I recently spent some time in a Kaiser hospital. As a cost-cutting measure (I assume) the televisions received only the broadcast channels. Having time on my hands, I got to watch a fair sampling of the broadcast programs in my area.
I had noticed before that there are periods where virtually the only thing available on the broadcast channels was paid programming. However lying in the hospital, I was amazed at the relative lack of meaningful programs or information that was available the rest of the time. This has got to have an impact on those whose information is rooted in these channels.
As most people already know, digital TV is heading our way. On February 18th, virtually all channels will switch from analog to digital - even for the free broadcast channels. People without cable or satellite service will either need a digital converter box (which they must buy), or a TV that is set up for digital.
These issues raise a number of issues. I wondered what the demographics and opinions were of those folks who receive only broadcast signals - or even no signals at all. There doesn't seem to be anyone looking at that issue, so I have no answer. My guess on the demographics would be those who live in "remote" areas (outside of broadcast range) and having no cable infrastructure are divided between those who can afford satellite and those who cannot. Likewise, those areas without broadcast repeaters would be in a "dark" zone.
Since virtually all homes in the U.S. have a television, those who receive only the analog broadcast channels are likely poor. The distribution of the poor is certainly not evenly divided across racial categories. These are also the people who are least likely to be able to afford a new digital TV, or to have the extra money to but a digital converter box - even with a $40 coupon from the government which they may not access anyway.
We have all heard the discussions over the "digital divide." This was a question of access to computer technology, and then to the internet. Few talk about the digital divide any more, even though it is real and pertinent, and a significant aspect of social inequality. Now we face a new digital divide.
This divide did not just start (as noted above regarding those who have only broadcast access); however, it is getting ready to expand dramatically. With the shift to digital only broadcasts, many will lose access to even the poor quality of information and programming that they already have. How many will lose access seems to be a slippery question.
According to an article titled "The Analog Shutdown, for Better or for Worse," under analog there are 2.7 million households that do not have any reception (analog or digital). When analog goes away, that number is expected to increase to 5.6 million households. In other words, more than two times the current number of people without television access will be without access.
However, according to a report on Wired News, the numbers are much higher. Citing information from Nielsen, currently about 14 million of households have only broadcast TV reception currently (13% of the 113 million television households).
It seems likely that as economic pressures increase, people will drop their cable or satellite services. Since many of them will likely not purchase converter boxes, then the numbers of those with no access to television as an information source will likely increase dramatically. One thing seems likely, and that is more people are going to fall into the chasm of the digital divide. What effects this has on our nation now or in the future does not seem to be of great concern to many.
Side note for those who might be concerned about my health. I had a cardiac "event" and was placed in the hospital for testing, observation, and prescription change. I seem to be "stable" at this point and am recuperating and regaining my energy.
I get 8 stations on analog. But knowing about the change over and reading about the expanded channels( including 4 instead of 1 PBS channel ) I decided to switch to digital. After ponying up $20.00 at Best Buy( with the change over coupon ) I now get 1 channel. Period. From 8 channels on my rabbit ears to 1 channel, for $20.00. Great deal, huh? Unfortunately, where I live a large outdoor antennae is not an option. I have since talked to several people who have the same problem. The "Better picture, Better sound" propaganda is BS. I wonder how many of "our fine government representatives" found "a little something extra" in their payoff envelopes from the cable and satellite tv lobbies for this act.
by
comncents (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 11 comments)
on Thursday, July 24, 2008 at 11:48:27 PM
I'm not just talking about the unit of a bit (binary digit), which is off/on. I think of which persons access what devices and why. If there is a telephone, there can usually be at least dialup computer usage. Cable TV and the other kind from bygone years are both receding in usage. In television's need to reinvent itself, and to keep up with film on DVD, it was essential to upgrade to high definition in order to milk the last best part of TV.
For the folks out in the boondocks, those theoretical souls who never turned on, they may be impacted by less entertainment, scarce news, and the latest weather forcast, perhaps.
It's not that I doubt all the statistics about the boonies, but I think the broadcast of the figures is a new effort to sell latest hardware. Those who have cable may decry the service and decide for direct reception involving some satellite or other. They may also want to enhance their viewing pleasure with a new plasma screen. The castoffs can end up for poor relatives or Good Will.
Sorry I'm so jaundiced on the matter. It's just that "keeping up with the Joneses" still prevails. And those who find programs on television to be vital to their social enlightenment will shell out the money.
Now, it I couldn't have my computer, that is a different story! Where would I get my news or my favorate C-Span coverage?
I'll back up just a little. I have basic cable, which has increased from 12 to 18 dollars over time. The other night the screen went black. I thought the 20-year-old set had finally bit the dust, until I found it worked the next morning. It saved me the task of deciding whether to replace it. But when the motherboard went out on my hard-used computer of 7 years year, I had the man go get me a new one that very day.
by
Margaret Bassett (25 articles, 1669 quicklinks, 29 diaries, 1011 comments)
on Thursday, July 24, 2008 at 9:37:17 PM
4 comments
How would you rate this?
You must be logged in (if signed up) to do ratings.
It's free to signup! And easy. And takes just a minute or two....
Must Read (
Well Said (
News (
Touching (
Funny (
Supported (
Interesting (
Inspiring (
Valuable (
