Hi, This is Reed Hundt. How are
you?
Good morning Mr. Chairman. I am very happy to have this
opportunity to
talk with you.We haven't spoken in awhile. In that interim an
accumulation of things have stacked up that we would like to discuss
now, if you have a moment? Go right ahead.
I think the overarching question is: How do you see HDTV
from within the
Commission? Well, I don't have a high definition television set yet.
I always consider this to be digital television because
high definition
is one, but only one, of the many different features of this new
transmission standard. So, what we need to do is to complete our work in
building an industry consensus behind the transmission standard. Saul
Shapiro is taking the leadership here. He will be meeting with the
industry representatives for coming to the final stages of the consensus
building over the next few weeks. I am hopeful that in the month of May
we will have been able to put the Grade A stamp of acceptability on the
transmission standard.
Would that be a result of the forthcoming NPRM? Yes. The
Notice would
ask: Is there anything wrong with this standard? We hope the Notice, in
fact, meets with widespread acceptance. We are trying to get this
acceptance in advance.
We all know that there are some who would like to adopt
this standard
for purposes apart from broadcasting, and they may have some difference
with it. How is that to be handled?
It is a Notice. So if people have any disagreements they
get a chance to
write it in the record and tell us what they think. But I don't
anticipate any serious controversy about the standard. "Standard"
means
a million different things when you get down to the engineering. This is
a very technical set of issues and it is important that knowledgeable
people will examine it.
But, I don't see any large policy questions, except one=D1don't
you want
broadcast to be able to continue to explore the flexible uses of this
new transmission technology? I would think the answer is quite
obviously, yes. That should be obvious, but that would be a huge change
here at the Commission since we always raised major impediments to
invention within the scope of the NTSC signals. Even now we have a
backlog of proposals to use the NTSC signal for delivering data. I think
that is ridiculous. Why should the Commission bar evolution and
innovations within a standard?
Is it then no longer important to the Commission whether
the channel is
used for a single HDTV broadcast or any variations that may have been
proposed and talked about? That question has nothing to do with the
standard.
Some are puzzled that you have spoken on several occasions
about the
multiplexing options that few in broadcasting, if any, have intention of
doing. Perhaps Fox said it a year or so ago. Or what Bob Wright said
yesterday! In Communications Daily he said 5 or 6 channels. But look, if
they are accurate, and if everyone is going to do two high definition
formats with their 6 MHz, so be it. That is up to the marketplace! I
hope you express this to everyone. I think that people should do what
they want to do with this invention. I wouldn't think that Henry Ford
would say, "I have invented the model T, but you can only use it to
drive from your home to work. I don't want you to ever go anywhere else
with it. Well, I am not interested in telling anybody what to do with
this invention. I am in favor of small government, deregulation, and a
market-oriented approach, and letting marketers and engineers together
decide how to make the most out of this wonderful invention. In any
event what we are talking about has nothing to do with the standard.
It is amazing to me. Because people are taking enormous
steps to try to
convey to you a message that they are devoted to HDTV, thinking that has
importance in your decision making processes.
The remainder of the interview is available by subscribing to the HDTV Newsletter
Dale Cripps
April 4, 1996