I'm one of the 19% that still receive tv signals through an antenna. Any public official that votes for this move will not get my vote no matter who they are or what their record is.

They should provide both digital and analog so people will have a choice.

I like the new digital format. But I can not and will not pay $2000 for a tv system. I'll just get a dvd player and watch that and steal movies offline to get around it.

Actually watching tv is kind of a drag anymore. It's mostly commercials and constant reruns of ridiculous and nonsesical programs. The only Fox network program worth watching is "24". The season seems to be only 4 or 5 months long then you get nothing but reruns. Don't these people know they are nothing without us?

I like the new digital format. But I can not and will not pay $2000 for a tv system

For someone basing his votes on this one issue, you sure are misinformed about it.

No need to replace the TV. Digital Cable or a digital OTA receiver (antennae) will do the trick just fine. You can *get* a digital receiver at Walmart for $20.

If you have satellite, even better, nothing new will be required.

When speaking about "the component designed to send and receive radio waves", the correct plural form is "antennas", not "antennae"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antenna

(Sorry, I'm a natural born nitpicker ... :P)

*slaps himself on the wrist*

I knew that looked wrong. I should have thought about it a bit more.

Good catch. I bet your English teachers hated you with a passion. :p

He, he ... :)

Mind you, English is my second language, so I have to be extra-careful when correcting native speakers.

And I guess some teachers hated me but others really liked me. I tend to grow on people :D

It's Ed Oswald who probably hates me with full passion for my (spelling) nitpicking ....

I too like the new digital format but my television is analog receiver and it is 6 years old now, so time for a new one probably. Also, I did not know that you could buy a digital receiver from Walmart for $20.00. Thanks for the tip and I shall look into it. My TV might be from 2001 but it works fine and still has allot of life in it. Besides, if I had a digital receiver I might be able to get the cable upper channels which are on digital and we cannot get them without their box but the technician told me, if I had a digital TV I could. Again, thanks PC_Tool for the tip about Walmart...

Your technician is full of it. You need the box to get the digital cable channels. It has nothing to do with your TV. You can get them on *any* TV with the box.

Stop worrying people. Congress had passed the legislation for this five years ago. They did it because we are ten years behind Europe when it comes to the way we broadcast TV. All it means is that TV manufacturers will have to make their new TV's different. A majority of congress voted yes to this, so if stop voting for a congressperson because of it, you are a moron. It will be simple, go to Best Buy and get a converter for $50. Pay $20 a month and get the cheapest cable you can buy. This isn't the first story about the issue. It has been reported in the news plenty of times.

Yeah, but are the shows ever going to get any better?
When dopey TV execs think that a show using those incredibly annoying and stupid Geico ad cavemen is a good idea, we're in deep you know what.

I think the Carl Jr.'s ads are even worse.

They may well be, but is anyone making a sitcom out of them?

*shudder* I hope not. A Geico caveman show is bad enough.

We have satellite tv, and you know what? Due to the stupid boxes for it we only have it on one tv. In my room I regularly watch standard over the air tv. One of my best friends does not have cable and he relies on air broadcasting. Not only that, but we both live in the middle of nowhere and digital tv comes in like crap here. Oh well, guess it'll have to throw out $50 for a converter, huge antenna and sit back to watch the glory of horribly blocky compressed mpeg television. Yippie

Well then just get a new TV. 80% or so of new TVs have the digital tuner built in now.

That would solve the problem with the "stupid boxes", as for the horrible reception, I can't help you with that, other than as you said, getting a huge antenna. Welcome to rural America. LOL!

Getting digital over a antenna is a major pain.
First you have to move the antenna every time you change a channel. Second the range you can get a channel in is far shorter. While far away analog channels can be messed with to get a some what less fuzzy picture and get the sound in with Digital you would never get that channel in at all. Leave DTV to cable and satellite because Over The Air DTV is crap.

PS Dont believe them when they say you need a DTV ready antenna thats a bold face lie.

fadeblack.. That for sure is something I'd like to know about. THere must be a way to improve that signal. I don't know enough about "radio" signals. I say radio kind of generic thing for broadcast signals. As I have the same problem with my HD radio as I do HDTV. Too much signal loss. And for the TV signal **eyes rolling** I'm in a low lying area with tall trees around. So I think. How about the people in these condos in the middle of town with no way to OTA antenna except in the condo. That won't work... GUess I have rambled too much. Better go.. lol.. Who else want's on the soap box?

I can't wait until this transition occurs. Then maybe I won't have to listen to Comcast's false advertisement's anymore about how their cable TV network is 100% digital (it's not and never has been). And then there's the false Comcast advertisement about how they were the first TV service to have a true fiber optic network (obviously Verizon beat them to it).

Comcast's commercials are true. I, as a Comcast customer and digital cable subscriber know about this.

For example, the TV Guide Network can not be seen without a digital cable box because it is now a digital channel. All channels are presented in a digital format but still show analog signals for those customers without a digital cable box ... at least until 2/8/09.

huh? The current deadline has nothing to do at all with cable. Only over the air is required to go all digital by 2/8/09. Cable could (if they wanted) air analog for far beyond that.

I'm sure there will come a time when cable will be all-digital, but the law so far isn't dictating a set time for that to happen.

Here's an idea: for a month after the deadline, make every possible station on analog TV transmit the same message or the same program that has one message:

This TV needs a conversion box to return function. They cost $29 at Radio Shack. We're sorry for the inconvenience, but after that time, you'll no longer have reception due to FCC regulations that have been out for YEARS. Please buy a converter, or just have a nice day! Spanks!

It'd obviously have to be a tad more friendly, but honestly that's what's got to be done.

That's more like it!

I have been working on this transition for over 7years. As part of the private sector it has been a goal of mine to inform as many consumers as possible of this coming transition. This is the largest media transition in the history of man. The NAB (National Association of Broadcastes) has pledged to come to the aid of informing the OTA (Over the Air) audience of this transition beginning in December of this year. Personally I think it should be a community effort initiated by all local broadcast stations and their network affliates. Local malls could run PSA's beginning in December from large screens and displays could be set-up that any teenager would want to read-say in the format of a comic book-to then take to their parents and further educate them. The problem has been focusing in the audience that will talk about this to others and making it something that we could work on together. The benefit of this transition makes it worth the effort.

Hmm.. They stopped this long ago in Holland, and it was not really the end of the world.

Who cares - there's nothing good to watch on TV anyway!

Ain't that the truth.

AMen! 2 that.

"As many as 3 out of every 5 Americans know little or nothing of the pending change...."

How can a nation of couch potatoes fail to grasp it ? It would never happen in Canada.

Most people have satellite or cable, so it does not affect them in any way. I imagine that's why they don't know, nor should they care.

ok so each station now has 2 signals one regular, one dtv.

why not for the 2 months before the switch run informational shows and ads on what is happening and how to switch - these could be ads, or longer tv interruptions with calls to action to phone for a converter. or telling people what they need. these only need to be run on the analog side as the digital people will not need them.

I can see why the DEMS are all concerned - if their constituency only gets their pablum fed to them via the TV (because the public school system they've built sure as heck isn't teaching them to read) - when those sets go dark - how are they going to get fed the latest propaganda?

That's why I'm sure that they're going to pass more tax payer spending on getting decoders or whatever you want to call them to those who can't afford them.

Got to keep them on the dole or they might start thinking for themselves - and then watch out!

Not sure how this is a partisan issue.

I guess neutral stories like this are like Rorschach ink blots. People project their paranoid psychosis.

Let me try one: "That 19% must be all DEMS! Without their analog content they'll get mad and elect more DEMS! Then there'll be no more guns - and then watch out!"

That was fun.

How on earth does this "problem" become a Democrat problem?

"Some lawmakers worry those who feel they weren't informed could take it out on their elected officials."

The irony in that statement is just killing me. You'd think these guys would realize they exist because they were elected, and should they want to be elected again they can go ahead and inform their local areas.

Ridiculous, we really need term limits on house/senate seats. This crap, and Senator Byrd is a prime example!

Comcast has already provided my Grandparents with a digital converter box.

Progress. Get with it, or get out of the way.

Remember, this is congress, not progress. :)

I wouldn't worry about it too much. Just get a campaign going to educate the public. I for one am welcoming the transition.

Sen. Inouye, I wouldn't worry so. If someone buys a TV now and doesn't know about this, they probably don't vote, either.

In fact, in shopping for a new TV over the past few months, without exception each salesperson has told me about the upcoming switch to digital.

So again, you're worried about that "3 out of every 5 Americans" who don't even vote.

If the unwashed masses don't stay educated on something they may use in their daily lives then let them fend for themselves in 2009.

Just don't push back the date again, those of us that want DTV don't need to be punished for their ignorance.

Agreed.

The underlying problem is that millions of Americans can't afford new digital TVs, and the complete chinese-made crap sold by Wal-Mart is already failing within the first two years of use. I ain't replacing a perfectly good TV that I hardly ever turn on until the screen goes black, period.

A valid point regarding current product prices and many who watch TV and strive to make ends meet.

On the contrary, you only need a digital tuner. An analog TV is not the problem.

"The underlying problem is that..."

The underlying problem is that people are ignorant, and YOU are proof of it! They don't need to buy a new TV set, all they need is a converter box! As it turns out, the US government is going to give coupons and vouchers, essentially handing out some of the converters for free anyway. And, if people need to shell out a few dollars, well, then, they've been given warning almost two years in advance. They can stash 50 cents per week in a cookie jar or their mattress, and by then, have enough to buy a converter!

Why buy a car if the horse and buggy work fine.

Or not.

If you have cable, you don't even need to worry about it. If you are OTA, all you need is a digital receiver instead of the rabbit ears. Since the gov is subsidizing these receivers, you really have nothing to worry about.

You make it too easy sometimes...

Guess I don't spend my day and night watching "the teevee" like you do. What's "Fixed News" ranting and opinionating about now, toolie?

Again, why if I'm not going to watch the device? I can watch every single snippet of "teevee" I want from my computer. I'm not paying some idiotic company for the privilege of watching amerikan idol, dog-murdering quarterbacks, and conservative corporate news.

PC_Tool does that, not me.

Actually, if you have cable TV than you are already set for it without having to get a new TV. This only really affects those who still use the old fashion antenna on top of the house. What it means is, no more FREE TV.

The digital over the air broadcasts will still be free.

then don't buy a converter. and don't watch tv.

zridling, your ignorance about this subject has nothing to do with whether or not you watch TV. As stated, there haven't been any TV ads concerning this issue. And again, the change to digital has nothing to do with whether or not you "pay" for TV programming either.

You make it too easy sometimes...

I have an idea guys. zridling could watch the radio. Just like in the old days.

Oh wait.. Darn that is going HD too. Anybody have some vinyl albums to send him?

Never heard of it. But then again, I don't seem to watch as much television as you seem to be under the impression I do.

It really would help if you'd stick to things you actually know something about. I know it's a short list, but we won't miss you.

Funny.

You complain that it's too much. That you don't want to replace it (proving you're not informed on the topic at hand). You're told why your complaints are irrelevant...

...and amazingly, you begin insulting everyone who does watch television.

Hey, if it's not good enough for you, everyone who does it must be trash-minded Neanderthals, right? A play taken directly from the Lib playbook. If you can't argue the facts (or in your case, just don't know them to begin with) just spew emotional rhetoric. That'll work.

Somehow I seriously, seriously doubt that Wal-Mart has ANYTHING to do with the "underlying cause".

Education is golden, son. Read up a little. You don't have to replace your "perfectly good TV" at all.

Yep, the heck with all the trouble in the Middle East, Congress needs to be worried about my analog TV! Thats why they are all that and then some!!

The military action in the Middle East is just that. A military action.

No-one in congress is part of the executive branch, and therefore, they *should* be focusing more on other issues than the war.

Congress has no constitutional right to dictate military action once they have authorized it.

It's called managing a country. If Congress and Senate only focused on one problem or issue at a time, it would be far worse than it already is.

Which reminds us toolie: you're of "prime-fighting-age", why are you serving your country and "dear leader"? Ah, the chickenhawk trolls are the last to have principles.

Shut up.

They certainly can dictate military action. The fact that Congress controls the purse-strings is the key element in this. Thus, they *can* dictate where we can fight wars by controlling the money spent. If money doesn't get spent on defense, then we can't fight wars. It's really crappy, but it's the way things work.

The military action in the Middle East is just that. It's a bunch of very very stupid Americans that have s*** for brains.

No-one in congress is part of the executive branch, and therefore, the *should* be focusing more on sucking-off pc_tool (bring the microscope)

Congress exists only to suck-off little pc_tool and they have authorized it.

Heart-murmur and chronically low blood pressure (to the point where if I get up too quickly from a resting state I will frequently pass out momentarily.)

Oh, you weren't actually asking because you wanted to know? I should have figured.

My father was in the Army, my grandfather was in the Marines. I was next in line and *did* go through the testing.

If I could be out there, I would. Don't worry, I wouldn't expect you be able to wrap your tiny little brain around that one.

Go away, child. The internet is for grown-ups.

Just have a day where every front page of the newspapers is bought as an advert, the radio talks about it every 15 minutes, the TV has a DTV advert every ad break and then no one could possibly have any comeback.

How badly do they not want any comeback is the real question.

Money shouldn't matter as the cost of them getting their arses sued will surely outweigh the cost of a day of heavy publicity.

OMG, EVERYONE FREAK OUT!!!!

lame

Yeah, no kidding. Sounds like "Chicken Little" syndrome to me. I seriously doubt the TV "sky" is falling and the world is going to come to an end over all this...

Perhaps more people should invest in a decent library of books instead. :-)

The transition has been discussed for years, and postponed at least once before. There's no excuse for anyone being surprised on the day of the transition in another year and a half.

"Far too few of these consumers know that the transition from current analog television technology to digital television, or DTV, is under way," Sen. Dan Inouye (D-Hawaii) said at the hearing.

Then tell them? You're a Senator ffs. If your constituency isn't listening to you, you've got more problems than analag-digital TV signals.

Ouch, the stupid, it burns! Move along folks, reality not welcome here.

Grow up. He seems to have a valid point.

loser, grow up

Move along folks, reality not welcome here.

That really should be the tagline for *all* of your posts.

Yup, I certainly would hate to be a Congressman on February 19th, 2009. When granny can't watch her soaps and all the hick's can't watch WWE Smackdown.

I might just have to open a torch and pitchfork kiosk near the capitol. :p

> Yup, I certainly would hate to be a Congressman on
>February 19th, 2009. When granny can't watch her soaps
>and all the hick's can't watch WWE Smackdown.

:LOL - wipe tears from eyes:

...and that's really what it will amount to, isn't it? All of the "...this program is brought to you in HD..." hasn't even made them ask if something new is on the horizon. As long as they can watch their Dukes of Hazzard reruns on Spike, all is well in the world.