HDTV and Me

Okay, I am taking a real plunge into uncharted waters here. I am writing about something I know very little about, something I have been accused of doing in the past, but this time I agree with whoever chooses to call me a know-nothing. I have no statistics to back up my statements, no technological know-how, nothing but my deep suspicion of what is afoot, and a personal knowledge of how we lived in the not so distant past. It's about the coming shift from analog TV to digital which we are told will take place just about this time next February. This has been sold to the public as an inevitable event, a boon to one and all by the government that was good enough to give us the Iraq War. It seems to be another act by a people-hostile White House sanctioned by a greedy, foolhardy Congress led by their noses which are actually their pocketbooks by commercial interests to the great detriment of the average citizen. Now that's a run on sentence that Ms. O'Conner, my fourth grade teacher would have torn apart. I've said it long. Now I'll say it short. I think this digital HDTV thing is a swindle and a disgrace. After next February, those who don't own a converter box or subscribe to cable will find that their TV world has disappeared into the ether and they will be watching a blank screen. Many older citizens who have not kept up with the news may actually believe that they have died and are now in limbo, frightened and staring into the blankness as they wait for St. Peter to determine their fate.

When I was a kid we had a great big Emerson radio dominating our sitting room. We all huddled around it, and watched its amazing green eye go emerald bright as it warmed up, and soon we heard Bing Crosby or Dick Powell, or the Amateur Hour providing the evenings entertainment. This was the '30s and '40s. Someone with an inexpensive home made crystal radio set built in the '20s could get the same program -- albeit with more static -- but it was theirs if they wanted to hear it. The same technology, at least the AM part would allow us to listen to a program on that same radio today, assuming that you could get the vacuum tubes needed to keep it on AM life support.

Later, in the '40s, my father, a prosperous business man who loved a gadget -- a gene that missed me completely but was transmitted to my sons -- bought the first TV set into our world. Maybe the whole world. It was a small black-and-white screen set in a large cabinet, a gentrified wooden box of rich dark wood in the Chippendale-style, made, I believe, by RCA. On its top my mother placed a vase of flowers hoping to disguise the ugly rabbit ears antennae that were in constant need of adjustment. Neighbors from all around knocked on our door humbly begging admission to our living room to stare at a black and white test pattern; this picture was only relived occasionally by a pair of night club songbirds, or the rare sporting event that was then televised. Then came color TV. And of course it was designed to transmit its programs on black and white sets as well. Nobody was coerced into buying a color set unless they wanted to, which eventually most did, but it was still a matter of choice, not government fiat.

Not so with HDTV. This Luddite you are reading now owns two old but perfectly good TV sets. Both of them are analog deals. I am advised that the cable TV which extorts a fortune from me monthly so that I can actually see some TV news program in a city of high buildings -- now where was I? Oh yes, they tell me it will be okay for me because of the cable company's technology but I will probably be obliged to buy some converter boxes to stick on top of that fat but aged TV that now holds a VCR, a DVD, and the cable box. The government will send me some discount coupon to buy those boxes if I run around the block four times shouting bless you Big Brother. Enough!

And what is this technological advance? It's not a cat-scan or some breakthrough like robotic surgery that can extend and enhance human life. No. It only extends broadcaster's profits by allowing for more channels that offer more of the same old same old. They assure us that thanks to HDTV we will now be able to see every pore and blemish on Katie Couric's cheek come next February, and if that doesn't give you pause, what will? For years Hollywood made sure to put gauze over the screen so that aging actresses, say a Joan Crawford, a Marlene Dietrich or a Claudette Colbert could look winsome well past their 40s into their 50s, allowing them to leap over their silent screen days and remain stars in the heyday of the talking motion picture. This new digital technology seems ageist, and more than a little bit dermatologicaly cruel. Let's get beyond that because ultimately who really gives a damn about the troubles of TV actors or news-readers? Think of the financial and ecological repercussions of all this. At the end of the day I must throw out my old, overweight but loyal TVs into the street. God alone knows where they will be dumped. Is there a landfill dump large enough to hold all of them? Will they be shipped to some unwitting third world country in exchange for the promise of vaccines? And so I must go out and buy these skinny deals, the anorexic sets that have taken the world by storm, the Paris Hiltons of technology. No, I don't want to hang a TV on the wall or over my fireplace. I still hang pictures on my walls and make fires in my fireplace. Why must the environment be further compromised by having all these old sets cluttering up the universe after next February? It's just more Sony baloney. I much prefer my robust old analog set whose excellent picture shows me all I need to see, but I know their days are numbered, as, alas, are mine, and ultimately I will have to fork over hard-earned money I don't want to spend in order to own something I don't want to own.

Sure, I can give up TV altogether but that would take a better man than I am. Like everyone else I have to turn off my agitated brain from time to time and being averse to drugs nothing does that as well as some program I am ashamed to watch. And, as the son of the man who owned the first TV in the world, I have a family tradition to uphold by watching that boring test pattern which passes for MSNBC or CNN. Although I must say that my cable service, which offers me more than a thousand channels never has anything worth watching other than CSpan and the Animal Planet, and a few gentle British-made cartoons to calm a visiting grandchild, I know there are sports lovers out there who celebrate the big screen as do movie lovers who want cinemascope in their homes. Sorry, I don't need any of that and it has now been imposed upon my life. Somehow, I don't think I am alone in this complaint. Although I suspect that there are not enough of us out there to form a cabal against the coming HDTV world, perhaps we should think of starting a support group, modeled on a 12-step program, led by Oprah, that can see us through next February's disastrous changeover as we are obliged to quit analog TV cold turkey.

Comments

[letstakeawalk]

If you get this fired up about not wanting to have to buy a new television, how do you feel about Rep. Jane Harman's (D-Calif.) plan to ban the good-old incandescent bulb? Sorry my first comment was deemed too inappropriate to post, but I have to say you are way off base. Your old TV will still work fine, the coupons will bring the cost of the converters down to about $10 (likely less at Wally World), and you might actually find your lifespan may increase due to cutting out all that radiation your vintage set emits. Besides, the planning of this change has been going on since the last quarter of the 20th century. The FCC is already auctioning off the 700mhz spectrum (normal TV now) for use in expanding the coverage of wireless internet. This auction will complete a process that was started in the 1990's.

[Apples]

A fun column to read, but the reality is you're wasting your time even whining about it.
I bought an HDTV two years ago, mostly for widescreen movie presentations, but I was so taken with the clarity and the overall look of an HDTV broadcast that I actually started watching regular TV again.
I doubt that I would have become hooked on 'Lost' without HDTV, and I got back into the habit of watching the late night talk shows again after several years of still missing Johnny.
My advice? Stop fighting what you can't stop, dump the ancient 425 lines - which looks like crud compared to regular broadcasts around the world - and purchase a new HDTV. And while you're at it, dump the VCR at the same time and buy/rent a DVR. And don't forget a Blu-ray. You'll never look back.

[Kremfresch]

uh... the converters are free. Take a deep breath and relax. I call BULLSH*T on the whole luddite act. Nobody involved in media in any way could be that dumb. Does anybody actually think you are cool when you act so stupid?

[Nutcase]

The converters are not free. The government will provide enough coupons for most people. They will cover about half the costs of the converters. I think the limit is two.

[BassMonk]

I am aware of the change to a digital signal, but not sure if the new signals will be HD only. Can someone please explain in simple terms?

[Nutcase]

HD is digital but not all digital is HD. You must have an HDTV to see HD.

[pizzmoe]

Yes, let's go back to the days of the dial phone, horse and buggy, and while I'm at it I'll use an abacus.

[guru75]

You missed the point. You can still use a dial phone, you can drive a horse and buggy if you wish, rather than a car - assuming the horse is brave enough and you are stupid enough, and you can certainly use an abacus instead of a computer to count your pennies. But you won't be able to use your old TV after February 2009.

[Nutcase]

You will with a converter.

[PatA]

I would laugh, because your column is hilarious, but I have to agree with you about the landfill situation and the fact that alot ofpeople don't have the money to switch so that some old fat congressman can take home more money. TALK about a long, run on sentence!
This country is in enough hurt now without adding to it by dictating what kind of televison we must have.
I happen to love my old Motorola (has the finest radio in it) that I bought at an estate sale for $25. I know first hand that the man who owned the house did buy one of the first "table top" models and I own it now!
Good column! Thank God you don't write about HOlly wood.

[haydesigner]

You write about putting "gauze over the screen so that aging actresses, say a Joan Crawford, a Marlene Dietrich or a Claudette Colbert could look winsome well past their 40s into their 50s". Well how about yourself? Exactly how old is your photo up there? If you were a child in the 30's, then you have to be 70+ now...

[guru75]

The issue is not Mr, Yellen's age, which he makes no effort to conceal in his blogs - many written from the pov of someone who has seen a lot and lived alot over many years. If you read the blog carefully he wasn't putting down those older acresses, only contrasting what people did then and what technology does to faces now. What should be of interest in his blogs is that they are so often wise and witty. I kinda like his old photo. In fact he wrote an old blog about human vanity and using an old photo. Who says that wrinkles define the man? It's who you are inside that matters, and what he shows of his inner self is often terrific and young in heart.

[Nutcase]

I'm also from the 30s but I don't look anywhere near as good as his picture.

[Nutcase]

I recall seeing a poll showing that 30-some odd percent of the people had never heard of the impending changeover.

cognito ergo populistae

[mckinley]

How can they not??!!

With every television network and station broadcasting the conversion PSA's every half-hour for the past eight months now...

[Nutcase]

Remember, about half the people voted for Bush - twice.