# FCC requires new message after Feb 17 problems



## samhevener (Feb 23, 2006)

The FCC is requiring a new message to be broadcast after the many problems due to the Feb 17th shutdown. The new message now tells the viewers they may also need a new antenna in addition to the converter box. Full story here
http://www.cleveland.com/plaindealer/stories/index.ssf?/base/business-11/12372787538750.xml&coll=2


----------



## n3ntj (Dec 18, 2006)

OK, now people will be asking the govt' for coupons for new antennas, too. Where does it stop?


----------



## Fontano (Feb 7, 2008)

That really isn't new.

Those antenna ad's started before the new year.


----------



## samhevener (Feb 23, 2006)

I have always said we would never be in all this mess if the broadcasters hadn't pressured congress into passing an amended "shutdown' date. The original law was to have each market shutdown analog broadcasting when 85% of households in that market had TVs with digital channel tuners. A great plan but broadcasters were in too much of a rush. No government coupons were required with that plan. Let each household purchase a DTV at the full going price at his or her own pace. Some markets may have been shut down by now and some wouldn't.


----------



## Ken S (Feb 13, 2007)

samhevener said:


> I have always said we would never be in all this mess if the broadcasters hadn't pressured congress into passing an amended "shutdown' date. The original law was to have each market shutdown analog broadcasting when 85% of households in that market had TVs with digital channel tuners. A great plan but broadcasters were in too much of a rush. No government coupons were required with that plan. Let each household purchase a DTV at the full going price at his or her own pace. Some markets may have been shut down by now and some wouldn't.


Sam,

The problem was that stood in the way of people making money. The DTV transition is all about freeing up that bandwidth so it could be auctioned off. I see these complaints about people using coupons...let's not forget the government brought in a large chunk of cash from the auctions.


----------



## scooper (Apr 22, 2002)

Sam - if we would have stuck to the original 85% threshold - the transition would have happened more than a few years ago (by the time you add in cable and satellite users as well). The "hard deadline" was put in to remove the uncertainty. 

Now - if you look into it - most of the county is at better than 90% - many parts over 95% - and most of those "not ready" are the usual group of procastinators that would wait until the last moment / after the event to get ready anyway. The senior citizens are , as a group, MORE ready than the younger people.

It's time to get it over with so we can start cleaning up the messes left behind. You can't change the laws of physics, but you can make adjustments to transmitter power, height, etc.


----------



## Lee L (Aug 15, 2002)

I am sure if they just had an 85% cutoff as mentioned, we would just have 10 different advocacy groups arguing about what the percentage really was at any given time and if it included cable boxes and satellite or if it had to be the OTA only people and it would never get done. Having a real date is the only way to make sure it happens.


----------



## samhevener (Feb 23, 2006)

The 85% shutdown still would have been a better system. The cellphone companies would have to wait a little longer in some markets for their frequencies. Lincoln once said it's a country of the people, by the people.......
It looks like we are becoming a country of the corporations, by the corporations.........


----------

