1 of 1- RadioActive
- Moderator
Offline 
Why You Won’t Be Forced To Buy A New TV – At Least Not Yet
It looks like those of us who get TV via an antenna from Buffalo may be off the hook for now – the FCC has released a preliminary report about forcing stations to convert from the current ATSC 1.0 to the new so-called “NextGen 3.0.”
The conversion worries many, because you wouldn’t be able to get stations on most current HDTVs once they do the conversion. But so far, it doesn’t seem like they’re in a hurry to do that, forcing most Americans (and those of us watching on this side of the border) to get a new TV to keep getting the signals.
“The draft notes that the FCC has tentatively concluded that television stations should be allowed to choose when to stop broadcasting via the ATSC 1.0 standard and begin broadcasting exclusively in 3.0.”
The fact they haven’t set a specific date to turn off the old system is a relief. I suspect that those without a direct interest in the new technology won’t be in any rush to make the switch. And whatever they do down south usually (and eventually) ends up becoming the standard up here, as well.
NextGenTV sounds like a great thing, including interactivity. But it could also prevent networks or stations from allowing you to record shows, due to Digital Rights Management, and that could potentially render your DVR useless. It could force us back into the TV stone age, where if you didn’t see a show when it aired, you missed it.
Or you’d have to sign up for a streaming service, many of which are owned by the networks, and they’d be only too happy to get you to sign up and pay for it.
For now, your TV is safe. But that could change as those pushing for the new system continue to have the ear of the FCC down south.
FCC Releases Draft Notice for NextGen TV Rules, ATSC 1.0 Sunset
- mace
- Member
Offline
Re: Why You Won’t Be Forced To Buy A New TV – At Least Not Yet
According to the CRTC, 97% of Canadians live within range of at least one OTA signal. In 2015, the CRTC reported that only 8.1% of Canadians receive their television signals via OTA. In 2024, that percentage crept up to 12. Cable/Satellte usage, while decreasing, was still at a significant 44%. Bell and Rogers are not known for wanting to spend, in their view, unnecessary dollars. If forced. Next Gen would come to major Canadian markets, but the rest of the country would see transmitters shut down. Ma Bell and Mr. Rogers must be smiling. You want to watch tv? Our door is open. No tv. You want to stream everything? We can help there too. I also an estimate that OTA viewership in the U.S. is about 20%. I thought it would be higher, but in a sports focussed country, an antenna won't get you ESPN.
- RadioActive
- Moderator
Offline
Re: Why You Won’t Be Forced To Buy A New TV – At Least Not Yet
Equally frightening, at least to me.
The Coming Signal Culling: Is Broadcast TV Next After Radio’s 2025 Decline?
- •
Thread Starter- RadioActive
- Moderator
Offline
Re: Why You Won’t Be Forced To Buy A New TV – At Least Not Yet
Will broadcasters dare try to do this to you again - force all consumers to buy new TVs in order to keep getting their signals? It's the ongoing question surrounding NextGenTV, the so-called 'new' standard for TV that broadcasters are anxious to institute.
Like HDTV before it, it would require anyone who wants to watch broadcast television to buy a new set, unless you're one of the lucky few who already have it built-in to newer models. It sounds exciting - "Next Generation" - who wouldn't want the latest and the greatest? Except other than a supposedly better picture (I'm fine with HD as it stands now) it benefits broadcasters and not viewers.
While it promises interactivity similar to the Internet (including ads targeted directly at specific viewers) the thing I hate about it most is the inclusion of Digital Rights Management or DRM, which would prevent you from recording shows you want to watch later.
"The use of encryption on TV signals for DRM purposes has some severe critics in the online world. Much of their complaint is, why should “Free TV,” as broadcasters often call themselves, need to prevent their signals from being received by their taxpaying audience? They, in theory at least, actually own the air waves, which the FCC licenses them to operate “in the public interest.”
"The anti-encryption advocates also note that the DRM in use actually prevents the development of cheaper devices and external adapters from being available to receive ATSC 3.0 signals.
"For their part, broadcasters and their trade groups claim the DRM encryption is needed to prevent the digital theft of their valuable content."
Yeah, as movie mogul Sam Goldwyn once said, "Include me out."
Is North America ready for NextGen TV?
- •
Thread Starter- RadioAaron
- Member
Offline
Re: Why You Won’t Be Forced To Buy A New TV – At Least Not Yet
How many people are actually using DVRs with OTA signals?
- RadioActive
- Moderator
Offline
Re: Why You Won’t Be Forced To Buy A New TV – At Least Not Yet
RadioAaron wrote:
How many people are actually using DVRs with OTA signals?
Well of course, I do and proudly so. But yes, we're a shrinking minority. Frankly, I'd like to be able to get both cable/satellite and over-the-air reception. But free TV has always been free since the first station signed on in the 40s. We need to keep it that way for as long as it lasts.
If you think I would ever pay for the privilege of watching a CTV or Global thanks to NextGen, I have some swamp land for sale near the Brooklyn Bridge.
- •
Thread Starter