analog shutdown maybe delayed

[Scott Fybush]

Sid Schweiger wrote:
>>> Its just the Gray Lady's usual new style of finger pointing reporting.<<
> 
> Woah, Nellie.  It's an op-ed piece (OKA opinion), not reporting.  Its authors are two former FCC chairmen, William Kennard and Michael Powell.

...both of whom have political scores to settle by making their 
successor, Kevin Martin, look bad.

It's rather depressing to watch the DTV transition getting turned into a 
political football. I just flipped across a half-hour show on C-SPAN in 
which Senator Sanders (I-Bill'O Land) was being interviewed by my old 
"TV Technology" colleague Sanjay Talwani - and in which Bernie professed 
how "shocked" and "surprised" he was to find out (just recently, mind 
you!) that the money for the coupons was running out, and how many of 
his constituents would be losing over-the-air TV service.

Earth to Bernie: You're from a state that's full of mountains. It's also 
- thanks in no small part to the many transmitter sites across Vermont 
built largely at state expense by Vermont Public TV - a great candidate 
for some large-scale testing of distributed transmission systems, which 
would do far more over the long term to provide reliable reception to 
underserved areas than would any of the proposals you're suggesting - 
from an extension of analog service to government funding for new 
antennas or to subsidize low-cost lifeline cable/satellite service.

But the more time wasted dithering over extending analog service by a 
few months means a later and later start on figuring out just what 
post-transition DTV service areas will look like in real life, and on 
finding ways to fix any problems that will exist.

(And another thought here: The whole "let's delay the analog shutoff" 
movement seems to be premised on an idea that once reception is lost, 
it's lost for good. Will the earth cease to spin on its axis if it takes 
a few weeks to restore service for some viewers who lose it temporarily?)

s