Are Public TV Stations Seeking To Limit Consumer Choice?
from the call-now dept
As the mandatory crossover from analog to digital TV approaches, there is still some concern about the fate of those few holdouts who still get their TV the old-fashioned way, through over-the-air broadcasts. Unless they get a digital converter, they'll find themselves unable to get TV channels. Apparently, public television stations want to get converters out to their viewers, and may promote them through retail partnerships and as gifts during pledge drives. James Gattuso at the Technology Liberation Front sees a possibly sinister motive for the move: if people switch over to cable once they can no longer watch TV, they'll have more choices and will be less likely to watch public television. If this were indeed the intention, then the move would be shortsighted, since these stations would be better off making their content more appealing rather than hoping to limit viewer choice. But, there's probably a benign explanation. Public television stations aren't worried about people switching over to cable, they're worried about people not watching TV at all, which would have a much greater effect on their viewer numbers. It's hard to imagine that the pool of people who will subscribe to cable or satellite TV services because of the crossover is that great, and the number that will do so unless they get a free converter box from a PBS pledge drive is even smaller. Furthermore, public television stations have been building out their own digital offerings, so it's not as though they've been resisting the transition. Either way, this is an issue that effects a relatively small portion of TV viewers, so it probably won't have much of an impact on the stations. Update: James Gattuso has responded to this post in the comments, and states that his original post was simply based on the stated sentiments of public television executives, and not his own assessment of the situation. Apparently, the original article on the matter (which can't be linked to) suggests that stations could lose between 10-15% of their membership in the transition, although this number seems surprisingly high.Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
I am Jack
While I personally dont give a crap about Public TV, I do think this issue is a diffcult one.
The parallel I always get stuck thinking about is Public Radio. What... what would happen if this same paradigm shift was being forced upon the FM airwaves. What if the digital alternative to the analog FM we currently use is one of those crappy satellite based services?
I am aware that they have a "whatever" Public Radio channel, however, it doesn't carry my local Public Radio programming (read: content).
Yeah, yeah, yeah, I know.... the broadcast HDTV stuff is still just as local as its analog counterparts, but one cannot ignore the amount of people that will migrate instead to cable, where the ratio of commercial:local public content is ... so completely overwhelming...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
two cents worth
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I'm sorry, that's just stupid.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Quit looking for the sinister motive in everything
Our public TV station (Oklahoma) broadcasts 4 digital subchannels; one a digital, sometimes HD, rendition of their standard analog broadcast, one kids only channel, and 2 other with misc. programming.
Our cable system (Cox) doesn't even carry PBS in digital or HD; in fact it only has 2 of our 9 local channels in HD, no subchannels, and their converter boxes (converting analog signals to digital TV signals) put out horribly artifacted video. With my over the air setup I get 25-30 crystal clear digital channels.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Some clarification needed
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Freakin Ridiculous!!!
"While I personally dont give a crap about Public TV..." That about says it all! Next:
"what would happen if this same paradigm shift was being forced upon the FM airwaves..."
It pretty much is! Ever hear of HD Radio? (No not satellite radio)
"...What if the digital alternative to the analog FM we currently use is one of those crappy satellite based services?"
Well, um, it's not! HD Broadcast radio works like Broadcast HDTV. It uses the space between the analog channels to transmit the digital signal.
And by the way; It's only because you don't listen to your "Whatever" public radio station that you haven't realized that in addition to the syndicated (perhaps too big a word for you) content there is local content as well.
Ok...now that that's out of the way...
It's a ridiculous claim to say that public televison is trying to keep people from moving to cable or satellite by offering a converter. In the first place cable and satellite offer public content for free. (by law if I'm not mistaken)
http://www.dmwmedia.com/news/2006/05/18/pbs-adds-7-programs-to-free-vod-line-up
Then there's the fact that unless you're a part of the NASCAR/UFC crowd, you will use whatever resources are available to learn and expand your mind (if PBS is there, it will be watched). The rest will only ever watch ESPN anyway which makes this all a moot point.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Freakin Ridiculous!!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Freakin Ridiculous!!!
I don't watch tv at all, hence not caring about public TV, so the very first assumption you made that all your other assumptions followed was so wrong it just makes you an ass for launching your offensive.
I believe commercialized sports are an insult to our society. And I believe anyone who thinks nascar is a sport is included in that category.
I'm glad to hear that you have heard of HD broadcast radio. I haven't. Does that make me a neanderthal?
I don't listen to "Whatever" Public Radio on XM/syrius because they are entirely syndicated (perhaps too big a word for you), and do not carry my local PR station programming.
OK, now that YOU are out of the way...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I still laugh
Over the air - free and accessible. Over cable - not available at all or $100 per month, and highly subject to outages from fallen trees. Over satellite - no line of sight because of trees and moderate to heavy rain knocks it out too. Digital broadcast - their power limits are a fraction of analog and I hate to have to point it out again but they DO NOT have the same coverage area as the analog signals so it's not a viable replacement even if converters were free.
All of the US doesn't live in big cities with good weather and buried cables. We need weather alerts and advisories and the very weather that worries us (storms, tornadoes, heavy rains and flash floods) are the ones that take out everything (BUT the analog transmissions) right when we need them the most. Unless substancial increases are made in digital power output analog is the only viable alternative.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: I still laugh
If your TV options are as limited as you claim, then time is already running out for you to find a replacement solution. Analog TV's days are numbered. Whether you like it or not.
You can choose to think about it and find a solution now with time to implement it. OR you can sit there and gloat about how great your analog TV is right up until the day you suddenly don't have anything to watch any more. And then be forced to act.
Gloating about great analog TV is kinda like the guys who used to gloat about making the best darn horse wagons. Built the same way as always. Super duper wagons, best in the world. Could haul all the cargo anyone could want, just feed them oats and water.
And then somebody invented cargo trucks. And then somebody else figured out that the trucks could fit on rail lines, and somebody else invented SeaLand containerized freight.
Don't see many horse cargo wagons now. They might have been really great, same as always, the best in the world, but the world changed and left them behind.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Small numbers...
Yes, but to use a comparable analogy, architects and contractors have to go out of their way--sometimes at a huge expense--to accomodate a relatively small portion of the public, namely, the handicapped.
Disregarding whether or not we should or shouldn't, the fact remains that a "small portion" can have a disproportionate impact on the whole.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Small numbers...
The majority of the effort exerted "for the handicapped" also greatly benefits the masses. (except the parking spaces where the non-handicapped are clearly at a disadvantage)
The same doent quite hold true for the analog broadcast realm. Well, unless I am missing something...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
NASCAR not a sport?!?
Okay, I'll start off by first explaining that NASCAR is not a sport. NASCAR is an organization. Furthermore it's an abbreviation and should be capitalized when typed or written. Secondly, NASCAR is a sanctioning body of auto racing and auto racing IS a sport. As a matter of fact, it is one of the most difficult sports. The athletes in this case are put under as great amount of physical and phsycological stress as any other sport in the world. At the same time these atheletes have the additional stress of knowing that the wrong move could put themselves or someone else 6 feet under the earth.
Now, while I think that NASCAR is very much a joke in terms of auto racing, it still hosts auto racing and the drivers that compete deserve your respect as competitors and athletes. So please, have some respect, Jack.
Someone who knows...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: NASCAR not a sport?!?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
A bit of good publicity, and ad revenue stays safely where it is.
just my $0.02
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Analouge vs. Digital
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
PBS Viewers
I think PBS working toward offering converters is a great idea. And to say they are trying to "trap" people is just another example of mealy mouthed protectionist garbage. The simple fact is that a converter box represents a one time expense. And if you can get some of that money to go toward supporting PBS it is a good thing.
I hate the thought of PBS appealing to the majority of people. Most people want to watch crappy shows with little redeeming value. I think I will go pledge some money to PBS again.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]