Obama asks Congress to delay digital TV switch*

President-elect Barack Obama today asked Congress to delay next month’s planned switch to all-digital broadcast television, warning that the TVs of millions of Americans could lose their pictures because of major problems in the government's preparations.

In a letter to Congressional leaders (PDF), John Podesta, co-chairman of Obama’s presidential transition team, urged that the Feb. 17 conversion date be extended. A major reason was the announcement this week by the Commerce Department that it had run out of money for a government program to provide $40 coupons for low-cost converter boxes to allow older TVs to receive the new digital signal. But Podesta also cited problems with the government’s effort to educate the public about the switch and help prepare people, particularly the elderly, poor and those living in rural areas.

"With coupons unavailable, support and education insufficient and the most vulnerable Americans exposed, I urge you to consider a change to the legislatively mandated analog cutoff date,” Podesta wrote to the chairmen and top Republicans on the Senate Commerce committee and the House Energy and Commerce committee.

According to the Nielsen Co., about 6.8% of U.S. TV households, or 7.7 million homes, were unprepared for the digital switch as of last month, meaning they had no TVs capable of receiving a digital signal. The percentage is higher in Los Angeles, with 9.46%, or about 535,000 homes unprepared for the switch.

The digital TV transition is being hailed as broadcast television's most dramatic upgrade since it bloomed to color from black and white half a century ago. The technology gives free viewers vastly sharper pictures and enables TV networks to offer a wider range of channels. What's more, a wide swath of the analog airwaves will go for free to public safety organizations, such as police and fire departments, so they can improve their communications systems.

People with cable, satellite or phone company TV services will continue to get broadcast stations. But those who rely on antennas to watch TV must ...

... either own a newer set with a digital receiver or get a digital-to-analog converter box. No-frills versions of those boxes cost between $40 and $70.

To offset the cost, the federal government allocated $1.5 billion to provide households with up to two $40 coupons. But the agency running that program announced Monday that the program had reached its limit and that new requests would be put on a waiting list. As existing coupons reach their 90-day expiration, the Commerce Department has said it could send out coupons to those on the waiting list.

Time is running out. Podesta said in the letter that 1 million requests were on the waiting list and that the number could climb to more than 5 million by early February. Obama supports waiving federal rules to allow the Commerce Department to start sending out more coupons and is planning to include additional money for the digital TV switch in the economic stimulus package it is drafting.

The problems with the converter box coupon program led Consumers Union to call for a delay in the switch. And Rep. Rick Boucher, a Democrat from Virginia who's the incoming head of a House subcommittee with oversight over telecommunications, said today he was also considering a delay.

But broadcasters, who have spent billions of dollars preparing for the transition and are eager to turn off their old analog signals, oppose a delay. They're pressing for Congress to quickly provide more money to make sure people who need coupons get them.

-- Jim Puzzanghera and Christi Parsons

Photo: Charles Wolfe, a retired software engineer in Sylmar, holds a converter box he bought to covert digital broadcasts for his analog TV. He has had signal problems. Credit: Al Seib / Los Angeles Times

* This post was updated with additional background about the digital TV transition and a link to Podesta's letter.

Comments

[cam]

The poor, the elderly had over a year to figuire it out. We will never have a 100% compliance, until you force people to change. Turn off analog and they will change, whether they have a coupon or not.

The only problem is the strenght of the Digital signal. Certain channels are too weak to be received. How are they going to resolve the weak signals?

[Missing the key part of the story -- the new uses of the spectrum]

The story omits the reason for the switchover. Old analog TV used a massive amount of spectrum to broadcast a small amount of singal. The new digital TV can broadcast on a much narrower slice of our scarce spectrum. That leaves the massive analog block open for new and productive uses.

The old analog TV spectrum has already been allocated to cell phone coverage, emergency responder (fire/police) radio coverage, and nationwide wireless Internet. It will be a boost to communication when new and innovative services can use this massive spectrum to help Americans communicate.

Coverage of the switchover should mention this. Otherwise the switchover just seems arbitrary.

[Keith]

"With coupons unavailable, support and education insufficient, and the most vulnerable Americans exposed, I urge you to consider a change to the legislatively-mandated analog cutoff date,”

Exposed to what? Exposed to a life without terrible TV shows? Oh The Humanity! What kind of country would allow "the most vulnerable" to live without the ability to mainline garbage programming and commercials straight into their brains for free? And how about the news they would miss out on? Oprah down to a svelte 160 pounds. 90210 stars being brought back from the dead. They'll never get those priceless moments back!

Maybe the poorest people shouldn't be wasting time watching the crap that passes for entertainment. Maybe they should get library cards and read some books. Or go for a walk and lose the 50 extra pounds that Americans now carry.

[deBeer]

I am waiting my for government coupon/check. They owe me when the switch was made from 4 track to 8 track tapes. They owe me when the industry changed to cassettes. They owe me more because of the switch to cd's . Add in movies from beta to VHS to laser disc, DVD now to blu- ray. That is a lot of money the government owes me so I can watch entertainment of my choosing..... Something many Americans choose not even to use in the first place.

In reality my tax dollars should not have to pay for this nonsense. Let the TV owners by a box themselves or get a TV. If they can't afford it, let them save. No sympathy, No tax money

[perplexed yet indifferent]

in a previous comment, "cam" wrote, "The poor, the elderly had over a year to figuire it out."

Heck, they had 12 years to figure ot out. 12 years!

But then again, it's no skin off of my nose to delay so why push it? - for a little while longer anyway.

[VJ]

I think the bigger issue is that some of these digital converter boxes are not as easy to install as they should be. And that there is very few systems of support to ensure that older TVs are prepared come Feb. 17.

In addition, I've actually lost a couple of my channels once I "went digital."

[Mike Reeder]

Why do the liberals always whine about the poor? Why don't they focus on the economic benefits of this cutover, and the billions of dollars that the feds will make from auctioning off the unused spectrum.

[S Davis]

For people in winter climates making a dramatic switch that may cause people to get on roof tops shouldn't happen in February. The digital converter boxes work well especially with good external antennas.

[nmoore6676]

If they delay it it will only create more confusion. Actually there has been more than a year to get ready, this has been in the works for several years. The campaign to make the public aware only has been ramped up for about a year. If they cut of the analog transmission the people will figure it out. If they can't then they are too stupid to be watching TV or voting for that matter. There will be no real idea of who can not receive it until the cutoff as the receivers already in place will revert to analog if no digital signal is available. So they could, if there are significant complaints always turn the old system back on before they dismantle the equipment if it is absolutely required. That should be a last ditch solution however.

To say that users will experience vastly sharper images is incorrect. 'Some' users 'may' experience sharper reception if the broadcast is HD. But a majority of users watch ATSC may experience severely compressed signals as broadcasters try to milk the most out of their digital spectrum allocation.

The point mentioned about weak signal reception is also going to be significant. It will affect a large number of users that don't have or can't afford cable reception. They currently can receive a signal, perhaps with a bit of snow, at distances of 50-90 miles from the station. With the digital shift, they are likely to have no reception at all.

[RichW]

"The new digital TV can broadcast on a much narrower slice of our scarce spectrum. That leaves the massive analog block open for new and productive uses."

Not entirely true. Both an analog and a digital signal have a 6mhz allocation of bandwidth. the only (relevant) difference is the digital utilizes it more efficiently and can include additional video streams, but it still uses 6mhz regardless. So, as we transition from analog to digital, we have the digital stations occupying the same bandwidth as their analog predecessors. There is no (and never was) a "massive analog block". The only thing that happened is the digital stations were put on channels that weren't being used, so all these "extra channels" were always there long before digital came around. The net result is we will be losing existing channel space, not gaining anything due to the digital transition. Its unfortunate the digital marketing campaign has people believing such nonsense.

[Steve]

I've been repeatedly annoyed by a crucial bit of information missing from the campaign to inform the public about this transition. I'm referring to the fact that the vast majority of "modern" TV sets do not need any upgrade at all. This is because TV manufactures have long been including digital receivers in their set designs. Most of the advertisements I've seen tell people that if they get their signal from an antenna, they need to buy a converter box. But that is only true if they're using an old TV.

I am one of the people who gets his TV from an antenna, but who doesn't need to buy a receiver because my modern set already has one built in. I have yet to tell someone that I get my signal from an antenna without then having to explain to them why I don't need to buy one of the receivers that they've heard so much about.

It seems likely that this information hasn't made it into the advertisements because it's too detailed to be absorbed in the time provided by short sound byte ads. Fair enough I suppose, but I can't help but wonder how many coupons have been wasted on people who didn't need even need the digital receiver in the first place.

ps - thanks LA times for actually stating that new sets don't need a receiver (for once).

[jack]

hey, gov'ment ought to make broadcasters just transmit in Black & White. who needs color, or this dtv stuff, anyway.

This switchover has been sufficiently publicized, there is no need to extend it.

[sangjmoon]

God forbid people stop watching TV. They might stop being complacent if they had time to take a hard look at the government.

[Warren]

Can't the government use the bail out funds until congress can fund the converter box coupon program again? Congress could always repay the bail out fund when it funds the converter box program.

[John]

Darn. I was looking forward to Television Emancipation Day!

[sethook]

Will there ever be a time when the government follows through and makes a deadline? Will there ever be a point when everyone is ready for the change-over? Throw the switch and let's get going. The stations have done what was asked of them and the people have had more than enough time to prepare.

[John]

Why is it that Washington can not focus on anything importent? People have had a year to convert. If they havn't done it by now what makes you think they will do it before the next deadline? Besides, it will probably do them good to do something other than watch TV.

[anonymous]

How many of you remember that the U. S. government first promised a switch to digital TV years ago then backed off one ore more times to February 2009 due to whining politicians, etc. Now the Obama administration wants to delay the transition even longer. Are they the Talibhan of TV--wanting the U. S. to stay in the dark ages rather than moving ahead? The word been out for two years on the February 2009 transition--TV, newspapers, etc. even for people that are not on the internet. It's time to move forward and get our countries collective head out of the sand.

[dave9]

I think terrestrial broadcast television is rapidly becoming irrelevant anyway. Most people have cable and frequently have it bundled with internet service. Actually, you only really need internet service as all the good bits from your favorite programs show up on YouTube the next day with all the commercials cut out as well. If you have a dvr, what does it matter whether the show came off the air or over the internet. So who cares about broadcast tv anymore.

[Lukiborg]

This is just plain asinine. I got my coupons and my converter boxes months ago. Very easy to set up. When the govt came out with the coupon program, they told us that only so many coupons would be available and that they would expire in 90 days. Ya snooze, ya lose. Also, as far as not being able to receive all the local stations, you need to buy a better antennae. Rite Aid has them for $17.99. And anyone that is unaware of the switchover is living under a rock; TV stations have been playing commercials informing everyone of the switch ad nauseum. When they don't receive any TV, then people will get off their butts and do what they have to do.

[deh]

What a joke.....is this another American "right" that we, the taxpayers, are subsidizing?

[Fred Williams]

"Support and education insufficient"? I think that the government and media have made quite an effort to get this information out to everyone in a timely manner. News paper articles, TV news programs, TV commercials, billboards, trucks and buses with signs driving around, TV digital tests.
If people haven't gotten the message yet, they will never get it. Sorry if you missed the coupons, you snooze, you lose. So go out and purchase a relatively inexpensive converter box and UHF antenna if you cannot get the new signal. Time to move on.

[DigiAlpha]

I would like to know why the broadcasters themselves are not paying for the boxes? They stand to lose the most if millions of viewers suddenly can't watch their stations. If they can pay their on air talent and super star actors millions upon millions of dollars then they should provide converter boxes. Broadcasters are not running as many public service adds as possible to educate their viewers about the HDTV conversion. This is very short sighted and even foolish. And you wonder why they are loosing viewers yearly to other entertainment mediums?