When Will Analog TVs Go Dark?

November 15, 2005 By

Congress is moving toward a deadline for the end of analog broadcasting.

The first commentary I ever wrote for this website was on what I called ?the DTV heist.? That was my characterization of the broadcast television industry holding onto its analog spectrum while occupying a fat new slice of the digital spectrum. Well, the end may finally be in sight for analog broadcasting. Maybe.

Because the planned analog-spectrum auction would bring in big bucks, the analog cutoff is moving through Congress as part of the budget package. The Senate recently voted 52-47 to approve legislation that would set a deadline of April 7, 2009 for the final transition from analog to digital TV broadcasting. One comic sidelight is that the senators were so worried about basketball fans missing the March Madness that they moved the analog cutoff from the year-end dates usually bandied about to just after the end of the college hoops tournament.

Of course, just because the Senate approves a bill, that doesn?t necessarily mean it?ll clear both houses and be signed by the president. The House Energy Commerce Committee has approved, by 33-17, an alternate bill that would set a deadline of December 31, 2008.

You can bet that both houses of Congress will hotly debate the analog cutoff when it comes up for a floor vote. If this isn?t a red-flag issue, nothing is. Imagine the pandemonium that will break out when Congress tells the American public that the vast majority of their TVs are about to become obsolete.

Interest groups will get in on the action. First of all, there are the broadcasters themselves. Once in awhile they get behind a specific date for giving up their analog spectrum but later they always conveniently forget about it. They originally promised to give it up on December 31st, 2006. That date was confirmed by loophole-ridden legislation in 1996 and has been ignored ever since.

These guys don?t want to vacate their analog spectrum in 2008 or 2009 or ever. They dread the prospect of losing even a small percentage of their viewers in the shuffle. And whether poor folks will ante up for new sets is only one of their worries.

Another one is that analog and digital broadcasting have different dispersion patterns. Analog degrades as the signal weakens, while digital usually looks great right up to the point where it fails altogether. In fairness, it?s hard to blame the broadcasters for fretting about that, though I enjoy getting my stiletto into them anyway as payback for the garbage they shovel over the public airwaves.

Then there are the consumer and public interest groups. Normally I regard these people as my natural allies but I don?t think they?re up to speed on digital broadcasting. One egregious example is Commercial Alert, which in late 2004 fired off a letter to Congress castigating the Federal Communications Commission for promoting the DTV transition. Expect these people and their blood brothers to run around the room in circles screaming ?your TV is going dark! Your TV is going dark! Your TV is going dark!?

What will happen to analog TVs is a legitimate issue. It cries out for solutions, not sensationalism. What has to happen is that set-top boxes must be provided to convert the new digital signals to the old analog format so that no one is forced to buy a new TV unless they want a better picture. The Senate committee-approved bill provides $3 billion to assist low-income viewers. The House bill allows only $990 million. Since the sale of the analog spectrum will bring in billions of dollars, Congress will have some money to play with, so while set-top box subsidies are not a done deal at this stage, they are a distinct possibility.

How much the spectrum auction will bring in is uncertain. Estimates have run as high as $70 billion though more recent numbers run as low as $10 billion. I find it interesting that the amount has suddenly shrunk now that the auctions are a few scant years away from happening. I?m sure it has nothing to do with sweetheart deals between our incorruptible government and the corporations eyeing the spectrum.

Another issue is spectrum for emergency responders?your local police, fire department, etc. Sen. John McCain has made numerous efforts in this legislative season and past ones to expedite the transition so that our heroes will not have communications problems when terrorists attack or a hurricane rips up a state or two. The Senate commerce committee rejected his latest attempt by a vote of 5-17. However, in the bill that went to the Senate floor, the committee did provide $1.25 billion for emergency communications and a national alert system.

Does the fate of the analog airwaves really matter much any more? After all, the majority of us now get our television from cable or satellite. The original DTV-transition plan called for the end of analog broadcasting only after 85 percent of the current audience in a given market is reached by digital signals. Arguably, most of us are there already. But 15 percent of the viewing public is still a big chunk?more than big enough to swing an election?so our politicians will tread warily. Do you think your great-aunt in the boonies wants to hook up a set-top box to her TV? How about all those bedroom sets your kids are watching that are still fed by antennas?

What do you think, folks? Are you a gung-ho HDTV viewer who couldn?t care less about an analog television broadcast system invented in the 1940s? Or does the prospect of your analog TV going dark?or being forced to acquire a set-top companion?really alarm you? I?m as interested in what you think as your elected officials are. Well, almost as interested.

___________________________________________________

Mark Fleischmann is the audio editor of Home Theater and the author of Practical Home Theater (http://www.quietriverpress.com/).

Showing 8 comments

jim keefe at 11:29am 2nd October 2007 why don't they tell us where to get the coupons for the convertors?
Night Eagle at 12:48am 29th December 2006 I believe strongly that this digital conversion was done not in the interest of the public good at all and that the FCC as well as Congress has overstepped the bounds it's given authority. The question of who profits from this madness is at issue. I sure many consumers will use there analog sets as CCTV monitors, a growing trend in home security, but most analog sets will end up contaminating the local landfill. The real bugger for me is not being able to use my 1960's black and white TV in my garage.
Dave Wilson at 3:42pm 22nd December 2005 Where are the convertor boxes for analog Televisions?

I would have thought that people could at least buy an expensive one by now.

mrpisces_2000@yahoo.com
digitaltv_guy at 6:05am 6th December 2005 The biggest problem I see is that there is not enough consumer education going on. People are out there buying analog tv sets RIGHT NOW, sometimes fairly expensive ones, and they do not realize that it will go dark in 3 years. A $50 box is not a big expense, and maybe that makes it ok, but it still bugs me that not much is being done to educate people. I guess maybe it can't be done until the date has been fully approved. Oh and btw, there _will_ be high quality $50 converter boxes available, especially by the time analog is shut down. Moore's Law pretty much guarantees it. 8-VSB performs quite well, provided the receiver has plenty of digital processing capability.
JEROME FROM SOUTH JERSEY at 4:49pm 2nd December 2005 Call me what you will, but I personally am sick of feeling the noose tighten every time I pick up my remote. Living in New Jersey, I have recently been made aware of yet another price increase by COMCAST. 2% - 9% this time for basic cable which in my opinion is already priced much to high! Although I love my CNN and a handful of other cable shows, I feel increasingly disturbed by having to pay a monopoly more and more for re-runs, the countless number of shows of no substance - and especially, paying for the ever increasing number of commercials that I never agreed to pay a fee to have to watch! I am seriously considering dropping cable. We certainly do have many other entertainment options that cost a lot less and that are certainly more enriching.
I agree with ACME's post:
"Lastly - we as Americans "own" the airwaves - so we deserve to have Over The Air free TV. That's what the advertisers are paying for us to have. Even those without Cable or Satellite reception are still valuable consumers - and in the end that's who pays for TV. If we don't have viewers we don't make money. If we don't make money we're out of business. We as broadcasters will not neglect our over the air viewers - even if it does cost us millions to update our own facilities for DTV transmission."

I feel that my opinion reflects the attitude of many, many other consumers.
Screw the monopolies.
ACME at 6:57pm 19th November 2005 As a television engineer, I fail to see the validity of Bob's comments. I understand and appreciate the differences between the ATSC 8-VSB standard and COFDM, which is used in Europe - but the US has never been bound to an international standard for television. Hence the current analog standards of NTSC, PAL, SECAM, MESECAM,N-PAL, M-PAL, and other standards (analog and digital) used around the world. Sure - one world standard would be nice, but manufactures have to justify their R&D budgets somehow by constantly building better (and different) mousetraps. It's called innovation in some circles.

Studies show that 8-VSB can be recieved as effectively as COFDM, and that 8-VSB is more effecient in terms of needed transmitter power. For the USA (which is much larger geographically than Europe) 8-VSB makes the most sense if you look at the technical specifications (more than 20 years in the making I might also add).

How will this affect the consumer? Probably not at all. Most people will never know about or even comprehend the engineering and political battles leveled between COFDM and 8-VSB.

Bob hints that US 8-VSB televisions will cost more than their euro counterparts - but I disagree. The US market is quite large, and chip makers will easily be able to scale production of ATSC chipsets for a reasonable cost per thousand.

I personally have a HDTV set without an ATSC tuner. I have an external ATSC tuner that works quite well - even if it was relatively expensive. Six months ago I saw an external ATSC tuner in Wal-Mart for less than 99 bucks - and I'm sure Wally World and the manufacturer are making a profit even at that pricepoint.

In the end - the chipsets for ATSC DTV reception will cost set manufacturers around $15-20 bucks, which will not drive up the cost of DTV sets considerably.

In the end - the consumer will have DTV at a slightly higher pricepoint than analog sets are available for today. If you take inflation into account, analog sets are much less expensive today than even 10 years ago. This makes HDTV sets a relative bargain in my humble opinion - as you get a much better viewing experience for not much more money.

As for the politics of selling the analog TV spectrum for emergency communications - all I can say is that in a chaotic situation, with understaffed and overworked safety personnel, communication channels will break down - no matter what technology is employed. I want our public safety officials to have the best tools available to coordinate efforts, but technology is only part of the solution - good coordination requires good prior planning and cooperation at all levels. If they plan well, the spectrum will work for them.

Lastly - we as Americans "own" the airwaves - so we deserve to have Over The Air free TV. That's what the advertisers are paying for us to have. Even those without Cable or Satellite reception are still valuable consumers - and in the end that's who pays for TV. If we don't have viewers we don't make money. If we don't make money we're out of business. We as broadcasters will not neglect our over the air viewers - even if it does cost us millions to update our own facilities for DTV transmission.

DTV is now - so bring it on!
MD at 5:37am 17th November 2005 Of course, being Canadian, I'm more worried about Canada's choices. Keep in mind there are whole swaths of the border, near Canada (and Mexico??) where the wholesale freeing up the spectrum won't happen without international coordination. What's going on there? (I see Mexico more than Canada resisting the cost to their population of turning off analog).

Are set-top boxes really available? I see a lot of cable/satellite existing boxes that already pump out Ch.3/4, so not extra equipment required - but over-the-air digital to ch. 3? Where? Cheapest box I see is $229 - you can buy a (old-style) TV for that! Consumers are going to be very mad; should make for an interesting congress in 2008.
fungku at 4:17pm 15th November 2005 I'm excited for this. This is one of those changes people will just have to adjust to. And that's one thing people are good at -- adjusting.

I would be willing to be that everyone, including low incoming homes, will be going out to their local walmart or calling up their local cable/satellite company and getting a convertor the day after the switch is thrown. If not then, I would be it would happen within a week.

I'm absolutely positive people would use up their last $50 thats supposed to go to feed the family for the week on the convertor instead.