The end of ota hdtv?

[alg2468]

I have been reading stories almost daily on Broadcasting Cable online about the possible reclamation of the OTA broadcast spectrum by the FCC to use for broadband and forcing everyone to get cable or satellite.  After many of us had to buy new equipment over the past few years to receive the signals this is a total outrage, and another hefty expense for many already struggling in this economy. And I predict that after the takeover there will be a government takeover of cable and satellite companies, too.  I'm surprized that many on this board are not watching these developments closely and make it loud and clear to their legislators that they do not want to end free OTA TV.

[M.J.]

As long as the broadcasters believe there is a market for OTA TV - and there certainly is - they will fight it hard.

That said, I believe the TV spectrum does not need 50 channels. With digital subchannels, the ability to put multiple channels on adjacent channels, and the number of TV licenses wasted on channels nobody watches, there is no need for 50 channels. Keep Channels 7-33, auction off 34-51 for other uses, and use 2-6 to expand the FM radio band. There are definitely some AM stations out there that would gladly move to FM if they could.

Here's an example of what could be done in a market with other markets nearby also needing channels.

7 - ABC
9 - English indy
11 - English indy
13 - PBS
15 - FOX
22 - CBS
25 - Spanish
31 - secondary PBS

[landtuna]

I am a fairly astute reader of things electronic but have not seen the articles the first poster talks about; the demise of OTA TV.  Certain blogs have advanced this possibility but it seems in the realm of pure speculation at this time.

As to the re-allocation of FM .....from what I read on these boards listenership on OTA radio has been in decline for years.  If this is true, and markets are now generally served with multiple copies of existing formats why would we need even more stations?  And what content would go on those new FM's that doesn't already exist?  FM-HD has already proved there is not much demand for digital subs.  Especially ones requiring new equipment.

Want to help AM?  Kill off IBOC.  AM does serve an important purpose which cannot be filled by FM but the AM band needs to be cleaned up.  Fewer stations with better signals are needed.  And kill the hash!

As for OTA TV.....with all the problems associated with digital VHF why keep it at all?  Move 'em all to UHF.

Someone with more knowledge than I have will have to address the adjacent channel issues but I don't believe, from what has been reported to date, that adjacent channel usage is possible.  Some separation seems to be required.  I agree we don't need 50 channels.  We have many more than needed today and certainly don't need more infomercial or brokered energy wasters.

[tripinva]

So MJ how do you decide which stations get shut down by the government without ending up in the Supreme Court?

I think we need all of the remaining channels.

- Trip

[ShawnHill1]

So MJ how do you decide which stations get shut down by the government without ending up in the Supreme Court?

I think we need all of the remaining channels.

- Trip

Plus, you have to look at it by a market-by-market basis.  M.J.'s idea might work in medium and smaller-size markets, but what about in larger markets?  I don't know if he/she intentionally left out NBC on that list, you also have Spanish broadcasters (Univision, Telemundo, and lesser ones--Telefutura, Azteca America, Mun2), the religious ones (TBN, FamilyNet, Daystar, etc.), and the other second and third-tier outfits (Ion and their digitals, This TV, and many others).  I can't see OTA HDTV/digital going away in the near future, but eventually it will...whether it'll happen in our lifetimes, we'll see.

[Dave]

There are markets that would like to have more channels, but channel allocations from years ago cheated many markets.  South Bend Indiana was only allocated 5 full power channels with one of them being non-commercial.  Lafayette Indiana only has 1 channel for their market, and it's a CBS station.  Fort Wayne Indiana has just 6 full power stations with 1 being non-commercial.

Chicago has 15 full power stations licensed to the market (14 of the 15 have their transmitters in Chicago, though WYIN-DT can locate in Chicago, but costs keep them from doing so).  3 stations in the market are non-commercial (2 non-commercial licensed to Chicago, and 1 licensed to Gary Indiana)  2 stations originally couldn't locate in Chicago: WYIN-56, now on 17.1 & WJYS 62, now on 36.1. WYIN was originally being short-spaced with what is now WPXE, then on 55 with their transmitter on the Wisconsin/Illinois state line.  WJYS 62 was short-spaced with what was then WEHS, now WXFT, originally on 60.  Since DTV, spacing is no longer an issue.

However, WCPX 43.1 & WJYS 36.1 air mostly infomercials.  These 2 stations aren't worth having on the air.  WCPX would be alright if it was just Ion Life, and not Ion TV, as Ion Life has TV programs, while Ion TV has mostly infomercials.   I thought once WJYS put their digital signal in Chicago, and was able to remove the null toward Milwaukee, that they would air more programming.  Infomercials have actually increased instead of more programming.  I thought they were gonna increase their religious programming (basically picking up where the old WCFC left off, when Pax acquired then WCFC 38.  It looks like that Jovan Broadcasting (owner of WJYS) isn't interested in having actual programming on their station.  Instead they're letting First United (owner of WEDE-CA, which airs on analog 34, and WJYS 36.2) air all the religious programming on their digital subchannel.  Ironically WEDE-CA 34 used to be WJYS's translator for the northern suburbs & north side of Chicago, since WJYS couldn't locate in Chicago at the time.  WEDE-CA also has eliminated a lot of the Family Net programming.

WPWR in my opinion was better when Newsweb operated the station.  Since Fox Broadcasting bought the station, programming sucks.  The station is basically a dumping ground for programs that don't fit into WFLD's program lineup, or any sports programming that WFLD might own the rights to, but can't air it, in order to commit to Fox programming.  Too bad Weigel Broadcasting didn't own WPWR.  I believe they would have had better programming on the station by either having MeTV on a full power signal (like they do in Milwaukee), or some other programming.

As for 3 PBS stations in the market, people have to remember that WYIN isn't a full market signal, due to costs that prevent them from locating their transmitter in Chicago.  Also, their station focuses on NW Indiana rather than Chicago, though most of the programming schedule has most of the same programs.  As for WTTW & WYCC, WTTW focuses mostly on general PBS programming, while WYCC shows some general PBS programming, but focuses a lot on educational programming.

[dhett]

There are markets that would like to have more channels, but channel allocations from years ago cheated many markets.  South Bend Indiana was only allocated 5 full power channels with one of them being non-commercial.  Lafayette Indiana only has 1 channel for their market, and it's a CBS station.  Fort Wayne Indiana has just 6 full power stations with 1 being non-commercial.

The six-channel separation common with UHF stations in a market need no longer apply with digital.  Now, you can even have adjacent full-power channels in the same market, so long as the transmitters are located within 20 miles of each other.  In most markets, most if not all full-power stations are already co-located in antenna farms or atop tall buildings  (eg., Chicago with the John Hancock Center and the Tower Formerly Known As Sears).  Once the DTV transition settles down, you may see more allocation requests in those "cheated" markets.  Multiple subchannels also will help fill in missing network programming.  That has already occurred in some markets.

Right now, given the problems with VHF DTV, even high-VHF, and the inevitable desire for mobile TV, we may see more and more DTV move to UHF.  I think the FCC should clear the low-VHF band for other uses, and eventually, high-VHF as well.

[Pat Cook]

As long as the broadcasters believe there is a market for OTA TV - and there certainly is - they will fight it hard.

That said, I believe the TV spectrum does not need 50 channels. With digital subchannels, the ability to put multiple channels on adjacent channels, and the number of TV licenses wasted on channels nobody watches, there is no need for 50 channels. Keep Channels 7-33, auction off 34-51 for other uses, and use 2-6 to expand the FM radio band. There are definitely some AM stations out there that would gladly move to FM if they could.

Here's an example of what could be done in a market with other markets nearby also needing channels.

7 - ABC
9 - English indy
11 - English indy
13 - PBS
15 - FOX
22 - CBS
25 - Spanish
31 - secondary PBS

And just where would you propose that NBC, CW & MyNetwork TV go genius?

Genius?  I don't think so.....

Cheers

[kenrayc]

There are markets that would like to have more channels, but channel allocations from years ago cheated many markets.  South Bend Indiana was only allocated 5 full power channels with one of them being non-commercial.  Lafayette Indiana only has 1 channel for their market, and it's a CBS station.  Fort Wayne Indiana has just 6 full power stations with 1 being non-commercial.

The six-channel separation common with UHF stations in a market need no longer apply with digital.  Now, you can even have adjacent full-power channels in the same market, so long as the transmitters are located within 20 miles of each other.  In most markets, most if not all full-power stations are already co-located in antenna farms or atop tall buildings  (eg., Chicago with the John Hancock Center and the Tower Formerly Known As Sears).  Once the DTV transition settles down, you may see more allocation requests in those "cheated" markets.  Multiple subchannels also will help fill in missing network programming.  That has already occurred in some markets.

Right now, given the problems with VHF DTV, even high-VHF, and the inevitable desire for mobile TV, we may see more and more DTV move to UHF.  I think the FCC should clear the low-VHF band for other uses, and eventually, high-VHF as well.

Adjacent channels don't even need to be 20 miles apart, actually they can be on the same tower.
In Sacramento KVIE DT 9 (6.1) and KXTV DT 10 (10.1) are broadcasting on the same super tower in Walnut Grove, same with most other stations in the Sacramento/Stockton/Modesto market..

[Dave]

There are markets that would like to have more channels, but channel allocations from years ago cheated many markets.  South Bend Indiana was only allocated 5 full power channels with one of them being non-commercial.  Lafayette Indiana only has 1 channel for their market, and it's a CBS station.  Fort Wayne Indiana has just 6 full power stations with 1 being non-commercial.

The six-channel separation common with UHF stations in a market need no longer apply with digital.  Now, you can even have adjacent full-power channels in the same market, so long as the transmitters are located within 20 miles of each other.  In most markets, most if not all full-power stations are already co-located in antenna farms or atop tall buildings  (eg., Chicago with the John Hancock Center and the Tower Formerly Known As Sears).  Once the DTV transition settles down, you may see more allocation requests in those "cheated" markets.  Multiple subchannels also will help fill in missing network programming.  That has already occurred in some markets.

Right now, given the problems with VHF DTV, even high-VHF, and the inevitable desire for mobile TV, we may see more and more DTV move to UHF.  I think the FCC should clear the low-VHF band for other uses, and eventually, high-VHF as well.

Adjacent channels don't even need to be 20 miles apart, actually they can be on the same tower.
In Sacramento KVIE DT 9 (6.1) and KXTV DT 10 (10.1) are broadcasting on the same super tower in Walnut Grove, same with most other stations in the Sacramento/Stockton/Modesto market..

In Chicago, WCPX 43.1, WLS-DT 44.1 (they still broadcast on 7.1 as a full market translator), & WSNS 45.1 are adjacent channels.  Same with WXFT 50.1 & WPWR 51.1.  All 5 of these stations are on the Sears Tower (as I still call it). 

2 channel spacing would be in this order: WYIN-DT 17.1, WGN-TV 19.1, WYCC 21.1; WCIU 27.1, WMAQ-TV 29.1, WFLD 31.1.  WYIN broadcasts about 40 miles south of Chicago in Cedar Lake Indiana.  Only WYCC in this list is on the John Hancock, while the rest are on the Sears Tower.  WGBO took over WCPX's old channel of 38, & is the other still on the John Hancock.

Now as for WBBM-TV on 12.1, they haven't shown any interest to go to UHF yet.   They were in a hurry to get off of channel 2 & 3 (3 was their original digital channel).  I was one of a few that did get WBBM-TV when they were on 3.  I don't know if WLS-TV will eventually abandon channel 7 or not.  Since I'm far from downtown Chicago, I have no trouble getting channel 7.  I have a VHF/UHF that picks up 2-51 (is actually optimized for 2-69, since it was made around 2001 or 2002, but got it in 2002).