RSSSenate considers delaying DTV transition until June
By Scott M. Fulton, III | Published January 16, 2009, 7:31 PM
On the theory that some two million eligible customers have yet to receive their $40 coupons toward the purchase of an over-the-air DTV signal converter, Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D - W.V.) introduced a bill giving them more time.
If approved, Sen. Rockefeller's bill would extend the transition date by 90 days to June 12. Rockefeller's sentiments appear to be echoed by key members of the President-Elect's transition team, along with Federal Communications Commission members who told a crowd last week at CES 2009 in Las Vegas that they saw a lack of leadership all last year in driving the transition forward.
But Rockefeller is also arguing that the dead of winter is the worst time to be making this transition, for fear that broadcaster's transmitter crews would be unable to make necessary changes to their equipment. This despite the fact that broadcasters say they are already ready, and most US stations are already broadcasting in DTV -- the real switch being thrown would be the one that turns off the analog signal. Already, broadcasters are being permitted to leave those signals running after February 17, if only to show images informing viewers that regular analog broadcasts have ceased.
"The Federal Communications Commission expects to receive almost 1.5 million calls on the days immediately following the transition but at current capacity their call center will be able to process only 350,000 of those calls each day," reads a statement from Sen. Rockefeller's office today. The statement goes on to cite Comm. Robert McDowell, who at CES called the government's efforts to date to educate citizens "inadequate."
Only last week, Sen. Bernard Sanders (I - Vt.) introduced a bill that would make more coupon money available to citizens, and that would set up government-run toll-free hotlines above and beyond what the FCC is planning. And the House introduced legislation, also last week, to extend the federal coupon expiration date past March 7.
Opposition to Rockefeller's plan comes from Rep. Joe Barton (R - Texas), who earlier joined with fellow congressmen in writing Pres.-Elect Obama, invoking 9/11 in their argument that any further delay in the DTV transition would impair the redeployment of VHF and UHF spectrum for use by first responders.
Hey, everyone, the next time either Tool, or foxfart, replies to your postings with their libertopian nonsense just post this link and you can then easily dismiss them.
http://sethf.com/essays/major/libstupid.php
Score: 0
|June!?!?!??!!?!?!?!?!?!??!?!?!
How can they even consider doing it before Thursday, July 23???
The nerve of those idiots!
I suggest we ship all of Congress over to the EU and let them all tackle the MSWindoes/IE browser issue together.
Score: -2
|Screw the senate.
Score: 0
|Attempts were made to educate a willfully ignorant public. I was driven crazy by the frequency and placement of the ads.
Go ahead and throw the switch already. Let the lazy suffer.
Score: 3
|AshG
Jan 19, 2009 - 2:54 PM
Attempts were made to educate a willfully ignorant public. I was driven crazy by the frequency and placement of the ads
Go ahead and throw the switch already. Let the lazy suffer.
>
>
What attemps are you talking about? You mean the *GARBAGE* that Comcast and others aired that told people *NOTHING* about the switchover and basically *INSULTED* their intelligence, and basically were nothing but ads for Comcast (and other companies) Cable Service?
*THOSE* Attempts?
Score: -1
|If the deadline is missed by three months, then the FCC gets an "F" for the transition. Does the new administration really want to start off with a failure? Turn the analog transmitters off and save the electricity.
Score: 0
|Those "last minute adopters" are going to wait until they have no signal no matter how long we delay this thing. Get it done and over with already. Lord knows we have other things to deal with that are far more important than the local news...
Score: 3
|It doesn't matter if you postpone 90 days or 90 months- the clueless folks of this country will never be ready no matter how long the wait to digital. Besides, what is so important on tv that folks would just die if they don't get to see it? I am debating right now to just cancel the cable and be done with the info commercials and those stupid shows - I don't even know their names their that stupid, but you know the shows. Heck, I block half the crap channels anyway ( BET, MTV, VH1, Comedy Channel) - Comedy Channel sometimes good, but can't let the kids watch it whenever they want. News is so damn biased and lacks credibility ,it's not worth watching either.
I say turn it all off, now and forever. God forbid someone pick up a book and read something!
Score: 2
|Though I agree with most of what you said (I'm close to ditching cable myself for the same reasons), the people that this transition will affect most likely do not receive those channels in the first place.
Major and public broadcasting channels received via VHF/UHF, gone. I imagine it will impact quite a few stay-at-home moms and seniors who religiously watch morning shows (GMA, Today), soap operas, Oprah, etc. I would also suspect that many of those same people do not subscribe to cable or other services for the same reasons that you've mentioned... most of it is indeed crap.
At any rate, the "clueless folks" might actually be ready *if* they had a clue in the first place... and therein lies the problem: poor planning and communication on the government's end.
Score: 0
|People have been "clued in" to the transition by the governement. It has been posted in newspapers, tv comercials, cable and sat tv companys have made a great effort to clue in folks (beacuse they want to sell thier product to you) Also their is word of mouth. Folks are clued in but they don't understand because they don't want to. Here is an example using my own family that I think parallels the rest of the country; My wife doesn't understand or know how to do something on her laptop, she calls me, I show her and I also show her the resources that are available so that she can help herself next time. The next time rolls around, and she calls me again, I show her of course, again. But this time I ask her why did you not use the resources I introduced to you last time to "fix" the problem because they would have worked. Her response- Why should I go through that trouble when I have you. So, there you go. Why should the public take an initiative to learn and understand when they have the government spoon feeding them. -- they will not try to understand the digital transition because its just too much trouble, and I have someone to take care of me (delay the transition) anyway -- so the transition delay will not solve the real issue.
Score: 5
|Who exactly do they expect to receive calls from in the first place? Are they actually expecting average citizens to call them directly... and know how to? I would suspect that most (if not everyone) affected will attempt to contact their local stations directly... unless those broadcasters have been notified ahead of time to redirect them to the FCC instead. Besides... has anyone actually ever tried to locate a number in the phone book for a local, state, or federal organization? It's not impossible, but it's sometimes easier to perform a root canal on yourself.
Score: 0
|Yawn.
If last minute adopters are the problem, just extend the coupons, which for some asinine reason have a finite life span of less then the transition period.
Many who jumped on the couples as soon as they were available sat and watched them expire as the larger stores like WalMart were unable to get sufficient quantities of the converters in the first several months!
Just print a few more coupons and get on with it.
Over 10 years is enough time! And if the change happens, that will simply make those who are still screwing around deal with it.
Score: 1
|Foxfyre, I'm told the coupons expire so that people have to act on them; if someone can just sit on a coupon indefinitely, that would prevent someone further down the list from getting their coupon and actually using it. (Remember, the system is not funded so everyone in America automatically gets a coupon. That's a whole different conversation, of course.)
Of course, that was as they say a lovely theory; it fell apart the moment the supply chain didn't meet demand. As we heard from the commissioners last week, the supply chain was at least in part affected by the breakdown in communications among the government, local viewing markets, suppliers and contractors. And the beat goes on...
Score: 0
|In other words, the government as our mommy fails yet again.
Boy, there's news!
"Change", my @ss.
Score: 1
|1. There have been ads on every analog TV station for well over a year.
2. People that waited until the last minute will just need to bite the bullet and pay $80 for the converter box. A far better investment would just be to get a digital TV, if you really care about OTA broadcasts. (I can't imagine ppl do care, if they have OTA)
3. Delaying is stupid. The government needs to move on with this transition and worry about more important stuff, like getting us out of this depression. (Yes I say depression, I have many friends that have been laid off lately. The s*** is hitting the fan.)
Score: 1
|1. There have been ads on every analog TV station for well over a year.
2. People that waited until the last minute will just need to bite the bullet and pay $80 for the converter box. A far better investment would just be to get a digital TV, if you really care about OTA broadcasts. (I can't imagine ppl do care, if they have OTA)
3. Delaying is stupid. The government needs to move on with this transition and worry about more impo rtant stuff, like getting us out of this depression. (Yes I say depression, I have many friends that have been laid off lately. The s*** is hitting the fan.)
>
>
The *ONLY* stupid people here are people like yourself and the other morons who were actually *DUMB* enough to buy into the DTV nonsense.
I still haven't seen a HDTV set that was actually worth buying. I still think my old KTV 13" inch analog set has a better picture in terms of clariitly and color than 90% of the LCD sets on the market.
And it's damned funny that one of the biggest retailers trying to shove the DTV crap down onto unsuspecting consumers (Circuit City) has gone belly up.
Score: 0
|< The *ONLY* stupid people here are people like yourself and the other morons who were actually *DUMB* enough to buy into the DTV nonsense.
I still haven't seen a HDTV set that was actually worth buying. I still think my old KTV 13" inch analog set has a better picture in terms of clariitly and color than 90% of the LCD sets on the market.
And it's damned funny that one of the biggest retailers trying to shove the DTV crap down onto unsuspecting consumers (Circuit City) has gone belly up.>
Actually it is you kifox who are misinformed. DTV is NOT the same as HDTV. Digital refers to how the signal is transmitted. HD means Hi Definition.
So DTV can be either standard definition or High definition. HD is simply the highest quality form of Digital Television.
If you are fine with your 13" set and you think its great video fine, but those of us who have actually bothered to try an LCD or similar set can really see the difference.
Not to be mean, but also I have read that many people have poor eyesight and don't check eyes often enough so they may not notice the difference as much for HD. Although for standard definition there is not much difference from analog as far as seeing it goes, more so the difference is in how its transmitted from the station to your tv set, the signal is more reliable.
Score: 0
|If you are fine with your 13" set and you think its great video fine, but those of us who have actually bothered to try an LCD or similar set can really see the difference.
Not to be mean, but also I have read that many people have poor eyesight and don't check eyes often enough so they may not notice the difference as much for HD.
>
>
BS. I can *SEE* the freaking *PIXELS* that's a result of the compression used in DTV/HDTV signals, and it's anoying as heck.
The colors on nearly all the LCD sets I've seen look washed out when you compare them to a good quality analog set. Certainly the colors aren't as vibrant or sharp on an LCD set as they are on an analog set.
>
>
Although for standard definition there is not much difference from analog as far as seeing it goes, more so the difference is in how its transmitted from the station to your tv set, the signal is more reliable.
>
>
As for the signal reception, don't make me laugh. My brother-in-laws HDTV set can pickup only 2/3 at best of over-the-air stations the old analog set he replaced it with could recieve. It just doesn't see the digital signals from these stations because I suspect the transmitter is too far away to put out a clean signal as compared to the analog transmission.
Score: 0
|The whole program is a complete joke. Most of the vouchers mailed out last year expired already. Most people don't have a clue about "digital". They think if the tv has push buttons or a LED display, then it must be digital. They also don't realize they have to buy an antenna in many cases. They need to start the transition in parallel and let each TV station decide when it's time to shut off their analog signal. Heck: humans can't even drive a car properly, and we expect this to go over smoothly? Give me a break.
Score: 0
|Just getting an antennae isn't good enough. You need a particular type of antenna depending on your location, elevation, distance from the tranmitter tower, and aiming the antenna is usually necessary.
Score: 0
|The FCC *should* expect nowhere near that amount of calls... assuming they had done what needed to be done in the first place to better prepare and inform those very same people who they expect to receive calls from. Lack of initiative in effectively promoting awareness of the transition... that's the problem. This is a government organization? Not to suggest that any of our government organizations at the federal level have ever implemented anything smoothly, but c'mon... this should have been cake.
All of those unnecessary man-hours wasted to field calls from people demanding an explanation of what has just happened. That money could be better spent by allocating airtime dedicated to better informing our citizens... the very same airwaves that they regulate.
As it is a transition that affects all of the United States, the State of the Union address would have been a good way to inform the greatest number of people at the same time.
Why not have the major broadcasters agree on a specific date and time (perhaps over the course of several days) to dedicate at least 30 minutes to a nationwide "infomercial" highlighting who and what is affected, why, and what their options are in the days leading up to and after the big switch? To the best of my knowledge, this has been largely left up to the local stations to handle... and from what I've seen, they all handle it differently. If the major broadcasters can devote 30 prime-time minutes to a (then) presidential candidate, they can surely agree to this.
It's a government-mandated transition, and it should be the government's responsibility to properly inform the greatest number of American citizens at the same time by whatever means necessary.
Score: 0
|Just get it over with already! No more waiting!
Score: 0
|Delaying it any more would be stupid. Just do it and get it over with, if someone hasn't heard about it by now they must be living in a cave.
What happened to Betanews by the way, jeez. This new design sucks horribly.
Score: 0
|I have cable and three known TV's with a digital converter, lets get this ball rolling!
Score: 0
|Greg, you're so on it! I have 2 TVs with digital converters, with one of them also having a built-in digital tuner. I'm really anxious to see what kind of power we could end up with!
And, it's not like the digital transition in 2009 wasn't announced more than 3 years ago in the first place!
Score: 1
|It will soon be revealed that Senator Rockefeller recently thought he got a great deal on eBay for a "gently used" Zenith solid-state console television with quadraphonic sound. To maximize the value of his purchase, Rockefeller is urging broadcasters to air as many shows in Technicolor as possible.
Score: 0
|So as to not sound like a mean ruthless person, but doesn't just about all the TV cable providers out there offer the dtv boxes for rent for just $3 or so a month. The public should also be informed by now...whether it's not caring or just down right ignoring it, I've even seen it a couple dozen times now on tv and I don't watch hardly any news channels unless I'm expecting bad weather.
The way I see it is that the government gave these companies a year to lay out any new lines or install new equipment to make this work and it is their problem if they waited til the last 2 months to get this done.
And shame on the government for not sending these vouchers out in a more timely manner so that people can be prepared for the switch.
But all in all, what is an extra $3 for a month if you haven't got your voucher yet and you have to rent a box from your cable company for a month. Please let me know if I'm wrong about the assumption that about all cable companies are offering these boxes. I live in a little backwater town with a little local cable provider who won't let Time Warner in to their service area, but yet they still provide these dtv conversion boxes for rent.
Score: 0
|The vast majority of cable companies still have analog. Expecially in the more rural areas. Yeah, some areas offer digital cable but that is still optional. Try asking your cable company about basic broadcast or basic cable. That usually is just the analog channels. You don't get the nice digital channels (like nicktoons or discovery health) but for someone who just wants the locals, it works fine.
Comcast in my market is advertising basic cable. (2-20 or 22 only) for $10.00 a month for a year or free with internet or home phone. Still a lot of money to watch abc and nbc but still, you know people will jump on it.
Score: 0
|Does anyone even really care anymore?
Score: 0
|Of course people care, Tool.
Score: 2
|Are you kidding me? This is the biggest soap opera in my world right now! (Okay, yes, I may be a little cabin-feverish. It's rather cold here. And I'm a big nerd. But still -- YES!)
And lest you think I have a dog in this hunt, I do find the first-responder argument mighty compelling -- though this change actually worries me much less than the imminent switchover to new-style Emergency Locator Transmitters for private planes. There's a situation where not changing over could lead to *horrible* safety consequences. (I'm following this on my own because I didn't sense a good match to Betanews readers' interests, but I'm happy to tell you more. And yes, the nerd designation applies again. I embrace my nerditude, dude.)
Score: 0
|Actually, we have a small TV in our kitchen with a rabbit ears which we use in the mornings to watch the news while having breakfast and on which I occasionally watch football. Having two other sets connected to cable, I am not about to increase my bill by connecting our kitchen TV; however I have applied for the coupons (which I should have received by now and have not) and will gladly pay $20 for a converter box.
In the end, if this fails then I will simply give up the kitchen set. But for now I'm certainly interested in giving this a try. Besides...there's still a bit of fun left in having to adjust the antenna and turn the dial to try and locate the least fuzzy picture.
Score: 0
|You do know, Straspey, that you can connect that other TV just by adding a splitter. :) Anyways, the cable companies here only charge 99 cents more a month for the third, or more, TV to connect it to their service in any home.
The vast majority of people don't have to worry about this changeover since their TV providers (Cable, Dish) have already done it at their end. Most won't even notice the difference come February either. Its a non-issue. In other words you only need a converter box if you don't already have cable or a dish.
Score: 0
|In some areas connecting another tv to cable is easy, no extra cost, just have to have an available outlet or as mentioned use a splitter.
I hope they don't extend it. We have waited long enough and I'm sick of seeing those messages scrolling across the screen. The only people who don't know about this are people who don't watch TV!
You can only do so much to educate the public, its their loss if they are don't get out more or turn on their TV. It is a problem I agree for seniors who often don't know what this all means but they need to ask someone then, but don't hurt the rest of us.
Score: 0
|Cable splitter. $5 at your nearest *mart.
Score: 0
|