Separating the two transitions
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.
::
Send to a friend
July 3rd, 2008 at 7:16 am
As a former journalist myself, I’m amazed that 90% of the journalists out there can’t wrap their minds around the digital transition and what it means for consumers. I don’t think I’ve seen a single story about consumers’ transition options that’s gotten everything right. Maybe working in the cable industry, it just seems obvious. Cable needs to get simple messages out there to consumers early and often.