Anyone else find the digital TV push peculiar?

[amy31416]

FCC moves to publicize digital TV switch-over
Mon Aug 18, 2008 6:26pm EDT

By Peter Kaplan

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. communications regulators will be fanning out around the country during the next six months to inform television viewers about the upcoming switch-over to digital TV.

Members of the Federal Communications Commission will appear at meetings and other public events in 80 cities around the United States in an effort to publicize the switch to digital signals from traditional analog service on February 17, the agency said on Monday.

"We intend to take whatever actions are necessary to try to continue to minimize the burden that's going to be placed on average consumers around the country," FCC Chairman Kevin Martin said at a briefing.

Between now and the deadline, the FCC's five commissioners will make individual visits to cities ranging from Atlanta and Chicago to Anchorage Alaska and El Paso, Texas.

The campaign also may include "soft" tests in which local TV stations would briefly switch off their analog signals to determine whether consumers are ready for the switch, the agency said.

Congress ordered the switch to digital television to free public airwaves for other uses, such as for police and fire departments. The switch will also mean improved picture and sound for TV viewers.

The transition is being closely watched because owners of analog televisions will be unable to watch television unless they subscribe to satellite or digital cable, replace their TV with a digital television by that date, or get a converter box.

The federal government is subsidizing the cost of buying a digital-analog converter box by offering the $40 discount coupons to anyone who owns an analog television. The $1.5 billion program has enough funding to subsidize as many as 33.5 million converter boxes.

The FCC's public outreach campaign is targeted at local markets in which more than 100,000 households, or at least 15 percent of the households, rely solely on over-the-air signals for television. It is aimed especially at groups who are most likely to be affected by the switch-over, such as older viewers, or the poor or disabled, as well as those who live in rural areas or do not speak English.

Broadcasters are also taking steps to alert consumers about the approaching switch-over and have promised to air more than $327 million worth of television spots as part of the effort.

Public surveys have indicated the U.S. public has grown more aware of the upcoming switch-over, but one survey found there is still some confusion about which TVs need converter boxes.

(Editing by Andre Grenon)

Ads on TV for it all the time, the analog channels will be used for police and firefighters, they're subsidizing the converter boxes.

What's the deal?

 

[acptulsa]

Multiple digital signals can be carried on one frequency, unlike analog signals. The whole deal is to be able to give away or sell bandwidth. Of course, the digital signal results in superior reception--not. Actually, you just have to go to the trouble to get really good reception before your set can get enough of the digital signal to decode.

I think it amounts to:

They don't want us to be without our pacifiers for fear we'll either riot outright or begin to think for ourselves.

They don't want anyone missing out on their "message".

And this in spite of the fact that we have to go to this trouble just so they can sell spectrum...

P.S. If only we were good little members of the herd, we'd all work our asses off to pay the cable company to bring us superior news services like CNN and they could sell all the spectrum. They'd like that.

 

[Sally08]

What are the landfill ramifications?

I have 3 TVs (one is a Sears/Zenith from decades ago?) and 3 VCRs in my home.

However, I do have cable (so far).

However, particularly given the economy and the elimination of "frivolous" expenses (e.g., other than electricity and water!), just exactly how/*where* will all of the obsolete analog electronics be disposed of?

How many TVs will be thrown into landfills *all in the same timeframe*?

 

[amy31416]

Hadn't even thought of that Sally. Acp, this article is a much better one and addresses some of your points:

No Couch Potato Left Behind Act

By George F. Will
Thursday, December 8, 2005

WASHINGTON -- Feeling, evidently, flush with (other people's) cash, the Senate has concocted a novel way to spend $3 billion: Create a new entitlement. The Senate has passed -- and so has the House, with differences -- an entitlement to digital television.

If this filigree on the welfare state becomes law, everyone who owns old analog television sets -- everyone from your Aunt Emma in her wee apartment to the millionaire in the neighborhood McMansion who has such sets in the maid's room and the guest house -- will get subsidies to pay for making those sets capable of receiving digital signals.

If you think America is suffering an entitlement glut, you may have just hurled the newspaper across the room. Pick it up and read on, because this story illustrates the timeless truth that no matter how deeply you distrust the government's judgment, you are too trusting. Here, as explained by James L. Gattuso of the Heritage Foundation, is the crisis du jour: The nation is making a slow transition from analog to digital television broadcasting.

Why is this a crisis? Because, although programming currently is broadcast in both modes, by April 2009 broadcasters must end analog transmissions and the government will have auctioned the analog frequencies for various telecommunications purposes. For the vast majority of Americans, April 2009 will mean absolutely nothing. Nationwide, 85 percent of all television households (and 63 percent of households below the poverty line) already have cable or satellite service.

What will become of households that do not? Leaving aside such eccentric alternative pastimes as conversation and reading, the digitally deprived could pursue happiness by buying a new television set, all of which will be digital-capable by March 2007. Today a digital-capable set with a flat-screen display can be purchased from -- liberals, please pardon the mention of your Great Satan -- Wal-Mart for less than $460. But compassionate conservatism has a government response to the crisis.

Remember, although it is difficult to do so, that Republicans control Congress. And today's up-to-date conservatism does not stand idly by expecting people to actually pursue happiness on their own. Hence the new entitlement from Congress to help all Americans acquire converter boxes to put on top of old analog sets, making the sets able to receive digital programming. All Americans -- rich and poor; it is uncompassionate to discriminate on the basis of money when dispersing money -- will be equally entitled to the help.

The $990 million House version of this entitlement -- call it "No Couch Potato Left Behind" -- is (relatively) parsimonious: Consumers would get vouchers worth only $40, and would be restricted to a measly two vouchers per household. The Senate's more spacious entitlement would pay for most of the cost -- $50 to $60 -- of the converter boxes. But there is Republican rigor in this: Consumers would be required to pay $10. That is the conservatism in compassionate conservatism.

Now, the hardhearted will, in their cheeseparing small-mindedness, ask: Given that the transition to digital has been under way for almost a decade, why should those who have adjusted be compelled to pay money to those who have chosen not to adjust? And conservatives who have not yet attended compassion re-education camps will ask: Why does the legislation make even homes with cable or digital services eligible for subsidies to pay for converter boxes for old analog sets -- which may be worth less than the government's cost for the boxes?

Gattuso says defenders of this entitlement argue that taxpayers will not be burdened by its costs because the government's sale of the analog frequencies will yield perhaps $10 billion. Think about that: Because the government may get $10 billion from one transaction, taxpayers are unburdened by government giving away $3 billion with another transaction.

Such denial that money is fungible fuels the welfare state's expansion. What oil is to Saudi Arabia -- a defining abundance -- cognitive dissonance is to America.

Americans currently are in a Founding Fathers literary festival. They are making best-sellers out of many biographies of the statesmen who formulated America's philosophy of individualism and self-reliance and who embodied that philosophy -- or thought they did -- in a constitutional architecture of limited government.

Yet Americans have such an entitlement mentality, they seem to think that every pleasure -- e.g., digital television -- should be a collective right, meaning a federally funded entitlement. Clearly, Americans' civic religion of reverence for the Founders is, like most religions, more avowed than constraining.

George F. Will is a columnist for The Washington Post and Newsweek. He can be reached at [email protected].

 

[LittleLightShining]

I have been kind of weirded out by this whole thing. I tend towards the paranoid anyway and I understand the whole bandwith thing and the analog channels being needed for "emergency management" BUT...

Last season we started watching this new show "Chuck"-- very light and funny spy show. So, the premise of the show is that Chuck is very tech-savvy and visually intelligent and his college buddy turned nemesis gets involved with the CIA and in order to save the world he sends all of the CIA secret files to Chuck in an encrypted email. Basically the email is just a long string of images. The computer is destroyed and now Chuck is the computer. He has "flashes" that relate things he sees in daily life to what was programmed into his brain from the email.

The images are shown really fast and it reminds me of the subliminal Disney messages and McDonald's ads during kids shows that are so fast a normal person would miss them. Then there is the whole Clockwork Orange/LOST Room 23 brainwashing scenario...

I could be wrong but I think the digital push is all about programming.

 

[DFF]

If this were true, wouldn't some super tech savvy individual pick up on it?

And if confirmed then relayed - holy shit! The entire NATION would be in an uproar!

That's an awfully big risk...

 

[amy31416]

If this were true, wouldn't some super tech savvy individual pick up on it?

And if confirmed then relayed - holy shit! The entire NATION would be in an uproar!

That's an awfully big risk...

If what were true?

 

[liberteebell]

Anyone else find the digital TV push peculiar?

Yes. Don't know what to make of it but when the Big Federal Nannies start pushing for something, I'm on autopilot thinking something is up. And that it probably isn't good.

The feds do not equal benevolence in any way, shape or form.

 

[Kade]

I have been kind of weirded out by this whole thing. I tend towards the paranoid anyway and I understand the whole bandwith thing and the analog channels being needed for "emergency management" BUT...

Last season we started watching this new show "Chuck"-- very light and funny spy show. So, the premise of the show is that Chuck is very tech-savvy and visually intelligent and his college buddy turned nemesis gets involved with the CIA and in order to save the world he sends all of the CIA secret files to Chuck in an encrypted email. Basically the email is just a long string of images. The computer is destroyed and now Chuck is the computer. He has "flashes" that relate things he sees in daily life to what was programmed into his brain from the email.

The images are shown really fast and it reminds me of the subliminal Disney messages and McDonald's ads during kids shows that are so fast a normal person would miss them. Then there is the whole Clockwork Orange/LOST Room 23 brainwashing scenario...

I could be wrong but I think the digital push is all about programming.

As a lifelong technician in the mold of "Chuck", I assure you, the government is incompetent and their technicians equally so... The best computer technicians in the world are usually unemployed.

Anyway, the digital push is nothing to worry about, the right people made this happen, and it is ultimately better in the end... nothing was being conspired... just makes good sense. Which is why I'm surprised it even happened.

 

[Danke]

It is a rip off (corporate welfare). They artificially jack the prices up on these digital to anolog converstion boxes and then get the government to subsidize most of the consumers' cost. (all but around $10)

I bet after this government coupon program ends, these boxes will retail for a lot less.



A good friend of mine explained how government is really not needed to regulate the airwaves at all, especially now with digital. Virtually an unlimited amount of capacity out there.

 

[Danke]

I have 3 TVs (one is a Sears/Zenith from decades ago?) and 3 VCRs in my home.

However, I do have cable (so far).

However, particularly given the economy and the elimination of "frivolous" expenses (e.g., other than electricity and water!), just exactly how/*where* will all of the obsolete analog electronics be disposed of?

How many TVs will be thrown into landfills *all in the same timeframe*?

You can still use your old TVs. Just need to buy a converter box.

 

[Sally08]

Note: FCC may "soft test" analog shutdown in your city

www.chicagotribune.com/business/technology/chi-tue-digital-conversionaug19,0,4081006.story

FCC to warn TV viewers: 'This is only a test'


To increase awareness, analog sets may go blank

By Wailin Wong

Chicago Tribune reporter

August 19, 2008

If you watch an older TV hooked up to rabbit-ear antennas and your screen goes snowy for a moment this November, replaced by a message telling you to call a toll-free number, do not be alarmed. It's not Martians. It's just the government.

Representatives of the Federal Communications Commission are scheduled to visit Chicago on Nov. 20 as part of a nationwide tour to regions that are considered at risk for missing the switch from analog to digital TV signals. While regulators haven't detailed their itinerary for Chicago, one of the options to test local households' readiness is what's known as a "soft test," or temporarily turning off analog signals.

In a soft test, the signal is shut down for 30 to 60 seconds. Viewers who are watching an older TV with rabbit ears or a rooftop antenna will get a snowy screen and a message telling them to call a toll-free number or visit DTVanswers.com, a Web site run by the National Association of Broadcasters.

"We've found that's an effective way to get the message out," FCC Chairman Kevin Martin said in a Monday press conference, during which he announced the agency's nationwide tour.

FCC commissioners will visit 80 regions between the end of August and Feb. 17, when the conversion will take place. The agency is targeting areas where more than 100,000 households or at least 15 percent of households use only over-the-air television signals.

According to data released in July by the National Association of Broadcasters, 801,940 households in Illinois are over-the-air only, representing 17.1 percent of homes. The NAB estimates that 19.6 million U.S. households use over-the-air signals exclusively.

***COMMENT: THAT'S A LOT OF CONVERTERS AND/OR THROWN AWAY TVs! How many of those households own *multiple* TVs?

The FCC's tour includes other major metropolitan areas, such as New York, Los Angeles, Philadelphia and Houston. Other stops in the Midwest include South Bend, Ind., and Milwaukee.

-snip-

 

[angelatc]

It is a rip off (corporate welfare). They artificially jack the prices up on these digital to anolog converstion boxes and then get the government to subsidize most of the consumers' cost. (all but around $10)

I bet after this government coupon program ends, these boxes will retail for a lot less.



A good friend of mine explained how government is really not needed to regulate the airwaves at all, especially now with digital. Virtually an unlimited amount of capacity out there.

I believe that that too. I think the future of video entertainment lies in the web, not over the airwaves. If the government hadn't become involved, TV would phase itself out in a generation.

(Which might still happen, but nobody would have cleaned up making converter boxes.)

 

[raystone]

They don't want us to be without our pacifiers for fear we'll either riot outright or begin to think for ourselves.

Yeah, who asked for digital TV, did I miss a consumer revolt ? A sharper picture with more features makes the sheep calmer.

 

[fr33domfightr]

In exchange for getting access to PUBLIC RF spectrum, the Broadcast networks are supposed to be giving something back to the public. I'd say exclusionary tactics of political parties isn't serving the public good. This practice should be stopped.

As far as the public service announcements, this is to inform the public, so they aren't caught off guard. Believe me, many in the public still don't know what's going on. They'll just get snow on their TV come Feb. 2009.


FF

 

[Sally08]

The real beneficiaries - the cable companies

It is a rip off (corporate welfare). They artificially jack the prices up on these digital to anolog converstion boxes and then get the government to subsidize most of the consumers' cost. (all but around $10)

I bet after this government coupon program ends, these boxes will retail for a lot less.

If a converter box is needed for each TV in the home, won't the real beneficiaries be the cable companies?

Any bets on how many new subscribers they get?

Gee, and if you have cable, why not "add-on" broadband Internet access, as well? Oh, and VOIP phone service, ... All for "just" $99/month (that wasn't a budgetable expense before for those 19.6 million homes!).

 

[Danke]

If a converter box is needed for each TV in the home, won't the real beneficiaries be the cable companies?

Any bets on how many new subscribers they get?

Gee, and if you have cable, why not "add-on" broadband Internet access, as well? Oh, and VOIP phone service, ... All for "just" $99/month (that wasn't a budgetable expense before for those 19.6 million homes!).

Maybe. But the boxes are a one time expense, not a monthly recurring charge.

You can pick up two per household with the coupons for a total of ~ $25.

 

[acptulsa]

If a converter box is needed for each TV in the home, won't the real beneficiaries be the cable companies?

Any bets on how many new subscribers they get?

Gee, and if you have cable, why not "add-on" broadband Internet access, as well? Oh, and VOIP phone service, ... All for "just" $99/month (that wasn't a budgetable expense before for those 19.6 million homes!).

Like I mentioned earlier, you have to have good reception for the digital equipment to be able to unscramble the signal at all. Analog just goes fuzzy when the signal is weak. With digital processors, a weak signal may cause the electronics to be so clueless it gives up and you get blue screen. So, yes, expect to see cable companies go after the rural market...

 

[Kotin]

Ahh Amy.. you and your conspiracy theories...

 

[LibertiORDeth]

Wow. Did I read that right? They have 1.5 billion of taxpayer money to buy you a TV converter??? GET ME OUT OF THIS COUNTRY!