Stroke, Stroke, Stroke!
My guess is that most people will be relatively unaffected by the digital switch beyond getting, for the most part, a lot better TV pictures and more services to chose from.
I must concede that my experience with interference to DTV reception–in this case a SMATV system–and its jagged, blurred, almost impressionist collapses and wipes of pictures as the bits stumble over themselves was not a pleasant one, but I trust, fingers crossed, that that will not be a common occurrence.
Anyway, the vast majority of people don’t get their TV over the air anyway. And many of those who do either are buying, or will be buying, digital TV’s.
But one of the things that separates us from the countries who rule, and sometimes bludgeon, their people with an iron fist, is that we care, institutionaly, about the welfare of the individual. It’s hard to tell sometimes from the currrent state of some of those institutions, but this, too, shall pass.
So, even if it is only a million or two people who may need more help keeping their TV’s humming along, they deserve to get it. Those are likely to include the poor, elderly, minorities, rural viewers and those with special needs, and maybe a few people whose VCR’s (note I didn’t say DVR) are still flashing high noon.
One thing eveybody needs to do on the industry and government side is be more precise in the DTV education messages being sent out.
The low-power TV lobby is being treated as an obstructionist whiner by many in the industry for complaining about the imprecision of some of the PSA’s. That is because most of their members, who number in the thousands, aren’t going digital in February 2009, and that includes many Spanish-launguage affiliates targetting a minority population with a large number of over-the-air only members. It also includes some major network affiliates. And then there are the translator stations that retransmit full-power signals to rural areas.
CBA has a point. It may have waited too long to make it, and that may have been a political calculation. But for the big guys in the business to hammer CBA over a strategy CBA perceived was in its self-interest is a charge levied by a pot against a kettle. The situation now is that it is a complicated transition–not merely a branding campaign–and needs a more nuanced message than it is getting.
The National Telecommuniations & Information Administration should have made sure the DTV-to-analog converter boxes being subsidized by the government took care of low-powers, but it neglected to do so.. So, now, PSAs about the transition should make it clear that not all stations are switching and that not all boxes, in fact not many at the moment, pass through those analog signals. For their part, low powers should try to educate, rather than incite, their viewers.
Everybody needs to be pulling on the oars in unison and in the same direction no matter how they feel about the person sitting next to them.
Victor Livingston commented:
John,
DTV interference could prove to be a huge issue, given the proliferation of wireless devices as well as the potential for electronic vandalism by way of illegal jammers. Would like to see a story on this subect.
Also, you mention that most people don't receive their TV over the air. But once people see how well DTV does work where the signal is robust, those who signed up for cable with reception in mind (mostly older subscribers) might be tempted by the excellent DTV pictures to drop cable (especially in light of the economy).
If some enterprising broadcaster offered an all-news DTV subchannel, I'll bet it would cause some news junkies to consider relying on broadcast TV. Better pictures and an all-news outlet could be an incentive to churn. I'd like to hear what NBC's Steve Capus and Fox's Roger Ailes would say about this concept.
Victor Livingston commented:
John:
I'm glad you've experienced DTV interference, because I believe it is a potentially huge issue for the sizable percentage of the viewing audience that wants over-the-air, free TV to continue to be widely available and technically robust.
Hand-held jammers already are available on the internet, used by signal vandals to disrupt cellphone traffic. Such devices also can cause DTV interference. Now, not to get too conspiratorial, but there are economic forces out there which would benefit if over-the-air DTV is deemed unreliable. Now I'm not saying that any industry sector would go to the depths of somehow initiating a campaign to pollute the DTV airwaves... but it is imperative that the FCC address the policing issue.
Also, to your comment that "most people don't get their TV over the air..." My prediction is that once people see how great DTV/HDTV looks over the air, assuming a good antenna and a robust signal, a percentage of cable viewers (especially older viewers and those financially disadvantaged) may churn off cable. Remember, a goodly proportion of older viewers signed up for cable not so much for the programming but for the reception. Those viewers could be tempted by DTV's crystal-clear pictures to drop cable.
Surely many viewers value cable-exclusive programming and would never churn at this point. But what if a savvy broadcaster offers a free, all-news DTV subchannel? I'll tell you, I know some people who buy cable just for CNN/MSNBC/FOX and would be quite satisfied with just over-the-air TV if they could get an all-news outlet in addition to other local stations.
Somebody in the broadcast world is going to try this (probably Murdoch, but MSNBC should take the lead, considering its parentage. I'd like to heat what Steve Capus and Roger Ailes would have to say about this concept.
I'd really like you to address these two issues -- DTV signal interference/jamming and all-news over-the-air DTV channels, in an upcoming article in the magazine. If the staff has more pressing issues to pursue, tell your editors that I'm available for freelance.
I see the blog responses are few in number and I hope the publisher promotes blog usage more heavily in the print mag and on the splash page of the web site. I enjoy your effort and with a bit of promotion I believe this site will become a must-read blog.
Best wishes and thanks.
Vic Livingston
Former editor, CableVision; former cable editor, TV/Radio Age