Computers & Technology >
TV
Get a Widget for this title
RSS FeedShould we be forced to have only digital TV?
Results so far:
| Yes | 32% | 192 votes | Total: 609 votes | |
| No | 68% | 417 votes |
Yes
Write now
Print
Invite a writer™
Add to FavoritesOn a technical level, digital television is far superior to analog. The digital transition is good for developing technologies. It will make more programing available for those that have off-air antennas. It will add money to our government coffers. And it will free up needed frequencies so a national emergency channel can be established. Free digital TV offers the consumer more of everything. Local broadcast stations can now even multicast. Multicasting is when a local station offers more than one over-the-air channel. They can have five or six channels in the same space they could only offer one analog channel. Even free high definition television is available in many markets.
The US government has spent more than a billion dollars to facilitate the analog to digital television transition. It's has also been advertising for more than three years to inform and educate consumers. Additionally, private industry has also spent hundreds of million of dollars to upgrade their equipment and inform consumers. I find it astounding that after years of incessant advertisement, some consumers have taken no action and express little understanding of the issue. The government and industry have bent over backwards to explain that analog television is an old and dying technology.
So why is there a debate? Simply put, some consumers are afraid of new technology or simply don't wish to spend anything to upgrade. In our world, technology marches on. We don't use eight track players anymore, floppy discs are gone and now it is time to upgrade television too.
Complaints about cost are not valid. Television is not an inalienable right, nor even a necessity. If you want it, then you must pay the cost. I checked with my local cable company (Comcast). In my area, their "limited basic" package is $11.90USD per month and includes twenty three channels. Plus they offer free installation for new customers. Also, the Dish Network has been advertising basic digital TV for around $20USD per month. Granted, it might not free, but it is very reasonably priced. The other option for consumers is to make a one time modest investment for a digital converter. The converter would be virtually free with a government funded coupon.
When consumers wanted free analog television, they still had to purchase the equipment to watch it. It's no different now. If consumers want to keep getting free TV, they must make an investment in equipment to get more and better free TV.
The government is doing something right. Luddites will just have to come along or lose out. You can always listen to the radio...oh no...wait, that's going digital too.
Learn more about this author, Philo Farnsworth.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.
No
While many people are sick of hearing about the switch to digital television, they may not recognize this issue for what it is: an example of others deciding what is "best" for people without their consent. This issue exemplifies the progressive dipping into folk's lives by the government, micro-managing and invading. These laws are always passed "for our own good" of course. As an adult who wants to retain the right to make decisions for myself, even if they don't meet the standards of some law-maker out there, I say no one should force us to move to a digital only world without our consent. In other words, I want my vote counted!
My first thought on hearing about the law forcing stations to become all digital was "someone is going to make money because of this, a lot of money." Someone, somewhere has a huge stake in the digitalizing of our television media. Whoever it was caught us off guard because the law was passed with little to no fanfare; the majority of people didn't even know about it.
"You'll get a better picture," they chant. When the weather doesn't interfere, this is a true statement. However, digital is not perfect and you wind up having your station pixilate or even disappear for seconds or minutes at a time. At least on analog, I get to watch (and hear) the entire show.
A "better picture" does not make up for issues with volume. In order to hear with a converter box, you must turn the volume up all the way. Even then, there is no guarantee you will hear all of the programs. Of course, commercials always come in loud and clear: surprise, surprise.
First a person who wants to continue watching television must buy a converter box that costs a minimum of ten dollars with a coupon. Many may claim ten dollars isn't much, but if a person or family lives frugally on a fixed income, ten dollars can spell the difference between watching television and eating. Then the prospective television watcher must bear the expense of a better antenna if they really want to get all those extra channels promised. These folks, strapped for cash at the best of times, may not have the option of purchasing cable or DTV they do not even want.
This move to exclusive digital television may appear as a non-issue to some, but I can guarantee you a converter box marks only the beginning of the hidden and not so hidden costs this move will engender. This law forces folks to make a difficult, impossible for some, choice in regard to their television viewing. The choices are: stop watching television, comply and pay all the added costs, hook up through cable or DTV or buy a new HDTV. Viewers must jump through the hoops while someone gets a whole new influx of cash from the "cattle" herded through the chute of forced digital television.
I own an analog television with rabbit ears. I only get a few stations, but I'm happy with that. Ask yourselves these questions: Who stands to gain by this move? Should Congress have the right to force me to go digital without my consent? Should Congress have the right to force all television stations to become digital? And finally, where will it end? Congress, in passing this law, protected big business at the expense of those who keep television solvent: the viewer.
Learn more about this author, Angela S. Young.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.
