Once more - there are two transitions…
As reported earlier, there was the first major test of the DTV Transition in Wilmington on Monday. Things largely seemed to go well, with a few exceptions. Ironically, since cable was originally built on delivering better reception, people seemed to have had some issues with clear reception of digital television.
Here is some of the coverage:
One takeaway from the event was that there seemed to be very high awareness of the transition, but there also continues to be some confusion between the digital transition involving over-the-air broadcast stations and the digital transition that cable operators have been conducting for a few years.
For example, here’s a recent post from the Cultured State blog: The 2009 Digital TV Transition: Flirting With Disaster. The author insists that “the cable television industry isn’t telling the whole truth on what’s about to happen to your cable service.” The false charge is leveled that you won’t be able to continue to receive your cable signal unless you have a set-top box or a Digital Cable Ready TV. Proof is offered in the form of a July article from MSNBC’s Bob Sullivan.
As it so happens, I’ve already addressed Sullivan’s piece:
Bob Sullivan, senior writer for MSNBC.com’s Technology section, posted an article today entitled “The ‘Other’ Digital TV Conversion Might Cost You,” which purportedly attempts to clear up some confusion about the coming Digital Television transition. In fact, it simply sows more confusion. Sullivan has tried to establish (falsely) a direct relationship between the upcoming “DTV Transition” and efforts by cable operators to expand their video offerings and enhance other services.
Read the whole thing for the full explanation, but suffice to say that cable needs to manage its bandwidth, which is why we see things like switched digital video or channels being moved from analog tiers to digital. This has been going on for some time and has nothing to do with the Digital TV Transition of next February.
A sinister portrait is painted of the cable industry’s intentions regarding set-top boxes. I will simply refer you to comments I made to the TV Barn blog:
“If you switched to DirecTV or Dish, you have to have a new box. If you switch to Verizon FiOS or AT&T’s U-verse, you have to have a new box. It baffles me to no end why there are four companies competing with cable and nobody has ever complained that you have to have a set-top box for them.”
Michael Marcus at the Spectrum Talk blog also has concerns: 6 Months to Go and Some DTV Confusion Continues. He tries to wade through a variety of website, but concludes, “…if you have your analog TV set connected directly to the cable system and select channels directly with your TV set tuner, you might be in trouble in the near future.”
What he’s referring to is that cable operators have offered to carry local broadcast signals on analog tiers for three years, unless the cable system goes all-digital. This does not seem to be sufficient for him:
Note that the FCC requirement only deals with local over-the-air signals (e.g. signals from NAB and MSTV members), not C-SPAN, CNN, The Food Network, etc. So the quote from the DTV Transition Coalition above (actually linked through the NCTA site) that says “TV sets that currently receive programming through cable or satellite are not likely to be affected by the transition to digital.” is at best a half truth. So is the FCC quote, “Analog TVs will continue to work with cable, satellite, VCRs, DVD players, camcorders, video games consoles and other devices for many years”. But if your idea of TV is limited to what the 15% of American homes without cable or satellite actually see, then the information is correct.
Once again, we’ve got apples and oranges. The Transition is about over-the-air broadcast stations. If cable channels have to be moved from analog to digital, that is a completely separate issue.
Tags: analog, digital TV, DTV Transition, FCC, North Carolina, switched digital video, Wilmington
::
Send to a friend
September 12th, 2008 at 12:06 pm
Still confused–
I have an analog television hooked directly into the wall without a set-top box. I select channels directly with my TV set tuner.
I understand that switching to DirecTV, FiOS, or U-Verse would require me to purchase a set-top box, but what happens if I don’t switch? I currently receive over 70 channels just fine. Will everything except local channels disappear on Feb. 17 if I don’t have a box? Or will channels start disappearing gradually as you transition to all-digital?
I think the problem with your switching argument is price. I already pay a substantial amount to have one digital set and one analog. If I don’t do anything, my analog set will soon disappear–this means I will pay the same price for less service. In other words, to continue to support two sets, I will have to purchase another box–a de facto price increase. It doesn’t matter whether other services will require me to have boxes, because they almost all include the necessary hardware for free when you switch. Even if the price of the plans were identical (they’re not–U-verse is cheaper), switching will save me money.
September 12th, 2008 at 1:55 pm
Holy smokes.
The Digital TV Transition that takes place on 2/17 is about broadcast stations. Your cable operator has committed to delivering the same broadcast stations in analog on the 17th as you’ll get on the 16th.
The whole point of my post was that the two transitions are separate. Cable channels moving from analog to digital have nothing to do with Feb. 17.
I don’t have a “switching argument.” I’m simply asking that people not connect two separate activities and present them as one.
You then seem to be suggesting that the value of your analog service goes down if channels are moved from analog to digital, that you “pay the same price for less service.” I couldn’t answer that point on behalf of a cable operator, since I’d have more specific details.
But I will challenge your claim about DBS & the telcos that “they almost all include the necessary hardware for free when you switch.” You might get a special deal as a new customer, but I don’t think anyone’s giving away boxes for free. I think DISH lets you buy equipment, but I don’t DIRECTV does any longer. I’m almost certain that U-verse and FiOS lease you the boxes.
DIRECTV has language on their website about the system lease that includes this warning: “RECEIVERS ARE AT ALL TIMES PROPERTY OF DIRECTV AND MUST BE RETURNED UPON CANCELLATION OF SERVICE OR ADDITIONAL FEES MAY APPLY.” FiOS’ site has a line in the FAQ that reads: “At this time, rental is the only option for Verizon FiOS TV Set Top Boxes.”
September 13th, 2008 at 8:19 am
Thanks for your response to my blog post, I have linked it to my blog.
But just like the first responder to your blog post, I still have some questions.
1) What is Time Warner actually doing in Wilmington now after the switchover to DTV last week? I have tried to call them several times and have not been able to reach anyone with any knowledge. Clearly per the mandates of the FCC 12/31/07 CS Docket No. 98-120 Third Report and Order and Third Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-170A1.pdf) they are either carrying analog versions of the local TV stations on their cable in accordance with §76.56(d)(3)(i) or they have given set top boxes for basic service to their subscribers in accordance with § 76.56(d)(3)(ii) and § 76.56(d)(4).
If they have not given free set top boxes for basic “must carry” service to all their subscribers, are they still carrying the usual basic cable tier such as C-SPAN, CNN and MTV in analog?
While your other writer views this as a pricing issue, I just want to know if elderly subscribers with cable service, analog TVs, and no set top box just lost most of their channels?
More importantly, what do cable operators plan to do on 2/17/09? Do most operators plan to meet only the minimum obligations of §76.56(d)(3) with respect to local “must carry” stations or do they intend to carry some or all of the the usual basic channels in analog for a while more?
October 10th, 2008 at 9:25 am
[...] Once more - there are two transitions… [...]
November 10th, 2008 at 10:00 am
[...] Once more - there are two transitions… [...]