Giveaway set for digital TV converters

Chicago Tribune ^ | 1/01/08 | Jim Puzzanghera

[Kid Shelleen]

The federal government doesn't usually give things away, but starting Tuesday broadcast TV watchers can apply for a gift that could keep their sets from going dark in 2009.

Via a toll-free hot line and Web site the Commerce Department will begin accepting applications for coupons worth $40 off a no-frills converter box to allow older televisions to receive digital broadcast signals.

[rawhide]

Thanks, I have a couple of these just gathering dust. I never thought about using one of them.

[irishjuggler]

Yeah, I agree. I’m strongly opposed to government waste, fraud and abuse, but the analog spectrum auction is expected to bring in $15-$20 billion or more. So, if the government wants to spend a TINY fraction of those proceeds to reduce the effects of all this on consumers still using analog TVs, what’s the big deal?

[Between the Lines]

I don’t see any 8-tracks or Betamax around. Silver halide based photography is almost dead. The government didn’t give people coupons or any other subsidies for those things. It didn’t interfere with the free market

The government also did not mandate any of these changes as it did HDTV. The government interfered with in the free market when it mandated all stations to broadcast only HD signals. If you don't want the government interfering with the free market, you should complain about HDTV not these boxes.

[AFreeBird]

The government didn't mandate away 8-track and betamax. You correctly identified the marketplace. Congress did however mandate that the TV stations give up their old (NTSC) analog spectrum, which they then plan to auction off for new wireless services.

If they hadn't, the stations would have kept using TWO separate slices of the spectrum forever. The money they get back from the auction should pretty much cover the money for converters.

[Anti-Bubba182]

Which is cheaper?

[discostu]

There’s nothing wrong with using traditional antennas, digital goes over the same air spectrum, where the problem comes in is in the interpreting of those signals picked up by the antennas. Not sure why the cable companies would be educating anybody, if you get cable you’re already set for the change, I suppose it’s not a bad way for them to get more customers though.

[ozzymandus]

I’d rather have the $40. How many people don’t have cable or satellite?

[Tolerance Sucks Rocks]

Yes, that RIGHT to properly receive digital television signals is prominently featured in the Constitution...

...right alongside the power to mandate what kind of signals a person can receive on his television set.

[RockinRight]

If you’re being serious give me the model numbers and I will see if they should work.

[RockinRight]

Not sure, but if you luck out and find one of those on ebay (the old sat recievers) you could probably have it under $50.

[RockinRight]

I love how they tell people that for HD you “must” have cable/satellite/FTTH.

[BBell]

Thanks for the info. I e-mailed it to friends and family.

[discostu]

Most of the estimates are that around 10% of the market is either receiving pure antenna analog TV or has no TV at all. Which is why they’re finally making the cut over, now that 90% of the country will only notice because of news stories throw converter boxes at the other 10% and get this long overdue change done.

[Wolfie]

The federal government doesn't usually give things away...

Puh-leeze. That's practically ALL it does. And in a few decades, that's all it will be doing period.

[Anti-Bubba182]

Thanks.

[discostu]

BUZZZZZ wrong. The government didn’t mandate HD, the government mandated DIGITAL. Now HD can’t exist without digital, but there’s nothing that forces digital to be HD. The reason the government mandated digital is simple, they can fit 4 times as many channels in the same spectrum, that’s 4 times as many leases, that’s a lot of money. But it really and truly is IN the same spectrum, that wavelength between 02 and 13 on your dial can be digital or analog, not both.

And really they have let the market decide, only about 10% of the market will be even slightly effected. The market wasn’t ready before, so they kept pushing the date. The world has finally moved to digital (or at least digital ready), that’s why they’ve finally stopped pushing the date on this and it’s actually going to get done.

[raccoonradio]

>>Congress has set aside $1.5 billion

I believe the money is made back when they sell the old frequencies to wireless companies.

Note also that those of you who have a Walkman with "TV Sound" will not be able to pick up Ch 2-13 anymore. The ones still in stores have a note on the package saying you'll need an adapter (yeah, right) to pick up TV sound after that date. Sometimes the TV sound can be useful if you want to hear a newscast (hopefully not TOO visual) and are away from home.

Examples: AM, FM, TV Audio, and Weather


>>CONSUMER ALERT This television receiver has only an analog broadcast tuner and will require a converter box after February 17, 2009, to receive over-the-air broadcasts with an antenna because of the Nation's transition to digital broadcasting.

[steve86]

I’m looking forward to putting a pcHDTV card in my system for over the air UHF broadcasts. Glad I didn’t throw those old antennas out! Things come full circle — now going back to OTA after 20 years on cable.

[discostu]

Between reporters who don’t know what they’re talking about ever, cable and satellite providers who see this as a way to get those last few holdouts, and the habitually irritated who can’t even entertain the possibility that the government actually got it right (I know it’s a rare event but it does happen every couple decades) the quantity of misinformation around this issue is staggering.

[dennisw]

gimme gimme gimmme gimme gimme gimme