Obama urges laggards get ready for digital TV

[DanS]

The delay was necessary because the long-planned transition was fubared by the Bush admin.

The transition was going just fine. If it really had been such a disaster, it couldn't have been fixed in 4 months -- it would have taken much longer.

Instead we have busybodies creating a crisis out of thin air in order to be able to take credit for having solved it.

Obama personally inconvenienced me for no good reason.

[-Jrabbit]

The number of people unprepared for the original February date was estimated at 6 million.
The number unprepared for Friday's actual transition is estimated at between 2 and 3 million (most believable estimate I've seen = 2,200,000).

[DanS]

They would have coped just fine, just like the 2.2 million are coping.

[Ming]

Digital TV: Now Showing on a Set Near You
FCC reports 700,000 calls to DTV hotline; 100,000 remain without equipment
By NED POTTER and EVAN HARRIS
June 13, 2009

The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) reported today that nearly 700,000 calls were received by a federal hot line this week from people confused about the nationwide switch from analog to digital TV broadcasts.

Of the 700,000 calls received by the hotline, approximately half of them came in on Friday, the day stations stopped broadcasting analog signals. About a third of the calls were about federal coupons to pay for digital converter boxes, an indication that at least 100,000 people still didn't have the right equipment to receive digital signals.

With 4,000 FCC staffers manning the phones Friday, the average wait time per call was 4.6 minutes.

"Our job is far from over," acting FCC Chairman Michael Copps said in a statement. "This transition is not a one-day affair. We have known about re-scanning and reception issues for some time and have been doing our best to get the word out."

The National Association of Broadcasters reported, from a survey completed last week, that of the 12.6 million households that use broadcast signals, 88 percent were all set, with new TV sets, antennae or set-top DTV converter boxes so they can watch the new, crisper TV transmissions. Another 1.75 million households, as of the survey's end, had not yet taken any action -- many of them apparently waiting until the last minute.

Sounds like things are going just fine...

[-Jrabbit]

They would have coped just fine, just like the 2.2 million are coping.

I tend to agree with you, Dan, just like I think more bloated corporations should be allowed to fail. But consumer coping wasn't the issue; goverement and industry preparedness was.

The real key to the delay was the lack of converter box coupons. There literally weren't any more available, going back to at least December iirc. And the govt sat on its hands -- inexplicably choosing this initiative as something that required fiscal responsibility. Without those coupons, and with 6MM people unprepared, there would have been a LOT more squawking, and far less immediate help available.

This whole process has been a poster child for inefficiency of big government. Especially considering they've been working on this for over 10 years, going back to the Clinton administration.

[rah]

So the transition has come and gone. The analog stations are off. The TV stations have turned up the power on their digital signals. And the few laggard TV stations have finally turned over to digital. And it was no big deal.

With the equivalent of rabbit ears, I get 11 stations broadcasting 29 channels whereas I got maybe a half-dozen fuzzy channels with analog. Obama delayed me receiving all of these stations for 4 months.

Almost all the stations in Chicago had been broadcasting digital for almost a year, so I don't see how Obama delayed anything for you. The only stations that didn't already broadcast were the obscure networks. But I also agree that it shouldn't have been delayed. I don't see how people were saying they didn't know, considering I was seeing ads and tests every day prior.

The one thing the did use the extra time for was explaining the rescanning aspect better. They did't mention that part of it as much back in January.

[Dis]

Here's a good question. Why is there not free tv on the internet? Why do they expect you to pay for shows that are free on tv? Obviously they'd have to run commercials as they would on a regular tv show. And yes I know internet advertising is considered to be less effective than television. But how is running a commercial/advertisement in the same spot as it would normally run on the air any different?

Basically what I'm wondering is why should we even need tv's? It seems like I should be able to watch these shows over the internet. I would really just like to get rid of my tv and use the space for something more useful.

[Wezil]

I watch House on the internet. Each segment starts with a 30 sec commercial.

[Dis]

I watch House on the internet. Each segment starts with a 30 sec commercial.

that's cool. I remember being on NBC's website once. but iirc they expected you to pay to watch the office. I'd like to watch the office without paying.

[Wezil]

I watch The Office online as well (same site actually).

edit: I don't know if it will work for you

http://www.globaltv.com/index.html

[Asher]

Pretty sure it's on hulu.com in the US

[DanS]

Almost all the stations in Chicago had been broadcasting digital for almost a year, so I don't see how Obama delayed anything for you.

On the contrary, almost all stations increased the power of their transmissions upon the transition. I'm in the city, and there were several stations with marginal reception that became rock solid over the weekend.

[-Jrabbit]

True dat.

But it's not an upgrade everywhere. Some people will get improved reception/more stations, but there are other areas where (based on verified complaints) where reception of certain stations was lost. My mother-in-law (near Columbia SC) is down to two stations.

[The Rusty Gamer]

I live in NZ but I spent 10 months in Hammond Indiana in 1984. It was a very poor area. Most people only watched one main network - the one on channel 7. That's because the other two networks were too fuzzy with only rabbits ears, and most couldn't afford an outdoor aerial, let alone cable. (As an aside, I'll bet the ratings system doesn't take this kind of thing into account).

Anyway, unless things have changed drastically in that area finanically in the last 25 years, which I doubt - the shopping centre had just about become a ghost town when I was there - most of them won't have a working TV anymore.

And so I suspect it will be in many other pockets of the USA.

Maybe it's time to forget broadcast TV and stick to DVDs and internet downloads. Following a scheduling can get increasingly complicated in any case and I doubt such poor areas can afford TIVO.

[Kuciwalker]

True dat.

But it's not an upgrade everywhere. Some people will get improved reception/more stations, but there are other areas where (based on verified complaints) where reception of certain stations was lost. My mother-in-law (near Columbia SC) is down to two stations.

On the whole it should be positive for reception, I believe.