Many fans are still upset at missing the bulk of Clayton Kershaw's career due to the impasseGETTY IMAGES
Spectrum's agreement with AT&T to carry SportsNet LA, the Dodgers' RSN, on its video platforms begins immediately and includes "DirecTV, AT&T TV, U-Verse TV and AT&T Now in Southern California, Las Vegas and Hawaii," according to Castillo & Shaikin of the L.A. TIMES. The length of the carriage agreement announced yesterday "was not disclosed." While it "expands the number of households with the channel, the deal does not include several other pay-TV providers in the area." After the deal was announced, some Dodgers fans "immediately reacted on social media suggesting the announcement must be an April Fool’s joke." But Castillo & Shaikin write it was "no joke that fans had missed six years of highlights -- including Vin Scully’s final years, Clayton Kershaw’s no-hitter, and six consecutive National League West championships." In the absence of live Dodgers games, SportsNet LA programming in April will include "condensed one-hour formats of game telecasts and behind-the-scenes" looks at current players (L.A. TIMES, 4/2). THE ATHLETIC's Molly Knight noted Spectrum has "yet to reach an agreement with other cable providers that serve a smaller segment of Southern California homes like Dish Network and Cox." However, the deal with "chief nemesis AT&T on this issue bodes well for the odds that everyone in L.A. will be able to watch the Dodgers soon" (THEATHLETIC.com, 4/1).
SWEET SYNERGY: In L.A., James & Shaikin in a front-page piece write, "In the end, old-fashioned horse trading helped bring AT&T and Spectrum TV’s parent company, Charter Communications, together." AT&T is "desperate for new subscribers to its upcoming video streaming service, HBO Max, which the company hopes will compete with Netflix and Disney+," and Charter "fits the bill because it can offer the new service to its more than 15 million pay-TV customers nationwide." AT&T can "ill-afford another failure." Meanwhile, Charter gets a "big benefit" too, as it will be able to "substantially reduce its losses of about" $150M a year on the Dodgers channel contract (L.A. TIMES, 4/2). In California, Bill Plunkett writes the agreement "ends a nearly seven-year battle of acrimony and absence" (ORANGE COUNTY REGISTER, 4/2).
MISSED OPPORTUNITIES: In L.A., Bill Plaschke writes it is "impossible to rejoice without also recognizing the scars of the most damaging monetary feud in this city’s sports history." It also is "irresponsible to ignore the smoking wreckage left behind, namely the legacy of a Dodger ownership group that could have avoided this mess long ago with one stroke of a pen." There are "many reasons to applaud what has been instantly gained by millions," but there are "as many reasons for remorse over the blackout’s cost." Plaschke: "The final years of Vin Scully, lost. The golden age of Clayton Kershaw, lost. Six summers of division-championship baseball, lost." The blackout also "hurt the Dodgers’ local popularity." Even though they "annually lead the league in attendance, and have been easily Los Angeles’ most consistent winners for those six years, they remain a clear second to the Lakers in terms of attention" (L.A. TIMES, 4/2).
