the aftermath for a Russian column that had been >>> repulsed from an advance on the Capital over a bridge. He showed tanks and >>> trucks and armored vehicles completely destroyed (by those American >>> Javelins Trump tried to use to extort fake dirt on the Bidens 3 years >>> ago?). He alluded to dead Russian bodies he did not want to show, then >>> (inadvertently I am prepared to believe) did come up on a dead Russian that >>> was shown briefly, and now I have seen the piece rerun at least once, so I >>> guess that did not violate CNN policy too much. The piece also showed him >>> crouching down, then realizing he was inches from an unexploded grenade and >>> moving away with deliberate speed. >>> >>> It was pretty valid news, and very good TV. I’m sure CNN will repeat it >>> if ten throughout today. >>> >>> I admit to not having a good understanding of what a streaming-dominant >>> television world will look like. I am not sure how linear news divisions >>> could be maintained without a critical sized audience. aBC can always have >>> talking heads and broadcast video it gets from others, but whatever vestige >>> remains of an actual news gathering operation could not be maintained if it >>> only had sizable numbers of viewers during intermediate crises. Maybe >>> streaming networks will be able to support real news divisions in the >>> future, but my experience with Netflix like operations has not included >>> many live programs. Lives sporting events is the exception, but those are >>> set pieces, relatively passive. Will a day come when one of the options on >>> Amazon or Netflix or Disney is a live Newscast? >>> >>> Adam’s point about the need for a “filter” is precisely what I have been >>> trying to say. I too have spent a lot of time clicking on Twitter IDs and >>> then trying to research the credibility of the source. Consumers of News >>> should not have to function as producers and editors and fact checkers. It >>> reminds me of my experience at work, with patients coming in having >>> diagnosed themselves and created their own treatment plans from cursory >>> Google searches. If my use of the internet to get information about >>> breaking news events is as accurate as what my patients bring to me about >>> their own mental health, we are in big trouble. Plus, I find that the more >>> a conclusion is the result of one’s own internet searching, the more >>> stubborn one is to hang on to them, even in the face of contradictory >>> expert judgement. Indeed, the whole culture and spirit of the Internet >>> seems to be aimed at freeing people from the tyranny if “experts” - aka >>> people who know what the hell they are talking about. We have seen the >>> harvest if this approach in Vaccine denial. >>> >> >> The vaccine coverage illustrates why counting on a network to filter your >> information doesn’t work anymore. Yes, it’s more convenient, but when the >> filters available are deeply flawed, viewers ultimately have to do it >> themselves anyway. And let’s be honest, the anti-vax people aren’t >> interested in even basic research; they are merely seeking those whose >> opinions align with their baseless beliefs. >> >> >>> On Mon, 28 Feb 2022 at 2:48 AM Adam Bowie <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> Obviously opinions vary considerably on what we want from news, and the >>>> TV news options I get here are different to most of this group's. >>>> >>>> Pgage wrote: >>>> >>>> "What would happen if there were no more “linear” television outlets on >>>> stories like these? I read the papers often during the day, and the AP, and >>>> Twitter, but there would be a huge hole without television news >>>> organizations with ongoing assets in the field. Will Amazon or Hulu be >>>> doing that down the road? I guess I will have to get CNN+" >>>> >>>> My feeling is that linear news channels will continue as we move to >>>> streaming, just as we are already beginning to watch live streams of >>>> sports. CNN+ is an oddity because it's clearly an interim service that >>>> Warner-Discovery (or whatever they're called today) has to have separate to >>>> the main channel because of those lucrative cable revenues. But at some >>>> point down the line, normal CNN (and the likes of regular ESPN) will become >>>> a streaming option and it'll be where we go to if we want live >>>> up-to-the-minute news coverage. See also BBC World News, Sky News, >>>> Euronews, Al Jazeera and whatever else. >>>> >>>> twolper wrote: >>>> >>>> "If I think about how the news stations are going to cover the invasion >>>> I know they are going to talk about how it’s going to affect the upcoming >>>> US elections. I lived in Israel for years and I remember cable TV came with >>>> CNN International. If something big happened locally and I turned on CNN to >>>> see their coverage, it was about how the event would affect Americans or US >>>> foreign policy." >>>> >>>> To be fair, I don't think CNN is alone in this. Watching the domestic >>>> BBC News, there are reports about what this will mean for British >>>> households. Fuel price increases in the main - and we're already facing >>>> some massive spikes in those ahead of this conflict. But that's a real >>>> concern, and you do need to explain to audiences why a dispute that is >>>> happening many thousands of miles away from your shores is going to impact >>>> you. Obviously, you wouldn't probably shouldn't lead on this with your >>>> global facing services. But then even CNN International simulcasts a lot of >>>> regular CNN. The big primetime shows all go out in Europe's late night >>>> timeslots. And during massive conflicts, CNN, like the BBC, merge their >>>> domestic and global services into a single stream. >>>> >>>> If I ignore those primetime shows, which are definitely from a >>>> US-angle, I don't think CNN International is too US-skewed. I get more >>>> irked to be honest when I've watched ABC's "World" News Tonight and >>>> realised that "World" has a very different meaning in that context :-) >>>> >>>> Kevin wrote: >>>> >>>> "Experts are now available online without a network filter. Survivor >>>> and victim accounts are also available." >>>> >>>> To be honest, I do want, and need a filter. There are some amazing >>>> experts online, but there are also lots of people with specific >>>> issues/grievances/angles, and it can be hard to determine which reports I >>>> should trust. I find I'm regularly clicking through to people's Twitter >>>> profiles and seeing if they look like they might know something based on >>>> that. Do they have a verified tick? Are they working for some organisation >>>> that has some credibility? It's really hard. This person may be the best >>>> expert on Ukraine/Russian diplomatic relations in the world, but I need >>>> someone to help me determine that. There are plenty of people just blindly >>>> retweeting other things, and while I "vet" who I follow fairly closely to >>>> get rid of people who retweet or share nonsense, that takes time and >>>> effort. It's not that dissimilar to trying to work out whether someone >>>> really knows about Covid or whether they're just an armchair-immunologist. >>>> (I should note that there absolutely cases where armchair experts have >>>> become real experts. I'm thinking of organisations like Bellingcat who have >>>> used open source material from social media, Google maps and so on to break >>>> real stories. They're doing some good work proving fabrications and "false >>>> flag" stories that are being planted currently. Many of the folks there >>>> started out as complete amateurs. So it is possible. It's just that it's >>>> hard for me to make that determination.) >>>> >>>> Given we live in a world where people are completely happy to believe >>>> something they read from someone's friend of a friend on Facebook, but not >>>> believe something they saw on network television, I'm not sure that most of >>>> the population are as discriminating or media savvy as they need to be. >>>> >>>> Pgate wrote: >>>> >>>> "I suspect both traditional and non traditional reports are getting >>>> carried away with the romanticism of David standing up to Goliath, and >>>> creating an expectation that somehow Ukraine is going to win this war in >>>> some kind of movie ending. Sadly that still seems unlikely." >>>> >>>> While there's a bit of this, most of the commentators I've seen have >>>> been darkly warning that worse is yet to come. Ukrainian leaders may be >>>> making online videos to show how to make Molotov cocktails, but I don't >>>> think anyone really thinks that they'll be much use in the longer term >>>> against the might of Russian weaponry. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Adam >>>> >>>> >>>> On Mon, Feb 28, 2022 at 5:24 AM PGage <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> So, I am uncomfortable in the role of defending TV news, as I agree >>>>> with the sorry state it is in. I have not been watching cable news >>>>> continuously since the invasion, but every 3-4 hours I watch for about 30 >>>>> min. I have not seen even one minute of discussion of how it will effect >>>>> midterm or presidential elections, or even Biden’s poll numbers. I >>>>> wouldn’t >>>>> be surprised if they have had segments like this, but not often enough >>>>> that >>>>> my sampling has hit it. The closest I have seen is a segment on Trump at >>>>> CPAC, and his comments on Putin and Biden. >>>>> >>>>> In the early days the story was about the resolve of the Ukrainian >>>>> people, and of their President. I thought TV News got this right, got it >>>>> right early, and before it was conventional wisdom. Another story they >>>>> have >>>>> covered well is the refugees, and how they have been helped at all of the >>>>> European borders. The last couple of days a key story has been how the EU >>>>> countries have changed what appeared to be deeply entrenched positions on >>>>> limiting sanctions on Russia and military aid to Ukraine. TV News has done >>>>> a good job of reporting the outcomes, but newspapers have done the real >>>>> work of reporting the process, see for example great WaPo story on how >>>>> Zelensky personally convinced the German Chancellor to change his mind in >>>>> a >>>>> video call to the EU meeting from the front lines: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2022/02/27/russia-ukraine-sanctions-swift-central-bank/ >>>>> >>>>> Where I think TV has surprisingly not done a very good job is actually >>>>> tracking the real time progress of the various Russian lines of advance. >>>>> All three of the outlets I have been monitoring seem to mostly have >>>>> reporters in fixed positions observing street intersections or buildings. >>>>> They get excited when they get audio of missals hitting, or air raid >>>>> alarms, or fires, but otherwise they mostly say things like “reports are >>>>> that the Russians are moving up from XXX”, or “the Russian advance is >>>>> slower than expected”, or “The Capital is still under the control of >>>>> Ukrainians”. >>>>> >>>>> Online you can find more specific reports (locals destroying bridges, >>>>> heated battles at specific locations), but this is where you also get a >>>>> lot >>>>> of conflicting reports. >>>>> >>>>> I suspect both traditional and non traditional reports are getting >>>>> carried away with the romanticism of David standing up to Goliath, and >>>>> creating an expectation that somehow Ukraine is going to win this war in >>>>> some kind of movie ending. Sadly that still seems unlikely. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Sun, 27 Feb 2022 at 6:31 PM <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> I’m with Kevin on the state of US TV news. If I think about how the >>>>>> news stations are going to cover the invasion I know they are going to >>>>>> talk >>>>>> about how it’s going to affect the upcoming US elections. I lived in >>>>>> Israel >>>>>> for years and I remember cable TV came with CNN International. If >>>>>> something >>>>>> big happened locally and I turned on CNN to see their coverage, it was >>>>>> about how the event would affect Americans or US foreign policy. >>>>>> >>>>>> I followed the Afghanistan and Iraq invasions closely in both the >>>>>> newspapers and on TV. From day to day there wasn’t a whole lot new to >>>>>> cover >>>>>> and in retrospect they missed the story in a big way. I don’t trust them >>>>>> to >>>>>> get this story right. >>>>>> >>>>>> On Feb 27, 2022, at 9:10 PM, Kevin M. <[email protected]> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> You make my point for me. Experts are now available online without a >>>>>> network filter. Survivor and victim accounts are also available. If I’m >>>>>> going to try to stomach Don Lemon or Rachel Maddow, they need to offer >>>>>> something I can’t get elsewhere. >>>>>> >>>>>> Like you, I’ve turned to TV during Breaking News throughout my life, >>>>>> too. But now I not only don’t miss it, but feel I’m better informed by >>>>>> virtue of not watching it. >>>>>> >>>>>> On Sun, Feb 27, 2022 at 6:04 PM PGage <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> While there is something to your critique, I think it is overly >>>>>>> harsh. I have seen several recognized experts on both Russia and Ukraine >>>>>>> interviewed many times, providing both general context but also targeted >>>>>>> context and analysis if minute by minute events. They have interviewed >>>>>>> Ukrainians getting out, and those staying. They have video, and >>>>>>> interviews, >>>>>>> with officials from surrounding nations, NATO, and the EU. Yes, I have >>>>>>> seen >>>>>>> much of this online as well, but television news has, during my >>>>>>> lifetime, >>>>>>> been an import supplement to print journalism, and institutional, legacy >>>>>>> media are an essential counterweight to much of the freelance reporting >>>>>>> one >>>>>>> sees on Social Media, which has less concern with its reputation and >>>>>>> credibility. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I’m not saying we would be blind without linear television news, but >>>>>>> there would be a hole. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Sun, 27 Feb 2022 at 5:54 PM Kevin M. <[email protected]> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Sun, Feb 27, 2022 at 1:47 PM PGage <[email protected]> wrote >>>>>>>> . >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> . >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> What would happen if there were no more “linear” television >>>>>>>>> outlets on stories like these? I read the papers often during the >>>>>>>>> day, and >>>>>>>>> the AP, and Twitter, but there would be a huge hole without >>>>>>>>> television news >>>>>>>>> organizations with ongoing assets in the field. Will Amazon or Hulu be >>>>>>>>> doing that down the road? I guess I will have to get CNN+ >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Really? A huge hole? What context are TV news providing? What, >>>>>>>> other than the instantaneous visuals of explosions, are they >>>>>>>> contributing >>>>>>>> to the story? I’m unaware of any experts on Ukraine employed by CNN or >>>>>>>> MSNBC… they might exist, but I can’t imagine they prepared for this >>>>>>>> eventuality, even though Putin has been preparing for this for more >>>>>>>> than >>>>>>>> a decade so they had plenty of time to develop sources and establish >>>>>>>> solid >>>>>>>> connections to the region. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I haven’t watched any TV coverage, and I don’t feel I’m missing >>>>>>>> out. I have friends in the area, so I can see any immediate events on >>>>>>>> social media. For context there are stories from AP and BBC. Both NPR >>>>>>>> and >>>>>>>> MarketPlace have done a decent job explaining the impact of war in the >>>>>>>> region on US economy and life. I fail to see any advantage in whatever >>>>>>>> CNN >>>>>>>> or MSNBC might be bloviating about. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I’m taking this war personally. I was in Kazakhstan 20 years ago >>>>>>>> when Putin murdered a school full of men, women, and children in >>>>>>>> Beslan. >>>>>>>> And I watched when he attacked Crimea. And Georgia. He’s patient and >>>>>>>> methodical, and the so called international community has let him get >>>>>>>> away >>>>>>>> with this crap over and over again. The US isn’t a moral leader >>>>>>>> anymore, >>>>>>>> and we’re on the cusp of ceasing to be a superpower, but we could >>>>>>>> still be >>>>>>>> acting against Putin with more than economic sanctions. As could a >>>>>>>> dozen >>>>>>>> other nations. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Putin won’t stop until he’s forcibly removed from office or >>>>>>>> assassinated. That’s the reality. Even if he’s convinced to stop >>>>>>>> attacking >>>>>>>> Ukraine, he will shift targets or wait until we are distracted and >>>>>>>> strike >>>>>>>> again. The TV news media is too dumbed down and too political to cover >>>>>>>> this >>>>>>>> situation with any degree of quality or depth. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>> Sent from Gmail Mobile >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>>>>>>> Groups "TVorNotTV" group. >>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, >>>>>>>>> send an email to [email protected]. >>>>>>>>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>>>>>>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tvornottv/CAKGtkYK7D6hT7SF-BOS%3DS233RxsL1BNG4OfO75UA1YqqpXS7dQ%40mail.gmail.com >>>>>>>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tvornottv/CAKGtkYK7D6hT7SF-BOS%3DS233RxsL1BNG4OfO75UA1YqqpXS7dQ%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >>>>>>>>> . >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>> Kevin M. (RPCV) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>>>>>> Groups "TVorNotTV" group. >>>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, >>>>>>>> send an email to [email protected]. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>>>>>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tvornottv/CAKgmY4BWhG%2BRHxKsoPxmuUw1hcKG99hVBDy-S0hcUres_z9V%3DQ%40mail.gmail.com >>>>>>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tvornottv/CAKgmY4BWhG%2BRHxKsoPxmuUw1hcKG99hVBDy-S0hcUres_z9V%3DQ%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >>>>>>>> . >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> Sent from Gmail Mobile >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>>>>> Groups "TVorNotTV" group. >>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, >>>>>>> send an email to [email protected]. >>>>>>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>>>>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tvornottv/CAKGtkYKwPP1v4U8RpOdLvLb5s%2BEOtR6uFiGb9k3AGud89-K5jg%40mail.gmail.com >>>>>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tvornottv/CAKGtkYKwPP1v4U8RpOdLvLb5s%2BEOtR6uFiGb9k3AGud89-K5jg%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >>>>>>> . >>>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> Kevin M. (RPCV) >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>>>> Groups "TVorNotTV" group. >>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, >>>>>> send an email to [email protected]. >>>>>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>>>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tvornottv/CAKgmY4Dc%3D1UUpj6x-a6cxpYa2QugqY%3D9j-Nksz8O9LjG7UhLbw%40mail.gmail.com >>>>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tvornottv/CAKgmY4Dc%3D1UUpj6x-a6cxpYa2QugqY%3D9j-Nksz8O9LjG7UhLbw%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >>>>>> . >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>>>> Groups "TVorNotTV" group. >>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, >>>>>> send an email to [email protected]. >>>>>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>>>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tvornottv/3868998F-5277-49C1-93D0-7C0A30FC5947%40gmail.com >>>>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tvornottv/3868998F-5277-49C1-93D0-7C0A30FC5947%40gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >>>>>> . >>>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Sent from Gmail Mobile >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>>> Groups "TVorNotTV" group. >>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>>>> an email to [email protected]. >>>>> >>>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tvornottv/CAKGtkY%2BCHvpxJdNYM1Fu-L1Ph8aG9%2B09oZV%2Be7M9WptXfm-K7A%40mail.gmail.com >>>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tvornottv/CAKGtkY%2BCHvpxJdNYM1Fu-L1Ph8aG9%2B09oZV%2Be7M9WptXfm-K7A%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >>>>> . >>>>> >>>> -- >>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>> Groups "TVorNotTV" group. >>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>>> an email to [email protected]. >>>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tvornottv/CAD_sJGDX_45oH6f%3DrCGpG5r8NRyPLaD5258vOaLNsY1%2BAuCSbg%40mail.gmail.com >>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tvornottv/CAD_sJGDX_45oH6f%3DrCGpG5r8NRyPLaD5258vOaLNsY1%2BAuCSbg%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >>>> . >>>> >>> -- >>> Sent from Gmail Mobile >>> >>> -- >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>> Groups "TVorNotTV" group. >>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>> an email to [email protected]. >>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tvornottv/CAKGtkY%2BncQXCzKpSU%2BpeN7ox4F%2B3dHDFns4BzazK%3DKD3_3srKw%40mail.gmail.com >>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tvornottv/CAKGtkY%2BncQXCzKpSU%2BpeN7ox4F%2B3dHDFns4BzazK%3DKD3_3srKw%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >>> . >>> >> -- >> Kevin M. (RPCV) >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "TVorNotTV" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to [email protected]. >> > To view this discussion on the web visit >> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tvornottv/CAKgmY4AQyetV-oC88FK8Saa707HXLEczKhNa5FMZ%3Dkw1aqgZAw%40mail.gmail.com >> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tvornottv/CAKgmY4AQyetV-oC88FK8Saa707HXLEczKhNa5FMZ%3Dkw1aqgZAw%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >> . >> > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "TVorNotTV" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tvornottv/CAD_sJGDv25zS2gFB%3DBR3Ly_yn9RWuHeG8BecZMitFGsU6%3DQg_Q%40mail.gmail.com > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tvornottv/CAD_sJGDv25zS2gFB%3DBR3Ly_yn9RWuHeG8BecZMitFGsU6%3DQg_Q%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> > . > -- Kevin M. (RPCV) -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TVorNotTV" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tvornottv/CAKgmY4AVOnt%2BC%2BHV1bNYNuaZ8gcovE6m%2BaEY69UFc7BKxh-HHg%40mail.gmail.com.
