FCC Chairman Reed Hundt on HDTV, Digital Television Standards, and Broadcast Flexibility

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