 | |||||
|
WELCOME TO THE ESSAY ARCHIVES!
<< Part I
(June/July)
<< June << June << June << Part I
(June/July) |
Home | Poetry |
Essays | Writing Excerpts |
Free Concerts | Links | 2008 Extras | About the Site
2006 Essays - June Digital Sunrise, Analog Sunset Part I: Update on the Transition to Digital Television in the U.S. "Heralded as the most important innovation in the history of the industry, digital TV involves the reconfiguration of a sector that, beyond its economic significance, is central to the mechanisms of democratic politics and the evolution of popular culture . . . In a sense, the transition to digital TV is about a revolution long overdue . . . Digital technologies have revolutionized the telecommunications industry, the information services industry, and to a large extent the film industry. But until recently, the use of analog equipment in the transmission and reception of video programming has precluded broadcasters from taking full advantage of fundamental innovations in information processing and distribution . . . The forces that challenge the broadcasting industry, however, are not only technological. The transition to digital TV is part of a larger process of change in the way information is produced, aggregated, and distributed in contemporary societies . . . It is a story about large-scale changes in the normative models as well as the institutions that shape television as an economic and social force -- and, ultimately, about the politics of the information society."(n1). From Hernan Galperin, New Television, Old Politics
In the final essay of 2005, website visitors were introduced to the story of the transition to DTV in the U.S. That essay, "Will You Be Singing the TV Black Box Blues?" is available by clicking here. This summer's series begins with an update to last summer's piece. It will include a brief introduction to and review of the subject, a look at the effects of this year's legislation, and a peek at what's on the horizon in the "transition from a world of spectrum scarcity, dumb terminals and one-way services, to a world of on-demand programming, intelligent terminals and abundant channels." (n3) Introduction and Review In the late 1980s, after the Japanese had first demonstrated their version of high-definition television (HDTV) in the U.S., concern arose that the U.S. lagged behind in the development of the technology. A competition of sorts ensued, and the outcome was a U.S. HDTV standard put together by a group of companies which came to be known as the "Grand Alliance." This standard formed the basis for digital television in the U.S. today. (As noted in the previous essay, HDTV is the highest of the three different levels of digital TV picture quality. For a brief tutorial on analog versus digital, especially some of the benefits of digital broadcasting, click here, or go to www.pbs.org/opb/crashcourse/digital_v_analog.) The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) subsequently developed DTV rules, and in 1996 legislative provisions for the transition were codified in that year's Telecommunications Act. (n4) The provisions were amended slightly in the Balanced Budget Act of 1997. A date for full transition was set for 2006 or when 85 percent of U.S homes were able to receive DTV programming, whichever was later. Broadcasters were given an additional portion of the radio frequency spectrum in order to broadcast analog signals in addition to the newer digital programming until the transition was complete. At that time the additional portion of the spectrum was to be returned to the U.S. government and the American people. In the years following 1996 and 1997, the transition proceeded more slowly than expected. This was due to a number of reasons including the inordinate complexity of switching to an all-digital system and consumers' initial reluctance to spend thousands of dollars for television sets capable or receiving and displaying digital, especially HDTV, pictures. Unanticipated circumstances also intervened. One of these was the growth in the use of cellular telephones and other wireless services, causing increased demand for portions of the radio frequency spectrum. "The 1993 Omnibus Reconciliation Act instructed the FCC to begin auctioning spectrum for commercial wireless uses. These auctions began in 1995 and construction of the new digital "PCS" networks was just beginning when the 1996 Act was passed." (n5) Between 1996 and 2005, the estimated number of total subscribers to U.S. communications-operated cellular, ESMR and PCS providers alone rose from about 44 million to over 207 million. (n6) "Since the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, there has also been a greater sense of urgency to free [up portions of the] spectrum for public safety purposes." (n7) Finally, looming in the background: the U.S budget deficit and ongoing Congressional attempts at deficit reduction.
In 2002 the FCC took a major step forward in addressing the availability of DTV-compatible television receivers for the general public. The agency mandated a phased-in schedule under which all new television broadcast receivers would have to include the capability of receiving OTA digital broadcasts. According to that schedule, as of July 1 of this year, all receivers with screens 25" or above must include DTV tuners. As of July 1, 2007, all receiver 13" and above also must include the tuners, as must all TV interface devices (VCRs, DVD players/recorders, etc.) which receive broadcast signals. (n8)
Photograph "Luxembourg Spring" © 1984 Dorothy A. Birsic Although legislators, retailers and content providers all hope that Americans will purchase the new television sets prior to the date of full transition, nothing is certain. Extensive testimony was presented before Congress seeking to minimize the financial impact of the transition on those still relying on OTA analog television technology when the DTV transition takes place. K. James Yager, CEO of the Barrington Broadcasting company, speaking on behalf of the National Association of Broadcasters, summarized the issue of OTA viewers for Congress by saying: Over the air viewers have important, well thought out and legitimate reasons for relying on over-the-air reception, e.g., they believe in the value of free, over-the-air television, they do not want to be locked into the every-increasing costs of pay television, they view primarily alternative language programming, they have additional sets that are not hooked up to cable or satellite, among others . . . Because broadcast television is universally available and is the only service used by millions of Americans, Congress should ensure that these viewers are not shut out or marginalized but continue to have the option to rely on over-the-air reception and still receive meaningful local broadcast service." (n9) Just how large is this group of OTA viewers calculated to be? According to U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) statistics released last year:
One common solution was proposed by many groups for enabling continued OTA viewing on existing analog sets. This solution was for Congress to provide, in some way, for set-top digital-to-analog converter boxes. These set-top "black boxes" convert digital signals to analog and could be used by those not subscribing to either satellite or cable services. Analog sets will go dark and be unusable without such boxes after the transition. Many cable and satellite providers are already broadcasting digital programming, and existing equipment may be sufficient for viewers of those services. It is best to contact local cable or satellite providers to determine digital and HDTV requirements for a particular area. Two FCC Consumer Fact Sheets and the FCC's DTV website may be of further assistance in determining the right equipment and viewing arrangements for each individual. They can be accessed through the following links:
The Digital Television Transition and Public Safety Act of 2005
On February 8, 2006, Congress passed the Digital Television Transition and Public Safety Act of 2005 as Title III of the broader Deficit Reduction Act of 2005. The main provisions of the legislation:
Photograph "Vatican Celebration" © 1984 Dorothy A. Birsic The bill passed this year goes well beyond simply setting February 18, 2009 as the date on which full digital broadcasts will commence in this
country. It is probably no coincidence that the Act appears as part of the broader Deficit Reduction Act. This is because it also sets in motion an auction process for the portion of the spectrum to be recovered from
broadcasters. According to Congressional Budget Office estimates, receipts from the auctions are expected to total between $10 and $15 billion dollars for the Federal Government. (n13)
"The recovered radio frequency spectrum is a medium that enables many forms of wireless communication such as mobile telephone, paging, broadcast television
and radio, private radio systems and satellite services. Because of the virtual explosion of wireless applications in recent years, there is considerable concern that future spectrum needs - both for commercial as well as government
purposes - will not be met. The spectrum that will be cleared at the end of the DTV transition is considered highly valuable spectrum because of its particular technical properties. In all, the DTV transition will clear 108 megahertz
of spectrum - a fairly significant amount." (n14) The Act mandates that the spectrum auctions commence no later than January 28, 2008 and that all proceeds be deposited no later than June 30, 2008. Proceeds from the auctions will be used to fund several programs, the largest of which is the Digital-to-Analog Converter Box Program. This program was created by
the Act to assist those with analog television receivers. The program, to be administered by the National Telecommunications and Information Agency (NTIA), has been allocated a budget of up to three billion dollars. This money will
be used to provide coupons to U.S. households to be applied toward the purchase of the digital-to-analog converter boxes. According to the provisions of the Act, U.S. households may make requests for a maximum of two coupons between
January 1, 2008, and March 31, 2009. The two coupons may not be combined toward the purchase of one box, and all coupons will expire three months following their issue date. Other programs to be funded from the auction proceeds include: Converting low-power television and television translator stations to ditital technology - $200 million Interoperable communications for first responders (police, fire, etc.) - $ 1 billion National alert system for catastrophe warnings - $250 million Implementing the Enhance 911 Act of 2004 - $250 million Grants to coastal states and Indian tribes affected by disasters - $200 million Essential air services to certain communities - $30 million (estimated)(n15) Even after the allocations listed above, the CBO has estimated that the legislation would reduce direct spending by $6 billion over the 2006 - 2010 time frame. (n16) Links to the text of the Digital Television Transtion and Public Safety Act and associated documents can be found at www.ntia.doc.gov/otiahome/dtv/index.html. The full text of the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 can also be obtained by searching under bill S. 1932 at http://thomas.loc.gov.
Photograph "I Ching, Chinatown, Los Angeles," © 2006 Dorothy A. Birsic On the Horizon For Television WITNESS TESTIMONY: . . . While a firm 2009 deadline is better than a deadline nobody believes will be met, it is still quite a long way off. The dominant priority . . . should be to free up as much of the spectrum allocated to broadcast TV as soon as possible . . . Finally, in this Internet age, it is not too early to start thinking about freeing up all of the spectrum allocated to broadcast because it may not be long before virtually all Americans will get their TV from another source. When that day comes, as [FCC] Chairman Powell has said, "What are we protecting?" MR. [CONGRESSMAN] UPTON: Right on the nose. (n17) Americans getting their TV from another source? If not OTA broadcasts, cable or satellite television, then to what was this person referring? He was speaking of the growing ability to send video over a broadband Internet connection, something more commonly referred to as IPTV. In 2005, Congress began a series of hearings on Internet Protocol - or IP-enabled services. The hearings were to serve as a foundation for modernizing telecommunications laws in the U.S., so as to bring them up to speed with today's and tomorrow's technology and marketplace. (n18) Though developing rapidly now, IP technologies were all in their infancy when the original DTV transition plans were being developed. (n19) Indeed, much has changed since the 1996 Telecommunications Act was passed. "The Act was developed in a voice-centric environment where time, distance and geographic boundaries drove the market. Today, those factors have receded to the background. In an IP-enabled world, voice is merely one of many applications, along with video and data, which are fundamentally digital packet streams of information. IP-based technologies have dramatically changed the cost and reach paradigms and will soon enable seamless delivery of blended voice, video and data services to any type of access device across any kind of network." (n20) Companies currently establishing both infrastructure and content for IPTV services include AT&T and Verizon. Available content from other sources is already plentiful over the Internet and becoming more so by the day. "All sort of big-name television networks now offer additional programming over the Web. That's right. Additional programming. Stuff you cannot watch on broadcast, cable or satellite TV." (n21) This includes shows such as CNN's "Pipeline," MTV's "Overdrive" (www.mtv.com/overdrive), and Comedy Central's "Motherload" (www.comedycentral.motherload). AOL also offers its own site, In2TV (http://television.aol.com/in2tv). Will this be the future of TV or just another phase of the changing digital dynamics of the industry and a chance for the former voice providers to enter a new realm? Will consumer rush to put Internet video on their screens while leaving other types of programming behind in a newly-linked world? It is still to early to say. As stated in the beginning of the essay, "The transition to digital TV is part of a larger process of change in the way information is produced, aggregated and distributed in modern societies." (n22) While the transition to digital TV does bring some closure to the story begun nearly 20 years ago, it is stil only a beginning chapter in the evolution of a medium which will undoubtedly be continuing for many years to come. * * *
n1 - Galperin, Hernan. New Television, Old Politics: The Transition to Digital TV in the United States and Britain, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004, pp. 3 - 4 (*) n2 - Digital Television Transition and Public Safety Act of 2005, Title III of S. 1932, Public Law 109-171, Deficit Reduction Act of 2005, February 8, 2006, 120 Stat 4, 181 pages (*) n4 - See 110 Stat. 56 - 161, "The Telecommunications Act of 1996," Title Two - Broadcast Services, Section 336: Broadcast Spectrum Flexibility (47 U.S.C. 336) (*) n5 - Statement of Robert Crandall in "Health of the Telecommunications Sector: A Perspective from Investors and Economists," hearing before the Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet, Committee on Energy and Commerce, U.S. House of Representatives, 108th Congress, 1st Session, February 5, 2003, Serial No. 108-3, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 2003, p. 36 (*) n6 - "Annualized Wireless Industry Survey Results - December 1985 to December 2005," Cellular Telecommunications Industry Association (CTIA), End Year 2005 Survey, p. 2, viewed 6/10/06 at http://files.ctia.org/pdf/CTIAEndYear2005Survey (*) n7 - Statement of Mark L. Goldstein in "The Role of Technology in Achieving a Hard Deadline for the DTV Transition," hearing before the Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet, Committee on Energy and Commerce, U.S. House of Representatives, 109th Congress, 1st Session, February 17, 2005, Serial No. 109-9, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 2005, p. 18 (*) n8 - See Federal Communications Commission, Second Report Order and Second Memorandum and Opinion and Order in MM Docket No. 00-39, 17 FCC Rcd 15978 (2002) at pp 40 (*) n9 - Statement of K. James Yager in "DTV Staff Discussion Draft of the DTV Transition Act of 2005," hearing before the Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet, Commitee on Energy and Commerce, U.S. House of Representatives, 109th Congress, 1st Session, May 26, 2005, Serial No. 109-28, pp. 59 - 60 (*) n10 - Goldstein Statement, "The Role of Technology . . .," pp. 18 - 19 (*) n11 - Federal Communications Commission, Consumer and Government Affairs Bureau, FCC Consumer Facts: Digital Television, available at http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/consumerfacts/digitaltv.html, viewed 6/9/06 (*) n12 - Federal Communications Commission, Consumer and Government Affairs Bureau, FCC Consumer Facts: Compatibility of Cable TV and Digital TV Receivers "Plug and Play, available at http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/consumerfacts/plugandplaytv.html, viewed 6/9/06 (*) n13 - Congressional Budget Office, Cost Estimate - The Digital Transition and Public Safety Act of 2005, October 24, 2005, available at http://www.ntia.doc.gov/otiahome/dtv/index.html, viewed 5/17/06 (*) n14 - Goldstein Statement, p. 18 (*) n15 - Congressional Budget Office, p. 5 (*) n17 - Statement of Thomas M. Lenard in "Advancing the DTV Transition: An Examination of the FCC Media Bureau Proposal," hearing before the Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet, Committee on Energy and Commerce, U.S. House of Representatives, 108th Congress, Second Session, June 2, 2004, Serial No. 108-86, Washington D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 2004, pp. 55 and 58 (*) n18 - Upton, Fred, Introductory remarks in "How Internet Protocol-Enabled Services are Changing the Face of Communications: A View from Technology Companies," hearing before the Subcommittee om Telecommunications and the Internet, Committee on Energy and Commerce, U.S. House of Representatives, 109th Congress, First Session, February 9, 2005, Serial No. 109-12, Washington D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 2005, p. 1 (*) n19 - Lenard Statement, p. 54 (*) n20 - Statement of Patricia Russo in "How Internet Protocol-Enabled Services are Changing the Face of Communications: A View from Technology Companies," hearing before the Subcommittee om Telecommunications and the Internet, Committee on Energy and Commerce, U.S. House of Representatives, 109th Congress, First Session, February 9, 2005, Serial No. 109-12, Washington D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 2005, p. 31 (*) n21 - Metz, Cade, "Online TV Only" in "TV Transformed," PC Magazine, Vol. 25, No. 2, February 7, 2006, p. 110 (*) LINKS INCLUDED IN ESSAY
BIBLIOGRAPHY - The following is the bibliography for the June 2006 essay on the transition to digital television in the United States. Arar, Yardena. "Ten HDTV Myths," PC World, Vol 23, No. 12, December 2005, pp. 165 - 170. Cellular Telecommunications Industry Association (CTIA). "Annualized Wireless Industry Survey Results - December 1985 - December 2005," End Year 2005 Survey. Document viewed 6/10/06 at http://files.ctia.org/pdf/CTIAEndYear2005Survey. Congressional Budget Office. Cost Estimate - The Digital TV Transition and Public Safety Act of 2005. Washington, D.C.: October 24, 2005. Viewed 5/17/06 and available at: http://www.ntia.doc.gov/otiahome/dtv/index.html. Crandall, Robert. Testimony in "Health of the Telecommunications Sector: A Perspective from Investors and Economists," hearing before the Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet, Committee on Energy and Commerce, U.S. House of Representatives, 108th Congress, 1st Session, February 5, 2003, Serial Number 108-3. Washington D.C: U.S. Government Printing Office (GPO), 2003. Digital Television and Public Safety Act of 2005. Title III of S. 1932, Public Law 109-171, Deficit Reduction Act of 2005, February 8, 2006, 120 Stat. 4. Federal Communications Commission (FCC). Consumer and Government Affairs Bureau. FCC Consumer Facts: Digital Television. Viewed 6/9/06 at http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/consumerfacts/digitaltv.html. Federal Communications Commission (FCC). Consumer and Government Affairs Bureau. FCC Consumer Facts: Compatibility of Cabel TV and Digital TV Receivers "Plug and Play." Viewed 6/9/06 at http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/consumerfacts/plugandplaytv.html. Federal Communications Commission (FCC). Second Report Order and Second Memorandum and Opinion and Order in MM Docket No. 00-39, 17 FCC Rcd 15978 (2002). Galperin, Hernan. New Television, Old Politics: The Transition to Digital TV in the United States and Britain. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004. Goldstein, Mark L. Testimony in "The Role of Technology in Achieving a Hard Deadline for the DTV Transition," hearing before the Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet, Committee on Energy and Commerce, U.S. House of Representatives, 109th Congress, 1st Session, May 26, 2005, Serial Number 109-28. Washington D.C: U.S. Government Printing Office (GPO), 2005. Hart, Jeffrey. Technology, Television and Competition: The Politics of Digital TV. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004. Lenard, Thomas M. Testimony in "Advancing the DTV Transition: An Examination of the FCC Media Bureau Proposal," hearing before the Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet, Committee on Energy and Commerce, U.S. House of Representatives, 108th Congress, 2nd Session, June 2, 2004, Serial Number 108-86. Washington D.C: U.S. Government Printing Office (GPO), 2004. Metz, Cade. "Online TV Only," in "TV Transformed," PC Magazine, Vol. 25, No. 2, February 7, 2006, p. 110. Park, Andrew, "HDTVs Scaled Down to Size," Business Week, Issue #3969, January 30, 2006, pp. 100 - 101. Russo, Patricia. Testimony in "How Internet Protocol-Related Services are Changing the Face of Communications: A View from Technology Companies," hearing before the Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet, Committee on Energy and Commerce, U.S. House of Representatives, 109th Congress, 1st Session, February 9, 2005, Serial Number 109-12. Washington D.C: U.S. Government Printing Office (GPO), 2005. Telecommunications Act of 1996. 110 Stat. 56 - 161, Title Two - Broadcast Services, Section 336: Broadcast Spectrum Flexibility (47 U.S.C. 336). Tully, Sarah and Chuang, Tamara. "Anaheim Allows AT&T to Install Internet TV," Orange County Register, Vol. 102, No. 67, March 8, 2006, pages News 1 and 4. Upton, Fred. Remarks in "How Internet Protocol-Related Services are Changing the Face of Communications: A View from Technology Companies," hearing before the Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet, Committee on Energy and Commerce, U.S. House of Representatives, 109th Congress, 1st Session, February 9, 2005, Serial Number 109-12. Washington D.C: U.S. Government Printing Office (GPO), 2005. Wildstrom, Stephen H. "Analog TV Fade to Black," Business Week, Issue #3968, January 23, 2006, p. 22. Yager, K. James. Testimony in "DTV Staff Discussion Draft of the DTV Transition Act of 2005," hearing before the Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet, Committee on Energy and Commerce, U.S. House of Representatives, 109th Congress, 1st Session, May 26, 2005, Serial Number 109-28. Washington D.C: U.S. Government Printing Office (GPO), 2005. "Your Guide to HDTVs," Consumer Reports, Vol. 71, No. 3, March 2006, pp. 12 - 22. 
To return to the top of the page, click here. To return to the essay archives, click here. Home |
Essays | Writing Excerpts | Poetry |
Free Concerts | Links | 2008 Extras |
About the Site |
||||
 | |||||
|
Comments? Questions? Send an e-mail to: 4dorothyb@dorothyswebsite.org | |||||
The politics and process of the transition to digital television in the U.S., the industry and legislative wrangling to
bring it to fruition, and its uncertain outcomes are much too complex to be fully outlined in a forum of this nature. This "snapshot," however, provides an update of actions taken this year which bring the
transition to DTV one step closer to completion.