In the early ’90s, a decision was made in the offices of the Federal Communications Commission: Digital TV was the future. The idea circulated, gained momentum and was handed down to broadcast executives in various memos and proclamations.
Testifying in July 2000 before a House committee, then-FCC Engineering Chief Dale Hatfield insisted that a conversion to digital signals was necessary for the “self-preservation” of broadcast television. The FCC had spoken; it was time to ride the wave of technology and go digital. What the new digitalization policy amounted to, however, was a forced return of billions of dollars in free public airwave space the networks had been using since the beginning of television.
As the 20th century drew to a close, the idea morphed in to what FCC Director of Media Relations David Fiske described as a “multi-tiered chicken and egg problem.” Stations were reluctant to undergo the costly changeover of broadcast technology if there were not yet digital receivers on the consumer end. Consumers were hesitant to invest in expensive digital TVs without immediate benefits in picture quality and channel choice. Manufacturers were thus unwilling to produce new digital models if there was no guaranteed market. It started to seem less and less likely that the proposed changeover to digital television would be complete by the original 2006 deadline.
In the months that followed Sept. 11, 2001, a new catalyst emerged for the digital changeover. According to various experts and most notably the Sept. 11 commission, public safety officials lacked sufficient airwave space to act effectively in emergency situations. In April 2002, FCC Chair Michael Powell launched a new push for America to enter an age of DTV in a proposal that would come to be known as the “Powell Plan.” The proposal was an effort to encourage the various players to stop heel-dragging and to move forward independently "without waiting for the other person to go first," Fiske said.
Press reports and blog discussions on Powell’s September and October statements this year urging Congress to set a definite deadline for digital conversion continually cited public safety concerns as the main reason for the impending changeover. In reality, only a small percentage of the vast public spectrum would be used for emergency networks, and most of what was needed has already been secured. The FCC looked into reallocating airwave space for public safety, Fiske said, long before Sept. 11. The FCC declared channels 60-69 off limits for commercial projects in January 2003, determining that four of these channels would be used for public safety purposes.
Powell, on the other hand, has consistently emphasized that the driving force behind the digital push is efficiency in divvying out the scarce spectrum. Analog channels create interference on the intermediate channels, making it possible to only use every other channel in any given market for television broadcasts. Digital channels, though, broadcast a clearer signal that allows other signals to share frequencies more closely.
In the current transition period, broadcasters are sending out both digital and analog signals. Once the FCC revokes the analog licenses, all the intermediate channels will be freed up for other uses. The possibilities are endless, Fiske said, including WiFi, 3D, HDTV, and new capabilities for wireless phone service.
Part of the motivation behind the changeover is keeping the United States as technologically savvy as global leaders such as Korea. Fiske noted, though, that the main goal of the FCC "was getting more wireless spectrum out there for more consumer uses."
Members of Congress and other government agencies see other benefits to digital TV. The original legislation granting digital channels to stations and setting an end-of-2006 goal for the complete switch was part of the 1997 Balanced Budget Act.
If broadcasters switch to digital channels, freeing up huge hunks of the public spectrum, this spectrum can be auctioned off for billions of dollars to wireless telephone and Internet providers hungry for the extra space. With the complete spectrum worth an estimated $70 billion, and with more efficient ways of using it constantly being discovered, some analysts predict that the solution to the federal budget deficit might be floating all around us. Fiske added that "budget estimators take into account potential money from spectrum auctions" when they plan spending each year. The FCC conducts these auctions, 82 to date, but the money is immediately transferred to the treasury department.
With the plan for digital conversion rushing forward, one major group remains stalwart in its use of analog technology: consumers. The FCC can pressure broadcasters to speed up the change through license provisions and legislation. Consumers, on the other hand, cannot be regulated into spending upwards of $500 on digital television sets or $150 on converter boxes.
The original legislation stated that the changeover would only occur at the slated date if 85 percent of households in a given market were digital-ready. New pushes by the FCC for a definite deadline make no such provision. Even if the 85 percent standard is met, Fiske pointed out that it still leaves 15 percent unable to access free television. To encourage people to invest in digital technology, the FCC launched a sleek website in October providing consumer information about the advantages of DTV and digital sets. Powell explained the site as a digital "education initiative" in a recent press release.
Fiske noted that the FCC is confident that as the market increases, the prices of digital sets and converter boxes will fall. There have also been talks of a government subsidy of converter boxes, but Fiske explained that the FCC has no funding to provide this itself. With no obvious model for replacing the 400 million TV sets that would be rendered obsolete by digital broadcasting, the plan risks disenfranchising millions of lower-income TV viewers.
Additionally, many smaller stations may have difficulty financing the technological overhaul required to go digital. Fiske said the agency has been flexible in granting time extensions of the digital broadcast deadlines to stations in smaller networks.
"Our job is to help everyone see the bigger picture," said Fiske of resistance to the digital age by various blocs. "Our goal is spectrum management, spectrum utilization and getting services out there for consumers."
Get The Chronicle straight to your inbox
Signup for our weekly newsletter. Cancel at any time.