So, you can get $40.00 toward the cost of a set top digital TV decoder (so you can use your old analog TV after the end of analog transmission in 2009). Why should the taxpayers subsidize this? Is TV watching a constitutional right?
Incidentally, has fraud occurred ? I can see some ring mailing in hundreds of applications.
Should I keep my 1969 RCA set going?
I definitely think they ought to. Since (and someone can correct me if I’m misunderstanding this) the gov’t has mandated a migration to a new format for media communication, I think it rests upon the government to help ensure that Americans are able to receive that media. TV is “free” communication, and I was pretty surprised when they mandated the change to hi-def, because millions of people would then be unable to watch their local news without forking over money for a new TV.
Subsidy, hell! The feds arbitrarily forced the broadcasters to render my TV obsolete. Rather than a $40 coupon, they should pay me full damages, and tax the hell out of the set providers to recover a bit of the windfall profits this decision gave them.
As I understand it, the spectrum saved from converting all TV to digital is going to be auctioned off for various uses, and the government is going to get billions because of the more efficient use of spectrum. If I’m not too far off base on this, then hell yes, Mr and Mrs TV Watcher deserve $40 to buy a box if they haven’t bought a new TV in the last decade. The huge amount of money involved in the deal and the inconvenience to many Americans make this a no-brainer, IMHO.
Just to be clear, Digital TV ≠ HiDef TV.
As for the subsidy… seems only fair since the government is mandating the change.
According to Wikipedia, 1 in 2 households already have at least one digital TV and every TV produced since March 1, 2007 must have a digital tuner installed in it. But I know many companies have been doing it longer than that because the TV I bought in 1998 (which died a year ago today) had a digital TV tuner.
So these coupons won’t apply to too many people by 2009.
This is going to be one of those major “fighting ignorance” things for the next 12 months, because somehow everyone seems to think that “digital signal = HDTV.” Over the holidays, I heard about 10 different relatives say “We gonna have to get an HDTV before January 2008, because that’s when the signals are going to be HDTV only!”
For the same reason that cigarette smokers had to pay the fines for tobacco companies’ fraud and perjury — it’s only fair.
Yes. You can’t just ignore the commas.
Considering that the vouchers can only be applied to the purchase of a digital TV converter (and will only cover about half the cost of one), unless the ring is planning to corner the market on receivers, there’s not much point in it.
As for your 1969 RCA, if something went wrong with it today, would you pay $50 to fix it? That’s about how much the converter will cost with the voucher.
And of course, if you get your TV signal from cable or satellite, they’ll convert the signal and you won’t have to worry about it.
None of this helps me with my little handheld TV that I take with me to games or events or whatever. That will just have to go straight to the electronics recycler (whom I’ll probably have to pay to take it off my hands.) I’m with Squink. You want me to get a next generation TV? Fine, here’s my old one. Replace it.
Leavigng aside if Mr and Mrs TV Watchers could argue that the action of the government constitutes a “taking” of some of the value of their property for the sake of a public-interest decision…
Other cases of changing standards took the form of simply no longer making new production of the old stuff, but the old stuff continued to function until it wore out by attrition:
-
In the change from leaded to unleaded gas, the vehicles already on the road were not removed; most were able to run just the same and a whole other lot of others just needed to get retuned, which was part of regular maintenance anyway;
-
In the phaseout of CFCs you continued to run your AC charged with Freon just fine, until it broke down at its end of service life and needed to be serviced anyway;
With the change in the TV broadcast standard, the change immediately disables a primary function of exisiting appliances though they may be in perfect working order. It happens this way because the FCC wants those frequencies for sale to other carriers, and needs them clear on that date, period. Your TV just became a dedicated monitor for your video player. Changing out the tuner circuit in your TV is not a reasonably-expected maintenance item, unlike tuning up your car or reloading your AC.
The government already DID provide the overlap period for old and new to coexist while being phased out/in, for years now there has been been digital AND analog TV going, but … who throws away a perfectly good 10 y/o TV to buy a considerably more expensive digital-capable set, just to watch Oprah in the afternoon and Letterman at midnight? Not to mention, a mass replacement of analog-tuned TV sets, virtually all of them using CRT screens, before their normal attrition lifespan, would have been and would be a waste-disposal headache.
The authorities apparently will assume that those who could afford it, will have paid for a DTV or a converter out-of-pocket BEFORE D-day, or are subscribers to Satellite/Cable TV; and that those most likely to face that date w/o the proper tuner will be a lot of lower income, rural, or senior customers. And yes, the owners of portables, like kunilou, ARE shafted. *(BTW: IIRC, DTV is much more needy of a strong signal and a properly aimed antenna than UHF/VHF… is this goodbye to pocket TVs and camper TVs?) *
If prior experience with rebate programs and Class Actions is any guideline, the number of applications for the benefit is likely to come below the number of eligible persons/households, so I would not be too concerned with fraud. It’ll probably end up involving filling out a form at the electronics store like you would for some rebates.
The government is under no legal obligation to compensate owners of equipment that has been made obsolete by FCC regulations. That has happened a number of times and the owners just had to eat the cost.
Which equipment was that? If I had a working AM radio from the 1920s or a working FM radio from the 1940s I could still receive AM and FM broadcasts. Telephones are still compatable with today’s telephone system.
Off the top of my head, the original FM broadcast band (42-50 MHz) receivers and wideband FM two-way mobile radios.
There is certainly a lot of confusion around this. Lots of people with cable think it somehow affects them. And personally, I found the websites very confusing when I was trying to explain this over the holidays. They say really useful things like “If you have cable, call your cable company to see if it affects you.” Thanks, government!
The FCC allowed cell phone networks to shut down their analog service, but did not require it..
mks57 the original FM band was reallocated after only a few years. I’ve been unable to find any references to regular broadcast service (rather than “experimental” – an experimental designation would tell both the broadcasters and consumers to proceed at their own risk) that operated on that bandwidth, but I’m willing to be wrong on this.
The common mythology is that David Sarnoff wanted to kill FM and successfully lobbied the FCC to move it to a new band. According to Radios for the old 45MHz FM broadcast band, “more than half a million FM receivers and some 50 transmitting stations would be rendered obsolete”. That’s a bit beyond experimental. That page also has a partial list of the non-experimental FM broadcast stations.
The mandate to switch to all-digital transmission is appropriate.
The amount of time given to let folks know this is happening is appropriate.
And no, I should not have to pay for your new TV or decoder.
You aren’t. Those who win the auctions for the spectrum being opened up by the transition will be paying for the converters.
Many, many, many people have televisions. Cut off service without the rebate and I think you could see urban riots.