RSSThe DTV launch is a shambles, say FCC commissioners
By Angela Gunn | Published January 10, 2009, 4:03 PM
The call earlier this week by President-Elect Obama's transition team to perhaps delay next month's DTV switch didn't just "come up" at Saturday's "2009 Regulatory Outlook" panel at CES. It electrified it.
Jonathan Adelstein and Robert McDowell, both commissioners at the Federal Communications Commission, have seen trouble coming for a very long time. Adelstein has served at the FCC since 2002, and McDowell began his first term in 2006.
Remember the coordinated governmental effort to fix and work around potential Y2K problems? That tech initiative, like the DTV transition, involved multiple agencies. And that's where the coordination comparison ends. Where the Y2K effort had top-down supervision from the White House, various guidelines to action, and synchronized effort, this has...well, at least it's only television, not a hurricane aimed at a major US city.
Nobody will actually drown thanks to a botched DTV rollout, but Adelstein and McDowell's description gave listeners the sense that the program has been in rough water since well before the transition team's remarks on Thursday. No one -- at the FCC or any other agency -- is tasked specifically with the changeover; there's no White House staffer cracking the whip. No one was charged with developing guidelines or information for the nation's 1,600-odd broadcasters, or for equipment manufacturers, or support teams. And, says McDowell, without coordination "we haven't maximized even the limited resources we had."
The results have been disturbing. A plan to reach the nation's 210 television market areas (TMAs) by working with mayors fizzled out, Adelstein remarked, when "somebody moved." State and local consumer-edition efforts suffered because the feds haven't been able to communicate what's happening and what to expect; in fact, both men said, feds, broadcasters and contractors often didn't know about important developments unless and until they were reported in the trade press. And the performance of the two toll-free consumer hotlines (888-CALL-FCC and 888-DTV-2009) would make the worst tech-support line operators blush.
With no coordination and no guidance, FCC field reps and the local TMAs have reached out to anyone who can maybe help, "reinventing the wheel" in each market as Adelstein put it. In some locales, someone thought to speak to ham radio operators about assisting in wiring up citizens who needed help; in other places, the Salvation Army was contacted. McDowell said that focused efforts were made to tap groups serving those who might not understand the situation -- AARP and other senior groups to work with the elderly, for instance, and PBS call centers in locales where public TV is well-established.
But delaying the launch will make some problems worse, especially for companies that have invested in digital with the promise of this final firm 2009 date. And some problems will exist whatever the roll date might be, notes McDowell: "There's always a certain percentage of procrastinators as well as those who through no fault of their own aren't ready. We don't know where we are necessarily, and unfortunately the only way to know [where these people are] is to have their screens go dark." There'll be a thirty-day period after the rollout for reaching out to those citizens, he says, but they'll be there regardless, and "for those who act at the last minute you need to have a last minute."
There are an amazing number of local issues turning up, too. For instance, says McDowell, they've just realized that many houses in Las Vegas are built mainly of stucco and chicken wire -- accidental Faraday cages. Those houses will need a rooftop booster, and there's no "coupon plan" for that. (The coupon plan has been in trouble for awhile; at this point, the commissioners estimated that there could be as many as 5 million applications by next month.)
To coin a phrase, what the heck happened? One audience member pointedly said that she'd attended hearings at which the NTIA and FCC had pledged to work together on the transition -- "What happened?" The panel members laughed, a little, and one noted that "[FCC Chairman Kevin Martin] speaks at 1:30 -- that'd be a good question to ask him."
Are people really this stupid? What kind of moron has no clue as to the DTV switch yet? I can't comprehend how clueless and uninformed the bulk of Americans really are.
This country and it's moronic masses are pathetic when it comes to technology.
Score: 0
|Hollywood_, I'd suggest that some folks may still not realize it applies to them -- especially if they don't pay much attention to tech news and only got their info from the television itself. Those commercials were just awful; much too much like informercials to get across the point that Really, This Applies To You, Yes You There In Front Of the Set. Those among us who tend to switch the TV on and use it as background noise may well have simply ignored it.
And that's leaving aside the issues connected to those who simply haven't got good access to resources, whether that means information resources (you see above what the commissioners had to say about the patchwork of education efforts) or time resources or financial resources. Here we are on a tech site; it's easy to judge. Outside, though, I know plenty of people who simply have spent their entire lives with television that "just works" and who simply aren't hearing the message that soon it will not.
Score: 0
|In areas that have little or no digital cell phone service (GSM/CDMA) I could probably get a signal on an analog cell phone. I might hear nothing but static on phone calls but at least my call wouldn't drop.
Seriously, the switch to DTV should have happened a long time ago.
Score: 0
|Tried to help my mother in-law get setup. She watches PBS exclusively. She got the coupons 6 months ago, set it all up, but had a hell of a time getting signals to work right. She even got the recommended antennae for her location. Quality is great when it works, but she'll get nothing at least once for 2 seconds every half-hour. She is somewhat angry, and is thinking about going to cable.
I have no solution for her really, since investing in a better antenna is no guarantee for her.
I predict lots are going to have these same types of issues. You can't just throw a converter box at the problem, there are signal quality issues as well.
Score: 0
|In the UK there is a MASSIVE difference in quality when it comes to converter boxes.
Any of the Bush made boxes drop signal, hang and are generally terrible.
Try it with a different converter box (if you have one yourself). Worth a try.
Score: 0
|You're a good son-in-law, MJM. And if this is what's happening with folks who understood the need in advance, have highly capable tech assistance, and lined up all the recommended gear... I fear for February 17. Just sayin'.
Score: 0
|I have the digital TV. Below few beauties you will get
1) "see - no see". With weak signal analog gets grainy, but you can still watch. Digital has very small signal amplitude range where you get squares and then nothing. Antennas and boosters are crucial.
2) Digital picture is possibly better (no ghost pictures), but transmission charge (with rented transmissions) is based on the bit rate. Guess what happens. If you want to see a good picture, you pay. Common channels have very low picture quality, worse than with analog. If major channels own the whole transmission infrastructure, then this is not a issue, but all others will have troubles.
3) Old people are badly lost. They do not understand the difference between the box and TV and channel. This needs major effort, believe me.
4) After this mess starts, lot of people will actually switch off from TV. Timing is good. Internet provides content. Some percent of the younger population may do this.
5) Text content may cause nice mess. I suppose many channels are waiting to have a chance to add text streams (spanish, many Asian languages). Unfortunately it depends on the customer box if streams come out. Several issues on both sides tranmission/receiver. Both must match to see...
6) Concerning picture quality. Good analog is better. Digital signal removes transmission related errors. I do not know US details, but I suppose they had to do same as in Europe, keep line count same as before. So in theory you can not get better picture. In reality most people will see a better picture, because transmission channel related errors (ghosts, color) are eliminated.
Score: 3
|In the words of Bill Cosby: 'Come on people!'... this isn't that hard. The date for this coming conversion and what people need to do has been in the national and local news for at least 2 years. This is just another display of how infantile and helpless we as a people have become in continuing to look to mommy and daddy government to develop a 'program' to spoon-feed us everything from cradle to grave. No wonder we've got a $10T national debt.
Score: 1
|Well, then by all means roll up your sleeves and go create an entirely new television infrastructure, dwick! We'll be rooting for you...LOL
I've been laughing at the fans of this oncoming fiasco for two years. Digital will be sooo much better, they say. Reception will be clearer and signal will be stronger. Really? Cause it sure doesn't work that way with cell phones, the technology that most closely resembles the brave new standard. The best part is that the new tech "doesn't require an antenna". Excuse me? So, my new set-top box will somehow magically pull that signal through the walls of my house unlike my phone which gets no signal away from the windows. But hey, this is the government we're talking about. They know everything!
Score: 2
|I heard one reporter call the proposed delay a "nanny state" action. Wanted so very much to ask why postponing to address what's obviously a FUBAR rollout was handholding, but dictating the changeover in the first place is not. Fortunately, I was distracted by the OTHER reporter, allegedly writing for a shopping-guide site that covers these things, snorting that "let 'em stare at a blank screen for all I care." Some days my profession just makes me want to upgrade -- I'm thinking wh***house piano player sounds like a possibility.
Score: 1
|Digital is better in a great many ways, but some of those ways are dependent on how far you currently are from your analogue mast. If you're sitting right next to it currently, then picture quality is likely to be worse with digital as it's compressed horribly (or at least in the UK the compression really is shocking on a large TV).
If you live a fair way from your nearest mast, then the signal levels should indeed improve quite noticeably.
In the UK, digital has brought about a much larger selection of free-to-air channels. This is a major reason why digital has been accepted fairly quickly in the UK (the final analogue switch-off is in 2012).
The 'not require an antenna' thing is either referring to cable or satellite I presume, or the author of that quote was clueless.
Score: 0
|Uh oh. Stucco and chicken wire is a problem?
They're still advertising the coupon program on tv even though the program is broke.
Score: 2
|PSH! My chicken coop has DirecTV anyway.
Score: 1
|Yeah. I didn't go into detail about McDowell's experiences with the phone line -- and the general thoughts re having two numbers rather than one -- but he's pretty disgusted with the promotion of a "help" line that's not helping much at all (doesn't pick up, goes to auto-attendant hell, etc.). Not good, not good.
Score: 1
|I would think that if s.&c.w. were a problem for the local ATSC broadcasts that
it would also cause trouble with the NTSC broadcasts, and that people with
this alleged problem will have already solved it.
Possibly by not watching TV, or by putting the set near a window that looks
towards broadcast antenna.
Score: 0
|