How I Became a Victim of the Digital TV Switch

Jacob Sullum | June 12, 2009

Tim Cavanaugh's post about the transition to digital broadcasting reminded me of a panicky New York Times story from last week, headlined "Millions Face Blank Screens in TV Switch." According to the Times, "The latest survey by the Nielsen Company indicates that as of the end of May, more than 10 percent of the 114 million households that have television sets are either completely or partly unprepared." But it turns out that total includes "nine million homes that subscribe to cable or satellite services but that have spare television sets—typically in bedrooms and kitchens—that are not connected to any service." By this definition, I am a victim of the digital switchover, one of the millions whose screens have gone blank, even though I continue to watch cable TV on two sets. (The other three are rigged for DVDs, VHS tapes, and video games, so they are not, strictly speaking, "blank," except when they're off.) The remaining 3 million households "do not subscribe to cable or satellite services," so they are "totally unprepared for the transition." I'm not sure this counts as a crisis, especially since that number must include people who don't have cable or satellite service because they don't watch TV much. Even the folks who can't afford pay TV probably could spring for a digital converter box that is essentially free with the use of a $40 government-issued coupon.

Trying to explain the American public's complete or partial unpreparedness, Commerce Secretary Gary Locke blames crappy PSAs: "We could have more crisply and clearly indicated who was affected by the switch. I've been critical of the public service announcements that just say, 'The switch is coming' or 'Are you ready?' " He also blames technological ineptness: "Too many people don't know the difference between digital and analog. I didn't even know myself until a few months ago, when my brother-in-law explained it to me." And plain old-fashioned procrastination: "There are so many people who are always waiting until the last minute, whether it is college students doing term papers, or people filing taxes, or people like me who wait until Christmas Eve to do their shopping." The Commerce Department has been meaning to launch a program that addresses this issue but has not gotten around to it yet.

Comments

|6.12.09 @ 6:36PM|#

"Too many people don't know the difference between digital and analog. I didn't even know myself until a few months ago, when my brother-in-law explained it to me."

The right people in charge, eh?

jpocali|6.12.09 @ 6:38PM|#

Never again will I use those blood sucking cable and dish companies again for my tv! Internet baby! I watch what I want, when I want, and usually, if not commercial free, it is nearly commercial free. All for FREE! (with internet connection) With that many FREE's how could it be wrong? So, I guess I am also one of those citizens who's tv went blank.

Doug|6.12.09 @ 6:50PM|#

Ha! Analog television disappeared over a year ago out here on the tundra. (Ironically Alaska is quite progressive when it comes to implementing new technology. No screwing around...just throw the damned switch.) Anyway, y'all will do just fine. Just remember to keep breathing when your screens go blank. It'll be all right.

Hugh Akston|6.12.09 @ 6:51PM|#

I might be one of the analog-TV throwbacks, unprepared for the high-definition challenges of a new millennium. I have one TV thats maybe seven or eight years old that is connected only to a power supply and a Playstation 2.

I have no clue if it receives these fancy digimal signals, and I may never know.

Mister DNA|6.12.09 @ 6:54PM|#

Clearly, we need a Digital Television Czar.

24AheadDotCom|6.12.09 @ 6:56PM|#

They're trying!

Meanwhile, the completely inept Reason fails to note that funds for preparing people for the switch were in the StimBill. In fact, I tried to figure out how I could cash in but got caught up in other things. And, more importantly, Reason completely fails to ask why our leaders are so darn insistent on making sure that as many people as possible watch TV. I guess there are TV execs at all those Beltway cocktail parties that are seemingly the only Reason d'etre for this site.

In case this is the open thread, here's a post where I eviscerate Mike Murphy.

P.S. In case anyone replies to this, their responses will almost assuredly be ad homs delivered through sockpuppets, thereby conceding my points and showing the cowardly, childish, anti-intellectual nature of libertarians.

nobody|6.12.09 @ 7:02PM|#

Lonewacko,

Seriously, what the fuck are you talking about.

Yours,

nobody

BakedPenguin|6.12.09 @ 7:06PM|#

For those who haven't seen it, here's some ad hominem for Lonewhacker...

Joel|6.12.09 @ 7:06PM|#

all those Beltway cocktail parties that are seemingly the only Reason d'etre...

LoneWacko made a FunnyComment! The point it was trying to make was as wrong-headed as it was incoherent, but the pun was actually QuiteWitty by LoneWacko's standards. Well done, LoneWacko, and Shut The FuckUp!

LarryA|6.12.09 @ 7:10PM|#

Gary Locke blames crappy PSAs: "We could have more crisply and clearly indicated who was affected by the switch. I've been critical of the public service announcements that just say, 'The switch is coming' or 'Are you ready?' "

Really? Our local and national news stations have been running stories on this "issue" for months, including temporary shutdowns of analog signals. "If your TV just went off for a moment, you need a box." Just how much more "clear and crisp" can you get?

Anyone not knowing this is coming and what to do is either brain-dead or doesn't watch TV.

Please, let the whole thing go away!

John C|6.12.09 @ 7:16PM|#

My TV from 2000 doesn't even have connections for a DVD player or a lot of those fancy new game systems. It does have a cable box, though.

EJM|6.12.09 @ 7:18PM|#

For me, the only benefit of the digital switchover would be the ability to watch all of MHz Networks' multicast channels over the air. I say "would be" because my sole TV is so old that I almost certainly would have to buy a new one--which I haven't yet done.

|6.12.09 @ 7:21PM|#

I have a feeling that all this bullshit is a result of the politicians and lackeys in DC being terrified that the yokels in flyover country, who are clearly too stupid to get analog/digital if Gary "bro-nalog" Locke didn't get it, won't be changed over. Then they'll freak out because all they do is watch Jerry Springer and drink beer while molesting their kids and goldfish, and they'll blame the politicians, and it'll be a shitstorm.

The fact that even the people I just described want their TV enough to get this switchover right seems beyond them.

Also, they are probably terrified of AARP. I know I am.

SIV|6.12.09 @ 7:26PM|#

Call 911 the TV is broken.

TallDave|6.12.09 @ 7:46PM|#

It's sad to see Jacob become a pawn of Big Analog.

Man. You used to have integrity. Now you're just a pathetic shill.

strat|6.12.09 @ 7:59PM|#

Though I completely believe that the majority of the politicians' concern is the risk of blame for "messin' up mah teevee," the broadcast infrastructure is a part of the National Communications System and is an important part of the systems in place with which the USG communicates with the populace during emergencies.

The Internet is wonderful but sometimes RF transmissions will travel to places wires can't.

HOCKEYPUCKANDSTICK|6.12.09 @ 8:16PM|#

I"M WATCHING HOCKEY RIGHT NOW OMOMOM

IT IS HD AND SEXY, so I guess I'm ready!

|6.12.09 @ 8:24PM|#

Wait a minute, did LoneWacko say all the trouble with digital conversion is because of IllegalMexicanImmigration? Someone who read his drivel tell me, because I, sure as hell, am not going to.

Warmongering Lunatic|6.12.09 @ 8:57PM|#

Meh. I've got my government-subsidized converter boxes in case some day I ever wind up with an analog TV not hooked up to cable.

baldanders|6.12.09 @ 9:35PM|#

There's a limit to the amount of stupidity we ought to subsidize. I mean, if it's not enough to waste some ungodly number of potentially paid advertising slots trying to _give away_ the requisite equipment, I'm not sure what would be. Maybe we should add a branch to Americorps that goes around fucking installing free converters for the elderly and the stupid.

I'm not sure I think Congress ought to dictate analog or digital (though I'm actually not quite sure they shouldn't given current regulations- gray area here, IMHO.) But seriously people- get with the fucking program.

baldanders|6.12.09 @ 9:37PM|#

"Wait a minute, did LoneWacko say all the trouble with digital conversion is because of IllegalMexicanImmigration? "

Well, I mean I'm no fan of Lonewhacko or anything, but surely that's plain to see Isaac.. or should I say Julio? Hmm?

|6.12.09 @ 9:49PM|#

LoneWacko struggled with the converter, trying to figure out how to install it. His RCA TV was 30 years old, but it was American made, damn it! So why wouldn't the digital converter work?

That's when he saw on the back: "Hecho en Mexico". LoneWacko cursed and flung the converter across the room. No wonder it was free! Subsidizing Mexican labor with his tax dollars!

He decided he might have to settle for a Japanese-made one. He couldn't miss a single episode of Sin Senos No Hay Paraíso. After all, one had to keep an eye on Columbian prostitutes desiring huge breast implants...for the good of the US.

24AheadDotCom|6.12.09 @ 10:40PM|#

Here's an interesting post about Reason commenter John Thacker. Google seems to like that post too.

Remember: you're never really anonymous on the web.

baldanders|6.12.09 @ 10:56PM|#

"I've heard a good rule of thumb is to reduce the reported street value by an order of magnitude."...

I've sometimes thought that the pile on you attract is a bit excessive. But really.. this is some juvenile bullshit. For the first time I'm really tempted to tell you to shut the fuck up.

baldanders1|6.12.09 @ 10:57PM|#

err- wrong paste there. I think you can figure out what I meant to respond to on your own.

24AheadDotCom|6.12.09 @ 11:13PM|#

By the way, I am a retard.

|6.12.09 @ 11:21PM|#

Ah, yes, LoneWacko trying to explain how "I'm against what Reason says about welfare and taxes and spending because I find the econ aspect of libertarianism morally abhorrent, I'm just against 'massive immigration'" should be ignored when he's trying to pretend to a different group of commenters at McArdle's blog that he's libertarian on spending.

It's pretty clear that you're a hack (and worse) who's willing to pretend to adopt any other position so long as you think it might further your goal of arguing the anti-immigration position. So you'll pretend to be libertarian, socialist, whatever.

Thanks for linking to the original Reason thread where you showed yourself to be a national socialist, LoneWacko.

|6.12.09 @ 11:25PM|#

From all the much ado concerning the switch-over one gets the sneaking suspicion that the television broadcasting industry is scared shitless at the prospect of large numbers of people going without television for a day or so. Whasamatta? Are they afraid people might find they actually enjoy the relative peace and quiet of a home bereft of the broadcasters' drivel? Who knows - people might even start thinking again. Horrors!

|6.12.09 @ 11:26PM|#

The idea of a moron who uses sock puppets and has to keep changing his alias because people realize that he's such an idiot trying to lecture me, who uses my real name, that "you're never really anonymous on the Internet" is laughable. I'm not ashamed of anything I said about you; the only person who should be worried about "never really being anonymous on the Internet" is you.

24AheadDotCom|6.12.09 @ 11:31PM|#

That retard above claiming I am a retard was a sock-puppet. Accurate, but still...

JB|6.12.09 @ 11:38PM|#

Fuck you digital Penguin!!!!!!!!!!!!!

JB|6.12.09 @ 11:38PM|#

I is victim.

Where is my affirmative action????!?!??!!!

I has tv and no cable. Because who needs bullshit tv run by cabal?

baldanders|6.12.09 @ 11:54PM|#

Let me explain this to you in really simple terms lone. What is said at Reason, stays at Reason, capisce? It's like Vegas.

Now, anyone who posts here under their real name ought to be ready to be googled- that's just the fucking facts. I mean- thank god I no longer have to go out, hat in hand, and ask people to pay me. But I might have to do that again eventually.. anyway.. if I do I hope they care more about my capabilities than what google turns up because I have been rather indiscreet in this respect.

This whole thing where you make a post meant to hurt someone and try to get it high in google's rankings is just... I mean, I hope you're prepared for the kind of retaliation that might inspire.

You're not very well liked. I would normally be against anyone trying to harm you based on the fact that people don't like you much. I mean- people don't generally like me much either. But I think you've crossed a line here.

HOCKEYPUCKANDSTICK|6.13.09 @ 12:01AM|#

THE PENGUINS WIN!!!

I WAS WATCHING THE HOCKEY IN THE SEXY HD then! THE LOCAL NEWS harasses! THE PLAYERS WHILE THEY CELEBRATE. GUY DROPS F-BOMB "I can't fucking believe it!" JOURNALIST WINCES, priceless!

|6.13.09 @ 12:08AM|#

oh shut the fuck up you caps abusing freak.


truthfully all this drama is what it wants, you see? to really win, you starve the beast. engaging with it in any capacity only feeds it.

draw the line at direct conversation. the inside jokes are funny enough. but maybe it craves abuse? whatever, this is petty shit.

|6.13.09 @ 12:11AM|#

The PSAs were just fine, especially during the period between the original switch date and today, when they tended to concentrate not so much on the converter boxes, but on the need to check one's antenna and do a channel-scan on or before the fateful day, to make sure that your gear was programmed with all the channels you could receive.

Those PSAs were EVERYWHERE, ALL THE TIME. I can practically recite them from memory. Anyone who tapes programs off the air (broadcast channels, whether via broadcast, satellite, or cable), is guaranteed to have collected several PSAs per tape over the past six months or so. They were visually appealing, easy to understand, and often featured perky, friendly TV stars or near-stars, no doubt picked for their ability to get you to put the clicker down long enough to hear their spiel. Really, the only way they could have commanded any more of our attention would have been to deliver the material in the "Naked News" style. I suspect that even that suggestion was seriously considered by the transition squad at the FCC.

MJ|6.13.09 @ 7:04AM|#

There are always going to be a number of people who do not understand or do not care enough to do much about it. Government officials should stop angsting about it or not mandate these types of changes.

Tricky Prickears|6.13.09 @ 7:12AM|#

The PSAs were just fine

Sure, the legit ones. One of the problems, though, was that the local cable companies (Comcast) were running their own "PSAs", trying to trick people into thinking the only way to make the digital transition, was to subscribe to basic antenna service for $9.95/month. Plus, charge them a rental fee on the converter box, and expose them to all of the pay-per-view stuff. And, possibly talking them into a complete cable service. It caused much confusion, and the real PSAs should have been clearer regarding this.(?)

|6.13.09 @ 9:18AM|#

No one at the Department of Commerce seems to have considered the fact that it is mid-June, and the trouble of going out and picking up a new converter box or springing for a new TV will result in... what? Wipeout? The Bachelorette? I'm one of the three million households, and you can bet I'm not even going to think about picking up a new TV until September at least. Maybe they should do a recount when Grey's Anatomy is on the verge of premiering.

|6.13.09 @ 9:45AM|#

Anyone not knowing this is coming and what to do is either brain-dead or doesn't watch TV.

Don't you understand? The people who don't watch TV are precisely those who are most at risk. The government should require hulu, YouTube, and similar sites not to let people see the videos without first watching PSAs telling them they'd better get their converter boxes while they still can. A few years from now, when this whole intrawebs craze blows over, they're going to want to watch TV again, and they'll be sadly disappointed if we don't act now.

(There should probably also be big posters in bookstores and public libraries, too, for the benefit of people who read books instead of watching the tube. We don't want their bridges getting burned inadvertently either.)

|6.13.09 @ 10:23AM|#

Isn't a digital what the nurse gives you to check for an enlarged prostate?

|6.13.09 @ 10:32AM|#

Even with the free converter box and an antenna I bought, I can't get most of the digital signals where I live. I don't watch enough TV to warrant paying for cable, but without it, I'm left with only 2 stations that get reception now. And I live in a pretty populated area. Get a little further out into the suburbs, and there's probably even worse reception. But signal clarity is the big problem with digital, as you can't just get a weak signal and make do with it. It's all or nothing.

|6.13.09 @ 10:58AM|#

I don't even own a TV.

|6.13.09 @ 11:23AM|#

So, TV went from "a vast wasteland" to something so critically important that the government is subsidizing people's access?

TV must have *really* sucked back in '61.

|6.13.09 @ 12:01PM|#

I really find it hard to believe that anyone still uses rabbit ears! My Mom is about as old school as they come and she has DirecTV for peets sake!

RT
www.real-anonymity.pro.tc

|6.13.09 @ 12:28PM|#

Whoa. Spambots have mothers?

|6.13.09 @ 1:35PM|#

I have DirecTV for peets sake!

RT
www.real-anonymity.pro.tc

|6.13.09 @ 3:12PM|#

Meh. I've got my government-subsidized converter boxes in case some day I ever wind up with an analog TV not hooked up to cable. - Warmongering Lunatic

Same here. In fact, a few months ago, my $99 RCA handheld analog set with the 3" screen gave up the ghost. I used to use that for watching news and sports outdoors. With a screen that small, it was really more for listening than watching. But the analog/digital switch has made that obsolete anyway.

So, I replaced it with a digital model, for about the same price. I scanned the local stations last night, and I can get three signals:

• 2 channels from the local PBS affiliate, whose transmitter is 5 miles from where I live. One is the main feed, while the other is the Create subchannel for cooking, crafting, etc. They also have 2 other subchannels that, while the set recognizes them, don't seem to be broadcasting yet.

• 2 channels from what was the local UHF station dedicated to 24-hour infomercials. Both channels show the same feed.

• The signal from the local ABC station had been coming in. Now it doesn't. The local UHFer that was running the CW was always touch and go. Now it doesn't show up at all.

My market catches signals from NYC, New Haven and Hartford. I live in a hilly, wooded area. I don't think a small portable with a monopole antenna will cut it. I could hook up a more sophisticated rig to it, but that sort of defeats the point of having a portable TV.

I suppose, once I find a decent job and can afford it, my portable TV "needs" could be met by streaming video captured by some sort of PDA or phone, but that's where the phone cos./ISPs will attach a vacuum tube to my wallet. Not gonna happen.

For now, we're getting the same crummy tier of cable channels we did before the switch. Comcast has "migrated" several of our favorites to the digital-only service, however, without cutting the monthly cost. Sucks.

Kevin

24AheadDotCom|6.13.09 @ 3:31PM|#

JohnThacker writes that I was trying to pretend to a different group of commenters at McArdle's blog that [I'm a] libertarian on spending.

What part of my comment [1] doesn't JT understand? Apparently the part where I said, "CA's sitation shows just how faulty the arguments of libertarians are". I'm pretending to be a libertarian at the same time as I'm saying their arguments are faulty?

As for what I "showed myself" to be on the earlier thread, I did no such thing. That was simply a smear added by JT out of thin air.

As for the bit about anonymity I mentioned above, that was a message to others; I already know who some of you are and I'm a couple subpoenas away from finding out exactly who's who. Spending a couple hundred to get some advice from a lawyer now might be a good idea.

[1] meganmcardle.theatlantic.com/archives/2009/06/
can_we_really_bail_out_califor.php

|6.13.09 @ 7:35PM|#

I got the converter box.
I was getting 3 channels "free" before the changeover.
Now I get none (with the box).
When someone from the company came out he said I need a better anttenna.
Screw it- I am NOT paying a cable company hundreds of dollars a year to drain my mind & fill it with nonsense.
Why do we seem to have such difficulty with silence?
I always wonder-an opportunity to hypnotise the whole (or most of) the population is not going to be used with subliminals by those who ONLY care about money and power?
As is, its just a great part of the con-spend hours getting to and from work- spend most of waking hours as a wage slave and whatever is left watching fantasies about other peoples' lives.
Well, guess what? Technology makes wage slaves increasingly useless- so what do you think the next plan is?
Is any one out there?

Tricky Prickears|6.13.09 @ 7:39PM|#

Somebody please explain to me why we went through all this bullshit. To free up the airwaves for WIFI, or something? Or does subliminal mind control work better on a digital signal? I know something's going on. 9 out of 10 times when I sit down at my computer, after about 2 minutes, I have to run to the bathroom, and release a very loose bowel movement. I'm trying to convince myself that it's just the chair, and the angle I'm sitting at, but I just have this funny feeling that it's some kind of virtual subliminal mind fuck side effect. If/when it starts happening when I sit down to watch TV (which is very rarely), I'll know somethings up.

|6.13.09 @ 7:41PM|#

LW, don't go down this course. Even people who might have sympathy for your cause can only think you are an idiot.

|6.13.09 @ 7:49PM|#

My initial thought, before whackjob's disgusting comment, was thanks to Reason for informing the WSJ on today's tobacco editorial. They may have lifted it word for word from H&R, but it's tough to know who owes who lately.

|6.13.09 @ 8:10PM|#

Lonewacko left the zoo a happy man. The monkeys had been masturbating pretty much non-stop for almost an hour, and he had recorded most of it so he could study their techniques in the hopes of applying them to his own love life.

But suddenly, he saw a crowd developing around a blonde pantsuit-clad woman in the parking lot. Could it be ... HER?! Quickly he reached into his fanny pack to pull out his minicam, but it was hard to do while he was running and the apparatus was banging on his crotch. Finally he retrieved it and was now close enough to see that the woman was indeed his white whale. But with a gasp he realized he only had three minutes of video left on his camera, so it would have to be quick.

Pushing his way through the crowd he finally arrived face to face with Hillary Clinton. She stared uncomfortably in his direction as he hit the record button, and fumbled for his MyLittlePony notepad where he had written all the questions he needed to ask the powerful. To his horror he saw that the partially eaten TootsieRolls he'd been saving for later had melted onto the notepad rendering it illegible. Sweating and shaking, all he could think to ask was "What's your favorite flavor of ice cream?"

The senator rolled her eyes, and everyone gathered about laughed at him mercilessly. A troop of BoyScouts pelted him with their miniature wax molded gorillas as he staggered away, making a mental note to delete the last three minutes of video from his camera.

But the next day, he received a YouTube link via email from his mother. Sure that it was another pro-border documentary or something, he clicked on the link...only to see video of himself asking Hildog about ice cream. He plotted his revenge against the author of the video -- one John Thacker. His vengeance would not be denied this time.

Lord Jubjub|6.13.09 @ 8:40PM|#

Homer: What really burns me up is they didn't give us one word of warning.

Carl: What do you mean? They ran those TV commercials about it, and that big radio campaign.

Lenny: Don't forget the leaflets they dropped from the Space Shuttle, and the two weeks we all spent at area code camp.

Homer: Not a single word of warning.

|6.13.09 @ 11:40PM|#

What about people who steal cable?

I wasn't "ready" for the switch, but I didn't see my TV "go blank" on June 12. Instead, it went blank on June 11 when I turned it off and threw it in the dumpster.

|6.13.09 @ 11:42PM|#

PSAs? I never saw one. Does this mean my rabbit ears are obsolete? If I can find them I'll have to check.

Until then I suppose I'll have to make do with the intertubes.

|6.14.09 @ 5:10AM|#

The DTV "transition" was a top-down command-and-control operation, the key goal of which was to "resettle" TV viewers in less valuable spectrum "reservations," so that the government could auction off the now-vacated VHF and UHF spectrum space to the highest bidder.

The stated rationale for the switchover was the technological superiority of DTV (while the less loudly touted rationale was the ability of the electronics industry to sell us more stuff). But the real reason was to facilitate the spectrum auction and get more dollars flowing into DC. No matter how "superior" DTV might be, or what a moneymaker it could prove to be for industry, we would have no mandated switchover if Uncle Sam wasn't in bad need of cash, or couldn't find a way to profit from the transition.

Tricky Prickears|6.14.09 @ 7:16AM|#

...so that the government could auction off the now-vacated VHF and UHF spectrum space to the highest bidder.

But what exactly, are these freed up frequencies going to be used for? WiFi, MuniFi? UHF and VHF have much higher bandwidths than the traditional 2.4GHz WiFi. The higher frequencies also penetrate buildings better, and have greater range. Will there be limitations (strings) attached regarding the usage of these frequencies? And what will they be? Are we looking at more of this?
Will it be all commercial development to directly compete with cable and phone company ISPs? Will cell phone companies try to gobble them up? Will cities and municipalities use them for emergency dispatch services and other types of "monitoring" of city streets and public areas? Does anybody care?

Tricky Prickears|6.14.09 @ 8:10AM|#

What is certain is that everybody will be watching the Philadelphia experiment to see if it becomes a big success or mess

It turned into a big shitty mess!

Craig|6.14.09 @ 3:48PM|#

...the broadcast infrastructure is a part of the National Communications System and is an important part of the systems in place with which the USG communicates with the populace during emergencies.

Only a few problems with this excuse -- in a real emergency, electricity is out and TV with it, and the USG (through FEMA) is typically a hindrance anyway (see Katrina, Hurricane.)

|6.14.09 @ 6:33PM|#

"Only a few problems with this excuse -- in a real emergency, electricity is out and TV with it, and the USG (through FEMA) is typically a hindrance anyway (see Katrina, Hurricane.)"

People have battery-operated TVs. And any serious broadcast station (radio or TV) has a backup generator. So while a great many viewers might be unable to receive broadcasts, a significant number still could, at least to the point of being able to spread the word in their neighborhoods about whatever they learned from emergency TV transmissions.

I agree about the relative uselessness of the USG, though. The fact that we allow them to be the gatekeepers for spectrum at all is a disappointing and -- in the case of an actual emergency -- frightening thing for me to consider.