Will It Take a Democratic President to Leave the Digital TV Switch to the Free Market?

It took staunch anti-Communist Dick Nixon to forge a relationship with Communist China and anti-interventionist George W. Bush to engineer the biggest experiment in nation building of this century.

So maybe it will take a Democratic president to let the free market handle America's switch to digital TV.

Most of the time, when new consumer technology takes over the nation, we hardly notice. As the iPod made record stores irrelevant, the DVR phases out VCR tapes and the remote control slowly crumbles the dominance of broadcast TV networks, we grumble a bit about the vanishing culture, open our wallets and jump into the next new thing.

That's why I always wondered about the rushed transition to digital TV. Under a government dominated by GOP lawmakers who supposedly valued the free market system above all, Congress drafted a plan to force consumers into using digital TV technology by making broadcast stations use it exclusively after Feb. 17, 2009.

The pot of gold at the end of this rainbow was the millions in revenue expected when the government auctioned off use of the old analog spectrum to private business. In the process, the entire TV-watching nation was nudged by a looming deadline to one of three choices: buy a digital TV-capable television set, get cable or satellite TV service or pony up cash for a converter to display images from a digital frequency on an analog set.

Isn't this the same party that opposed government aid to power companies rebuilding after the disaster of Hurricane Katrina? So why was the government forcing the TV industry to rush into a new broadcast technology, regardless of whether the market was ready or willing?

Barack Obama's request to delay this wrenching change -- a possibly destabilizing event that the already shaky broadcast television industry surely does not need now -- may give legislators enough breathing room to decide whether government needs to force this issue at all.

Especially since TV stations have already spent millions to broadcast digital signals and no new analog TVs are being sold, consumers will transition to the technology on their own in a few more years and broadcasters can decide for themselves when to stop broadcasting an analog signal for the lone holdouts.

If Obama does suggest this path, there shouldn't be many Republicans opposing him. In fact, they probably should have thought of it first.

Comments

[Montanagramma]

We have satallite TV. But, there are lots of people her who still use rabbit ears. People cannot all pay for cable or satellite TV. The coupons that were available were dated to expire, and many people, believing they had time before Feb 17, didn't even look at the coupons until they needed to get their box, and found it was after they had expired. You cannot get replacements. So, that takes away TV for some very poor people.

In addition, we personally have a battery operated TV for the times that we lose power. That happens frequently here, because of snow and other weather events. It is a small, cheap little thing, but we get the local stations, and during prolonged problems, we still have communication. I just realized that we would need a box for that. But, I wonder if you have to have electricty to operate the box? If you do, we are SOL. Anyone know?

[Erdgeist]

My dream is to see TV as we have known it, destroyed. Accordingly, I have always looked at digital TV through the words of Stalin who said, "When we hang the capitalists they will sell us the rope" which is to say that once TV is digitized it will, at that point, hang itself having lost its power to shape the news and delude the people.

[woodsmoke]

Finally! Level headedness regarding this Government push to all change to the same signal!

Who would trust a group who has done their best to destroy the Bill of Rights? Who would volunteer to be subject to further propaganda by Government TV?? GW must've got this idea from his buddy in Red China.

I did order the "coupon". The coupon turned out to be a card that was thick and expensive to make. The more I considered it came to me that perhaps it is time to get off the tube altogether. It seems Americans under television have been dulled of their ability to think for themselves as it is.


Read Stephen King's: The Cell.

[BillMelater]

Republicans might support it, except for the pot of gold you mention.

[shamanbart]

People who argue for indefinite delay of the switch to DTV are impeding progress. The sooner the switch is made, TV image and sound quality will improve and the government can recover funds from the unused analog TV spectrum. This is one of those times when Americans should scrape together their pennies and suck it up to buy a converter if needed.

Those who want to stick with the same old 50+ year old technology bother me. The light bulb, the internal combustion engine, gas powered lawnmowers, analog TV -- they all got to go! However, on the other side, some technology pushed on us turns around too fast -- DVDs are becoming obsolete, CDs... it's nice to have some continuity. All in moderation I suppose.

If the format change didn't force us to upconvert, the same old cheap, massive and mercury-laden CRTs would still be sold, and people would cling to the old format indefinitely. Change is good.

[elijawan]

The article's point is the hypocrisy of "free market" conservatives legislating changes to the market. If you carry this argument out to the macro level, it's pointing out that the whole notion of free markets is a complete fabrication and bears absolutely no resemblance to how governments and economies actually interact in practice.

[KillTheMessenger]

We don't leave a lot of things to the free market. For instance we do not sell justice to the highest bidder (at least not on principle and we try to avoid it happening in practice). In this case the government has decided (rightfully so) to reallocate some part of the spectrum. There was a rather conservative (as in long) time table to achieve the switchover. Whoever was sleeping for the past years about this can continue to sleep. The train has left the station and if they are not on it, too bad.

[SherbertTulips]

I have not had cable in years. My televisions are 5-10 years old and all use rabbit ears.

I am unemployed, struggling on unemployment, wondering how I will be able to afford my prescriptions for next month, taking care of my sister who is terminally ill, and so on, and so on . . . Even with the $40 coupon, I cannot afford a converter box.

There is no way in hell we should be forced into this sham.

[KillTheMessenger]

Since you have a computer and internet and most of the shows on tv are online, you can watch without tv. Problem solved.

[SherbertTulips]

Excuse me KillTheMessenger, but I do not want to spend my time staring at a 17" computer monitor.

You missed the point.

[captainigor]

The converter boxes are about $40.

The government coupons are worth $40, and you can get two of 'em. . .

Sounds like a push to me (plus or minus

[AdamTheLawyer]

I"m confused.

The government is basically willing to give you two free converter boxes which will (in most cases) dramatically improve your TV reception (I used an OTA HD antenna for a while; it worked great and gave crystal-clear HD reception, unlike the fuzzy occasionally-working reception I'd get if I tried it manually).

How can you not afford a box "even with the $40 coupon?" I've seen at least a dozen places, online and retail, that are selling the boxes for $40. $40-40, last time I checked, is nothing. They've been offering the deal for over a year. You can't afford nothing?

I'm sure a lot of folks that rode horses got angry when they paved the roads--good for cars, bad for hooves. I"m sure a lot of them thought there was no way in hell they should be forced into that sham.

They got over it.

[Yaa]

In my area (Cleveland, Ohio), the converter boxes cost $70 or $80, and lots of folk here do not have the money to spare to buy a box in spite of the government's passing out a $40 dollar coupon.

Also, horses and buggies weren't phased out by a fixed date, and neither should everyone be required to switch to digital by a certain date.

[Cacaoatl]

The transition to DTV has hardly been "rushed". The Japanese have had DTV since the 1980s. DTV is just one of many technologies that the US has fallen behind in. TV broadcasters have had years to get ready for the transition, the Congressional mandate was passed in 2005, I didn't realize 4 years was a rush.

[EngineerBill]

It is ridiculous to let "a few more years" pass by to get the transition. The people who purchased the new available spectrum would want their money back and successfully sue for damages. I agree with commenter "muchmadness". Not only should converters be subsidized but also new antennas as well.
Obama wants to delay the transition. That is good because this was poorly handled. A four month delay coupled with a more robust subsidy program will do the trick.

[odyssey58]

New antenna subsidies would have been great. We just spent $250 to get a new combination antenna to replace our UHF antenna. I know it's still much cheaper in the long run compared to cable or satellite. And you're right, this transition was VERY poorly handled. I wasn't aware of the antenna issue until late October. Even now, PSAs only mention the converter box and nothing about the switch from UHF to VHF and vice versa which could require a new antenna.

[captainigor]

If you have an old, crappy, corroded antenna on your roof, with ancient weathered RG-59 cable (or twinlead) feeding your set, you probably got a really bad picture on analog.

Spend a couple of bucks to upgrade to an equivalent new antenna, use RG-6 (low-loss) cable, and chances are you'll have a perfect picture.

This transition is a clock that has been ticking for SIX YEARS now. Some stations in larger markets have had a digital signal on the air since 1998.

Digital TV is the future!!! Let's get on with it!!

YES WE CAN!!!!!!

[AdamTheLawyer]

See: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EWQhlmJTMzw

An easy YouTube video describing how to make a fantastic portable HDTV antenna with wire hangers, some 2x4, and assorted parts.

I built one ¦ cost maybe 10 bucks, worked like a charm.

Plus, it's kinda cool looking.

[KillTheMessenger]

What's the gain on that antenna? A 12dB antenna should go for a quarter of that price.

While I agree that the campaign to explain to people what's going on was not very thorough technically, my feeling is that most people would be more than confused if we tried to explain to them in 30 second spots what the difference between UHF and VHF is and that they might need a new antenna... or not.

[Craig Calvin Jones]

This is a huge "non-story" along the lines of famous non-event of midnight, December 31st, 1999. While the airwaves are owned by the "public", the public has no control over them and has not for decades.

I consider the free coupon simply another industry bailout, or at least a dip into the public fund bucket. What a waste of money. TV is becoming less and less important. The people left who have not made some sort of switch are "at the margins", or sticks-in-the-mud, like me. To the industry, we (me and my margin pals) are nothing. So, "Let Them Eat Cake", or better yet, not watch TV. Read, visit, talk, go places.

Throw the switch as planned, and better yet........ Kill Your TV.

[bayside]

I have never seen our govt. spends billions just to make our lives better..Especially a republican govt. Fool me once. Cant help but feel they are up to something..

[DRaymond]

As long as there are a few holdout stations and consumers around the country the freed up bandwidth isn't worth that much. Having new digital products that work in some parts of the country but not others (because there is still an old analog TV station there) is what nobody wants.

And it isn't just private industry. A significant part of the new bandwidth is for a new generation of law enforcement communications devices.

[beaupritchard]

Finally a voice of reason.

[dadw5boys]

FREE MARKETS ????

Where ?

The USA has not had and FREE MARKETS since J.F.Kennedy !

The oil companys bought up refinerys and shut them down to control prices while we were in Vietnam.
All kinds of laws passed that protect old established business and prevent competition.

FREE MARKETS ARE OPEN TO COMPETITION ON THE SAME LEVEL NO FIXES FOR THE OLD BOYS!!!!!!

[MuchMadness]

What Congress should do is subsidize good antennas for people who want to receive digital broadcast TV rather than having to subscribe to cable or satellite to get digital TV. That would allow "free" broadcast TV to become a competitive option again, and it would slow the rate of price increases for cable and satellite. Congress should also encourage stations to boost the strength of their digital signals.

[Deftguy]

Asking a television station to boost the strength of their signals will bankrupt them. I am an office manager for a local television stations engineering department. Since going both digital and analog many years ago, I have seen our energy expenses go through the roof as a result of adding the digital service for our viewers. We are probably at a little over medium power now, and it is expensive. Asking us to go to even higher power would kill our station's revenue even more than it already has. Also our temporary analog shut off tests have shown considerable areas of "dead spots" all over the bay area. Increasing the power of our broadcasts will not help these areas, but it would probably kill us.

[KillTheMessenger]

People who ask for more transmission power simply do not understand that they need a better antenna. Don't worry about it. The dead spots, of course, are your own fault. The US is the only country I know which uses giant central transmitters to distribute signals. Other countries like Germany have tv transmitter stations with 1-10kW sized transmitters distributed like cell phone towers all over the hill tops. You can see them every time you take a hike in the local woods.The reason for that is simply topographic: you could put a 1MW transmitter on a mountain in the Black Forrest and the people living three valleys away would not see squat. Therefor the telecommunications people had to figure out early how to decentralize the service.

[janinwb]

Another point is that local TV stations have worked for years to bring this to pass on this day. Many stations have been funding both an analog and a digital signal. Continuing the analog signal past February would cost about $20,000 per month per station. All because the Feds would rather paint a Nascar car than pay for a phone bank.