If you live in one of certain key markets – such as Green Bay, WI; Buffalo, NY; Indianapolis, IN; Dayton, OH; Austin, TX; Toledo, OH; Springfield, MA; Fort Wayne, IN; Mobile, AL; Terra Haute, IN; or Columbus, OH – you may have a keener interest in the issue of retransmission consent than other readers of this blog.

The basics: Cable operators and other Multichannel Video Programming Distributors can’t retransmit broadcast signals (such as NBC, ABC, CBS, or Fox) without first obtaining the broadcaster’s consent.

TV station group LIN TV and Time Warner Cable have been in negotiations, but haven’t reached an agreement. At midnight last Friday morning when the existing carriage deal expired, LIN pulled the signals of 15 stations in 11 markets from Time Warner systems, which affects about 2.7 million of their subscribers.

While negotiations continued over the weekend, alternatives were promoted. LIN suggested Time Warner customers could switch to such competitors as Dish Network or FiOS TV. Time Warner has given away around 50,000 antennas to allow over-the-air reception of those broadcast signals and has also produced an online video that shows people how they can watch some broadcast programming over the Internet for free.

If you missed NCTA’s Kyle McSlarrow on C-SPAN’s The Communicators Saturday night, you can now watch the episode online (or catch the repeat tonight on C-SPAN 2 at 8:00 p.m. ET). One of the first questions he addressed was the issue of retransmission consent. NCTA has expressed concern that a number of carriage deals are set to expire at the end of this year, about six weeks before the Digital Television Transition occurs on February 17. There is potential for consumer confusion and disruption with these deals being renegotiated during this period.

While the NAB has volunteered a four-week quiet period surrounding the DTV transition date – two weeks before Feb. 17 and two weeks after – McSlarrow has proposed that a slightly longer quiet period would be beneficial for consumers, while hardly tipping the balance of power in retrans negotiations.

Earlier this week, the House Energy and Commerce subcommittee on telecommunications and the Internet held a hearing: “Status of the DTV Transition: 154 Days and Counting.” As a reminder that the Digital TV Transition is about over-the-air broadcast TV stations, one could note some of the issues raised in press coverage.

• Lawmakers See Challenges for TV Transition (WaPo)
• Early Digital-TV Switch Has Flaw: Viewers Could Lose Certain Channels on Permanent Basis (WSJ)

Some viewers had issues in Wilmington with over-the-air reception of the new DTV signal; some had problems setting up converter boxes with their analog TV sets.

NCTA President & CEO Kyle McSlarrow had a little different perspective, as he testified at that hearing. He focused on the issue of retransmission consent and how it would be effected by the transition. This FCC fact sheet covers the details, but suffice to say that retrans (and the related term “must carry”) refer to how cable operators can carry broadcast stations.

Here is some of the coverage of his testimony:

• Retranmission Deals May Get Derailed by DTV Transition, Cable Operators Warn (TV Week)
• McSlarrow: Retrans Uncertainty Creates Cable ‘Storm’ (MediaDailyNews)
• DTV “quiet period” debate gets noisy in Congress (Ars Technica)

Here is a link to the text of McSlarrow’s comments and I’ve embedded the audio below (which runs just under six minutes).

[display_podcast]

To help you understand this, you need to understand that retrans and must carry play a critical role in ensuring you can see your local broadcast stations as part of your cable lineup.  Some of the existing deals will lapse around the end of the year, right before the Feb. 17 transition date.

Last month, the NAB Board of Directors pledged to identify a Retransmission Consent Quiet Period. NCTA issued this statement:

“In recent months, we have discussed with NAB the need to recognize the potential for consumer confusion and disruption involved with retransmission consent disputes that might arise as we approach the broadcasters’ digital TV transition on February 17, 2009. We appreciate NAB’s acknowledgment that this is a very real concern, and continue to support efforts to minimize potential consumer confusion through the adoption of a quiet period. But the reality is that many outstanding retransmission consent agreements expire by the end of 2008. Any voluntary quiet period that does not begin before the agreements actually expire – or which is too brief to preclude potentially confusing messages about broadcast carriage during the time of the actual DTV transition – represents the illusion of a commitment and does not serve the consumer.”

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:

• Charlotte Observer
• Light Reading’s Cable Digital News
• Elon University’s The Pendulum

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.

As you’ve probably read, the Federal Communications Commission chose the Wilmington, NC market as the first test case for the Digital Television transition (Here’s the story from the local paper, the Star-News). The switch was flipped at noon on Monday – a literal giant switch handled by Wilmington Mayor Bill Saffo and FCC Chairman Kevin Martin.

Several of my colleagues were down for the event and one captured this video.

In that video, there were four TV sets displayed, but you can only see the two on the right. Of those two, the one on the left is hooked up to a digital TV converter box and is receiving the digital signal. The one of the right is receiving the analog signal. Once the switch is thrown, the screen first goes black and then shows a message telling viewers that they need to do something to receive the digital signal.

And here’s a  more detailed report from NCTA’s Rob Stoddard:

By all measures, the Wilmington trial was, technically, a success. The full-power commercial broadcast stations in the market were successful in pulling down at 12:00 noon Eastern Time all of the network, syndicated, and local programming they were broadcasting in analog – leaving viewers entirely dependent upon those broadcasters’ digital signals. Cable operators in the market, and presumably the satellite providers that also serve viewers there, were successful in accommodating the digital-only scenario, as well as in processing the hundreds of requests for new service or service upgrades that came in the days preceding and during the cut-over.

All major stakeholders – broadcasters, cable operators, and government officials at the national, state and local level – also appear to have been successful in collaborating on solutions that would best serve consumers. That collaboration left a halo of good feelings, in that the various groups, which more frequently are competitive and adversarial, were almost surprised to discover that they could work closely together within tight time constraints to resolve all of the issues implicit in the cut-over.

What we’ve actually learned from the trial, so far at least, is more an affirmation than new knowledge:

People will (and do) wait until the last possible moment. According to published reports, cable operators reported a flurry of consumer calls; supplies of pertinent consumer electronic devices (converter boxes, antennas, etc.) were stretched; and local officials reported a run on applications for government discount coupons, meaning that some consumers would be waiting to receive coupons well after the cut-over date – all in the hours leading up to the actual cut-over. And this in a market in which NAB reported 97 percent awareness in the week prior to the cut-over.

The “digital cliff” effect does take a toll. Published reports also say that local TV stations received, collectively, hundreds of calls right after the cut-over, many from people who had obtained and properly installed the government-certified digital-to-analog converter boxes for their over-the-air analog TV sets, but who for a variety of reasons could no longer see some or all local TV signals. We can assume that some people needed new or better antennas; others had failed to program their new boxes by scanning for available digital channels; still others just aren’t in a good place to receive local digital TV signals.

And, many people needed help from others to get over-the-air converter boxes hooked up and working properly. The City of Wilmington was persuaded to take action less than a week prior to the cut-over, to make firefighters and emergency responders available upon request, to help hook up a box, re-position an antenna, or provide other assistance to citizens who needed it.

It remains to be seen how these learnings can be applied to the nationwide cut-over that will occur February 17. However, the trial was successful in identifying the kinds of issues that tangibly could be addressed by all communities and stakeholders in the weeks ahead.

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.

As a public service, I’ll attempt to unpack what he wrote.

First, let me point out that NCTA has been saying for some time that there are two “digital transitions” – the digital TV transition for full-power, over-the-air television stations, and the cable industry’s efforts to transition analog channels onto digital cable tiers, in order to reclaim bandwidth and serve consumers with more and better services. This second transition is more of a “digital migration,” and it has been under way for many years now. See this earlier blog post for more details on the differences between these two transitions.

The article starts off correctly distinguishing between the two efforts, but then he makes the claim that cable’s transition “could leave up to 100 million TVs in the dark, unable to display any cable TV channels at all without adding extra equipment.” He further claims that this gathering threat will come to pass eight months from now: “Come February, though, millions of TVs will no longer be capable of displaying cable TV channels without new equipment…”

Having sounded the alarm, Sullivan then pulls back on the timing. First, he writes, “But the death of cable analog television is arriving a bit more stealthily, and more piecemeal.” And pretty soon he makes it clear that the change will be gradual:

…it’s unclear how the industry can turn off analog service without leaving millions of customers in the dark.

The cable transition will not be as brutal as the end of the analog broadcast, which will hit with one fell swoop in February.

Instead, cable operators will decide on their own when to make the switch. So far, some services – such as Time Warner – have indicated that its analog signal won’t be shut down any time soon. Robyn Watson, spokeswoman for the company, said its 3 million analog “basic cable” consumers won’t see any changes in service.

The rest of the article continues to mix concerns about the broadcast transition and the cable one, suggesting that something nefarious is afoot. The fact that cable’s transition has been going on for some years (since the late Nineties), and is anticipated to continue for several years beyond next February, appears to be almost entirely overlooked.

The transition to all-digital cable systems will provide a range of benefits for cable customers, such as access to many more channels, including high-definition offerings. Freeing up bandwidth will help with the deployment of DOCSIS 3.0, the ultra fast “wideband” Internet access that will deliver speeds of over 100 Mbps. In addition, new digital set-top boxes will deliver DVR capability, better interactivity, and improved technical quality. For consumers who don’t want a set-top, the coming deployment of tru2way technology, supported by recent progress in completing deals with television set manufacturers, will move us towards a world where consumers can elect to not have a box.

As pointed out already in the article, the cable industry is working hard to comply with the requirements from the FCC for continued carriage of broadcast TV signals in analog.

It’s important to note that DBS was an all-digital platform from its inception, which means that consumers have always needed a box on every TV for reception. AT&T’s U-verse multichannel video service has also been all digital since inception, and Verizon’s FiOS TV service is undergoing the exact same digital conversion, on a market-by-market basis, that the writer finds so sinister. Therefore, it’s amusing to read reader comments under the story expressing anger about having to take a box from a cable operator, complete with threats to go to the telcos or DBS – who will then require you to take a box.

UPDATE: Michael Willner also touched on this issue in a post today, in regards to the migration of premium channels from analog to digital on Insight’s Louisville system.