COFDM vs. 8-VSB: A Call for Reconciliation on the DTV Modulation Debate

Has the time come more than ever for reconciliation? For this nation to move forward many of our differences must be set aside and a tight focus taken upon our most common objectives. This trying presidential election has come to a close, and I, for one, want to begin a similar closure on the crippling debate we have long suffered--the modulation debate for DTV--at least for this nation.

I realize that closure may come only after still-more exhaustive debate, perhaps strong actions taken, as did Al Gore in his attempt to recount and/or count the votes. So be it. Let's scream at each other until horse, pound our fist until raw, shake the rafters with eloquent speeches, and when that energy is spent, let's look together as the colleagues we are at what the price of a non-decision for us and our nation is.

I am in the debate too. I have no preference for either modulation scheme. I throw my hat in the ring fighting for "no delay." If COFDM forces can cause a zero delay in the roll out of HDTV with an inclusion or substitution at all levels, then for me the debate is over.

I realize that "time" is not the only concern. Some of you feel or know that your business is going to have some limits imposed on it by either system. Some want both. But these limitations must not be all that great, or there would be NO debate--just a REVOLUTION tossing off the loser without a further thought. If the answers were obvious to everyone, talk would end, paperwork would begin, new decrees from the FCC would be quickly be made, and we would all join hands to do our best for the transition. It is inevitable, we all must know, so the only thing left to do is make the very best out of it. That is a debate--how to make the best of it--I would welcome.

But that with which I sympathize most is the dilemma that those wanting to "maxamise" everything all-the-time labor under. It is a damn close and hard call. It may not be as close, nor mean as much to our nation as the outcome in our presidential elections, but it is still a close call and financially meaningful. If we can decide to govern our nation, however, after such a close call, we should be able to govern our industry, and our obligation to the public we serve as well, as our stockholders.

I know that for some COFDM favors your circumstances over the 8-VSB, at least in theory, and from tests. To others 8-VSB fits their environment and business objectives better. But is what "favors" you from one or the other mean enough to you to suppress the entire industry, and all of the benefits of DTV we have conjured up for the public? Is the greater good always centered about what you personally can gain? Or, is the greater good, the greatest good for all? After all, the only legitimate reason for this transition is to bring a better thing to life for the public. I refuse to accept the utterly cynical view that all of this transition to DTV is just about money. I know that HDTV is not the only product in DTV, and many other benefits are certain that are affordable and attractive to the general public even if HD is left only to the uppercrust. If we have motives at the core besides public service, we lose in the end like the monarch does who seeks his glory over that of his people. Like it or not, our stockholders must know and respect that you, at least in the broadcast field (receivers too) are ONLY public servants. Those using public airwaves are not only public servants, but use public assets to be so. Yes, you are granted money-making opportunities galore to compensate for that duty, but every real broadcaster I have ever met knows he or she is FIRST an unelected, privileged, and well-paid servant to the public. You owe it to me--a citizen-- and you owe it to every citizen in this nation, yourself included, to reconcile these differences.

I know that some of you have already swept this debate under the rug, saying, "It's subsided now, and the big issue is that there is not enough programming from those stingy broadcasters." If that were only true I would never find cause nor energy to write these words. This debate is both very real, and it is incredibly insidious. It is insidious because it causes market results that are then held up as proof-positive that we have taken the wrong turn.

I bring this message today with no thought of seeing closure tomorrow. I bring it only as a seed to hopefully grow in us until fruit-bearing. The MSTV/NAB test will be made public later in January. I trust that there will be enough information contained in that report to set a course for reconciliation. We cannot continue divided much longer without becoming abusers of our positions. We cannot continue on the horns of a dilemma and claim we are doing our job by just blaming someone else for our shortcomings. Superior men and women do not let things rot while still offering them for public consumption, which is the case we have today. No one knows what the future holds until this debate is settled with some a stamp upon it which all trust. And everyone, including myself, selling any part of this transition to an unsuspecting public will have to answer to a higher authority if and when we let it fail through indecision. We can begin on this very historic day to think "closure," or we may never get to it. If we do not achieve some means for clearing these obstructions for the DTV transition in the U.S,.it will be only an unearned kindness in our citizens that can shield the entire industry from public contempt, ridicule, and lasting resentment. I, for one, do not want to go to my grave knowing I played a role in what turns out to be a bitter joke--the promise of a great-new-good turned into a bad, rotten, stinking mess.

Well, that may be a bit overstated...but you get my drift.

Thank you.

Dale Cripps
HDTV