Ed's View - The Demise of Broadcasting

[Ed Milbourn]

This provocative article from our Ed Milbourn will echo forward for a long time to come. While broadcasting is still a robust business the cracks in its business model are severe. Analog technology once dictated the business model for telecasting, but that is now remade beyond recognition with the advent of digital technology. What lays ahead for the use of broadcast spectrum? Let Ed Milbourn open your mind to an exciting and creative future. _ Dale Cripps

__________________________________________________


Don't panic! This may be a very good thing for HDTV. Sometimes it takes a seminal, very disruptive event to cause a fundamental change in traditional business and/or political models to ensure survival. Failure to make those changes usually results in complete disaster. Successful change, however, usually results in the surviving entity being stronger, more vibrant and successful than before. History is replete with examples or this phenomenon, so I won't belabor this tome with any further philosophical discussions. Suffice saying, however, traditional OTA (over-the-air) television broadcast may be upon that seminal event - the 2009 digital transition date.

In spite of all of the publicity, the subsidized digital converter and economic attraction of "free" HDTV, an increasingly smaller percentage of viewers are...

[url=http://www.hdtvmagazine.com/articles/2007/11/eds_view_-_the_4.php]Read the Full Article[/url]

[videograbber]

Wow! A "provocative" article by Ed, indeed.

> one thing is clear; there is no room for "HDTV" in this spectrum equation, nor should there be. ...will not be distributed via their OTA spectrum and will not have to be compromised by it. <

So, screw over the 60 million OTA-watching citizens of the USA by taking away analog, and forcing them to go digital (and pay the price to do so). All with the carrot of HDTV (yes, I'm fully aware that the FCC mandated no such thing).

Then screw them over again by dropping HDTV from OTA entirely, after they've gone out and bought new HDTVs, with ATSC tuners. Isn't capitalism wonderful?

- Tim

P.S. BTW, I'm a digital-transition promoter (though my Dad is not), but I hope you're wrong about factoring HD out of the OTA equation, Ed. Unfortunately, seeing the effects that multi-casting is already having on HD PQ, I wouldn't be surprised to see this prediction come to pass.

P.P.S. > This may be a very good thing for HDTV. <

I fail to see how forcing folks to pay for cable or satellite service is a "very good thing" for HDTV? Especially when satellite broadcasters have already demonstrated they have NO commitment to HDTV quality, only quantiity. Perhaps Ed could expound on that statement?

[kf4buk]

Just read with interest an article by some guy named "Ed" which
insinuated that OTA broadcasters would not be sending out free
HDTV signals in the near future. He must not be aware that thousands of viewers are "dropping the dish" and going back
to a rooftop antenna just to get free HDTV. I joined this informed
group of TV watchers almost a year ago and noticed that there are
new channels broadcasting in HDTV coming online almost weekly.
Do you think for one minute that the networks are going to p***
off literally hundreds of thousands of OTA viewers by doing this?
Talk about a slam dunk class action lawsuit!
I am very happy with my decision to "drop the dish" and go back
to a rooftop antenna. The monthly savings has already paid for my
big screen HDTV and I am getting better TV than I ever did. I get
over 30 digital channels and thats a hell of a lot more than I have time to watch, eh? And they ain't those worthless shopping or music channels, either!

[tlp95129]

It (HDTV) just will not be distributed via their OTA spectrum and will not have to be compromised by it.

I'm very confused by this article. I fail to understand how OTA HDTV would be quality-compromised. From, what I've seen so far, it seems like cable and satellite systems are the ones compromising HD quality by overly aggressive compression in the interests of cramming more channels into the pipeline. Unless OTA broadcasters try to put HD and multiple SD channels in their 6 MHz, OTA HD should be as good as it gets.

And who the heck is interested in viewing HD on mobile/handheld devices?

[Robz]

Outrageous, infuriating! Ever since the beginning of the radio era, the spectrum has been under attack; but never as aggressively until now. It seems the capitalist corporations believe that the spectrum belongs to them, to do as they please. However, it is not capitalist property; the spectrum belongs to the citizens and not the corporations or the government. A broadcaster is licensed to use the spectrum according to the FCC rules and regulations. A major component of the licensing requirement is public service. Clearly, the public expects, as it should be, the obvious benefits of free HDTV as an enticement to support the digital transition. In addition, the Congress, FCC and broadcasters all have embraced HDTV over the public airwaves. So lets see, watch HDTV on a big screen TV or watch SDTV (or worse PQ) on a 3 inch mobile handheld device; surprise, it

[bradtothebone]

There are a couple of things that jump out at me after reading Ed's article:

First, I think the market for mobile/handheld TV is 'way overestimated. I suppose there is some limited market for road warriers and short-attention-span U-tubers, but I would guess that most of us would rather sit down and relax while catching up on our favorite shows. And, for most of us, that's a shared experience - not a squinting, lonely, pathetic one.

Second, even if local broadcasters unilaterally decide to limit HDTV distribution to cable/satellite distribution channels, what is to keep the networks from pulling their affiliations if they do so? If I'm one of the Big Four, and my expensively-produced HD shows are only going to be seen on cable and satellite anyway, I'm going to make distribution deals direct with those guys.

Brad

[Roger Halstead]

To me the mobile/hand held Digital TV is one of the most useless devices made by man. PDAs, Laptops, and mobile computing at least do something useful. I can think of no reason why I'd ever want to carry around a tiny screen TV. If I need up-to-date news the portable radio will do just fine. However the question remains what will happen to the advertising supported business model of "free to the consumer" over the air television and in particular, HD television. I see no reason why the same model would not continue to work just as well as in the past for OTA HD

As a substitute, I find cable to be less reliable, of a lesser quality, and with poor service (outages).
However I find the OTA stations (meaning major networks) to carry little of interest and watered down programming to the point of making movies almost unrecognizable. As far as TV over the Internet or Internet Television the bandwidth in general is just too small to give widespread coverage with full screen images even on the 22, 19 or even 17" screens, at least in real time. Given a couple hours on a 5 meg connection you can download a reasonably good program. Maybe in the future, but so far I've seen little to impress me.

I have Satellite, OTA, and cable here. Cable is for high speed internet that came as a package with basic cable stations. IF I need the local news I do get that OTA. However be they movies, documentaries, music, or reasonably interesting programs they come from satellite.

If ABC, CBS, NBC and FOX disappeared tomorrow it would likely take me a month or two before I'd notice.

[Dale]

I have read the comments up to this point and find what is a very universal trait. We all presume the markets are going to be as we envisage them now. We all are quite ethnocentric in our views quite like this nation of ours when seeking political harmony with other nations. Marketing teaches above all that we are not one group of people all having the same desires and wants. We are as diverse as the plant life on earth and everyone in this country has as much right to influence the use of spectrum as does another. Ed wrote this article as a result of being in communication with several broadcasters who had come to the conclusions represented in his articles.

One thing seldom recalled by the public, but yet is THE law, is that a television station has no obligation what-so-ever to telecast over its newly assigned digital airwaves any HDTV. A station has a legal obligation only to replicate the analog services on one of the digital channels which it can carve out of the 6Mz spectrum alloted to it. That means a television station can chop up that spectrum into four or five 480i resolution channels with programming fit for a segment of their audience. One sub-channel may be carrying Hispanic programming while another is Asian and a third is Arabic and another directed to handheld devices receiving music or news. I don't agree with the vision that produces this kind of mixed use, but you know I am fast becoming a minority in this nation. I am certainly not 16 running around all day with an iPod or Zune or any other hand held video contraption. Market forces will shape the future more than your fist pounding. Be sure you are part of the market studies and being represented. Take our survey and be heard! That is about all any of us can do. Picket the streets and rage at the moon as long as you like, but until you effect a change in the FCC ruling, you are not going to get any guarantee that HDTV will be sent to your antenna or if it is today that it will continue. In all practicality I will say that those stations already investing in HDTV equipment are doing so because they either want to do that as a public servant or they think it is the best use and business for the spectrum under their management. As patrons we can impact all this by honoring their sponors. _Dale Cripps

[Dale]

Keep in mind that there is no legal condition that mandates broadcasters to send to you HDTV. The federal mandate is to go to digital with at least one program equal to what was dropped in analog and of the same technical quality as was the analog service. We see more evidence in the National Association of Broadcasters' press release below that Ed is on the right track.


November 12, 2007

NAB TO HELP FUND OPEN MOBILE VIDEO COALITION

NAB Board Approves $750K Allocation to Advance Mobile DTV Technology --


WASHINGTON, DC - Underscoring NAB's continued support to bring broadcast DTV service to mobile and handheld devices, the NAB Board of Directors allocated $750,000 to the Open Mobile Video Coalition (OMVC) during the trade group's October Board meeting.

"Accelerating the development and implementation of mobile digital broadcast television is crucial to the future of broadcast TV and will provide viewers with an additional platform to receive our high-value content," said ION Media Networks President and CEO Brandon Burgess, who is leading the effort.

The Open Mobile Video Coalition represents 422 commercial TV stations and 361 public stations. At NAB's June meeting, the NAB Television Board of Directors unanimously passed a motion to actively support the efforts of the OMVC.

"NAB is actively working to ensure a bright and vibrant future for broadcasters," said NAB President and CEO David K. Rehr. "The digital era of broadcast TV will bring a plethora of options for both broadcasters and viewers, and NAB's financial commitment to the OMVC is an important step in furthering that goal."

More information about the Open Mobile Video Coalition can be found at www.openmobilevideo.com.