Jenaroph and Dead Badger There are so many things that need attention right now – war(s), unemployment, recession, aging infrastructure, crime, bailouts, to name but a few – that, in my humble opinion, who does or does not get their fucking TV signals is so low on the list of priorities as to be negligible. Multitask? The Jews and the Arabs are once again killing each other’s civilians, we’re still in up to our knees in Iraq, unemployment is the highest it’s been in 15-ish years, we’re deep in recession, our infrastructure is aging about as well as Tina Louise, the crime rate is… well… there’s never been too *little *crime now has there?, and everyone and their brother is oinking around the bailout trough. I’d like to see The Chosen One making significant public statements on each of these, along with offering a prescribed course of action (even something as brief as he’s offered for the TV thing), vet and pick his cabinet and key appointees, and then, only THEN, tackle the horrifically difficult issue of who does or does not get their fucking TV signals.
Why didn’t these people get coupons earlier, when they could have gotten $40 off a converter box that sells for $45 to $60? I admit to chronic procrastination, but I applied for coupons as soon as the program went live, and bought my converters a month or so later, during a time when I was unemployed and struggling. (One is on a small CRT NTSC TV in my old bedroom at my parents’ house, which I use when I’m visiting; the other … well, I’ve got it just in case.)
If they’re so poor, how did they manage to afford a television set to begin with? Years ago a used 19" mid-end NTSC CRT color television cost $50 or so at a typical thrift store. If they were able to purchased a used television, or even a new set (NTSC CRT televisions were quite inexpensive when they still filled store shelves a few years ago; sometimes under $100 for a 19" set on sake), why not a converter? I’ll admit the market for used HDTV sets is dysfunctional; their owners tend not to part with them for that much less than what they paid initially, and on Craigslist it’s the norm to see used HDTV sets selling for more than new models. Old CRT-based HDTV sets and newer CRTs with ATSC tuners haven’t appeared on the second-hand market, from what I’ve seen.
Aside from eccentric Luddites and little old ladies who still have rabbit ears attached to their 25" Zenith Chromacolor Bicentennial Edition console so they can watch their “stories” and judge shows, how many of those complaining about not being able to afford the conversion have cell phones? How often do they swap their phones out for the newest model? Was there this kind of wailing and gnashing of teeth when analog cell phone service went dark a couple of years ago, with complaints about lack of service and the cost of having to buy one of them there newfangled GSM phones to replace their Motorola brick?
Rushgeekgirl, send me a PM with your mailing address. I’ll mail you my spare converter, no charge.
The government shouldn’t be subsidizing the switch at all. It should just be a switch over and people should have to handle it themselves. It’s criminal that taxpayer money is funding people’s ability to watch TV.
First off, thank you for being one of the few people to actually address the core issue.
The problems with the coupons are a valid point, but as far as the overall point of how we as a technological society decide when to upgrade our infrastructure, I’m not sure it changes anything. I’m certain that with any program people will not take advantage of it one way or another. Case in point - as of November, there were well more than a quarter million stimulus checks still unclaimed by folks - free money, and it’s fallen through the cracks.
http://money.cnn.com/2008/11/28/news/economy/stim_check/index.htm?postversion=2008112810
In short, that sucks, but it’s also not unexpected.
I must respectfully question your implied premise of whether or not radio is unavailable to folks (you say uncommonly used, which I do agree with. But I do not believe it is actually unavailable, which seems implied).
With every indication being, from Obama himself, that this crisis will last well into 2010 and beyond, my opinion is that in six months exactly the same number of people would be protesting this on the SDMB (and very few additional converter boxes would be bought). Whereas the sale and utilization of the freed-up radio spectrum may ironically spur economic growth and result in a net positive for the country.
The fact that the government arguably made a mistake in the past doesn’t persuade me that they should make a similar mistake – of a much greater – magnitude now.
I was just going to mention that. Did these people get compensated?
-
Americans who bought Apex 25-44 MHz AM band and Armstrong 42–50 MHz FM band radios in the 1930s and 1940s, when those broadcast bands were abandoned for FM at 88-108 MHz in the late 1940s?
-
Anyone who still used an analog brick cell phone when AMPS went dark?
-
Anyone with cars built in the 1960s through the 1980s with AM-only radios who wanted to listen to music while they drove?
-
Those in Eastern European countries that switched from SECAM to PAL television, or from the OIRT 65-74 MHz FM band to the 88-108 MHz band?
-
Japanese analog MUSE HDTV owners?
-
Those driving cars made before the early 1970s when leaded gasoline became unavailable?
Not that this really affects me, but if one looks at the coverage maps for my area (Central PA), one sees HUGE swatches of red and orange in the mountainous areas–it really highlights how sub-optimal digital TV is for elevated areas and ridgelines.
elmwood, my man, two things:
-
There are a lot more people a LOT worse off than they were even a year ago–how many people like Broomstick do you think there are, who bought a good TV and lost their job in the last year?
-
I don’t know where you’re from, but where I’m from a TV lasts a while. I got rid of my 12-year-old set a few years ago because it was physically broken due to random acts of cat (snapped off the coax connector, don’t ask). My point is, there are people with perfectly good televisions that are a decade or more old, and how can you predict what their economic situation was vs. is and say if they have a worthwhile TV they should be able to afford a converter?
For your later post, I say this: If the government actively makes a spectrum unavailable, then they share some duty in making the owners of obsolete tech bought before the switchover plans be able to bring themselves up to current standards. This goes especially if the spectrum being made unavailable is not necessarily technically superior (see also my previous statement about the analog vs. digital coverage in my area).
What specific benefits will we all be seeing from the “freed-up radio spectrum”?
When? (Well–how long after the big switch happens.)
Me. I got my converter coupons, paid about $20 for two converters, and later landed a job. I finally bought an ATSC HDTV set last week.
Same thing where I’ve lived. You can’t kill 12" black-and-white television sets made during the 1970s, apparently, and a good percentage of color CRT televisions made since the 1980s will last for decades into the future.
Thing is, months ago, people could have gotten converter boxes for $10 or less after using a coupon. As now, there were constant PSAs about the program; once if not several times on every show on every channel.
That being said, I’ve got a converter box with remote (Insignia; the Best Buy house brand), that I’m willing to send to any Doper in legitimate need who didn’t get one earlier; you’re poor, you have a NTSC television that cannot natively receive ATSC signals, you don’t have cable or satellite television, you don’t have a working converter in your possession, and you can’t get a coupon now. I’m a procrastinator too, so I have some sympathy.
Or worse, they could start reading.
Interesting that a Republican administration that keeps blaming the recession on us consumers’ mindless materialism the resultant profligate misuse of credit wants us all to trash perfectly-good TVs and buy expensive equipment and antennae that would be unneeded had the Administration not whored themselves to the Chinese(the manufacturers of nearly 100% of these digital TVs and converters) and Big Telecom.
The best data I can find says nationwide, 6.8% of households as of the start of December were “completely unready”: http://blog.nielsen.com/nielsenwire/media_entertainment/digital-transition-unready-us-homes-decline-in-december/
However, I have read criticism that the Nielsen results have a high margin of error in them due largely to the technical ignorance of the average American. Here are some examples of that last point:
http://www.consumersunion.org/pub/core_telecom_and_utilities/005383.html
Reputedly, there are a significant number of folks who may actually be DTV-ready, and just don’t realize it yet. And as I said, that’s not stupidity, it’s ignorance. I’ve heard more than one Engineer I work with here state over the year that they’re “scared they’ll have to buy an HDTV” even though they have a satellite dish or cable, and never watch broadcast TV. One here bought a converter box for…wait for it… their HDTV. The mind boggles.
I have no citation handy, but I have come across statements while researching this believing the true number of unready households may be just under 3% at this point in time. Make of that unsubstantiated claim what you will.
I have to admit, Broomstick, your stance on these issues doesn’t seem to make sense to me, either. You want the government to make it harder and more expensive (a lot more expensive, as I recall) to get & maintain a driver’s license, which many, many people need in order to be employed (including you, I’m sure, considering where you live), and at the same time, you think the government should make it easier and cheaper to watch television? I don’t get the logic.
I’m still scratching my head over why the switchover to digital TV is so gosh-darned important that analog TV has to be shut down. The relevant Wikipedia article states three “advantages” to the handover:
[quote]
[ul][li]Potentially higher image and sound quality over analogue broadcast (though in practice it can be worse). [/li][li]Freeing radio spectrum space, which can then be auctioned off for other purposes. [/li][li]Multiplexed subchannels—which can carry entirely separate programming. [/ul][/li][/quote]
Point 1 seems like a toss-up to me. People who still get TV through an antenna (i.e., the ones most likely to still be using analog) will apparently often be getting worse picture due to multi-path interference. Point 3 sounds good, but my experience with multiplexed subchannels is that it’s all hype and little substance: “Shop on TV” and that kind of crap.
That leaves Point 2. Guess it really is all about the money, then.
Oh, please. A good leader does not put every non-critical issue on hold indefinitely when faced with critical issues. Moreover, you have no evidence that this action in any way slowed, delayed or diminished the Obama administration’s actions on any of the major issues you mentioned.
And your tone makes me suspect that Obama could shit a pile of gold bricks big enough to pay off the national debt and you’d bitch about his squatting posture.
You never got TV for free. You had to buy a TV, didn’t you?
My first car was a 1982 Chevette with AM only radio. I didn’t get a coupon for a reduced price FM radio from the government. I just lived without radio.
This is true. There are Comcast customers (I say Comcast, because I have Comcast and I see their PSAs) who, despite the Comcast PSAs that run at least once every half hour, seem to be completely unaware that they are already prepared for the DTV switchover. The PSA’s message is ‘Don’t worry about the change to digital TV. You have cable, and do not need to do anything to prepare.’
Regardless, you are absolutely right that during any change over from one technology to another, someone will be left behind. I think we have reached an acceptable level of ‘someone’.
Not money - it is a waste of resources. And in this ecconomic climate, resources of all kinds are at a premium.
Why not take advantage of it?
No different than the Bushophobes around here who take any and every occasion to yammer on about how EEEEEVIL!! <sniff> Bush is, how everything from global warming to the Bratz dolls was his fault, etc. etc. etc.
Now that it’s your sacred cow that’s getting tweaked you’re all high and mighty and offended by it.
My posts are my opinion directly related to the topic at hand. In fact, the title of this thread implores His Highness to “STFU about DTV”. I was agreeing, and further opined that He should focus on more important things. So no… I’m not trolling. Although, admittedly, I did choose to refer to a political figure in an unflattering way – as is the wont of many people here.
But as I was composing my posts I was thinking “Gosh… I wonder if the constant Bush-bashers around here can take as well as they dish out?” And Giraffe… you stood up loud and stood up proud to declare “No! We can’t!”
What does Bush have to do with anything? You said something stupid, and I disagreed. If you’re acting stupid because other people acted stupid in the past, well, good for you. You’ll show them all.
Whose resources are they, and who is making the money?