----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
This is close to the precise case as you have stated it. None of the
broadcasters enjoy two power bills and double maintenance. They also agonize
over the fact that local retailers will NOT display their digital
programming to illustrate their OTA HD capabilities (the retailers will
typically not show local OTA programming fearing that a competitive
electronics store's advertisement may appear on their own in-store display
sets). The cable "must carry" issues are thorniest because the cable
operators don't want to carry all of what the broadcasters can transmit,
i.e. multicasting, because the content that could be carried via
multicasting by all stations in a given area could be sufficiently
competitive to cut deeply into their (cable's) first tier bread and butter
audience. This has given more incentive for cable to resist the
broadcasters' request to "carry all" and to advance their own "triple play"
strategy, which none-but-cable AND telephone can so far deliver effectively.
Having said all of this, there is also the view among major broadcast groups
that the old spectrum should not be returned to the FCC because a new
technical threat or opportunity could easily arise which also needs
transition spectrum if that threat is to be met (ust as it has been with the
present iteration of DTV) or that opportunity (like MPEG 4 added to the ATSC
standard). This position is diminished (or rises) in direct proportion to
the perceived importance of broadcasting by our society. While the public
may place less and less importance upon local broadcasting, the politicians
still believe that elections are won or lost with their presence on local
broadcasting (and not cable or satellite) channels and they will do nothing
to endanger that condition.
Dale
> ----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
>
> So many keep saying that the broadcasters are hoarding the spectrum. I
> think a lot of broadcasters would be most happy to turn off their analog
> transmitters and save themselves lots of money spent on power to run that
> second transmitter if they knew that they wouldn't lose their audience.
> But there's no means right now for them to get their signal to all of
> their audience with just their digital transmitter.
>
> The majority of the public still don't have digital receivers, most of the
> digital stations aren't carried on cable and none are carried by DirecTV
> or Dish. If cable and satellite dropped the analog signals and replaced
> them with their digital counter parts, then we'd be making a major
> headway. Until that happens, though, the broadcasters will not want to
> turn off their analog... and for good reason. Right now those analog
> transmitters are still their life blood.
>
> Larry
> San Francisco
>
> - - -
>
>> Message-ID: <002601c5b08c$51cd0d70$6400a8c0@bc1>
>> Reply-To: "B Car" <
[email protected]>
>> From: "B Car" <
[email protected]>
>> Subject: Re: TV in Emergencies
>> Date: Sat, 3 Sep 2005 09:35:16 -0400
>>
>> Dale, I hope you are not suggesting that "ALL" (commercial) broadcasts be
>> pre-empted by emergency broadcasts for the duration of the emergency?
>> While I can see the benefit of getting urgent, official communications to
>> the public - providing critical, lifesaving information, at the same time
>> I'm troubled if this means the Government - (ie: FEMA - Homeland
>> Security, etc) would become the sole source of information for the
>> duration of the crisis.
>>
>> Take this current - absolutely unbelievable and totally incomprehensible
>> disaster that continues to worsen hour by hour even 6 days after the
>> initial impact! - it is only through the eye-witness exposure by the news
>> organizations' "on-the-scene" reporters and camera people, that are
>> enabling the rest of us to SEE and HEAR the harsh reality of the"TRUE"
>> conditions of suffering these people are experiencing. A comparison of
>> what we are seeing and hearing in real-time, with some of the comments
>> and evaluations of "some" of those in authority, it is frightening to
>> think of having all communications restricted to that information which
>> "certain officials" deemed appropriate to tell us!
>>
>> Believe me, I'm sincerely trying, to the best of my ability, NOT to make
>> any political inferences on any side...
>> Yet the horror of what I'm observing with my own eyes and ears (granted
>> through the lens and microphone of the "Media") is beyond rational
>> explanation... What we are witnessing compels any sentient being to
>> question, "WHY?" (and) "What the Hell are they thinking ... and doing?"
>> I'm not interested in blame; I just want to understand. Next time it may
>> be my family and friends! If the only information we could receive came
>> from Emergency Management, we would be as much in the dark as those
>> helpless people in New Orleans! There would be no questions, since no
>> one would know anything, except that which "someone" decided was safe to
>> tell us.
>>
>> There are two distinct communication needs during any major crisis... (1)
>> The immediate need to communicate with those directly involved - victims
>> and first responders; and (2) all the rest of the public not directly
>> affected, but who may have family and friends in the area. There's the
>> "need to know" 1st priority, and the "want to know" 2nd priority.
>> Having gone through a couple of hurricanes and tornados - but thank God ,
>> nothing on a level compare to this! - a battery powered radio was the
>> only link we had to the outside world, for many days, and longer nights.
>> One irony following a hurricane that left us without electricity for 15
>> days, was listening to the simulcast of the local TV station on our
>> battery powered radio. It was maddening to hear the TV commentators
>> discussing scenes relating to their video broadcasts, which we could not
>> view! (Immediately after the return to normalcy, we bought a small
>> battery powered TV - for "next time!")
>>
>> Sorry, if I went beyond the proper scope of the TIPS; but in my 65+
>> years, I've never been so horrified, moved, angry, bewildered, nor
>> witnessed any event that equals this nightmare! You know, this is the
>> first time since getting involved with HDTV, that I really don't have any
>> desire or need to view an event in High Definition. I doubt that
>> amplification of these pictures would change anything, for better or
>> worse.
>>
>> Politically correct or not, my (and my family's) thoughts and prayers are
>> with all those people in the three affected states, and with their
>> families and loved ones. May God's Blessings flow to them, in an even
>> greater deluge than the winds and waters that have so mercilessly torn
>> loose and washed away, life as they knew it.
>>
>> Bob C
>>
[email protected]
>>
http://HDTVInfoPort.com
>> HDTV Demystified!
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: Dale Cripps
>> To: HDTV Magazine
>> Sent: Saturday, September 03, 2005 3:34 AM
>> Subject: Re: TV in Emergencies
>>
>>
>> ----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
>>
>> While it is true that the broadcast spectrum is best for security
>> purposes
>> and it is true that broadcasters are holding that spectum in their
>> inventory, it is also true that a major emergency which is more
>> important
>> than anything else that can be commercially broadcast can occur. It
>> would be
>> an easy matter to have an alert system that when blazing caused the
>> broadcaster's analog transmitters to go off and the homeland security
>> devices fire up using those same frequencies. That would be a shared
>> use of
>> the frequencies.
>>
>> Dale
>>
>>
>>
>> -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
>> Version: 7.0.344 / Virus Database: 267.10.18/89 - Release Date:
>> 9/2/2005 ------------------------------ Message-ID:
>> <03b301c5b0a2$118422b0$0402a8c0@gateway> From: "Dale E. Cripps"
>> <
[email protected]> Subject: Re: TV in Emergencies Date: Sat, 3 Sep
>> 2005 09:10:57 -0700 And all of the information you have received is from
>> over -the-air services? None of what I have seen is. This idea I
>> proffered was a trial balloon and in private back channel talk I would
>> say it has burst with the prick of more reasoned experience, but one
>> thing we should realize is that these broadcast frequencies are not going
>> to be easy to recover. Politically speaking, the people we see so
>> devastated are being re-empowered politically, and the idea of now
>> ordering their TV service to be discontinued in order to sell spectrum to
>> services they are least likely to buy or use is more political
>> difficulty. One has to be neither republican
> nor democrat to see that many decision made at all governmental levels are
> not in the spirit of sheltering the people but rather for special
> interests. One can even argue that progress is dependant upon overriding
> an ignorant public interest of today for what someone "smarter" foresees
> as a "better" public interest for tomorrow. Respected commentators are now
> saying that this disaster is revealing how far away from the notion of
> public sheltering we have come and a shift back to that is inevitable.
> That shift, if it occurs, will make the challenge of shutting down
> existing TV services more difficult. I think where public safety is at
> stake, even as in the case with homeland security communications, some
> answer must be made that will not upset the least enfranchised of our
> citizens. It won't fly today. Perhaps we will forget all of what we have
> seen tomorrow and even claim that the people are and have always been
> sheltered in the love of their government, but that is not the tone of the
> articles being written today. But of course, this is nothing definitive
> being said here, just some thoughts generated by the circumstances of our
> times.... Dale ----- Original Message ----- From: "B Car"
> <
[email protected]> To: "HDTV Magazine"
> <
[email protected]> Sent: Saturday, September 03, 2005 6:35
> AM Subject: Re: TV in Emergencies
>>
>>>> ----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
>>>>
>>>> Dale, I hope you are not suggesting that "ALL"
>>>> (commercial) broadcasts be pre-empted by emergency
>>>> broadcasts for the duration of the emergency?
>>>> While I can see the benefit of getting urgent,
>>>> official communications to the public - providing
>>>> critical, lifesaving information, at the same time
>>>> I'm troubled if this means the Government - (ie:
>>>> FEMA - Homeland Security, etc) would become the
>>>> sole source of information for the duration of the
>>>> crisis.
>>>>
>>>> Take this current - absolutely unbelievable and
>>>> totally incomprehensible disaster that continues
>>>> to worsen hour by hour even 6 days after the
>>>> initial impact! - it is only through the
>>>> eye-witness exposure by the news organizations'
>>>> "on-the-scene" reporters and camera people, that
>>>> are enabling the rest of us to SEE and HEAR the
>>>> harsh reality of the"TRUE" conditions of suffering
>>>> these people are experiencing. A comparison of
>>>> what we are seeing and hearing in real-time, with
>>>> some of the comments and evaluations of "some" of
>>>> those in authority, it is frightening to think of
>>>> having all communications restricted to that
>>>> information which "certain officials" deemed
>>>> appropriate to tell us!
>>>>
>>>> Believe me, I'm sincerely trying, to the best of
>>>> my ability, NOT to make any political inferences
>>>> on any side...
>>>> Yet the horror of what I'm observing with my own
>>>> eyes and ears (granted through the lens and
>>>> microphone of the "Media") is beyond rational
>>>> explanation... What we are witnessing compels any
>>>> sentient being to question, "WHY?" (and) "What
>>>> the Hell are they thinking ... and doing?" I'm
>>>> not interested in blame; I just want to
>>>> understand. Next time it may be my family and
>>>> friends! If the only information we could receive
>>>> came from Emergency Management, we would be as
>>>> much in the dark as those helpless people in New
>>>> Orleans! There would be no questions, since no
>>>> one would know anything, except that which
>>>> "someone" decided was safe to tell us.
>>>>
>>>> There are two distinct communication needs during
>>>> any major crisis... (1) The immediate need to
>>>> communicate with those directly involved - victims
>>>> and first responders; and (2) all the rest of the
>>>> public not directly affected, but who may have
>>>> family and friends in the area. There's the "need
>>>> to know" 1st priority, and the "want to know" 2nd
>>>> priority.
>>>> Having gone through a couple of hurricanes and
>>>> tornados - but thank God , nothing on a level
>>>> compare to this! - a battery powered radio was the
>>>> only link we had to the outside world, for many
>>>> days, and longer nights. One irony following a
>>>> hurricane that left us without electricity for 15
>>>> days, was listening to the simulcast of the local
>>>> TV station on our battery powered radio. It was
>>>> maddening to hear the TV commentators discussing
>>>> scenes relating to their video broadcasts, which
>>>> we could not view! (Immediately after the return
>>>> to normalcy, we bought a small battery powered
>>>> TV - for "next time!")
>>>>
>>>> Sorry, if I went beyond the proper scope of the
>>>> TIPS; but in my 65+ years, I've never been so
>>>> horrified, moved, angry, bewildered, nor witnessed
>>>> any event that equals this nightmare! You know,
>>>> this is the first time since getting involved with
>>>> HDTV, that I really don't have any desire or need
>>>> to view an event in High Definition. I doubt that
>>>> amplification of these pictures would change
>>>> anything, for better or worse.
>>>>
>>>> Politically correct or not, my (and my family's)
>>>> thoughts and prayers are with all those people in
>>>> the three affected states, and with their families
>>>> and loved ones. May God's Blessings flow to them,
>>>> in an even greater deluge than the winds and
>>>> waters that have so mercilessly torn loose and
>>>> washed away, life as they knew it.
>>>>
>>>> Bob C
>>>>
[email protected]
>>>>
http://HDTVInfoPort.com
>>>> HDTV Demystified!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>> From: Dale Cripps
>>>> To: HDTV Magazine
>>>> Sent: Saturday, September 03, 2005 3:34 AM
>>>> Subject: Re: TV in Emergencies
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
>>>>
>>>> While it is true that the broadcast spectrum is
>>>> best for security purposes
>>>> and it is true that broadcasters are holding
>>>> that spectum in their
>>>> inventory, it is also true that a major
>>>> emergency which is more important
>>>> than anything else that can be commercially
>>>> broadcast can occur. It would be
>>>> an easy matter to have an alert system that when
>>>> blazing caused the
>>>> broadcaster's analog transmitters to go off and
>>>> the homeland security
>>>> devices fire up using those same frequencies.
>>>> That would be a shared use of
>>>> the frequencies.
>>>>
>>>> Dale
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>
>
>
>
> To unsubscribe please click:
[email protected]
>
> To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted that same
> day) send an email to:
>
[email protected]
To unsubscribe please click:
[email protected]
To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted that same day) send an email to:
[email protected] 