Digital Television Now!
- Posted by: Joel Johnson
- on January 27, 2009 at 9:30 am
Boing Boing’s Joel Johnson on why we should change the channel already
The televisions in 6.5 million American households will stop working when stations are forced to switch to the digital format—and I don’t care.
Although it’s been pushed back time and again (yesterday the Senate voted to postpone the transition deadline once more, from February 17th to June 12th), the switch from analog to digital television will happen eventually. When it does, valuable radio spectrum will be freed up for new uses, like “white space” wireless networking. (Think Super Wi-Fi.)
The Obama administration was behind the latest delay. It asked Congress to postpone the transition again, fearing that the 5.7 percent of American households without the proper digital-to-analog conversion boxes—boxes that can be had for free simply by requesting a voucher from the FCC—would wake up on the 17th, find themselves greeted by only static, and march in the streets.
Okay, no one is really afraid of that. At best, the switchover will cause those last few million people to get off their asses and go get a converter box. (They’ve had several years to do so, but who could blame them for getting distracted? Television has been pretty awesome over the last few years.) At worst, they’ll quit watching television—at least on their television.
It’s clear that digital is the future of television, not just in over-the-air broadcasts, but in direct delivery over the internet (Think YouTube and Hulu.) For some services, like Verizon’s FIOS and AT&T’s U-Verse fiber-optic internet service, television signals are pumped down the same digital pipes as your internet connection.
To be fair, many of those affected by the switchover are poor, disenfranchised, or disabled, and Consumers Union has raised concerns about the government’s coupon program. If we were talking about something critical to a full life, I’d feel a little more compassion. But it’s television. For every person that’s watching the news, 20 are watching American Idol. (As one of those 20, I bow my head.)
And wouldn’t you rather they have a chance at high-speed internet that could do more than just replace their television signal, but also provide them two-way access to the rest of the connected world?
Those analog television frequencies aren’t just going to sit unused. They’ve already been provisioned for a wide array of wireless data services that could very well revolutionize broadband connectivity in the United States. Some of the spectrum has been licensed by big, often evil corporations like Verizon and AT&T (I do not think all large corporations are evil, but telecommunication companies that thrive in large part due to taxpayer largess who also see fit to facilitate warrentless wiretapping of American citizens are pretty much the definition of corporate evil). But part of the spectrum being freed up will be released as “open,” potentially allowing all manner of devices and services to flourish.
Not to mention the white space devices that may, as part of a wide-ranging wireless service offered by Google or another technology company, provide the first serious competition to the wireless carriers for long-range wireless internet service.
The switchover to digital will inconvenience some, but it puts us on a path for real innovation in the future. In twenty years we’ll be kicking back watching all the television we want through the internet—not to mention all the other forms of entertainment we haven’t even invented yet—and wonder why we waited so long to make the switch.
UPDATE: The original text of this piece suggested that Congress had voted to postpone the transition to digital television. In fact, at this time, only the Senate has voted to postpone the transition. The piece has been updated to reflect this correction.
Joel Johnson writes about technology so much that he sometimes gets tired of it, but stays interested when gadgets and computers actually make life better. He is about to move to Eugene, Oregon with his dog and his favorite plants.
DISCUSSION: 917 Comments
If we were talking about something critical to a full life, I’d feel a little more compassion. But it’s television.And “Super wi-fi” is more important. Again, putting technology before human beings. The people (yes Joel, the horrible monsters who watch “American Idol” are actually humans) who are most affected by this changeover are the elderly, the disabled and poor. They’re going to lose simple over the air analog television which provides not only the national karaoke contest, but also bulletins about dangerous weather and other localized disasters (chemical spills, fires). Events where a tv bulletin can save lives. Not everyone is toting an iphone Joel, shocking as that may seem to a technophile. The 40 dollar credit has been nothing shy of a scam, it’s just rife with hucksters making money off people with fixed incomes being forced to “upgrade”. But hey, forget them right? They’re just watching game shows. They don’t count. Give me super-duper wi-fi so I can post to my tumblr and vlog in real time! Harry Shearer has been covering this for months on his “Le Show”.
Uhm. No, the adapter tuner isn’t “free”. The coupon is good for a $40 discount, but I have yet to see one offered for under $60. Also, those of us foolish enough to have gotten the coupons early may have misplaced them — and the gummint does not issue replacements.
Having said that, I’m still in favor of “just do it”.
Hey, I like American Idol!
As a response to steampoweredboy’s comment:There is no real reason to have a television. It is just there for entertainment. Anything you NEED can be received through other means. As a source of entertainment, you can listen to a radio or read a book. As a source of news or emergency information, the radio once again fills that need. Most local stations comment on accidents and they are required to participate in the Emergency Broadcast System too. So, I have no sympathy for someone who has not gotten their conveter box over the last three years we have been getting notices about this changeover.
It’s guys like you, Joel, that really get me mad. But, hey, if you want the switch over why don’t you buy me a converter box? I don’t see why I should have to give up a broadcast system that has worked pretty damn good for decades just for you to use your cell phone. I bet you’re the guy ahead of me on the road who can’t stop talking on the cell phone while he’s driving…
“At best, the switchover will cause those last few million people to get off their asses and go get a converter box. (They’ve had several years to do so, but who could blame them for getting distracted? Television has been pretty awesome over the last few years.)”Tell that to every person camped in a trailer in New Orleans who depends on broadcast TV. In person.No, seriously. There’s a few volunteers in N.O. who go door-to-door looking for people who can’t afford a DTV-ready set or box and didn’t have a valid mailing address to get a subsidy coupon during the eligibility period.
Your digital superiority complex and condescending tone make it sound like you don’t know anyone who uses an analog TV, or why they are reluctant to switch. Let’s not forget that, shockingly, there was once a generation of people who invested their money carefully in products they expected to last, without having to upgrade hardware to enable some vague, future, digital, Utopian “wide array
of services.” Perhaps more specifics of the “real innovation” you speak of might make me more sympathetic to your cause, but I doubt it.
No, television isn’t “necessary”. And neither is “super wi-fi” (a term which I pick at because it’s patently ridiculous) or wi-fi in general. I love the “I have no sympathy” comment. Of course not, because you’re not affected it’s easy to ignore. I work in public libraries and regularly deal with the so-called “digital divide” issue. Poor, older and disabled people rely on television (and to an extent radio) to connect to the wider world. They also read books, one is capable of consuming more than a single medium and still remain informed. Again, like Joel, don’t think of them as people who deserve your concern or empathy. They’re just getting in the way of true digital! Human speedbumps. This whole changeover has been handled poorly and, I believe, done to the cost benefit of the cable companies and manufacturers of these converter boxes, many of which are cheap garbage rushed to market.
Contemptuous or not though, the man has an important point. Obsolete technology can be allowed to hang on for a certain amount of time, but at some point accomodation for it has to stop. Gas stations no longer sell leaded gasoline. We no longer have hitching posts for horses, nor stableboys at inns.And while the ‘built to last’ argument has merit, any television that will be rendered obsolete is likely decades old. It has assuredly ‘lasted.’ I don’t think we buy ANYTHING that we use regularly and expect it to last our entire lives.Is NOW the time for the plug to be pulled on this old technology? That’s up for debate, but bear in mind that this is more than a question of whether to take down a hitching post – it’s about holding back the advancement of technology (and our culture). There are consequences if the airspace is being used redundantly, as it currently is.
So, people can’t afford the $20 bucks to buy a converter box (~$60 – $40 voucher), but they can afford to own a TV (and the electricity that it consumes)? Hah!The only way I could see that.. yes those people depend on analog TV’s for news. So why not let the stations switch to digital, then have an emergency station for weather/emergency broadcasts?There. Problem solved.
I thought only the Senate had passed a resolution to postpone the switch.And wasn’t the coupon program running out of money one of the major reasons for delaying?Anyway, I bought a Zenith DTT901 at my local electronics store for $40 with a government coupon. (I only had to pay the local sales tax.)
This is a great look at the consumer-oriented reasons why the switch is being postponed, but there’s a bit more to it than that. For a broadcasting station, each channel will cost them $20k-$40k to switch.-Pork Musket
Unlike analog, digital signals are all or nothing – so if you live in an area with poor reception, you aren’t getting a TV signal at all. That might not bother people who live in cities (like you, Joel?) but it certainly affects people in rural areas, who were able to get by with a slightly fuzzy analog signal. Now, they have nothing unless they get cable – and if they didn’t already have cable, it’s unlikely they had high-speed Internet either, so your improved Internet connectivity will do jack squat for them. And wireless – if they can’t even get a proper digital TV signal, how are they going to benefit from new wireless services?
Free converters? Where? Even with the coupon you have to pay $20-40(or more, plus taxes). And for what? For something you are forced to buy? No thanks. If the switch is goind to give us more channels (from which broadcasters are going to make more money) THEY should chip in to make this easier on the public. By the way, I just can’t for the life of me imagine an 80 year-old man getting the wiring right, less programming the damn thing.The whole thing is stupid.
“boxes that can be had for free simply by requesting a voucher from the FCC” WRONG. That program already ran out of money weeks ago, there’s now a waiting list. Likewise, many people got their coupons, went to the store and were unable to find a converter being sold; and now their coupons have expired and they need to request a replacement. Also, because of the $40 coupon, I’ve heard a lot of stores/manufacturers have been marking them up in price.
I live in a moderately large, upscale city and I can tell you that the converter boxes did not show up on my local store shelves until Nov/Dec of this past year. I would like digital to go ahead now. I can only get 1 channel (3 subs) on my new indoor antenna that I’ve hooked up to my digital TV (and I’ve dropped cable). But, the transition up to now has been nearly-bungled. I have no problem with President Obama not starting his presidency by pissing off a lot of people by cutting off their TVs. I think this extension has been a good compromise: more funding to the coupon program, the option to begin the conversion for stations that are ready for it, and a *short* extension to the hard cut off.
I come from a rural state with a lot of storms, and the television is a crucial part of receiving information about the path of tornadoes, 100 mph winds, and other severe and dangerous weather. The analog signal will become fuzzy during sever weather, but won’t disappear completely. A digital signal, on the other hand, ceases to exist under the least amount of stress, leaving these people to listen to the radio (which is probably on in the kitchen). So far, no HUGE deal, although not having the luxory of a live weather map is a little stressful when you’re worried about the safety of your kids. In this mostly rural state the analog spectrum will not be used for wi-fi, because no one makes money providing wi-fi at population densities that low. SO there’s no upside for these people. The government is mandating that they abandon there old equipment ( which works just fine, thank you), spend money on new equipment that probably won’t work when it needs to (see above), and then either get cable (not always an option – remember, they are rural area) or satellite (which doesn’t necessarily carry local weather or local channels). Which transforms a situation in which they got television for the price of a set ($50 – $300), or pay $50 a month, indefinitly, at the mercy of the local cable monoply. All because broadcasters faced a failure of capitalism, in that there was no way they could transition to digital and hold on to folks like yourself (who probably have already abandonded them for cable) while also keeping all the poor shlobs who use analog. They needed to use the government to force everyone to transition at the same time. And this was possible because the sort of people who should have been naturally annoyed with the broadcasters for using the government to do their dirty work are so desperate for super wi-fi (because they have to go into a coffee shop, now, and who needs the hastle?) that they will gladly – self-righteously even! – kick the downtrodden salt of the earth in the face. My question is this: who are the lazy, self-satisfied pricks who expect the government to fix their problems for them, the broadcasters and the upwardly mobile who need constant connectivity, or the people who grow food, work in our remaining industries and steward are wild areas whose needs, though easily met, are too simple and unprofitable to be worth the former’s time?
I have found $40 adapters, effectively free with the coupons. I’ve also posted reviews of multiple converters, a more technical Q & A, and tips in my technical blog at tinyurl.com/dtv-pdx tinyurl.com/dtv-qanda and tinyurl.com/dtv-ready …. to be followed by several recycled-material DIY UHF antenna designs. K7AAY, Portland OR (the home of America’s first commercial UHF station).
OBTW, no one has mentioned the greater electrical efficiency of digital transmission over analog; digital stations are significantly greener than analog stations. When combined with the ability to distribute more signal in less bandwidth, and the freeing up of more bandwidth for public service and other uses, I think it merits the change, even if it’s for a product many reader here find beneath them. K7AAY, Portland OR
I can’t believe someone from BoingBoing wrote this opinon piece.We have a 29″ Pioneer SD-T292, [1990, multi-system, s-video, composite], which works just fine, with an antenna, inside my roof. 4 networks and PBS for free, anything else is available via our fantastic public library system or online, for free.We borrowed a converter box for testing and don’t get PBS. PBS, think about that. We’re being forced to buy a box to get FREE BROADCASTS. It doesn’t matter if they coupons bring the price down to just $10, we shouldn’t have to pay at all.Next we’ll all be forced to buy digital radios when they decide to take away analog radio.danatvoiceofirondotcom
Congress did not postpone the deadline. The Senate voted to postpone the deadline, but nothing is decided until the House concurs and the President signs the bill.Left completely unaddressed here is the fact that the government ran out of vouchers. Those few million people are not “sitting on their asses” — they’re waiting for the financial assistance that the government promised, that was paid for out of the spectrum auction proceeds, but which is not forthcoming. That problem has to be fixed before the analog signals can be switched off, and that is the reason for the postponement.
Try being poor.FAIL.
Those few million people are not “sitting on their asses” — they’re waiting for the financial assistance that the government promised, that was paid for out of the spectrum auction proceeds, but which is not forthcoming.They haven’t been sitting on their asses for three years??? That’s like saying sorry I didn’t get you a Christmas gift this year..Oh, yes, I knew it was coming..but I ran out of money and was waiting for Santa Claus to bring you one.
“…and wonder why we waited so long to make the switch.” Now if we could only make the switch the metric system, then we’d really be a smart nation.
-Brian Hawkins, Redondo Beach, CA
We did it! http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/28/digital-tv-transition-delays-fails-to-pass-in-house/ Also, I really appreciated everyone’s discussion, even if you were calling me a jerk
I’m poor. Not welfare poor, but there are months when after my partner and I have paid our rent, our car payment, our insurance, and bought groceries we have very little left. Add to that the slowing economy and I’m losing more hours at work. I also live in a very rural area, with lots of trees. I also happen to hate commercials, so in my house, we don’t have cable. We prefer to spend our precious extra money to have internet access. Usually, we can watch any cable show we want for free and minus all commercials. Now, however, we have to invest in the converter boxes for our two sets and most likely, due to our rural, tree filled locale, a costly exterior antenna. I used to get to mock American Idol contestants from the comfort of my own couch for free and now you want me to pay for it? I understand the switch has to be made, but some people, like me and my partner will have to save up for it. I’m going to be totally without network TV for at least a month. Great. Thanks, guys… if we could have done this switch a few years back, maybe it would not be quite so painful.