By allowing ads to appear on this site, you support the local businesses who, in turn, support great journalism.
How to cut the cable and save
7fa0c75c5d41a884eb517b0a115ba8cfdfab51e6298cb7a35407a37a18f2b192
Consumer costs for cable and satellite TV continue to explode. Here are some strategies to cut the cable and your television viewing costs at the same time. - photo by Jeff Wuorio
To any cable or satellite television subscriber, the cost of in-home entertainment is going up.

An analysis by Consumers Union shows that cable rates have increased 30 percent in the past five years, nearly three times the rate of inflation. According to a 2014 federal study, the average "basic" cable bill was $64 a month. That pales against the monthly cost of satellite. Taking in fees, pay per views and other costs, the average monthly DirecTV bill tops $100.

Every day I try to help my clients minimize their expenses, and cable is the first item to go, said Atlanta financial planner Whitney Lee.

But does pulling the plug on cable mean being cut off from the world and left staring at the four walls? There are tradeoffs, to be sure, but there are also a number of money-saving alternatives that provide choice and more control over a family's in-home entertainment.

Some 600,000 paid TV subscribers dumped their services in the second quarter of 2015. Tanja Crouch of Nashville and her family were part of that trend in part. The Crouches subscribe to cable for the high-speed Internet. But they scaled back to a bare-bones cable package of local programming through the major networks.

We're considering the next step of turning off the cable altogether and just relying on Netflix and other apps to watch programs, she said. We are happier we have limited options of TV channels. Instead of just turning on the TV, we read or talk or do other things.

A three-step process

Would-be cable-free TV consumers may be surprised by the number of options that can replace cable/satellite technology and programming.

A TV antenna may smack of the days of yore (Who shot JR? anyone?), but local network affiliates, public television and other stations have continued to broadcast programming accessible via antenna throughout the cable/satellite stampede.

Most people don't realize that approximately 95 percent of the top shows are on network TV, not to mention a good portion of NFL games, said Chris Brantner of www.cutcabletoday.com, a how-to site for prospective cable cutters. (Brantner goes by the moniker Mr. Cable Cutter.)

And much of the antenna accessible programming is delivered in high-definition quality.

The reception is excellent, said Lynda Spiegel, a New York City career coach who said shes saving some $64 a month after going cable-free. In fact, the HD is far sharper than it was via cable.

The website Antennaweb.org can help guide viewers on whether they need an outdoor or indoor antenna. Sites such as antennapoint.com can assist in identifying compass directions to orient the antenna for optimal reception.

Another cable-free option is streaming services that offer television shows, movies and other content. These feature such well-known brands as Netflix (monthly plans start at $8.99) and Hulu ($7.99 a month). Other choices include Amazon Prime (which, for $99 a year, in addition to streaming video and music, also offers other perks such as discounted shipping of purchased items) and Sling ($20 a month, which provides live television programming such as ESPN, American Movie Classics and others.)

The great thing about cutting the cord is that most streaming services offer free trials, so you can take services for a test drive before you settle on them. And then after you sign up, they're month-to-month with no contracts, so your cord-cutting setup can be an ever-evolving thing, said Brantner. For example, say you want to carry Sling TV during football season for Monday Night Football, but then you can cancel it after the season until the next season.

Additionally, many networks offer popular programs online free of charge via their website. The downside is that there can be a delay between when the shows are actually broadcast and when theyre available on the Internet. Their quality may be spotty, but sites such as YouTube also offer full-length movies and other material.

Consider the caveats

Bear in mind that accessing streaming via the Internet content may require purchasing some equipment. Choices include Roku ($49.99 and up), Apple TV ($70) and Google Chromecast ($35). Other devices such as some video game consoles can also serve this purpose.

Another caveat to consider before cutting the cord is Internet speed. You may need to boost your bandwidth to handle video streaming. Rural viewers might find their Internet provider doesnt offer high-speed plans to handle streaming.

Very often high-speed Internet is not available in rural areas, which limits the ability to stream, which is why I often recommend that people living far out stick with satellite television, said Brantner.

Rural consumers may be not close enough to pick up quality broadcast television via antenna.

Future programming

While the current television service climate has reached a standoff either cable or satellite or a patched together menu of alternatives consumers will see network television programming undergoing a change in the next decade, experts say.

Industry analysts have suggested that television networks will begin to move toward a more on-demand model, where viewers will have greater leeway in picking and choosing which shows they want to watch.

The video on-demand service Netflix is a suitable model for that type of service, said Bernstein Research analyst Todd Juenger in a report called This Report is Not Entitled The Death of the TV Network, released this summer, according to the Wall Street Journal.

Juenger wrote that Netflix is essentially a compilation of material that viewers can browse and access according to their personal tastes. Although viewers effectively pay for material they don't watch, the monthly cost is a fraction of what cable and satellite providers charge.

If that analogy holds at all in the world of on-demand TV, the implication were suggesting is viewers will choose shows simply on the merits of program by program, Juenger wrote. If the network loses its attachment and relevance, the studios/networks will have to fight for viewers show by show."

The exception, Juenger added, would be sports and news, which are still largely watched live.
Sign up for our E-Newsletters
How to avoid 'sharenting' and other paparazzi parenting habits
ce406c66b9871a104ac24256a687e4821d75680dcfc89d9e5398939543f7f88f
A recent study revealed parents often spend up to two hours staging a single photo of his or her child to post online. - photo by Amy Iverson
Before having kids, some people just dont appreciate their friends baby posts. But after having a child of their own, three fourths of new parents jump right on the parental social media bandwagon. If you have become a member of this group, there are some rules to follow for posting responsibly.

Much of a parents worry is how to teach their children to use social media responsibly. We talk with our kids about privacy, oversharing, and setting restrictions on their devices to keep them safe. But parents themselves need to look in the digital mirror once in a while. Before having children, it doesnt take as much effort to think about what to post online. Its up to us to decide what we share about our own lives. But once you become a parent, there are many questions to think about regarding what is appropriate to post about your kids on social media.

In a recent survey, kids clothing subscription company Mac and Mia surveyed 2000 new parents to find out how they are documenting their kids lives on social media, and what concerns they may have.

First of all, people without children seem to feel a bit differently about the onslaught of baby pictures online than those who are parents. 18 percent of people say before they had kids, they were annoyed by their friends baby posts. But after having children of their own, 73 percent admit they post progress pictures of their little ones every single month.

Not only are new parents letting the world know each time their baby is a month older, but they are posting about their kids every few days or so. Men and women report they post 6-7 times per month about their baby.

And while 70 percent of new parents say the benefit of using social media is how easy it is to help family and friends feel involved, there are some downsides. Here are a few tips to avoid the pitfall of becoming paparazzi parents.

Dont miss the moment

In the Mac and Mia survey, some parents admitted to spending up to two hours to get the perfect shot of their baby. That seems a little extreme. New and old parents alike should be careful about spending so much time taking pictures and videos that they dont enjoy the moment. Years ago, I decided to never live an experience through my phone. A study by Linda Henkel, a psychology professor at Fairfield University in Connecticut, found that when people took pictures of objects in an art museum, they didnt remember the objects as well as if they simply observed them.

This photo-taking impairment effect can happen to parents as well. If we are so consumed by getting the perfect photo, we can miss out on the moment all together, and our memory of it will suffer.

Dont forget about privacy

60 percent of couples say they have discussed rules and boundaries for posting their babys photos, according to the Mac and Mia survey. Even so, men are 34 percent more likely to publish baby posts on public accounts. If parents are concerned about their childrens privacy, keeping photos off of public accounts is a given.

In the Washington Post, Stacey Steinberg, a legal skills professor at the University of Florida, and Bahareh Keith, a Portland pediatrician, wrote that sharing too much information about kids online puts them at risk. They write that all that sharenting can make it easier for data thieves to target out kids for identity theft. Check that your privacy settings are where they should be and never share identifying information like full names and birth dates.

Dont be paparazzi parents

36 percent of parents say they take issue when their childs photo is posted online by someone else. Responsible social media users will always ask permission before posting a photo of another child. But parents should also think about whether their own children will take issue with their own posted photos a few years down the road.

When parents are constantly snapping pictures and throwing them on social media, it can be easy to forget to pause and make sure the post is appropriate. I always use the billboard example with my kids. I ask them to picture whatever they are posting going up on a billboard in our neighborhood. If they are okay with that, then their post is probably fine. Parents should ask themselves this same question when posting about their children. But they should also ask themselves if their child would be OK with this post on a billboard in 15 years. If it would cause embarrassment or humiliation, it might be best to keep it private.

Once children reach an appropriate age, parents should include them in the process of deciding what pictures are OK to post. Researchers at the University of Michigan surveyed 10- to 17-year-olds and found children believe their parents should ask permission more than parents think they should. The kids in the survey said sharing happy family moments, or accomplishments in sports, school and hobbies is fine. But when the post is negative (like when a child is disciplined) or embarrassing (think naked baby pictures or messy hair), kids say to keep it off social media.
Latest Obituaries