The HD Hegemony of DirecTV

I have been feeling dismayed by the new season of Project Runway. My dissatisfaction is not rooted in its recent network change or cross-country move to Los Angeles (not a fashion capital, but still adequately equipped with fabric and thread). Rather it's the picture. It's the picture that got, well, not small but fuzzy.

That's because Lifetime, its new network, is not offered in high-def (HD) on my satellite provider, DirecTV. It's a big problem because this is a show that features a lot of bright lighting with white backgrounds. Also, one that encourages a viewer to look closely at small details, such as a bit of trim on the cuff of a sleeve. After all, you need to know exactly why Nina Garcia is employing that certain frown, and not one of the many others in her arsenal.

But distinguishing much of anything is a challenge. Because the image is so soft and the color saturation is so poor. After an hour I've got a headache. And I can't understand why this problem persists. Why does a service that endlessly trumpets its myriad HD capability refuse to add many of the most longstanding basic cable stations?

I decided to investigate. By going to the DirecTV website, I took a gander at the HD channels it has added recently and what is and is not available in high definition. In the past year the overwhelming majority of new HD offerings have been sports channels and packages. In fact, of the 100-plus channels available in HD, more than 50 are sports-centered.

What's not available? Lifetime, Hallmark, WE (Women's Entertainment), Style, E!, Oxygen, Soap channel, etc... Is it me, or do most of these channels have something in common? Namely, they are programmed for and mostly watched by women. These customers don't seem to have the same value as baseball fans.

Another show I had to stop watching because it looked awful was Beautiful People on Logo--the only gay and lesbian-directed channel on the dial. It's certainly very lonely since the PTB at DirecTV banished all of HereTV's content without any sort of explanation. (Don't try to talk me into Bravo. It's gay cred defenestrated itself a while ago, and I refuse to accept that all those bitchy housewives annoy just one demographic.)

Still, is this an effort to disenfranchise non-straight, non-sports-loving, non-males, or is this just aimless whining on my part? Maybe no providers offer these particular channels, you may posit. Well, many do. DishTV, for example, the other major satellite provider, offers most of them in HD. It even has adjacent channels like the Lifetime Movie Network and Hallmark Movie Channel in high-def. Many cable services are also more friendly to women and gay folk, and so are A.T.&T's U-Verse and Verizon's Fios services.

I thought DirecTV really ought to be more accountable to the full range of its subscribers. So I wrote them a letter outlining many of the concerns mentioned above. The response I received from Joan M. was a dismissive, "We don't have any news about upcoming HD channels." But it was the P.S. tacked on to the email that was the real kicker:

P. S. -Football season is almost here! Catch up to 14 games every week this fall with NFL SUNDAY TICKET, now available at directv.com/nfl.

P. P. S. -Joan, you and your satellite company just don't get it. The ball I'm most interested in watching is the one you guys have dropped. Maybe you could pick it up soon.