There is a hearing in Washington today with the House Telecommunications Subcommittee. It's about the DTV transition and cutting off the analog signals. Legislation is being crafted that seeks a specific date for shutting down analog services so the spectrum can be returned and reassigned by way of auctions to some presumably "new" highest bidder. As with any complex issue there is never an easy answer that fully satisfies all, but the one party that must be satisfied above all others is the public. As other hearing panelists send us their papers we will publish them here in our HDTV Magazine blog. Let me urge you to comment on anything you have read from these panelist. You are the consumers and they say you are the ones who have to be protected above all else. Do you want to be protected by any government measure? Is it needed? Could the analog channels be discontinued today and leave you wihtout a negative consequence? Let me hear from you Here is one thing you can take to the bank: The broadcast community is motivated to conclude the transition as there are power bills and maintenance cost for the "extra" channel of bandwidth now under their management. http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story.asp?guid=%7BCC3E6C94%2D1CEE%2D44A0%2DAE87%2DEDC264A9DC07%7D&dist=rss&siteid=mktw Testimony of Mr. James Yager CEO of Barrington Broadcasting On behalf of NAB Before the House Telecommunications Subcommittee 5.26.05 Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Mr. Markey, Members of the Subcommittee. I'm Jim Yager, CEO of Barrington Broadcasting, which owns and operates four television stations in Michigan, Illinois and Missouri. Today, there are nearly 1,500 local television stations on-air in digital. Let me be very clear: all broadcasters -- large and small -- want to see the DTV transition brought to a successful close. As an industry, we have consistently said that this transition is first and foremost about consumers - your constituents. . . our viewers. Many good things can be said about the staff draft in this regard. For instance, labeling as "soon to be obsolete" the 20 million analog-only sets that manufacturers plan to sell this year. . . is the right thing to do. . . for consumers. Accelerating the FCC's tuner integration deadline is a good thing. . . for consumers. Whether discussing the benefits of DTV, talking about cable carriage. . . or discussing over-the-air TV sets. . . the central piece of the equation must always be consumers. In that vein, let me recommend a few modifications to the staff draft that would better protect consumers' interests. First and foremost, protecting over-the-air viewers must be a priority. The GAO has said that there are 21 million households in this country that rely exclusively upon over-the-air reception. That is more homes than are located in the states of Texas. . . Michigan. . . Massachusetts. . . Mississippi. . . Nebraska. . . New Mexico. . . Oregon. . . Tennessee and Wyoming combined. Under the draft's hard date, viewers will either lose their television service or have to pay for converter boxes. . . or even worse. . . subscribe to pay TV. . . all just to keep something they currently get for free. Many of these viewers are among society's most economically vulnerable demographics. Low-income senior citizens are disproportionately dependent upon off-air reception. African American households are 22% more likely to rely exclusively on over-the-air reception. Forty-three percent of Spanish-language households rely solely on over-the-air television. Moreover, when you count the second and third sets in the bedrooms and kitchens of cable and satellite homes, there are 73 million sets in this country that risk being rendered obsolete by a premature hard date. Some on this Committee have recognized that turning off these TV sets will create a firestorm of consumer outrage. But even setting aside the political considerations, all of us here share an obligation to protect over-the-air television viewers. Local television broadcasters are ready to work with you to achieve that goal. Consumers' interests should also drive the cable carriage discussion. Broadcasters commend the draft's authors for trying to tackle down conversion. The draft will allow cable subscribers with digital sets to enjoy the benefits of DTV. That's good for consumers. Allowing cable systems to down convert as long as they also carry stations' digital signals will mean that subscribers with only analog sets won't be be cut off. That's good for consumers. Under the current language, all must-carry stations in a market would be treated the same in terms of down conversion. That's good for consumers. But, the draft leaves room for a scenario in which pay TV services could essentially withhold smaller stations- religious stations, Spanish language stations - from consumers who have not yet purchased DTV equipment. We see great promise in this section of the draft. However, it does require modest clarification so that all stations in a market - large and small - are treated equally with regards to down conversion. Finally, let me touch upon multi-cast cable carriage. Today, 540 local television stations are using DTV to multi-cast and better serve their communities with enhanced programming options. These free services are the beginning of a whole series of new offerings that will evolve to benefit consumers. . . . But only if cable does not withhold them. Should cable operators block consumers from receiving this programming, it will be difficult for stations to justify the risk and costs of developing these services. . . and the potentials of multi-casting will not be realized. This is not a capacity issue. Cable carriage of these services would occupy no more capacity than carrying a single, high-definition, digital channel. After all, 6 megahertz. . . is 6 megahertz. . . is 6 megahertz. The Committee should protect consumers by adopting a strong multi-cast. . . must-carry rule. Mr. Chairman, let me close by reiterating that the draft is a good starting point. As the Committee moves forward, local broadcasters are ready to work with you to develop a DTV policy that ends the transition. . . that clears the analog spectrum. . . that protects the interests of over-the-air television viewers. . . and, ultimately enhances television for all consumers.