Maybe this is something you should ask Fox News, rather than Rogers. It may be about licensing, or about availability - and one thing you may not be aware of - is Fox programming has ALWAYS been YEARS behind other stations in providing HD to their customers. You may not have noticed, but almost 10 years after almost every channel went High Def, many of the Fox channels were STILL displayed in terribly looking low definition resolution.
This trend continues today with UFC events on the Fox channels. Even though they are now in HD - the Ultimate Fighter series displays their fights in INCREDIBLY low frame rate - such that the fighters jitter from frame to frame. I don't know how low the frame rate is - but it is very, very apparent - and it's not just an issue of this happening with one type of TV. It happened with both of my old TV's (which were DLP rear projection and LCD rear projection) and it's still happening with my new TV's - which are LED LCD's.
It seems that the Fox executives are old fogies who probably still have 14 inch CRT's themselves - and I've been irritated that Fox channel operators showed their customers considerable disrespect by assuming their customers didn't care about picture quality.
But it may be that Fox channel viewers may be older than average - and the viewing audience of Fox News in particular are MUCH, MUCH OLDER than the average TV viewer. The average Fox News viewer is close to 60 years old.
It really is true - what Jon Stewart used to say: "Your crazy old uncle who watches Fox News will be complaining this week about ....."
@billmcintyre you're probably right about the originating network being at fault in not broadcasting a high quality HD signal. But since the digital migration, there's no excuse for Rogers not making HD standard across the board with all the bandwidth now available.
I really think a big part of it is the Fox bigwig execs are stingy old guys who don't understand why the 'young crowd' wants those new-fangled big TV's.
I think they didn't want to spend the money on new cameras and all the other stuff required to upgrade their signal to HD.
I think they are dinosaurs.
And, frankly, it always offended me that they didn't respect my wish for a high quality image when watching TV. And I was one of the FIRST people to go HD with a form of progressive scanned higher definition TV years before almost anybody else had them. Many of you may not even be aware of the line of Proscan large screen TV's that were running their own firmware to take existing signals and turn them into progressive displays. This was several YEARS before anybody else was producing anything like HD.
And I think I'm one of the few people who started connecting their computer to their TV - starting, oh, probably 14 years ago. As I write this - I'm using a cordless keyboard and surfing the web on a 75 inch 4K TV - and I'm viewing this page at 60 Hz in 3840 by 2160.
So, I, more than most people, really hate Fox for not appreciating good quality picture image.
Well, I see Fox as the poor cousin of the Big Three networks, like Chrysler was in the heyday of domestic auto production. They likely have less resources.
I second the motion. The only news channels offered by Rogers at no additional cost are CBC, CTV and CNN, all of which are left-leaning. We need balanced news.
I just added FOX news to my channels and discovered it is only in SD? For such a large and popular news channel how can this be? CNN is in HD why not FOX?