So…the boss says, “How about taking a look at television?” I figured, “Why not?” I watch television. This is a good excuse to watch some more.
Of course, he had something more complicated than that in mind. Thus began a multi-month project, the fruit of which you will see beginning tonight, as I begin a four part series of reports titled, “The Future of Television.” Our goal at Nightly Business Report is to give you the information you need for wise investing and money management. So our series will be devoted to indentifying the trends and the players, information you may be able to use to your advantage.
We’ll begin tonight with a look at the technology. When I was a kid, growing up in Chicago, we had five TV stations. One each affiliated with CBS, NBC, ABC and PBS and a fifth “independent”. TV watching meant the family gathering around the big black and white set in the living room, watching what the stations were offering when the stations wanted to offer it.
The first technological advance I remember was color, which also led to my first “relationship advance.” I was 14 at the time and the girl next door was kind of dorky but they got a color television before we did and there was this neat new program on called, “Star Trek” which looked much better in color, so at least once a week I was spending time with the neighbors.
By the time I was ready for college, TV technology had changed. Now we could afford multiple TV sets, so the family viewing sessions were a thing of the past. TV sets had also become small and portable, so my parents bought me a little black and white unit to take to college, figuring that it would improve my “people meeting” opportunities. My underclass years in a “dorm” environment proved how smart my parents were as my room became a meeting place for an entire floor of guys, mostly interested in watching sports and just “hanging out.” It got even better in my upper-class years, when I lived in a former hotel which had been turned into a coed “college.” Once again there was a TV loving girl next door. But she was more attractive than my former neighbor, I was older, and, well you get the idea. You can see how helpful TV can be.
In the late 70s, when I was a news writer at Chicago’s CBS station, I lived for the first time in a high rise apartment building with a central antenna system for TV. The building put a satellite receiver on the roof, and suddenly I had two dozen stations in place of the five I had grown up with. Plus, there was a new station called HBO for Home Box Office. That one cost extra, but the programming was worth it. The era of increased choice and pay TV had arrived. Home recording equipment soon followed and now I was free to watch what I wanted when I wanted.
Where are we today? A lot further down the road. But I’ll ask you to tune in to tonight’s broadcast to get more. You’ll also see some forecasts on what our TV viewing will be like tomorrow and get some advice on how to cope with the upcoming conversion to all digital transmission for over-the-air television channels.
As always, I’d like to hear what you think of my report. But I’d also like to hear YOUR views. How has your TV viewing changed over the years and how do you see them changing in the years ahead? Check it out tonight, and I’ll look for your comments tomorrow.
Comments
This comment is for Barstow, above.
If you have cable service (any tier, not just the highest) your analog TV, the one you have and use right now, will work just fine. The new law, which I do not like either, is strictly for free, over-the-air broadcast TV only.
Hope this helps, Rod
I'm all for technical advances. I would own every new gadget that hit the market if I could afford it. But to be forced by our own government to buy new TVs or converters is wrong. In the past our government thought so too! They have protected the consumer from corporations that are continually trying to ‘obsolete existing technologies’, by passing grandfathering laws. For example my old AM radios still receive just fine even after the introduction of FM, my old rotary dial phones still make and take calls just as well as they did before the new touch-tone phones came out, and my old black and white TVs still have a good picture even after color arrived on the scene. Don't believe for a minute there wasn't a battle waged by the corporations to obsolete those and many more existing devices, so as to force the public to purchase more new products. But, the government has always stuck up for the consumer, till now.
After lobbying since the mid 1990s, and using the events of 9/11/2001 to promote their efforts to obsolete our current TV sets, it looks like the corporations have finally come up with enough enticements to buy our legislators and politicians off, allowing the corporations to dig deeper into the consumer’s pockets. It's been estimated that there are billions of dollars in this for the TV and electronics manufacturers (in the sales of new TVs and related products), and billions of dollars for the government (through the sales of the vacated current TV channel frequencies to cell phone companies, alarm companies, mobile broad band carriers, mobile video carriers, Wi-max, and emergency services, etc.). What will corporations be able to force us to buy next?
Our government will offer 2ea. $40 coupons per household that will not even cover the cost of the cheapest, bare bones converter to make our current TVs usable after February 17th, 2009. To be fair to the poor and lower middle classes, such a transition should be completely seamless. The total cost of converting existing TV sets should be borne by the very corporations and government agencies that will profit from the change-over.
Some of the things they are not telling the public: if you buy a converter for your current TV, you will not be getting a better quality picture from the new digital signal but, you will be getting a smaller picture on your current TV screen. They are changing the aspect ratio so you will have a very noticeable black bar (no picture) at the top and the bottom of your screen. The new digital system also will enable them to insert a broadcast flag that can prohibit your equipment from recording programs for future viewing.
Another can of worms this new “LAW” opens up is that more than 2900 low power TV stations and 4400 signal-relay stations that serve rural areas not targeted by the big broadcasters are not covered by the “LAW” and will leave their viewers without access to the major networks if they don’t buy converters, and if they do buy converters they won’t be able to pick up their local broadcasts.
Has anyone bothered to calculate the environmental impact that will be felt when the 44 million analog TV sets, plus VCRs with analog tuners, and DVD recorders with analog tuners (some estimates say 300 million units in all) hit the junk pile? Or, how much it will cost the homeowner to get rid of all the trash this "LAW" will generate? Some estimates say it could cost $35 per unit to recycle this trash, not including transportation costs. Will we just continue to ship this additional toxic waste to China so they can send it back to us in our pet food, toothpaste, toys, and who knows what else?
Only a small fraction of the people I have talked to realize that their TVs will go blank on February 17th. 2009. Even with the commercials that have begun to appear lately on TV, most don’t understand what the commercials are telling them, or don’t believe that their government would do such a thing to us. The press says that about 50% of the population knows about, and understands the forced transition. I believe the percentage is much smaller, especially within the middle and lower classes.
Electronics is my hobby, and we have almost a dozen analog TVs that I have been able to keep working for years. They are our only form of entertainment at our age. Now they will become a useless pile of junk, and it seems there is nothing we can do about it. My wife and I survive on a small disability pension with a little help from my veteran’s health coverage. How are we supposed to replace our existing sets with expensive digital sets or retrofit them all with converters when we can't even afford our medications, and are struggling to pay the grocery and heating bills? I am sure there are millions of Americans out there, in the same boat as us. We are the ones who suffer the most due to corporate greed.
Laws are meant to protect and defend the people of this country, not to bolster the profits of corporations and line the coffers of our government. This country has reached a sad and dangerous state when corporations can buy laws that fatten their profits by controlling the consumer’s wallet.
Why can't they just leave the analog broadcasts on the air (like they are doing now) for those of us who can't afford the upgrades, and broadcast the digital signals (like they are doing now) for those who can afford the more expensive products? Or at the very least, pass out coupons for the full cost of one full featured converter for each working analog TV in every household that uses them? That way we can all continue to enjoy our favorite entertainment media, not just the financially well to do.
I am sure this is only the tip of the iceberg of money making opportunities for the greedy corporations, and costly headaches for the consumer. With the mandatory obsolescence of existing television sets, I dread the thought of what the corporations have in store for us next.
I think Ralph Nader was right when he said "Our government has become a government of the people, by the corporations, and for the corporations." I don't remember being given a say in this matter, or even being allowed to vote on it. Now that the corporations have full control over the law makers, how can the little guy ever have any input about anything? This is not the government I proudly defended!
Guess we will be spending more time at the library after February 2009, if we can afford the gas!
Machiavellianised in Michigan
I'm very confused by all of this.
I can barely afford to pay for basic cable and my television (i only have ONE) is 20 inches and it is NOT plasma, it's not HiDef, it's not wide-screened or flat-screened, it's not a big name brand tv, nor it is equipped with TiVo or DVR.
Will I be one of those who will likely be left behind in this television-digital-revolution?
I cannot afford to purchase a new, wide-screen, HD-ready tv.
Come time for the big turn-over, will my old non-name brand tv still work if the cable wire is connected to the wall and plugged into my cable-ready tv?..
That's what I want to know!
Thanks.
I must inform you that the media is habitually misleading the public on the DTV Transition each and every time someone includes the words or phrases 'all analog television will end'… and we, the Community Broadcasters Association (CBA) will not stand for this ANYMORE!
On Friday, December 7th, the CBA filed a complaint with the FCC showing that the converter boxes approved by the FCC that do not pass an analog signal violate the all channel receiver act. The CBA tried extensively to get the CEA and the FCC to change these boxes to add NTSC tuners but we had no luck.
Our blood is boiling over the fact that the FCC would actually allow our tax dollars to be used to make converter boxes that take analog viewers away from us and potentially put us out of business. We need YOUR help - today!
Please log on to www.KeepUsOn.com and read our Complaint and the various related articles. This injustice to the LPTV industry needs to end right now! The CBA believes in truth in advertising and we need your help to get the TRUTH OUT THERE!
Congress is also becoming very concerned that the public is not being adequately informed about the digital television transition and that there will be undue and unnecessary public confusion and distress when full power television stations stop their analog broadcasts on February 17, 2009.
We believe that the situation will be worsened if the digital converter boxes that will be offered to the public and subsidized by federal funds, intended to allow the continued use of analog receivers after the transition, block over-the-air analog signals from reaching those receivers. If a member of the public attaches one of these boxes to a receiver during 2008 and suddenly finds that only digital signals can be received, confusion and anger are likely to result.
These boxes will be sold in the next few weeks, when full power stations are still broadcasting analog signals, and some viewers may still rely on those signals if they have problems with digital reception. Equally important, there are thousands of Class A, Low Power, and TV Translator stations -- some four times as many as there are full power stations -- that are not subject to the statutory 2009 transition deadline. These stations will not be able to convert by 2009, even if they want to, because only a few of them have construction permits for digital channels, and the manufacturing community cannot supply so many digital transmitters that quickly.
It is also important not to mislead the public in educational efforts by telling them that the digital transition will “end” or “be complete” in 2009. To do that is not only misleading to the public but is also extremely detrimental to the small business enterprises that operate Class A and Low Power TV stations, as well as rural communities that depend on TV Translators for over-the-air service.
The digital transition is difficult enough without filling the marketplace with converter products that will block reception of a substantial number of over-the-air signals and without misleading publicity about the transition.
Please call or e-mail me with questions or follow-up comments. And I thank you in advance for your HONEST REPORTING!
Amy Brown
CBA - Executive Director & Secretary
1-800-215-7655 ph