backtop

Print E-mail del.icio.us 74 comment(s) - last by rcreyes.. on Feb 2 at 2:12 AM
Albuquerque-Santa Fe is the least prepared local market for DTV transition

The digital transition is almost here, barring any last minute delays by the U.S. government. The majority of the country is ready for the transition with converter boxes or by subscribing to pay TV like cable or satellite.

The Senate unanimously approved a bill that would delay the transition until June 12 of 2009. However, that bill was voted down once it hit the House. The Nielsen Company reported that over 6.5 million households in the U.S. were not ready for the digital transition.

New numbers from the company now show that Hispanic and African-American homes are the least likely to be prepared for the transition. Nielsen shows that 9.7% of Hispanic homes aren’t ready for the transition and 9.9% of African-American homes are unprepared.

The percentage of white homes not prepared for the transition is about half the number of minority homes at 4.6%. The least prepared local metered market in America is in New Mexico, specifically the Albuquerque-Santa Fe area.

The Albuquerque-Santa Fe has only 12.4% of homes that are ready for the digital transition among the 56 local markets that Nielsen measures with electronic meters. The most prepared market is Hartford & New Haven with a mere 1.8% of unprepared homes.

Nielsen vice chair Susan Whiting said, "Nielsen has been preparing for the transition to digital television for more than two years. Because we recognize that accurate and reliable information on consumer behavior is essential to this transition, we've been sharing our data with clients, government leaders and the public so they could track progress to digital readiness."

Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
Good
By therealnickdanger on 1/29/2009 11:45:03 AM , Rating: 5
Aren't minorities also supposed to be the "least educated" and such? A lack of television might prompt them to read a book or do homework.




RE: Good
By theArchMichael on 1/29/09, Rating: -1
RE: Good
By bighairycamel on 1/29/2009 12:18:41 PM , Rating: 5
This article reminded me of an old joke...

Q. How do you starve a <insert minority> person?
A. Hide his food stamps in his work boots!

Tasteless I know; I swear I'm not actually racist.


RE: Good
By mherlund on 1/29/2009 12:52:11 PM , Rating: 3
If this implies that these people are not working, they are not probably paying their taxes, so why should the government pay for them to get their TV working?


RE: Good
By Spivonious on 1/29/2009 12:54:36 PM , Rating: 3
Because it seems the government places TV on the same level as food and rent money (aka Welfare, or what it's supposed to be).


RE: Good
By dever on 1/29/2009 1:02:59 PM , Rating: 5
I'm very skeptical that this is divided by race. I'm curious if income level, education level, and other non-racial factors were considered (the answer most definitely, is no).

If a non-minority with a similar income & education level is just as likely to be "unprepared," then there is no racial component. I can't stand divisive stories like this that make everything about race.


RE: Good
By JAB on 1/29/2009 2:28:54 PM , Rating: 3
Sadly or not the biggest difference in the US is not race it it is economic.

I really wonder about the US. Why are we putting TV so high on the news list not education. If you really cant afford TV then you probably should not be spending all your time on it.


RE: Good
By SlyNine on 1/30/2009 1:57:20 AM , Rating: 2
God I wish I could rate this guy up agian.


RE: Good
By FITCamaro on 1/29/09, Rating: -1
RE: Good
By MrBlastman on 1/29/2009 12:29:16 PM , Rating: 2
Wait a minute, I need to point something out. Lets see... *thumbs through the PBS Kids programming guide*

Barney - check
Teletubbies - check
Sesame Street with 100% more Elmo - check

Within every diamond, there are some flaws. I wouldn't allow any of my kids to watch any of the above. Instead, I'll be popping in one of those Rated R Sesame Street episodes from the 60's and 70's. There are plenty of other good shows on there, but the programming is far from perfect. Like any good parent, you've got to parent and control what they have access to.


RE: Good
By theArchMichael on 1/29/2009 12:45:40 PM , Rating: 2
certainly, I dont' think teletubbies comes on anymore, barney is a good show though. It kind of is just filer and inter relationship stuff. How can you not like sesame street in any form!?? I guess to each his own, but although I find elmo annoying and kind of a jerk (especially to Mr. Nudo) Jim Henson's progeny are still awesome.

To be 100% honest its not so much the shows themselves ( although I think they are good and they are very educational in different ways ) as the commericals in between them. They tend to be far fewer and less INTENSE. When I say intense you know what i'm talking about that.. GET RED ROBOT DINOSAUR MONSTER DESTRUCTION RAGE! NOW WITH FULLY FUNCTIONAL MANDIBLE FOR BONE CRUSHING ACTION!... then follows the inevitable... daddy daddy I want to get my moster destruction rage on!... ehh . No thank you and they want me to pay for these television channels.


RE: Good
By MrBlastman on 1/29/2009 12:57:27 PM , Rating: 3
I loved Sesame Street - back in the 70's, when they purveyed a less-than-utopian world. This is why I'd rather my kids watch the older Sesame Street of long ago than the Sesame Street of today.

As for the commercials, that makes sense. Better to prevent them from being consumer whores at a young age then letting them grow up with a fascination towards materialism.


RE: Good
By Suntan on 1/29/2009 2:08:15 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
when they purveyed a less-than-utopian world.


Yes, yes. Must temper toddler’s minds with the harsh realities of the world as soon as possible. No coddling! Truly there is no place for the fiction that is ‘thoughts of a happy world’ in a show that also portrays 7 foot tall talking birds, monsters with honking horns, etc. etc.

-Suntan


RE: Good
By drank12quartsstrohsbeer on 1/29/2009 1:07:41 PM , Rating: 5
Maybe you need to learn how to tell your kid 'NO' ?


RE: Good
By theArchMichael on 1/29/2009 3:11:44 PM , Rating: 2
It is clearly implied that i do. But why should I subject him and her to those that would prey on their childish naivette.

Maybe you should only have 11 quarts next time...?


RE: Good
By monitorjbl on 1/29/2009 6:31:24 PM , Rating: 3
Cause if you don't (to relatively harmless things, anyway), they won't learn or grow up. Also, eleven quarts of what?


RE: Good
By rburnham on 1/30/2009 10:09:20 AM , Rating: 2
I concur. The new kid shows are awful. I plan to give my future kids some older Looney Tunes and Sesame Street (pre-Elmo). Beyond that, reading, drawing, playing with Legos, building things and playing outside are all worth encouraging.


RE: Good
By Oregonian2 on 1/29/2009 12:29:54 PM , Rating: 2
At least locally, if one gets a digital converter one then has two or three PBS channels, not just the one analog.


RE: Good
By FITCamaro on 1/29/09, Rating: 0
RE: Good
By Spivonious on 1/29/2009 1:47:15 PM , Rating: 2
You obviously have never seen Nova, Nature, or any of the broadcasts from the Metropolitan Opera. PBS rocks. NPR is good too.


RE: Good
By mdogs444 on 1/29/2009 12:07:08 PM , Rating: 5
Yeah, but they may not be able to watch BET anymore. What, no more 50 Cent videos, and get a job to pay for cable instead? Oh what a shame.


RE: Good
By Dreifort on 1/29/2009 12:17:01 PM , Rating: 2
BET is OTA? OMG, NFW!? GTFOH!


RE: Good
By Spivonious on 1/29/2009 12:58:30 PM , Rating: 4
Calm down, it's not. He was just stereotyping.


RE: Good
By tdawg on 1/29/09, Rating: -1
RE: Good
By tdawg on 1/30/09, Rating: 0
RE: Good
By Crysalis99 on 1/30/2009 8:28:50 PM , Rating: 2
They just voted a black president into office, what more do you want from white people?!?!?

Seriously though, it is a bit of a shame, but I think what most (white) people are more and more upset about is that it is the ghetto mentality that over runs ALOT (not all but alot...Im good friends with quite a few black people) of black minds and they get stuck in the mentality and just squeeze into the social norm.

Just with ANY stereotype, it is hard to breakaway from it when you constantly have menbers continually proving the stereotype right.


RE: Good
By Micronite on 1/29/2009 1:11:06 PM , Rating: 2
Actually, I hope it prompts them to go out, buy a nice, big HDTV and stimulate the economy a little.


RE: Good
By Aquila76 on 1/29/2009 11:00:16 PM , Rating: 2
Korea's or Japan's?


Does this make...
By MrBlastman on 1/29/2009 11:57:10 AM , Rating: 5
The Minorities the Majority in this case? Hmm...

In reality, according to our last census, they do indeed possess a lower educational level, a higher level of divorce and single parent families, as well as a lower level of household income. I'm not suprised as a result that they are behind on the conversion process. They can do something about it, just the same as the rest of us, and ask for a voucher from the govnernment to fix thier deficiency. Everyone - except for the illegals. Perhaps they should step up and start trying to become legal.

Nothing to see here, please move along everybody.




RE: Does this make...
By Athena on 1/29/2009 12:39:30 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
They can do something about it, just the same as the rest of us, and ask for a voucher from the govnernment to fix thier deficiency
As it happens, I have a friend in Albuquerque who has been trying to do just that for over a year. When the voucher program started, post office boxes were not accepted on the voucher form -- which automatically excluded large numbers of rural and exburb residents. After months of complaints, the agency changed the rules but most of those who had been excluded were not made aware of the change until very late and ended up on the waiting list.

In the meantime, many who paid full price for digital converters discovered that they were useless because the digital signals don't have the same reach as the old analog signals. Cable and satellite will be the only be the options for thousands who do not live in metropolitan areas -- which means added expenses for rural residents who just don't have any extra income.

If you've lived your whole life on the east coast or in a major city, you have no idea what life is like outside your personal bubble. This whole program is an example of what happens when upscale, cable subscribing, urbanites make false assumptions about the composition of the nation and formulate public policy based on those false assumptions.


RE: Does this make...
By Suntan on 1/29/2009 12:52:31 PM , Rating: 3
Calm down there skippy.

As a person that grew up on an acerage in rural Iowa (and can claim that most all Wal Mart stores had a higher population than my home town)I can certainly understand what it is to live in the weeds.

People that live in the sticks have different standards of living than dense populations. Cable/Broadband/close access to shopping/acres to run around in/no community covenants/etc. There are pluses and minuses in both directions.

Long story short, you don't like the poor reception you get? Get a bigger receiving antenna or move closer to the broadcast antenna.

-Suntan


RE: Does this make...
By Chaser on 1/29/2009 12:54:26 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
discovered that they were useless because the digital signals don't have the same reach as the old analog signals. Cable and satellite will be the only be the options for thousands who do not live in metropolitan areas -- which means added expenses for rural residents who just don't have any extra income.


Hmmmm So I wonder how their channels looked on analog?

Enough already! I think we should have a government program providing free satellite for those that live in rural areas!


RE: Does this make...
By AssBall on 1/29/2009 1:09:04 PM , Rating: 2
Agreed. Lets also implement the following:

For towns under 300 people, residents get a government voucher for free satellite TV and radio. If your neighborhood is over 33% minorities, you only have to pay half price for fried chicken and burritos. If you have more than 6 kids, watermelons, cornbread, and salsa are free!


RE: Does this make...
By DCstewieG on 1/29/2009 1:03:26 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Q: We hooked up a TV converter for my parents. They live in northern Wisconsin and only receive 4 channels. With the converter attached, they lost 3 out of 4 of their regular channels and picked up different ones. What is going on with that?

A: First, remember that not all stations are sending out the digital signal yet, and the ones that are may be sending them on a different channel for the time being.

Many stations are sending a signal at reduced strength until the conversion.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,480904,00.html


RE: Does this make...
By monitorjbl on 1/29/2009 7:05:05 PM , Rating: 2
Digital signals have about the same reach as standard analog signals. The only difference is they way in which they are rendered. You can't really have a "snowy" digital signal, so the TV outputs nothing if the signal is degraded. You pretty much get a perfect frame, or no frame. Interestingly, urban areas aren't an optimal place for reception; digital signals are very, very susceptible to signal echoes from buildings and such. If you live in a place where you can only get a badly distorted signal, you may want to look into satellite or cable.

Frankly, you don't have a constitutional right to entertainment, so why is this such a big deal? A digital TV broadcast frees up bandwidth for other things. The FCC is a governing body in charge of regulating the use of the EM spectrum in the US, and while they do some things I don't approve of (like censoring TV and radio broadcasts), I think the DTV push is a good thing. There are plenty of companies out there that would love to use that bandwidth for other things.

Sure, they could have handled the voucher program better, but they didn't have to offer any kind of program for DTV converters. They could have just told people about it and ordered the switch. Sure, a lot of impoverished people will be affected by the switch for a while, but not in a way that infringes on their rights as citizens.

It sucks. We know. Save up and buy a new TV/converter, you can go without it for a while.


RE: Does this make...
By SoylentG on 1/31/2009 12:58:30 AM , Rating: 2
Seriously? You know that it's not a matter of analog's reach, its a matter of companies not willing to build broadcast towers in the middle of nowhere so that 1,000 people can get a broadcast. It's just not worth it.


how many?
By Dreifort on 1/29/2009 12:03:15 PM , Rating: 5
Wonder how many "minorities" and "women" were prepared for computers? Did they run out and sue Service Merchandise or Sears in the 80s when they stopped selling typewriters?

Wonder how they handled the government ban on "leaded fuel"? or the switch from 7 digit to 10 digit dialing? (which Albuquerque uses now) And wonder how many had to deal with buying phones that had 'touch tone' dialing?

It's not like these ppl are suddenly losing 50 TV channels. These ppl claiming to be affected DON'T HAVE CABLE! Soooo? they lose the 4-6 TV Channels they get now? If they did have cable the cable companies are offering ditital converter boxes.




RE: how many?
By phattyboombatty on 1/29/2009 12:09:15 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
If they did have cable the cable companies are offering ditital converter boxes.

If they have cable they won't need a digital converter box.


RE: how many?
By Dreifort on 1/29/2009 12:20:52 PM , Rating: 2
Not all, but some cable companies (mine incl) are not transmitting the digital channels over their cable unscrambled. Those even with basic cable cannot pick up all their channels anymore without a digital tuner box from the cable company. Mine was free, just had to ask for it.

On the plus side, all the benefits of digital cable over the prev few years (the built in tv guide, etc) is now free with the box.


RE: how many?
By phattyboombatty on 1/29/2009 12:40:31 PM , Rating: 2
Regardless, the cable company is free to send the channels over their lines as either analog, digital or both. If the cable company decides to use the digital tv transition date as an excuse to go all digital, that's their choice.


LOL
By Soldier1969 on 1/29/2009 12:05:40 PM , Rating: 3
Its freaking 2009 people, and this has been advertised its arse off for years. If you are still watching tv on a analog set with rabbit ears you dont deserve to be informed or given another chance at a voucher. Deal with it. Get a second job buy a new tv make the transition suck it up!




RE: LOL
By Oregonian2 on 1/29/2009 12:33:13 PM , Rating: 2
Some percentage will never do something until it's forced (in this case "TV not working"). Largest portion in this group are probably those called "procrastinators".

P.S. - Although I'd put me in that category, I still got a couple converters last spring for our off-satellite TVs (guest room, etc).


RE: LOL
By Oregonian2 on 1/29/2009 12:33:46 PM , Rating: 2
P.S. - But only one of them is hooked up. :-)


RE: LOL
By Oregonian2 on 1/29/2009 12:35:30 PM , Rating: 2
P.P.S. - "Off-satellite" meant not connected to DirecTV, not ones getting TV off the satellite. Sorry about the ambiguity. :-)


Penalize 90%?
By Atheist Icon on 1/29/2009 12:33:13 PM , Rating: 4
quote:
Nielsen shows that 9.7% of Hispanic homes aren’t ready for the transition and 9.9% of African-American homes are unprepared.


So we should penalize the other 90% of households because they couldn't get their heads out of their asses long enough to catch a bus/drive/bike/walk/wheelchair/etc, and buy something to attach to their TV?




RE: Penalize 90%?
By FITCamaro on 1/29/2009 1:36:39 PM , Rating: 4
They were likely too lazy to even request the voucher. They don't need TV.


Odd Timing
By DtTall on 1/29/2009 12:36:55 PM , Rating: 3
I won't say my opinion one way or another because I don't really have a strong opinion on the topic.

That said, isn't it a little odd that Nielsen decided to release this report on how the change is impacting minorities after the bill got voted down. What's the point? Is this supposed to change someone's opinion?

We knew that X.X million were not ready for the transition. Does the color of their skin make a difference?




RE: Odd Timing
By FITCamaro on 1/29/2009 1:38:07 PM , Rating: 3
It does to Democrats. Despite them claiming to be the party where race doesn't matter.


RE: Odd Timing
By crafty on 1/30/2009 2:07:41 AM , Rating: 1
Are you sore that the Whites Only party went down to defeat last November?


Prepared?
By phattyboombatty on 1/29/2009 12:17:54 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
The Albuquerque-Santa Fe has only 12.4% of homes that are ready for the digital transition among the 56 local markets that Nielsen measures with electronic meters.

I have a hard time believing that 87.6% of homes in the Albuquerque-Santa Fe area do not have either cable, satellite tv, or televisions with digital tuners. If that really is the case, DirecTV and Dish really need to step up their advertising in that area.

Because I don't believe the numbers, I think Nielson's definition of "unprepared" must be wacky. To Nielson, "unprepared" must mean that the home has at least one television without a digital tuner that is not connected to cable or satellite, regardless of how many other televisions in the home do have access to non-OTA analog programming. If you have a rusty old television in your attic without a digital converter box attached to it, you are unprepared for the conversion, even if you have the premium package from DirecTV with Sunday Ticket Superfan on six televisions in your home.




RE: Prepared?
By ebakke on 1/29/2009 12:32:30 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Because I don't believe the numbers, I think Nielson's definition of "unprepared" must be wacky.
That's like the definition of "uninsured Americans".


RE: Prepared?
By gstrickler on 1/29/2009 2:18:23 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
quote:
The Albuquerque-Santa Fe has only 12.4% of homes that are ready for the digital transition among the 56 local markets that Nielsen measures with electronic meters.
I have a hard time believing that 87.6% of homes in the Albuquerque-Santa Fe area do not have either cable, satellite tv, or televisions with digital tuners.
I caught that too. While it "may be accurate", it's deceptive. Don't assume that 12.4% "ready" is the same as "87.6%" not ready. There could possibly be only be 12.4% who are ready to receive OTA DTV, but that doesn't mean that 87.6% will lose signal when the DTV transition occurs.

From:
http://tvbythenumbers.com/2008/12/19/us-satellite-...
quote:
Top 50 markets with the highest percentage of ADS TV households include Salt Lake City (41 percent), Albuquerque-Santa Fe (41.8 percent) and Dallas-Ft. Worth (38.7 percent).
About 42% of Albuquerque-Santa Fe households subscribe to cable or satellite and are unaffected by the DTV transition, so there is no way that 87.6% are not ready for the transition.

See how easy it is to deceive with statistics?


Simple Solution
By acase on 1/29/2009 1:57:47 PM , Rating: 2
A week before the switch they should just have all of the digital turned on and scroll a message across the bottom of every OTA station that they won't have it in a week. They could easily put it in English, Spanish, or ebonics if they have to...
Hell even if they don't have a job to afford a converter they could make 40 bucks in a week of begging on the street with their 12 inch black and white TV playing the scrolling message.




RE: Simple Solution
By Keeir on 1/29/2009 2:45:51 PM , Rating: 2
Ha, I think you do not watch US TV

For at least the past 4 months (long as I have had a TV), every 30 minutes there is a minimum of 15 seconds advertising/informing the viewer of the upcomming switch. There are full-length commericals (I hate you Comcast), scrolls at the bottom, and service announcements. News reports, newspaper stores, web stories... wouldn't surprize me if its on the radio as well.

Going out on a limb here and say it should be nearly impossible for someone who -uses- a TV not to have at least heard of the transition by now. Comprehending it appears to be a different thing...


RE: Simple Solution
By acase on 1/30/2009 10:59:55 AM , Rating: 2
Alright yah, I wrote bottom, but I was thinking like the entire bottom half so it would be an incredibly motivating inconvenience instead of the little annoying one they have now.


OhNo
By AnnaT on 1/29/2009 11:48:00 AM , Rating: 3
"World is coming to an end...Women and Minorities hit hardest"




RE: OhNo
By johnsonx on 1/29/2009 12:21:46 PM , Rating: 2
or the other famous variation: "World to end tomorrow: Homeless hit hardest"


Tell Congress
By billg1745 on 1/29/2009 12:48:20 PM , Rating: 2
The reason Congress gets away with so much stupidity (like politicizing the digital conversion) is that not enough thinking people communicate with them. If you're unhappy about their absurd meddling in this and other things they don't understand, email your Representatives.




RE: Tell Congress
By Chaser on 1/29/2009 12:59:18 PM , Rating: 3
Actually SOME of them did act.

Bill to Delay DTV Switch Fails in U.S. House
http://www.dailytech.com/Bill+to+Delay+DTV+Switch+...

Common sense can prevail sometimes.


oh???
By meepstone on 1/29/2009 12:26:56 PM , Rating: 2
They probably didn't understand english or in some people's case, proper english to comprehend the message this was sending. If you had inserted something about football into these dtv commercials a small percentage of you know who's would of been paying attention to pay attention to the dtv message being broadcasted.




RE: oh???
By nixoofta on 1/29/2009 1:16:41 PM , Rating: 2
?Que?...futbol?


Individual issue, not race issue...
By tallcool1 on 1/29/2009 12:35:42 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Report: Minority Homes Most Likely to be Unprepared for DTV Transition
quote:
Hispanic and African-American homes are the least likely to be prepared for the transition.

Ok, this is a little bit of spin here. Being a minority does not make you more likely to be unprepared for the DTV switch!

What makes you more likely to be unprepared for the switch is an individual issue, not a RACE issue.




By zombiexl on 1/29/2009 12:51:02 PM , Rating: 2
You must have missed the meeting where they decided that playing the race card is the best way to get anything illogical done...


Take Some Initiative!
By Mclendo06 on 1/29/2009 12:36:38 PM , Rating: 4
Seriously, if you aren't ready for the transition, that means one of two things-

a) You don't watch TV.
b) You watch TV and have seen hundreds (of thousands) of advertisements about the digital transition saying to get a converter box by February 17th over the last year or two but haven't done a single thing about it, leaving three other possibilities:

1) You don't care and have decided that you don't need to have TV in your house
2) You do care but you were not responsible enough to take the initiative to save the money to get a converter box yourself.
3) You waited until the last minute to do anything about getting a coupon for the converter box and therefore you haven't received one yet.

Only option 3 has anything to do with the government failing the people, and even then, TV is arguably a luxury and given the amount of time people had to prepare, I don't see how any responsible person couldn't have saved enough money to buy a $40 - $80 converter box, even without the government's help.

I'm glad that the delay didn't pass. The root reason that the desire for a delay came from the new White House is questionable based on conflicts of interest within the telecomm advising group that works for Obama - See DC Examiner Opinion Column here- http://www.dcexaminer.com/opinion/columns/TimothyC...




LOL!
By InfantryRocks on 1/29/2009 11:44:57 AM , Rating: 2
"Women and Minorities Hardest Hit"




Cry me a river
By Fenixgoon on 1/29/2009 12:02:44 PM , Rating: 2
as many have said before - it's television, not water, heat, or electricity. it is a luxury that every has, but it is *not* a necessity.




Can I just...
By Motoman on 1/29/2009 12:28:01 PM , Rating: 2
...point out how disappointing it is that TV is seen as having such importance as to get all up in arms about?

You don't have a "right" to own a TV, or to recieve TV signals. It's a luxury, by any definition, and granted that OTA broadcasts are paid for by advertisers and not the consumer, I see little reason the consumer can complain when they don't get the broadcast...no one has a contract with the consumer that they are breaking.

People who find themselves without TV will do one of 3 things. Firstly, they might finally trot their lazy asses to the store and buy the converter box...with our without a government coupon. Secondly, they might order up some cable or satellite service. Or, heaven forbid, they might decide to go without TV for a while. OMFG.




By novacthall on 1/29/2009 12:40:30 PM , Rating: 2
"There's no point in acting all surprised about it. All the planning charts and demolition orders have been on display in your local planning department in Alpha Centauri for fifty of your Earth years, so you've had plenty of time to lodge any formal complains and it's far too late to start making a fuss about it now." ~ Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy




By Jay2tall on 1/29/2009 2:17:59 PM , Rating: 2
TV is entertainment and not essential for your well being so why is the government even giving out coupons in the first place? I find it a waste of government funds to even offer these coupons. A digital converter box is what, $50? And how long ago were we all told about this? If you rely on broadcast TV and haven't saved the $50 needed by now, it is your own fault. If the government would have never started giving out these coupons there would be no argument. But once you give out free stuff, everyone has their hand out and complains that they did not get their fair share.

So on February 17th 2009, PUSH THAT BUTTON. If you aren't prepared, too bad. Don't give me the PBS kids, News, etc, etc, arguments. There is the newspaper, libraries, and the internet. Speaking of, how many people do you think use broadcast TV and also have the internet? So read the news there. And if you don't have the internet, aren't public libraries free? People have so many choices. 21st Century people just like to WHINE! that is all.




Hmm...
By bkslopper on 1/29/2009 10:44:34 PM , Rating: 2
Hey, those old analog TV's should still work in Mexico. This DTV switch might actually be more effective than our border patrol.




By oxymojoe on 1/30/2009 1:41:34 AM , Rating: 2
Our current President has a constituency, and how else will he reach those people? Getting said people TV access is very important for 2 reasons:

1. They will scream bloody murder and blame him for cutting off the TV. It won't matter who's fault it actually is.

2. The channels these people will get are the same news channels that are overwhelmingly favorable to the President.




Minority?
By rburnham on 1/30/2009 10:12:35 AM , Rating: 2
Is it just me, or does the angle of this article seem subtly racist? True or not, why should attention be paid to that particular stat? Being a minority is not something people can control. Economic standing might be a more relevant measure.




By rcreyes on 2/2/2009 2:12:08 AM , Rating: 2
As usual, the media never considers Asians. Asians are more educated and have more income than any group in the US, including whites. It's the non-Asian minorities that have problems.




"DailyTech is the best kept secret on the Internet." -- Larry Barber

DailyTech Poll
Do you use copy/paste on your smartphone? 




16 Comments









botimage
Copyright 2010 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki