DTV Transition A Disaster
In a recent New Yorker profile of Naomi Klein, an anti-globalization writer and activist, Klein describes her Canadian upbringing:
"Both of my parents lived through a honeymoon period in the public sector," she says. "My mother and [the government-run feminist film studio] Studio D were always furious because they weren't getting the resources they thought they deserved, but from the outside perspective it was, like, Oh, my God. You were allowed to have a women's studio making films about social change within a huge public institution! And my father was able to do something similar within the health-care system, starting the birthing room at the hospital"—he admitted midwives and alternative medicine, and waged a campaign against unnecessary surgical interventions in childbirth. "It's easy to deride the idea of government in America, where people's association with the public sphere is the post office."
This quote seems particularly illuminating in these tough economic times: A crisis whose wheels were greased by government, and in which 1.5 million Americans are losing their homes every year as a result of unmanageable health care costs.
Our government tends to put the interests of business ahead of those of average citizens. And so it has been with the FCC-mandated changeover to digital TV scheduled for February 17. As Barbara Kyle of the Electronics Take Back coalition told The Thin Green Line in September, the government seems not to have considered the fates of the many analogue TVs that will likely be thrown out as a result of its actions. (E-waste is toxic, and many so-called recycling programs just send the toxic junk to Asia.) And I find it a little cheesy that the government is only willing to pay about half the cost of the converter box required as the cheapest, and greenest, response to the changeover.
But now it's run out of money even to pay that much. Millions of Americans are now on a wait list for a coupon, which will only become available if somebody else fails to use theirs within the 90-day active period. Coupons that expire cannot be renewed. The government alloted to the coupon program just $1.34 billion dollars of the $19 billion it made by auctioning off the old analog bandwidth. The program seems designed to leave citizens holding the bag, while the FCC and its corporate buddies get rich.
In fact, many Americans will find that, even with a converter box, they will no longer get reception unless they also buy a $75-100 antenna that may require rooftop installation. (Digital signals will be marginally weaker, and don't allow for partial reception.) There are also concerns that many Americans aren't aware that on Feb. 17 channels will also change, leading them to falsely conclude that their converter boxes don't work.
This last point raises an important issue, that echoes Naomi Klein's assessment of the American public sector:
Does the U.S. government even have a reliable, straightforward, inclusive way of communicating with its citizens? One that would be approached without the skepticism consumers know to bring to advertising?
Have political advertisements and governmental statements filled with blatant mistruths made it impossible for the government to convey basic messages to its citizens?
The Obama team is calling for the FCC to delay the changeover. The FCC and the television industry claim that that will create more uncertainty. What do you think should be done?
| January 09 2009 at 12:24 PM
Comments
Sort Comments by: Oldest | Newest | Recommended
Add Your Comment