<< Nov/Dec 2014 <<
January 2015 <<
February <<
March <<
April/May
<< July <<
August <<
September
<< July <<
August <<
September
<< June <<
July <<
August <<
September
<< July <<
August <<
September
<< June <<
July <<
August <<
September
<< June <<
July <<
Aug/Sept
<< Part I
(June/July)
<< Part II
(August)
<< Part I & Part II Bibliography
<< Part III
(September)
<< June <<
July <<
August <<
September
<< June <<
July/August <<
September
<< June << July << August << July/Aug
Bibliography <<
September
<< Part I
(June/July) << Part II
(August) <<Part III
(September) << Bibliography
<< August <<
September
* * *
Click here to read about the summer's FEATURED ARTISTS!
Visit the site's GUESTS page.
Click here for site NEWS.
* * *
* * *
|
|
Essay - September 2005
Will You Be Singing the TV Black Box Blues? The Transition to Digital
Television in the U.S.
*As with the previous essays,
the following is an interactive essay. Although it can be read as is,
links are embedded at various points in the article. By clicking the link
you can read more about the particular topic being discussed, then return to the essay.
(The links are included for information purposes only. No guarantees are
made as to the accuracy of the materials presented on the sites, although
every effort has been made to search out reliable and respected sources of
information.) (Please note:
some links have changed since 2005 or are no longer in existence.
Where it is possible, they have be updated to reflect the changes. Changes which have been made are not
included in the body of the text but are noted in the "Links List" at the bottom of the page.) Footnotes and a bibliography are also included at the end
for anyone wishing to learn more about the subject. The materials
represented here are only a small fraction of what is available on this
issue. The glossary link has been provided as a reference for use as
needed.
Click here to reach the
glossary.*
Picture the following scenario in the not too
distant future: You've had a busy week or two and haven't seen the news in
a while. Thinking you might watch the morning news while you have a cup of
coffee, you head to the kitchen and turn on the TV. Instead of getting a
picture, however, you get nothing but a blank screen. You call the repair
shop, and the first thing the person on the other end of the line asks is
"Is your television set digital or analog?" "Why?" you reply. The person
explains, "Well, the nation has just switched to all-digital television
broadcasts. Your old analog television will no longer work without a
converter box that lets you receive and view the digital
transmissions!"
Is this
science fiction? No. For nearly a decade the nation's TV broadcasters,
carriers, manufacturers and retailers have been in the process of shifting
away from traditional analog broadcasts and television receivers to
digital television (DTV), including high-definition television (HDTV).
Although full transition was originally scheduled for 2006, it is now
likely that Congress will push the date back to 2009. At that point all
analog broadcasts will cease. Owners of television sets not equipped to
receive over-the-air (OTA) digital broadcasts will be forced to either
purchase converter boxes to use with their old televisions, buy new
televisions, or subscribe to a cable or satellite service enabling them to
view the digital programming.
The transition to digital television has been a lengthy -
and sometimes contentious - process involving the Federal Communications
Commission (FCC), Congress, broadcasters, industry, consumers, retailers,
and virtually all involved in the production, transmission and
distribution of television programming. It has been said of the change
that it is perhaps "the largest gamble ever undertaken by any industry,"
(n1) and one which
presents "marketing and technological challenges of daunting proportions."
(n2) This month's
essay will focus on the transition to DTV -- its history, current
timetable, and implications for consumers both now and in the years
ahead.
Analog vs.
Digital
Since television's inception, the system used to transmit
and display pictures and sound has been analog, using radio frequency
waves to deliver and display the images on a screen. It was a system
developed in the 1930s, and it produced a picture with a
horizontal-to-vertical (width to height) aspect ratio of 4:3, the
proportions of the image still used in today's conventional television
systems. (n3) Each
of the images of those systems is composed of a series of horizontal
lines, the picture's definition. In 1941, the U.S. adopted the 525-line
National Television System Committee (NTSC) standard (n4), and current
analog pictures provide a resolution of about 480 horizontal lines. (n5).
Digital television systems also use radio frequency waves
to deliver and display images, but the image information is encoded. The
"digital system represents the information content of [a] picture as a
series of numbers specifying the color and brightness of each point in
[an] image . . . Picture information can then be manipulated (modified,
adjusted, corrected, etc.) by digital signal processing techniques and/or
stored in memory, . . . similar to the way computers manipulate and store
data." (n6) [To
learn more about analog vs. digital, especially some of the benefits of
digital systems, click here,
or go to www.pbs.org/opb/crashcourse/digital_v_analog.]
There are three different levels of digital picture
quality:
-
Standard Definition TV (SDTV): Basic digital
television that may be displayed with fewer than 480 progressively
scanned lines (480p) in a "widescreen" 16:9 aspect ratio or standard 4:3
format.
-
Enhanced Definition TV (EDTV): A better digital
television transmission than SDTV with at least 480p, in a 16:9
"widescreen" or 4:3 display with Dolby digital surround sound. 480p is
the quality used by most DVD players.
-
High
Definition TV (HDTV): The best quality digital picture, a
widescreen (16"9) display with at least 720 progressively scanned lines
(720p) or 1080 interlaced lines (1080i) and Dolby digital surround
sound. (n7)
Some may think that the impetus for
the move to digital television came from the computer or
telecommunications industries. It did not. The roots of the nation's
switch to digital came as the result of a perceived threat from
Japanese-developed HDTV in the 1980s.
The Development
of Digital TV in the U.S.
Back in the early- to mid-1980s, the Internet as we know it
today did not exist, and personal computers were only beginning to gain
widespread use. By the start of the decade, however, televisions were in
about 98% of U.S. households, with an average of about two sets per home.
(n8) At the time
when the Japanese first demonstrated their HDTV system in the U.S., the
Japanese were "already manufacturing about one-third of the television
sets sold in America." (n9) "All U.S.-owned
firms, except Zenith, [had] abandoned the TV receiver manufacturing
business . . . [and] little work [was being done here] on HDTV." (n10) In addition, in
the period between 1980 and 1990, VCRs went from being found in about one
percent of American households to nearly 70%. (n11) Although an
American firm, Ampex, had invented the video cassette recorder, "by 1987
Japan and Korea had sold more than 100 million VCRs around the world, [a]
story [which] was a dark legend in the consumer electronics industry." (n12) In other words,
tensions were already running high regarding the ability of U.S. firms to
compete with the Japanese in certain industries.
With its pictures of previously unseen clarity, HDTV came
to be touted "as the greatest technological advance since the invention of
television itself. It was also seen by many at the time as a necessary
step [for the U.S. to pursue] to keep pace with the Japanese, who were
perceived as having a significant lead in the technology." (n13). Between the
late 1980s and early 1990s, materials on HDTV became so pervasive that
cases on the subject were even being taught at some of the nation's top
business schools. One note accompanying 1990 course materials at the
Harvard Business School indicated that, "Many observers predict that HDTV
will be the largest consumer electronics segment of the late 1990s and
early 21st [sic] century. What the U.S. government decides on a variety of
trade and industrial policies will have a critical impact on whether
Japanese, European or American producers gain advantage in the U.S. market
for this product." (n14) HDTV had become
not just an issue for consumers and the marketplace but a matter for
government policy as well.
During this same time the nation's broadcasters also became
concerned about what effect HDTV might have on them. "In 1987, 58
broadcasting organizations petitioned the Federal Communications
Commission (FCC) to initiate proceedings to explore the issues arising
from the possible introduction of advanced television technologies . . .
At the time it was believed that high-definition television (HDTV) could
not be broadcast in a standard television channel, which is 6 MHz
(megahertz) wide," (n15) and the
Japanese had announced their HDTV system was being re-designed for the
U.S. market. This petition led to the FCC's subsequent creation of the
ACATS, or Advisory Committee on Advanced Television Service.
When the ACATS announced it would accept proposals for a
U.S. HDTV standard, it set into motion a competition of sorts. Nearly two
dozen applications were submitted for consideration as the U.S. HDTV
standard. Most were for partially or fully analog systems, as was the
Japanese system. The prevailing sentiment in much of the broadcasting
community at the time was that "We'll have digital TV the same day as we
have an anti-gravity machine." (n16)
To the
surprise of all, and in a major breakthrough for the period, an engineer
at General Instruments devised a fully digital system and submitted a
proposal to ACATS for its consideration. Eventually, after all system
prototypes were tested, there was no one clear winner selected. The four
finalists, however, formed what was referred to as the "Grand Alliance,"
and together the developed what became the basis for DTV/HDTV in the U.S.
today.
Digital artwork "The Conductor" © 2010 Dorothy A. Birsic
The FCC and
Congress
Once a
standard had been established, broadcasters argued to the FCC and Congress
that they would need time to both alter their equipment for digital
transmissions and begin creating and airing programming in the format.
Given the nation's tradition of free over-the-air (OTA) television
programming, broadcasters argued that they would need an additional 6 MHz
portion of the broadcast spectrum so as to be able to broadcast both
digital and analog signals until the time that the transition to digital
television was complete. At that point analog broadcasts would cease, and
the additional 6 MHz of the spectrum would be returned to the government
and the people of the U.S.
The FCC developed digital television rules, and legislative
provisions for the transition were written into the Telecommunications Act
of 1996. (n17) A
target date for full transition was set for 2006 with a requirement for
evaluation of the advanced television services program within 10 years
after the date the licenses were issued. The provision was amended
slightly in the Balanced Budget Act of 1997. A clause was added stating
that analog broadcasts would cease in 2006 or whenever 85% of homes were
able to receive digital programming, whichever was later.
The entire plan was not without critics, including "Senate
Commerce Committee Chairman John McCain (R-Arizona) and former Senate
majority leader Robert Dole; liberal and conservative citizens' groups;
and rival industries." (n18) Ralph
Nader-affiliated groups called the spectrum give-away "a $70 billion
corporate welfare bonanza," (n19) and in a New
York Times article on March 27, 1997, Bob Dole referred to the give-away
as "a fleecing of the taxpayers." (n20) The reason? In
prior years the government had auctioned off portions of the broadcast
spectrum to other telecommunications entities raising billions of dollars
for the government. Estimates of the value of the portion of the spectrum
given to broadcasters were placed at $12 - 70 billion, (n21) an amount
critics argued could be used toward paying down the national
deficit.
The Schedule
Slips
The nation's transition to digital television involves
major changes in three areas: 1) broadcast stations (antennas, towers,
equipment, etc.), 2) digital programming (different equipment is necessary
to produce HDTV programming than analog programming, and digital content
must be created), and 3) consumer purchases of DTV/HDTV-compatible
receivers and/or compatible transmission service. (n22) By the year
2000 the complexity of the transition and associated problems were already
apparent, so much so that one Congressman remarked, " . . . there is no
longer a soul in the industry who thinks this transition will be over by
2006." (n23)
The
matter was revisited in Congress in 2002 prompting the following remarks
from Congressman Edward Markey of Massachusetts. In his comments he
highlights not only problems underlying the transition, but also perceived
costs in other areas due to the delay.
"The digital television
transition is woefully behind schedule, and quite simply will not conclude
by the original target date of 2006. It is also apparent that the slowness
of the transition is holding back two important telecommunications
revolutions. First, the lack of meaningful progress in DTV transition
impedes the growth of various industries in the interactive television
marketplace, including high-tech manufacturers, software engineers, and
content providers. Second, the fact that broadcasters will not return to
the government their current analog broadcasting frequencies any time soon
means that a new generation of wireless technologies and services is also
thwarted from reaching the marketplace. Both the interactive TV and
wireless revolutions that are unnecessarily delayed by the glacial pace of
the DTV transition could greatly contribute to economic growth, innovation
and job creation.
We must admit that at its core
the DTV transition represents a government-driven policy, not a purely
market-driven phenomenon, and it is therefore imperative that government
create the conditions and environment for policy success, especially given
the current economic slump. It is important for the FCC and the
subcommittee to follow through on the DTV policy we set in motion several
years ago in ways that serve the consumer interest.
Government
action to accelerate the DTV transition would send a strong signal to
entrepreneurs and [the] investment community that Federal policymakers are
committed to creating an environment where the technology sector can once
again drive growth and prosperity in the American economy. Failure to do
this is unfair to consumers and to taxpayers but is also unfair to the
various high-tech industries with a stake in the future of television and
a new generation of wireless services that could operate using frequencies
that the broadcasters ultimately give back." (n24)
That same year (2002) the FCC (www.fcc.gov) took a major step in
addressing the availability of DTV-compatible (but not necessarily
HDTV-compatible) television receivers for the general public. In its
Second Report and Order and Second Memorandum and Opinion Order (n25), the FCC
mandated a phased-in schedule under which all new television broadcast
receivers must include the capability of receiving over-the-air (OTA)
digital television (DTV) broadcast signals. This has been referred to as
the "DTV tuner requirement." In the original order, by July 1, 2007, all
new television receivers with screens 13 inches or larger must include DTV
tuners. The same date was applied to 100% of other receiver devices (VCRs,
DVD players, etc.) that receive OTA broadcast television
signals.
It is important to make the distinction here again between
DTV and HDTV. The receivers mandated by the FCC order "are required only
to provide usable picture and sound commensurate with their video and
audio capabilities when receiving DTV signals." (n26) This means that
anyone wishing to receive the highest quality OTA HDTV signals would still
need to purchase HDTV-specific equipment in order to view free OTA
broadcasts in HDTV format.
And what is the cost of HDTV-specific equipment? "Four
years ago the average retail price for an HDTV monitor (without a
tuner/decoder) was in the range of $2,200. Today that price has dropped by
a third to around $1,400 . . . The price drop is more dramatic for
integrated HDTV receivers [which include tuner/decoders] . . . Today a . .
. 61-inch model can be found for under $3,000 - a 62% price reduction
since the DTV transition began." (n27)
Congress is expected sometime this month to set the new
and final date for the end of analog television transmissions. Last year
the Media Bureau of the FCC proposed a date of January 1, 2009. (n28) Senate Commerce
Committee Chairman Ted Stevens has confirmed that the date is likely to be
in 2009, (n29) and
industry publication Broadcasting and Cable has reported that the
date is "expected to be June or July 2009." (n30)
Photograph "Lausanne, Switzerland" © 1984 Dorothy A. Birsic
DTV, HDTV and
the Consumer
What this all means for television viewers is likely to
depend on how each individual household receives television signals. In
general, the three primary means of viewing TV broadcasts in the U.S. are
OTA, cable, and direct broadcast satellite (DBS). According to U.S.
Government Accountability Office (GAO) statistics released earlier this
year, "19 percent, or roughly 21 million American households, rely
exclusively on OTA transmissions for their television viewing; 57 percent,
or nearly 64 million American households, view television via a cable
service; and about 19 percent, or about 20 million American households,
have a subscription to a DBS service." (n31). Since digital
programming policies vary from service to service, it is suggested that
cable and DBS subscribers contact their providers directly for information
concerning DTV and HDTV transmission and receiver
compatibility.
Consumer groups such as Consumers Union are of the opinion
that "any conversion to digital television must ensure that the analog
sets now in use will continue to function after the transition without
imposing additional costs on the consumer." (n32) In order to
ease the transition for households relying solely on OTA transmissions for
television programming, it has been proposed that a government subsidy be
established for consumer purchases of the set-top boxes which would be
used to convert digital signals for viewing on existing analog
televisions. Manufacturers estimate that if mass produced such converters
would sell for about $50 - $100. (n33) In principle
there appears to be little objection to subsidies for converters as a
means of speeding the DTV transition, especially if funds for the
subsidies were to come from proceeds of the eventual spectrum auction. At
issue, however, is to whom subsidies would be provided and in what amount.
Would they be available to all OTA households or means tested for
low-income households only? Who would administer the program and at what
cost? To read more about the set-top boxes and possible subsidy programs,
visit the GAO website at www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-05-258T.
Environmental
Issues
In 2002 there were 254 million television sets in U.S
homes. (n34) As
was noted in Consumer Reports last month, "The digital transition means
Americans will be discarding millions of TVs. Their components can be
hazardous and must be disposed of carefully." (n35) The recycling
of all electronic waste products, not just televisions, has become a major
issue throughout the U.S. To begin addressing the problem in California,
as of January 1 of this year, an Electronic Waste Recycling Fee is being
added to the retail purchase price of certain electronic display products.
The fee ranges from $6 to $10, and products on which it is levied include
computer monitors and LCD and plasma TV screens. To learn more about the
program, visit www.erecycle.org. (Information
on the site is also available in Spanish.)
Links and
Further Information
The
following list of websites is offered for those interested in learning
more about DTV and HDTV, especially those considering purchasing a new
DTV-compatible system. The list is by no means exhaustive; it is presented
as a starting point for further information on the transition to digital
television.
-
www.dtv.gov - The FCC's official
DTV website. The site provides information on virtually all aspects of
DTV and includes some information in Spanish.
-
www.checkHD.com - Also
accessible through www.nab.org,
the site allows a person to view HDTV program listings, antenna and
other information by zip code.
-
www.HearUsNow.org - The
Consumers Union (publishers of Consumer Reports) public policy website
for telecommunication issues, including HDTV
-
www.antennaweb.org - Helps
identify which antenna you'll need for OTA digital broadcasts. Also has
a link to an HDTV consumers guide.
-
www.ceretailers.org - Main
page includes a link to a pdf "Tip Sheet for Buying a Digital
Television." The same document is also available through the "Shoppers
Guide" link at www.dtv.gov
-
Consumer
electronics retailers sites such as www.bestbuy.com can carry
significant information on the HDTV products they sell. Also, the Sony
Style store in South Coast Plaza offers an in-store HDTV tutorial.
Contact the store directly for further information.
Conclusion
The
shift from analog to digital television is a major hurdle for a medium
which will undoubtedly be evolving for many years to come. Setting a firm
date for the end of the transition may bring a sense of finality to a
process begun nearly twenty years ago. In some ways, however, it is only
the first chapter in the story of a digital future which is still being
written.
Few
who have experienced the near life-like image clarity and theater-quality
sound of HDTV broadcasts, especially on large, wide-screen monitors, would
question the remarkable nature of the images presented. What seems
remarkably absent from the transition process, however, is a full
explanation to the American public as to how their interests are best
served in the switch from analog to digital television. If a survey was
taken tomorrow, it would be interesting to know not only how many people
are actually aware of the transition (which was originally scheduled to
end next year), but also how many fully understand the options available
to them outside of purchasing complex, thousand-dollar HDTV
systems.
There are signs, from the FCC's DTV
website to consumer "tip sheets" beginning to appear in retail outlets,
that the need to educate the public on digital television is being
recognized. The sooner the process begins the better, so that when the
final date for analog broadcasts arrives TV viewers are not left "singing
the TV black box blues."
FOOTNOTES - The following are the footnotes
indicated in the text in parentheses with the letter "n" and a number. If
you click the asterisk at the end of the footnote, it will take you back
to the paragraph where you left off.
n1 - Testimony
of David D. Smith in "High Definition Television," hearing before the
Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation, U.S. Senate, 105th
Congress, 1st Session, September 17, 1997, Senate Hearing 105-826.
Washington D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office (GPO), 1999, p. 40 (*)
n2 - Testimony
of Joseph J. Collins in "Transition to HDTV," hearing before the Committee
on Commerce, Science and Transportation, U.S. Senate, 105th Congress, 2nd
Session, July 8, 1998, Senate Hearing 105 - 1005. Washington D.C.: U.S.
GPO, 1998, p. 27 (*)
n3 - Robin,
Michael and Poulin, Michel, Digital Television Fundamentals, 2nd
Edition. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2000, p. 1 (*)
n4 - Ibid. (*)
n5 - Federal
Communication Commission (FCC), Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau,
"Digital Television: FCC Consumer Facts." Available on FCC website at
www.fcc.gov/cgb/consumerfacts/digitaltv.html. Viewed 8/23/05. (*)
n6 - U.S.
Congress, Office of Technology Assessment, The Big Picture: HDTV and
High Resolution Systems, OTA-BP-CIT-64, Washington D.C., U.S. GPO,
June 1990, p. 52 (*)
n7 - Federal
Communications Commission/Consumer Electronics Association/Consumer
Retailers Coalition, Buying a Digital Television Fact Sheet,
available at www.dtv.gov, click shoppers guide, or at www.ceretailers.org
(*)
n8 - "Table
1120: Utilization of Selected Media: 1970 - 2002," U.S. Census Bureau,
Statistical Abstract of the United States: 2004-2005, Washington,
D.C.: U.S. GPO, October 2004, p. 717 (*)
n9 - Brinkley,
Joel, Defining Vision: The Battle for the Future of Television, New
York/San Diego: Harcourt Brace and Company, 1997, p. 23 (*)
n10 - U.S.
Congress, Office of Technology Assessment, p. 7 (*)
n11 - U.S.
Census Bureau, Statistical Abstract, p. 717 (*)
n12 -
Brinkley, p. 24 (*)
n13 -
Testimony of Games Gattuso in "Transition to Digital Television," hearing
before the Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation, U.S. Senate,
107th Congress, 1st Session, Senate Hearing 107-1103, March 1, 2001,
Washington, D.C.: U.S. GPO, p. 64 (*)
n14 - Course
Syllabus - Managing International Trade and Competition, Harvard Business
School, Cambridge: Harvard University, Graduate School of Business
Administration, Spring 1990, p. 8 (*)
n15 - Boston,
Jim, DTV Survival Guide, New York: McGraw-Hill, 2000, p. 2 (*)
n16 -
Brinkley, p. 127 (*)
n17 - See 110
Stat. 56 - 161, "The Telecommunications Act of 1996," Title Two -
Broadcast Services, Section 336: Broadcast Spectrum Flexibility (47 USC
336) (*)
n18 -
Fleming, Heather, "DTV Critics March On," Broadcasting and Cable,
Vol. 127, No. 14, April 7, 1997, p. 11 (*)
n19 - Ibid.
(*)
n20 -
"Transition to Digital Television," U.S. Senate Hearing, March 1, 2001, p.
52 (*)
n21 - Ibid.
(*)
n22 - Ibid.,
pp. 4 - 5 (*)
n23 - "High
Definition Television and Related Matters," Hearing before the
Subcommittee on Telecommunications, Trade and Consumer Protection,
Committee on Commerce, House of Representatives, 106th Congress, Second
Session, July 25, 2000, Serial No. 106-143, Washington, D.C.: U.S. GPO
2000, p. 3 (*)
n24 - "Staff
Discussion Draft on the Transition to Digital Television," Hearing before
the Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet, Committee on
Energy and Commerce, House of Representatives, 107th Congress, Second
Session, September 25, 2002, Serial No. 107-141, Washington, D.C.: U.S.
GPO 2002, p. 3 (*)
n25 - See
Federal Communications Commission, Second Report and Order and Second
Memorandum and Opinion and Order in MM Docket No. 00-39, 19 FCC Rcd 15978
(2002) at 8-46 (*)
n26 - Federal
Communications Commission, Background, Report and Order of Further Notice
of Proposed Rulemaking, ET Docket No. 5-24, FCC 05-121, June 9, 2005. Also
available through www.dtv.gov (*)
n27 -
Statement of David H. Arland in "Preparing Consumers for the End of the
Digital Television Transition," hearing before the Subcommittee on
Telecommunications and the Internet, Committee on Energy and Commerce,
House of Representatives, 109th Congress, 1st Session, March 10, 2005,
Serial No. 109-5, Washington, D.C.: U.S. GPO, p. 21 (*)
n28 -
Testimony of Kenneth Ferree, "Completing the Digital Television
Transition," hearing before the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and
Transportation, June 9, 2004. Available at
http://commerce.senate.gov/hearings/testimony.cfm?id=1220&wit_id=3513.
Viewed 9/7/2005 (*)
n29 - Senator
Ted Stevens, Remarks at the Federal Communications Bar Association's
Annual Meeting, June 6, 2005. Available at
http://commerce.senate.gov/newsroom/printable.cfm?id=238489. Viewed
9/4/2005 (*)
n30 -
Eggerton, John, "DTV Bill Tops Busy DC Docket; FCC, Congress Have Full
Plate for Fall Season," Broadcasting and Cable, Vol. 135, No. 35,
August 29, 2005, p. 6 (*)
n31 -
Statement of Mark L. Goldstein, "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,
House of Representatives, 109th Congress, 1st Session, February 17, 2005,
Serial No. 109-9. Also available (pdf) at
www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-05-258T, p. 3 (*)
n32 -
"Viewpoint: You Shouldn't Have to Pay for Digital-TV Transition,"
Consumer Reports, Vol. 70, No. 8, August 2005, p. 61 (*)
n33 -
Testimony of Gene Kimmelman, "Digital Television Transition", hearing
before the Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation, U.S. Senate,
July 12, 2005. Available at
http://commerce.senate.gov/hearings/testimony.cfm?id=1568&wit_id=2054.
Also testimony of Dr. Jong Kim and K. James Yager, "The Role of Technology
in Achieving a Hard Deadline for the DTV Transition," hearings before the
Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet, Committee on Energy
and Commerce, House of Representatives, February 17, 2005. Both available
at
http://energycommerce.house.gov/108/Hearings/02172005hearing1435/hearing.htm.
See also Footnote 31. (*)
n34 - U.S.
Census Bureau, Statistical Abstract, p. 717(*)
n35 -
"Viewpoint: You Shouldn't Have to Pay for Digital-TV Transition," p. 61 (*)
Photograph © 2011 Dorothy A. Birsic
LINKS
INCLUDED IN ESSAY
-
Glossary - www.dtv.gov/glossary.html
-
Digital vs. Analog Crash Course -
www.pbs.org/opb/crashcourse/digital_v_analog
-
Federal Communications Commission - www.fcc.gov
-
Goldstein Testimony from Government Accountability
Office (GAO) - www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-05-258T or
www.gao.gov, search report GAO-05-258T
-
California E-Waste Recycling - www.erecycle.org
-
FCC Digital Television website - www.dtv.gov
-
HDTV Program Listings and other information by Zip
Code - www.checkHD.com. ( This link will direct you to www.antennaweb.com.)
-
Consumers Union public policy website -
www.HearUsNow.org
-
Digital Television Antenna information -
www.antennaweb.org
-
CERC - www.ceretailers.org
-
Retailer site - www.bestbuy.com
BIBLIOGRAPHY
- The following is the bibliography for the September essay on the
transition to digital television in the United States.
Boston, Jim. DTV
Survival Guide. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2000
Brice, Richard. Newnes
Guide to Digital Television. Oxford and Woburn, MA:
Butterworth-Heinemann/Reed Educational and Professional Publishing, Ltd.,
2000
Brinkley, Joel.
Defining Vision: The Battle for the Future of Television. New
York/San Diego: Harcourt Brace and Company, 1997
"Completing the Digital
Television Transition," hearing before the Senate Committee on
Commerce, Science and Transportation, June 9, 2004. Available at
http://commerce.senate.gov/hearings/testimony.cfm?id=1220&wit_id=3513.
Viewed 9/7/2005. Full witness list available at
http://commerce.senate.gov/hearings/witnesslist.cfm?id=1220
Course Syllabus - Managing
International Trade and Competition, Harvard Business School.
Cambridge: Harvard University, Graduate School of Business Administration,
Spring 1990
"Digital Television
Transition," hearing before the Committee on Commerce, Science and
Transportation, U.S. Senate, July 12, 2005. Available at
http://commerce.senate.gov/hearings/testimony.cfm?id=1568&wit_id=2054.
(Kimmelman)
Eggerton, John. "DTV Bill
Tops Busy D.C. Docket; FCC, Congress Have Full Plate for Fall Season,"
Broadcasting and Cable, Vol. 135, No. 35, August 29, 2005, p.
61
Federal Communications
Commission, Report and Order of Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking,
ET Docket No. 5-24, FCC 05-121, June 9, 2005. Also available through
www.dtv.gov
Federal Communications
Commission, Second Report and Order/Second Memorandum and Opinion and
Order, MM Docket No. 00-39, 19 FCC Record 15978 (2002) at 8-46
Federal Communications
Commission, Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau, "Digital
Television: FCC Consumer Facts." Available on FCC website at
www.fcc.gov/cgb/consumerfacts/digitaltv.html. Viewed 8/23/05.
Federal Communications
Commission, Consumer Electronics Association and Consumer Electronics
Retail Coalition, "Buying a Digital Television Fact Sheet." Available
at www.dtv.gov, click shoppers' guide, or at
www.ceretailers.org
Fleming, Heather. "DTV
Critics March On," Broadcasting and Cable, Vol. 127, No. 14, April
7, 1997, p. 11
Goldstein, Mark. Digital
Broadcasting Television Transition - Estimated Cost of Supporting Set-Top
Boxes to Help Advance the DTV Transition." GAO-05-258T. Washington, D.C.:
Government Accountability Office (GAO), February 17, 2005
Hart, Jeffrey A.
Technology, Television and Competition: The Politics of Digital TV.
Cambridge: University Press, 2004
Hartwig, Robert L.
Basic TV Technology: Digital and Analog, 3rd Edition. Boston: Focal
Press, 2000
"High Definition
Televison," hearing before the Committee on Commerce, Science and
Transportation, U.S. Senate, 105th Congress, First Session, September 17,
1997, Senate Hearing 105-826. Washington, D.C.: U.S. GPO, 1999
"High Definition Television
and Related Matters," hearing before the Subcommittee on
Telecommunications, Trade and Consumer Protection, Committee on Commerce,
House of Representatives, 106th Congress, Second Session, July 25, 2000,
Serial No. 106-143. Washington D.C.: U.S. GPO, 2000
"Preparing Consumers for the
End of the Digital Television Transition," hearing before the
Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet, Committee on Energy
and Commerce, House of Representatives, 109th Congress, First Session,
March 10, 2005, Serial No. 109-5. Washington, D.C.: U.S. GPO,
2005
Robin, Michael and Poulin,
Michel. Digital Television Fundamentals, 2nd Edition. New York:
McGraw-Hill, 2000
"Staff Discussion Draft on the
Transition to Digital Television," hearing before the Subcommittee on
Telecommunications and the Internet, Committee on Energy and Commerce,
House of Representatives, 107th Congress, Second Session, September 25,
2002, Serial No. 107-141, Washington, D.C.: U.S. GPO, 2002
Stevens, Senator Ted.
Remarks at the Federal Communications Bar Association's Annual Meeting,
June 6, 2005. Available at
http://commerce.senate.gov/newsroom/printable.cfm?id=238489. Viewed
9/4/2005.
"The Role of Technology in
Achieving a Hard Deadline for the DTV Transition," hearings before the
Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet, Committee on Energy
and Commerce, House of Representatives, 109th Congress, First Session,
February 17, 2005, Serial No. 109-9. Washington, D.C.: U.S. GPO, 2005.
Also available at
http://energycommerce.house.gov/108/Hearings/02172005hearing1435/hearing.htm
"The Telecommunications Act of
1996," Title Two, Broadcast Services. 110 Stat 56-161; 47 USC
336
"Transition to Digital
Television," hearings before the Committee on Commerce, Science and
Transportation, U.S. Senate, 107th Congress, First Session, Senate Hearing
107-1103, March 1, 2001, Washington, D.C.: U.S. GPO
"Transition to HDTV,"
hearing before the Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation, U.S.
Senate, 105th Congress, 2nd Session, July 8, 1998, Senate Hearing
105-1005. Washington, D.C.: U.S. GPO, 1998
U.S. Census Bureau.
Statistical Abstract of the United States: 2004-2005. Washington,
D.C.: U.S. GPO, October 2004
U.S. Congress, Office of
Technology Assessment. The Big Picture: HDTV and High Resolution
Systems. OTA-BP-CIT-64. Washington, D.C.: U.S. GPO, June
1990
"Viewpoint: You Shouldn't Have
to Pay for Digital-TV Transition," Consumer Reports, Vol. 70,
No. 8, Aug 2005, p. 61
Weiss, S. Merrill.
Issues in Advanced Television Technology. Boston: Focal Press,
1996
To return to the top of the
page, click
here.
To return to the essay archives, click
here.
Follow www.dorothyswebsite.org on TWITTER!
"Like" www.dorothyswebsite.org on FACEBOOK!
Home | 
Essays | Poetry | Free Concerts | Links | 2015 Extras |
About the Site Featured Artists | 2015 Website Special Guests | News
|
|