Print 131 comment(s) - last by rcc.. on Jan 29 at 7:56 PM

Bill to delay digital transition until June is expected to pass unanimously in Senate

The digital transition set to happen on February 17, 2009 has been talked about for years now. It's hard to watch TV on local stations that broadcast over-the-air without being blasted with numerous reminders that if you watch over-the-air, you will need a converter.

Despite the incessant reminders that the digital transition is set for next month, there is an astonishing number of TV viewers across the country that are not ready for the transition. Today the Nielsen Company reported that the number of homes in the U.S. not ready for the digital transition totals 6.5 million.

The glut of procrastinators not moving to prepare for the digital transition has been worrying some in Washington for months now. In October, the Government Accountability Office warned that the government wasn't ready for the last minute surge of viewers would need one of the millions of converter coupons that the government was providing.

In late December, reports started coming in that the government would run out of coupons in early January, meaning late coupon requests would go unfulfilled. This and other concerns led Obama to ask that the Digital Transition be postponed from the widely publicized February 17 date to June 12 of 2009.

It seems that Obama is going to get his wish with reports coming in that the Senate is on the verge of passing a bill that would postpone the transition until June. If the bill fails to be passed all stations in America will have to turn off analog broadcasts and move to all digital broadcasts in February.

Some Senators are drafting a few minor changes and the Senate is expected to pass the bill unanimously. However, one of the Senators, Kay Bailey Hutchison from Texas, said, "[the June 12 date is] an option, not a mandate [for broadcasters]."

The reason the Senate cites for not making the change to June 12 mandatory is that if broadcasters have already invested in the needed equipment for the digital transition, the cost to broadcast both digital and analog programming could be very expensive.

Hutchison said, "If the broadcaster has invested in the equipment, they can go ahead after Feb. 17 so they don't have to do both, because that could be very expensive."

Dow Jones Newswires reports that the waiting list for converter coupons from the Commerce Department is at 2.5 million, a bit less than half the number of homes that the Nielsen Company estimates are unprepared for the transition.

One of the changes being made to the bill before the Senate votes on it is a provision that will allow consumers who previously requested a coupon and then didn’t use it to reapply for a new coupon. The coupons expire 90 days after they are issued and people can’t reapply.

Senate Commerce Committee Chairman John Rockefeller said, "There are 16 million people out there where it's going to go black, their TV sets," Rockefeller said. "I don't want that to happen."

House Republicans have voiced opposition to the change in the mandated transition noting the cost to broadcaster and confusion to consumers who have been blasted with public service announcements for months.

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Make the switch
By Sanity on 1/23/2009 9:59:10 AM , Rating: 5
We've been bombarded with the fact that this change is coming for at least the last year. Maybe more. Make the switch. When their televisions no longer work right, those people that have been ignoring the news will figure it out and get off their couches to fix it. These are the same people who will be in the same situation later if we postpone the change.

RE: Make the switch
By FITCamaro on 1/23/2009 10:01:10 AM , Rating: 5
Think I speak for everyone when I say.

God damn it.

RE: Make the switch
By seamonkey79 on 1/23/2009 10:31:34 AM , Rating: 3
Nope, you don't.

RE: Make the switch
By omnicronx on 1/23/2009 10:58:57 AM , Rating: 4
I rarely agree with FT, but he is bang on here.

If this is Obama not wanting to rock the boat a month into his presidency, my view on him is going to change very quickly. I have supported Obama because he has campaigned for change, but this is just the same old same old, not wanting bad press, even if it is for the good of the country.

RE: Make the switch
By Machinegear on 1/23/09, Rating: 0
RE: Make the switch
By omnicronx on 1/23/2009 11:24:37 AM , Rating: 2
You might consider in the future judging people by what they have done , and what they chose to do, rather than what they say;
Yes but its kind of hard to do this, before they are in office isnt it ;) I am not going to make my decision on Obama based on one bill, but it sure has me thinking..

RE: Make the switch
By MrBlastman on 1/23/2009 11:39:49 AM , Rating: 4
This bill serves no purpose. Why put this transition off?

... WAIT ...

I have figured it out!

Apparently there is a a strange source of microwave radiation with a resonance frequency similar to the cascade level needed to interrupt thought processes. Essentially it bridges the synapses in a calculated, but quanifiable manner and prevents particular neurotransmitter sequences from being absorbed and processed. The weak link in this signal is that due to the size of our nation, it is impossible to succeed in transmittal of this signal on a national scale...


It is done through TV stations and Television sets. The very same Television sets that the majority of the voting base for our President possess. The Obamatons apparently need to phone home frequently and do require constant input to operate at optimal mezmerization spread transferral levels. With the signal being relayed through these repeaters, the grip of our new, supreme supergenius in Washington can be solidified.

Yes, there is more behind the scenes. It is not as simple as it sounds. Conspiracy I say! Obama is tightening his grip around our minds as I type... this... ppo...sssssss...

Obama is our Leader.
Obama is our Hero.
All is good.
All is well.
We will all be wealthy.
We will all be saved.
Obama. Obama. Obama!


RE: Make the switch
By omnicronx on 1/23/2009 12:12:57 PM , Rating: 1
Hahah, so wrong, yet so funny haha

RE: Make the switch
By Chaser on 1/23/2009 12:35:08 PM , Rating: 4
Obama is our Leader. Obama is our Hero. All is good. All is well. We will all be wealthy. We will all be saved. Obama. Obama. Obama!

And now I don't have to pay my mortgage or for gasoline anymore. Yay!

RE: Make the switch
By FITCamaro on 1/23/2009 12:49:29 PM , Rating: 2
So have the riots started yet? I am assuming the checks didn't arrive in everyone's mail boxes today.

RE: Make the switch
By Dreifort on 1/23/2009 4:27:43 PM , Rating: 2
no, but ppl are going to the doctor now. And when asked for their insurance card, they say "Obama didn't say anything about an insurance card..."

And sadly as I's not Obama to worry about taking the country in the wrong direction. It's Pelosi and Reed. But as Majority House Leader...why does it always seem like Ried is 2nd fiddle to Pelosi? scary. Ethier way, whatever they put in front of Obama to sign - he's not reading it and signing it. Someone get him some glasses!

RE: Make the switch
By RU482 on 1/23/2009 12:37:46 PM , Rating: 2
last time I checked, Obama isn't in the Senate anymore

RE: Make the switch
By MrBlastman on 1/23/2009 12:49:31 PM , Rating: 2
The Democrats are all in on this man! Don't you know!
(In the voice of that Army/Navy Store owner from Falling Down)

*points finger*

He's one of them! Get him!

RE: Make the switch
By PhoenixKnight on 1/23/2009 1:29:13 PM , Rating: 4
There are Republicans in the Senate, too. And if the vote is unanimous, as is predicted in the article, that means all of them would have voted for this, not just the Democrats.

RE: Make the switch
By Samus on 1/23/09, Rating: 0
RE: Make the switch
By Suntan on 1/23/2009 2:01:24 PM , Rating: 4
1) I don’t want even *more* of my tax dollars handed over to the lazy slobs that want the government to buy them a converter box.

2) Read up on the potential of what the freed spectrum is going to be used for.
-More/cheaper cellular services
-Nation wide, uniform emergency response communications network
-WiMax capabilities

Yeah, why would anyone care about getting this accomplished, we’ve delayed this a couple years already, what’s another couple months…


RE: Make the switch
By omnicronx on 1/23/2009 3:44:28 PM , Rating: 4
its not like it affects your quality of service in any way.
Yes.. it does.. OTA DTV channels are being broadcast at lower power as to not interfere with analogue broadcasts, not to mention they use smaller antennas.

One of the main reasons the FCC does not want to switch this date is because they have already booked and hired people to switch these antennas nation wide.

DTV is also all or nothing, there is no half picture, half static scenario. There are probably a large amount of people who currently can't take advantage of DTV, but after the switch they will be able to. It would not surprise me if this is one of the reasons many waited so long to get these converter boxes. Even if they have one, they can't use it until the analogue shutdown.

RE: Make the switch
By Oregonian2 on 1/23/2009 6:15:38 PM , Rating: 2
Digital channels would have smaller antennas because they are UHF band channels (much higher frequency) where the wavelengths are shorter (they play games with the numbers -- channel 2 analog and channel 2 digital are at VERY different frequencies). An equivalent antenna would be proportionally smaller.

RE: Make the switch
By omnicronx on 1/23/2009 8:54:58 PM , Rating: 3
No, most DTV channels are currently located on UHF because they are already transmitting the analogue broadcast over VHF. After the switch most of your major channels will be moving from UHF to VHF and replacing your old channels (mainly for reasons you already explained, longer wavelength means further distance it can travel). The antennas will be bigger than the current ones being used to transmit DTV.

RE: Make the switch
By Oregonian2 on 1/23/2009 11:40:44 PM , Rating: 2
Some will move "back down" to the upper VHF channels (7~13) but from what I've read most will still be UHF channels (not the higher UHF ones that are being sold off). The lower VHF channels (2~6) are not desirable and are unlikely to be used -- even though I've got two local stations using them for analog transmission (ch 2 & 6). Although more were originally slated for going back to VHF my understanding that the majority will be UHF stations, more than even originally planned.

There is advantage to being UHF. For a given size of antenna, one can have higher gain for a UHF antenna. Also power limits for stations are higher on UHF than on VHF.

RE: Make the switch
By eggman on 1/23/2009 3:45:47 PM , Rating: 3
It effects my service. One of my local HD stations (NBC) is moved up to be out the channel 2 to 6 range and running at reduced power so I barely get it the others are running at reduced antenna height because the analog antenna is where they will be when the analog antenna goes away. This last group, ABC and CBS I can't even get because of that. Once the analogs are gone they all have FCC approval to boost their power.

So to sum it up, in a few weeks I should have been getting good signals on my new HDTV from these, and more, stations. It stead I will barely get to see 1 HD Channel until June.

RE: Make the switch
By Keeir on 1/23/2009 3:47:33 PM , Rating: 2
I think it depends alot of your location and distance from your towers.

In many areas of the country, forcing analog broadcasts off longer range lower frequencies could improve signial reception of Digitial Televison through OTA antennae. I personally have a station that comes in around 50% of the time clear and 50% of the time its choppy or non-existant. The DT portion is currently on slot 39 (Logical 7-1), but after Feb. 17th it was supposed to move to slot 7. This transition might ensure I can recieve the signal without additional purchases, etc.

RE: Make the switch
By rcc on 1/23/2009 4:00:23 PM , Rating: 2

In and of itself, no, it's not a big deal. But, for those people and companies that went out and upgraded TVs and broadcasting equipment on the original schedule they spent big bucks on equipment that may be obsolete, or just not up to the latest standards by the time the changeover occurs.

Sort of like them decreeing that any car built prior to 1980 has to be off the road by 2000, then changing the date to 2005. People complying in the original timeframe spent time and effort for nothing. (This is a hypothetical example only).

You have to wonder what the real source of the delay is. Broadcasters not being ready? Or manufacturers that want to sell the last of the old stock?

RE: Make the switch
By ebakke on 1/23/2009 5:21:21 PM , Rating: 1
You have to wonder what the real source of the delay is. Broadcasters not being ready? Or manufacturers that want to sell the last of the old stock?
Try old people who don't have a box, and have bitched to their congressman.

RE: Make the switch
By Oregonian2 on 1/23/2009 6:17:55 PM , Rating: 1
Or young people who don't have a box and just bitch.

RE: Make the switch
By rcc on 1/29/2009 7:56:14 PM , Rating: 2
Or middle aged people that are soooooo busy they just haven't been able to find the time in the last 3 years to get one.

RE: Make the switch
By ebakke on 1/23/2009 5:17:56 PM , Rating: 2
Because we want our government to actually do something. And whenever possible, do something productive. After years and years, we were almost there.

RE: Make the switch
By Dreifort on 1/23/2009 4:34:30 PM , Rating: 3
if 100 ppl have a vote but only 60 vote...then it can be unanimous.

Don't forget that 56 seats are held by Liberals right now. That makes almost any vote favorable to liberals unanimous.

Now, in his second prominent act as Majority Leader since the election, as AP reports tonight, he's considering going ahead with the seating of MN's Al Franken, despite the fact that Franken's opponent, former Sen. Norm Coleman, is allowed, by state law, to challenge the results of the election --- which found that he lost by 225 votes --- in a court of law before the election is certified by the state's SoS and Governor.

It keeps getting better and better. Ried allows Burris into the Senate because the law allows him. But the law doesn't apply when it comes to deciding between Republican or Democrat.... not in Harry's mind.

RE: Make the switch
By cmdrdredd on 1/23/2009 9:26:33 PM , Rating: 2
There are Republicans in the Senate, too. And if the vote is unanimous, as is predicted in the article, that means all of them would have voted for this, not just the Democrats.

Unanimous doesn't mean all inclusive. Besides, maybe they earmarked a fat raise for everyone on capitol hill? That's just like those morons.

RE: Make the switch
By foolsgambit11 on 1/23/2009 3:38:55 PM , Rating: 3
Hey. Happy is happy. If it takes a lobotomy to get there, so be it.

RE: Make the switch
By FITCamaro on 1/23/2009 12:46:41 PM , Rating: 5
He meant Obama's past actions and decisions. Something he has very few of.

And I have no doubt he stood/stands for change. The question no one asked is what that change was. Or whether it was good for the country and the economy.

RE: Make the switch
By Suntan on 1/23/2009 1:21:26 PM , Rating: 5
I’m just waiting for the government to rally behind the minority of us that believe being responsible for your own actions and that it is your own responsibility to be prepared to handle all the little things in your own life.

Seems as though we are dwindling down to less than 6.5 million in this country so I would assume we have hit critical mass numbers for some Politian to think he can make a career move off of us…


RE: Make the switch
By superflex on 1/23/2009 3:33:35 PM , Rating: 3
Now now Suntan,

Responsibility. That's an awful big word for a democrat.

Nevermind. I see they've already mastered reconciliation, reparation and restitution.

RE: Make the switch
By Dreifort on 1/23/2009 4:43:34 PM , Rating: 2
Responsibility (Liberal definition):
To be patriotic and pay for someone else to afford an abortion on foreign soil. To take care of everyone around you, but do not take care of yourself.
Example: President Obama says the responsibility of assisting the lower class rests upon the wealthy.

Responsibility (corrupt Conservative definition):
To take upon one's self the sole accountability of one's action and divide it among a greater number to dilute the inherent recourse for fore-mentioned action.
Example: The CEO's responsibility was to keep this company's stock price up.

Responsibility (American grass roots definition):
To think about the outcome of one's action(s) before taking such action(s). To make sure your foundation is stable before building/expanding.
Example: The airline stewardess explains your responsibility to make sure of your own safety before helping your baby or others.

RE: Make the switch
By jimbojimbo on 1/26/2009 3:57:04 PM , Rating: 2
Hey, it takes a really decisive mind to vote "present" so many times. Give the guy some slack.
In case some of you didn't get it, I was being sarcastic.

RE: Make the switch
By ggordonliddy on 1/23/2009 10:13:46 PM , Rating: 5
> Yes but its kind of hard to do this, before they are in office isnt it

No, it's very easy:

- Obama does not want union members to have anonymous votes.

- Obama supports partial birth abortion (there is NO health reason for this, as is claimed by some nuts; it makes no sense). (No different from taking an already-born baby and sticking it in a blender, microwave, plastic shredder, wood pulper, or smashing it with a baseball bat.)

Those are just 2 of many reasons.

Why would anyone be so thoughtless to vote for someone who only speaks of "change" and "hope" without that candidate having a strong legacy behind him (unless of course you are just picking between the lesser of 2 evils, and of course McCain wasn't so great... but better than Obama)?

RE: Make the switch
By Crysalis99 on 1/23/2009 1:00:35 PM , Rating: 2
I don't know about you, but that is what I have noticed from people in todays world. Too many people are worried about looking good instead of doing what is really needed to be done. And yes, I say that as a generalization. Some self sacrificing for the greater good needs to be done more often...

Im with you here, I loved Obama going into this but I was always skeptical, always doubting (it was/is a weird fence I sit on, I know). I just hope he delivers what he has promised. Especially in the technological arena, which is beginning to a rocky start with this...

RE: Make the switch
By Suntan on 1/23/2009 1:11:46 PM , Rating: 3
I just hope he delivers what he has promised.

Would that be what he promised leading up to winning the election, or what he has since backpeddled with after winning the election?


RE: Make the switch
By omnicronx on 1/23/2009 1:32:42 PM , Rating: 2
Would that be what he promised leading up to winning the election, or what he has since backpeddled with after winning the election?
You say this as though it is different with ANY politician.

RE: Make the switch
By Suntan on 1/23/2009 1:39:39 PM , Rating: 3
The difference is in everybody that beat down my door for the better part of two years leading up to the election telling me how this guy *is* different than all the other politicians.

I can’t remember an election campaign going back to Regan or before where so many people had completely drank the kool-aid with regards to the idea the “this time its different.”



RE: Make the switch
By Suntan on 1/23/2009 1:43:43 PM , Rating: 2
I would also argue that never in recent history has a president-elect gone to such great lengths to try and downgrade the expectations placed on his administration. It started with his acceptance speech and continued, full bore, right up to his inauguration speech.


RE: Make the switch
By tdawg on 1/23/2009 4:28:22 PM , Rating: 1
Yeah, but look at those expectations. A lot of people were probably expecting everything to be fixed as soon as he was sworn in. In his position, anybody would try to temper these unrealistic expectations.

In your recent memory, who's expectations were so high? When you have to follow one of the worst presidents in history, with people expecting you to right the wrongs of the past eight years right away, what do you expect? McCain would be doing the same thing.

It amazes me how many people here are so adept at seeing into the future to criticize everything that the rest of us haven't seen yet. Give the president a chance to succeed or fail first, then criticize.

RE: Make the switch
By Suntan on 1/23/2009 4:57:24 PM , Rating: 3
Yeah, but look at those expectations. A lot of people were probably expecting everything to be fixed as soon as he was sworn in.

I’m not faulting him for being a lying politician like all the others, I’m faulting him for running his whole campaign based on the premise that he wasn’t “just like all the others.”

You don’t find it disingenuous that he literally starts putting the brakes on everyone’s expectations 5 minutes *after* he has been confirmed as the winner?

McCain would be doing the same thing.

True, but everyone was claiming he was “more of the same” so it’s not like he was trying to deceive anyone on that count.

Also, one particular thing that bugged the heck out of me was the way Obama constantly pointed out how McCain was a war monger just like Bush, and even when pressed he would not admit that recent activity in Iraq (aka “The Surge”) was successful. Once he gains the nomination, he asks Bush’s Secretary of Defense to stay on. If that isn’t tacit acknowledgement that he was feeding his base what they wanted to hear, even though he didn’t believe it himself, I don’t know what is.

I don’t disagree with his decision to keep the previous administration’s Secretary of Defense. I do disagree with the way he dealt with the subject prior to locking in the nomination.

It amazes me how many people here are so adept at seeing into the future to criticize everything that the rest of us haven't seen yet.

I’ve only been criticizing the actions that he has already taken. I haven’t said anything about his future actions.

RE: Make the switch
By tdawg on 1/26/2009 7:01:48 PM , Rating: 2
What has he done? How can he be a determined to be a lying politician if he's only been in office a week?! Believe it or not, a President's term is 4 years, not 10 days. Give the man an f-in chance to prove himself to you and the rest that he's going to earnestly try to get done what he said he wanted to do (external factors will keep him from getting everything done that he wants).

RE: Make the switch
By WalksTheWalk on 1/23/2009 2:20:36 PM , Rating: 3
Option 1: Continue with the transition given the huge investment already made educating everyone (or trying to anyway) about the change.

Option 2: Delay the transition and spend additional huge amounts re-educating everyone (or trying to anyway).

Option 3: Join the Neo-Luddites and just cancel it all together declaring the TV a scourge on the written word. Subsequently all TVs would be remote-detonated by "The Man".

RE: Make the switch
By PrinceGaz on 1/23/2009 8:05:14 PM , Rating: 2
If funds have run out for the digital STB coupons, why don't they just make more funds available so the backlog of applications from people who want one can be cleared? Five million coupon at what? US$40 or so each? is only US$200M. That's a tiny fraction of how much is being pumped into other sections of the economy. Hell, half a billion dollars would be enough for everyone who has yet to buy (or receive a subsidised) STB to get one.

You can buy a DTT STB here in Britain for UK£20 or so, and that includes the profit margin for every step in the retail distribution chain to the store you eventually buy it in. I'm sure it would be possible for your government, instead of providing coupons, to instead bulk-purchase several million STBs direct from a manufacturer(s) and also send them out directly to people for little more than US$30 each for those who haven't yet switched, when they respond to radio and newspaper ads about "what to do if your TV went blank on February ..".

There's no need to delay the switchover, I just wish they were doing the same here in the UK- a nationwide switch on one date, instead of the region by region switch between 2008-2012. I've long since abandoned analogue, but a stronger digital signal would be a godsend as the signal is borderline for a USB DTT stick I use, and it would allow HDTV broadcasts to be brought in sooner.

RE: Make the switch
By Reclaimer77 on 1/23/2009 3:01:27 PM , Rating: 3
. I have supported Obama because he has campaigned for change

I'm just curious, not trying to flame. But what is this big change people like you thought we needed from a President ? What was so wrong with this country, that you actually believed 4 years from a President could "fix" it ?

RE: Make the switch
By foolsgambit11 on 1/23/2009 4:11:38 PM , Rating: 3
For some, I think it didn't matter what the change was, the fact that he pledged change was good enough - people felt that, when you're at the bottom, change can only move you in one direction. Up.

Of course, that is logically incorrect (there's still a long way down that we could go), but people vote for somebody based at least partially on emotion. That, and they vote against 'the other guy'.

But anyway, independents were swayed by his charisma, as well as a feeling that he had a better grasp on what the economy needed. That may or may not be true, but it seemed clear that McCain supported, historically and during the campaign, doing things the way they had been done, the way that created the downturn. He also won over independents with pledges to responsibly leave Iraq - a popular position. He didn't need to win over Democrats, despite media commentary that Clinton supporters would desert him en masse.

In other words, there were specific changes that most people wanted, a few of which have been named, and which Obama campaigned for.

This isn't to say that America is 100% wrong on every issue. It's nowhere near that. It's at least 90% right, I'd say. But then again, you could get a baby's DNA 90% right and it would come out as a gorilla. So 10% can be important. Bush signed something like 280 executive orders during his 8 years, and I'm sure 250 of them are pretty uncontroversial. But the fact is, the more we believe the same things, the more we feel we should agree on everything, and the more frustrating it is that we don't. So people get worked up about that 10%.

As for things a President could 'fix' in 4 years, here's a list of some things Obama has already started 'fixing':
Indefinite detention of terror suspects
Extraordinary rendition
Torture/harsh interrogation tactics
Open government (really, that's a decision made every day)
Lobbyist relations with the White House

Here's some things he has pledged to work on:
Righting the economy (probably will take all 4 years)
Health care reform
Removing "Don't ask, don't tell" from military service
Leaving Iraq
Stabilizing/'winning' Afghanistan
Improving diplomatic relations with the world

Now, not everybody agrees with all of those changes, but people who voted for him on the issues (not everybody who voted for him, obviously, some had no idea about the issues) were encouraged by his pledges to work on one or several issues that were important to them.

RE: Make the switch
By Dreifort on 1/23/2009 4:52:52 PM , Rating: 1
Improving diplomatic relations with the world?

Let's see. England. already in good relations. Scotland. already. Egypt. already. Israel. already. Russia. already (some even think Putin and Bush are buddies). Georgia. already. Canda. already. S.Korea. already. Kuwait. already. Afghanistan. already. India. already. Japan. already. Austrailia. already and actually has increased support from this country.

Which countries does Obama want to improve that we don't already have a decent relationship with already?

Iran? China? North Korea? Palistine (Hamas)? Pakinstan? Venezuela?

or, do you mean countries like Germany and France which have strong ties with the corrupt UN?

just wondering which countries Obama wants to improve our relations with?

RE: Make the switch
By Dreifort on 1/26/2009 2:00:23 PM , Rating: 2
Whoever rated me down must be confused.

Having a good relationship politically is NOT the same thing as having a good international public opinion.

Don't argue (opinion) when that's not even the topic.

RE: Make the switch
By Reclaimer77 on 1/23/2009 5:41:09 PM , Rating: 2
Indefinite detention of terror suspects

I just read that Obama signed orders to close Getmo. Guess where all the terrorists are going to end up now ? South Carolina.

I live in South Carolina.

Now let's not mince words. All of these guys can't be "suspects". These ARE terrorists, no matter how you spin it. And our president just ordered them to be placed into OUR COUNTRY, and my backyard.

I am so angry and dismayed over this decision... I can't even express it into words. Nice choice too, South Carolina. Because we all know Liberals like Obama think this is just a big cesspool of redneck ignorant idiots and nobody will care about dumping a few suicide bombers and murderers here. Thanks oh Great One !

I knew we wouldn't be as safe with Obama in charge, but I had no idea it would come this fast and this far.

Torture/harsh interrogation tactics

We know there was no torture. Liberals redefined what torture was to conform to their agenda. Waterboarding produces no trauma, no marking/breaking of the skin or bones, and no possibility of death. How can that be torture ? Because it makes you 'feel' like you might drown and you get scared ? Awww, poor babies..

But harsh ? Define harsh for me please. Are you saying under Obama we won't be mean to terrorist and people who have SWORN to murder us ? I guess that's somehow a good thing ?

RE: Make the switch
By HeelyJoe on 1/23/2009 10:33:40 PM , Rating: 2
Yes, god forbid we put terrorists in prison.

RE: Make the switch
By cmdrdredd on 1/23/2009 9:42:10 PM , Rating: 1
As for things a President could 'fix' in 4 years, here's a list of some things Obama has already started 'fixing': Indefinite detention of terror suspects Extraordinary rendition Torture/harsh interrogation tactics Open government (really, that's a decision made every day) Lobbyist relations with the White House

What happens with these terrorists who KILLED or helped and planned to KILL American citizens? Nobody knows but they want to rush into removing the only logical place to put them? Good job....NOT

These guys behead americans and other democratic and free people, they blow up schools and places of worship, use women and children as human shields, train their kids to shoot americans and teach them hate and war and death. These people would kill their own mother if she went against them. They would kill you, and your family without batting an eye. These people have information vital to the fight against international groups who plan to and carry out acts of war and aggression against otherwise peaceful people. Yet, when they can videotape themselves cutting off the head of a reporter, it's too much for us to pour a little water in their nose...yeah give me a freakin break.

Open government...oh god. So just tell everyone our national secrets, security concerns, and tactics. Tell everyone in the world where we are vulnerable and what we are watching closely so they can counter our efforts and attack us more easily. Seriously...that's like you giving away your PIN number at the ATM because "it's the fqair thing to do". Screw that, there are MANY things the american people and the people of the world do not need to know about the CIA, FBI, military technology, R&D for certain technology etc. I'm sure Iran and North Korea opened up the doors to their secrets too right? Ever hear of classifed information?

RE: Make the switch
By callmeroy on 1/23/2009 12:37:40 PM , Rating: 2
So you are for delaying something like this that has been planned, budgeted for and known about for how many years now -- anyone anyone??????

If I a marketing exec for comcast or one other cable outfits in the land, i'd be about fuming mad at this point....having spent millions on commercials and print ads for the change that looks like isn't coming next month.

RE: Make the switch
By Master Kenobi on 1/23/2009 10:31:56 AM , Rating: 5
Yes, God Damn It indeed. This sort of stupidity is why I can't stand politicians. They are idiots, all of them.

RE: Make the switch
By Gzus666 on 1/23/2009 11:04:31 AM , Rating: 2
It is not so much that they are all idiots, it is just that the majority of them are idiots. Just like regular population, the idiots heavily outweigh the intelligent. Idiocracy, here we come. That should be a new horror film/documentary: When Idiots Ruled the Earth!

RE: Make the switch
By reader1 on 1/23/2009 11:08:10 AM , Rating: 2
"Who's more foolish: the fool, or the fool who follows him?"

RE: Make the switch
By bhieb on 1/23/2009 10:39:21 AM , Rating: 2
My thoughts exactly. And I hope that the networks have some recourse to sue over the AD dollars spent on the Feb date.

RE: Make the switch
By LostInLine on 1/23/2009 11:33:56 AM , Rating: 2
Damn, and these people say gamers aren't social.

We may be argumentative but we are damn social.

RE: Make the switch
By LostInLine on 1/23/2009 11:35:17 AM , Rating: 2
oops posting error please disregard.

RE: Make the switch
By superflex on 1/23/2009 9:40:47 PM , Rating: 2
Smoke much?

RE: Make the switch
By LostInLine on 1/23/2009 12:12:53 PM , Rating: 1
"WASHINGTON ( -- The pace of homes getting ready for the digital TV changeover is quickening, but with the Feb. 17 transition date approaching, the potential is growing for a significant loss of TV audience for advertisers. There is still the possibility that the switchover date will be postponed, probably to June 12."

RE: Make the switch
By callmeroy on 1/23/2009 12:39:29 PM , Rating: 2
your point? do the switch, next month.....

RE: Make the switch
By DCstewieG on 1/23/2009 2:59:47 PM , Rating: 2
I know this is cold, but should advertisers really care about losing the part of the audience that can't go out and spend 40 bucks for a converter?

RE: Make the switch
By Keeir on 1/23/2009 3:53:21 PM , Rating: 2
I think thats the crowd they are most interested in... those that spend 100% of thier money impulsively

RE: Make the switch
By superflex on 1/23/2009 1:56:38 PM , Rating: 2
Yes he does.

This is just the beginning of BO pandering to the poor huddled masses without their TVs

RE: Make the switch
By Brandon Hill on 1/23/2009 10:07:33 AM , Rating: 3
Agreed. Yes, there are millions who haven't made the switch, but how long have we all known about this deadline? They've been blasting us with commercials on the switch constantly.

It doesn't matter if they delay it another 12 months -- there will still be people who aren't ready. We just need to stick to our guns and make a clean break on February 17.

For those that aren't ready, maybe they'll actually get up and do something about it when they see snow on their TV.

RE: Make the switch
By callmeroy on 1/23/2009 12:43:40 PM , Rating: 2
Agree....and the reasoning posted above about fear of lost ad revenue from a smaller audience is BS.....

But typical of both our political reasoning and media sensationalism in this country --- over the years so many reports blasting "lazy americans" for watching so much TV, so many reports of folks being nearly "addicted" to television, now magically they are worried above too small an audience for TV advertising dollars......LOL....we are the ultimate society of hypocrits.

If everyone is so obsessed, addicted and glued to their tv's don't you think if they are forced to buy a $50 digital converter box they will?

some may not, but if Vegas was running odds on this one i'd say --- yeah the majority would cave and buy the box to get their precious TV.

RE: Make the switch
By Lord 666 on 1/23/2009 2:46:58 PM , Rating: 2
In a true capitalistic society, we should be charging $5 MORE per day for the DTV boxes after Feb 17.

Instead of the "Change" platform, the next Presidential contender should run on "No More Excuses" mantra.

RE: Make the switch
By Kary on 1/23/2009 5:24:21 PM , Rating: 2
Agreed. Yes, there are millions who haven't made the switch, but how long have we all known about this deadline? They've been blasting us with commercials on the switch constantly.

You have to be careful though..maybe the 6.5 million really don't know about the transition to digital television..maybe they never saw the commercials/ads/paid announcements...maybe there are 6.5 million people in the US who just don't watch TV :)

RE: Make the switch
By rburnham on 1/23/2009 10:16:21 AM , Rating: 2
Sink or swim, people! Make the digital change as planned. If people don't understand the change, well they can get out the old radio and get their news that way. Delaying this will help nothing. Besides, how many people do you know that do not have some form of at least basic cable?

RE: Make the switch
By Hiawa23 on 1/23/2009 11:30:08 AM , Rating: 2
Wow, I thought most homes had cable or satellite. For those who have not made the switch, what happened to a time where adults were responsible for themselves...
Go Figure..

RE: Make the switch
By Kazairl2 on 1/23/2009 9:41:43 PM , Rating: 2
Actually, I don't have basic cable. This is primarily because I live in the middle of Atlanta and could always get ABC, CBS, NBC, PBS, Fox, the CW, MyTV, WTBS, etc. on an cheap, unamplified indoor rabbit ears + loop antena. However, I am looking FORWARD to the transition. Why? Because I got my converter box SIX MONTHS ago! It's actually a huge improvement. Now I can pick up EVEN MORE stations and all of them now come in as clear as cable with no more "ghosting", snow, or static noise. I don't have to fiddle with the antenna after changing stations to re-optimize the reception. A boost in power to the digital broadcasts might even result in my being able to add a couple of more TV channels, such as ION.

The sad part if "the poor" understood this better, they would be all for the transition to occur on time. A large number of "the poor" are concentrated in large central urban areas with many over-the-air TV channels. The one-time purchases of a digital converter and a cheap ($20) indoor antenna could give them a wide variety of cable-quality channels without having to devote $20/month (at bare minimum) to the local cable complany. The converter would pay for itself in less than 3 months.

RE: Make the switch
By mherlund on 1/23/2009 10:27:16 AM , Rating: 2
I think the government has done more than enough with the coupons already. The government does not pay for a person to have a TV or even the antenna, why is it the governments responsibility for a person to continue watching TV? An argument could be made that it is to deliver important information, but there is still the newspaper and radio.

One could also blame all the people signing up for coupons who don't even need them.

Make the switch!

RE: Make the switch
By cubdukat on 1/23/09, Rating: -1
RE: Make the switch
By omnicronx on 1/23/2009 12:21:29 PM , Rating: 3
Yawn.. the faster they transition, the faster they can make use of the spectrum reserved for a nationwide emergency broadcast system.
I think the Japanese went through three or four different specs in the same time it took us to come up with one.
Huh? The Japs have been using NTSC up until now, the same as the US.
And if you think this is a mess, just wait until they decide to switch over to MPEG-4 encoding. Think it couldn't be any worse than the current situation?
Good thing thats not going to happen ;) They havnt changed the NTSC spec for 60 years, what makes you think they will change the ATSC spec anytime soon? Furthermore in regards to OTA digital broadcasts, compression is really not needed unless they are trying to fit more than two channels in the allotted space. In fact OTA ATSC has more available bandwidth than HD over cable and satellite. Which is why in many areas, OTA HD is actually higher quality than Cable/Sat.

RE: Make the switch
By mherlund on 1/23/09, Rating: 0
RE: Make the switch
By Lord 666 on 1/23/2009 6:13:51 PM , Rating: 2
TV is mind control.

Want proof? Mind control is the only logical explaination for voting in a first term Senator for President. And mind control is what is keeping people fooled thinking there is real change coming. Sure is change and its for the worse!

Remember, we are talking about his prime voting demographics that can't watch TV if the switch happens as planned.

RE: Make the switch
By Draco on 1/23/2009 10:43:47 AM , Rating: 2
Our government officials are truly a bunch of pussies. Their will still be a great mass of mouth-breathers who still have no idea about this change come June.

RE: Make the switch
By omnicronx on 1/23/2009 11:01:34 AM , Rating: 2
Exactly! Aside from a few outliers, most of the people that are not ready thought they could wait until the last moment. Now that they have more time, who is to say they wont wait until the last moment again?

RE: Make the switch
RE: Make the switch
By foolsgambit11 on 1/23/2009 4:19:26 PM , Rating: 2
Oh, snap!
By FITCamaro on 1/23/2009 9:07:05 AM

Scientists who's names I can pronounce!'s

Sorry, that's cheap. I'm sure you can find a spelling or grammatical error in my posts today, too.

RE: Make the switch
By cubdukat on 1/23/2009 11:06:41 AM , Rating: 2
I'm confused on how I feel about this. On one hand, I see their point, that they probably won't get the money for the coupons before the cutoff happens and a lot of people will be left in the dark, as it were. On the other hand, though, I suspect a pretty good part of that are just plain lazy and they'll sit around until the last minute, not realizing that millions also have that same mindset, and that when they all converge on their local retailer at the same time, that never ends well.

I think I'm leaning towards keeping the date as is, because I suspect that only the jolt of having the analog spectrum yanked out from under you will be enough to move these stragglers to action.

Personally, I was an early adopter. I have one internal and one USB HD tuner, and I picked up two boxes with my coupons. Now, if I could only get the two PC tuners to cooperate and work reliably...

RE: Make the switch
By dr4gon on 1/23/2009 12:09:27 PM , Rating: 2
Indeed, this is not change we can believe in.

RE: Make the switch
By FITCamaro on 1/23/2009 12:54:30 PM , Rating: 2
I've yet to hear about or see any change that I want. Much less believe in. Everything I hear about and see scares the crap out of me.

RE: Make the switch
By foolsgambit11 on 1/23/2009 4:24:29 PM , Rating: 2
Everything I hear about and see scares the crap out of me.
You must go through a lot of pants. No, seriously, you should see a psychologist. That sounds like a major complex you've got. Okay, really seriously now, are you actually scared by Obama's pledge to make government more open, where national security isn't at stake? I don't see how you could be. There are plenty of policy changes Obama has implemented that reasonable people will disagree on. But surely that isn't one, is it?

RE: Make the switch
By cmdrdredd on 1/23/2009 9:51:19 PM , Rating: 1
Okay, really seriously now, are you actually scared by Obama's pledge to make government more open, where national security isn't at stake?

Yes because what defines national security? There are a GREAT many things that are vital to national security that will be disclosed and WE DON'T HAVE TO KNOW!

He's just trying to look good for all the unemployed lazy fuckers out there who voted 6 times for him.

RE: Make the switch
By MrBungle123 on 1/23/2009 12:57:36 PM , Rating: 2
anyone with a brain could have told you that before the election.

RE: Make the switch
By SillyCon Volley on 1/23/2009 2:28:46 PM , Rating: 2
A converter box is $44 people!! switch already:

RE: Make the switch
By superflex on 1/23/2009 9:52:07 PM , Rating: 2
But they need that money for pork rinds, a 64 oz. soda and scratch off lottery tickets.

RE: Make the switch
By Gunbuster on 1/23/2009 2:36:28 PM , Rating: 2
What is garbage day going to look like right after analog cutoff?

RE: Make the switch
By Chiisuchianu on 1/23/2009 3:27:34 PM , Rating: 2
Only a few days in office and Obama is already failing miserably. Talking about debt and the economy yet wanting to give people coupons for TV? How about that ridiculous government subsidized cell phone program too? This is an absurdity.

RE: Make the switch
By bnutz on 1/23/2009 4:06:07 PM , Rating: 1
I agree, those people are not going to do anything about it until their TV goes black. Postponing is not going to make a difference, it's going to be the same shit June.

I believe someone already made the comment....
By UppityMatt on 1/23/2009 10:31:54 AM , Rating: 5
This is TV not F***ing water here people. People can live without it.

By lifeblood on 1/23/2009 12:56:55 PM , Rating: 2
Unfortunately, for some it is an essential service warning them of inclement weather, etc.

Consider this hypothetical situation, if you bought a car that got less than 20 mpg, then a year later the government said you may no longer drive any car that gets less then 20 mpg, you'd be pissed and want compensation. The government is in effect doing that with analog TV's. And considering how much they made off selling the spectrum, I think they can afford to give some of it back to the taxpayers.

Personally I want the change to occur. I have an old analog TV and no converter. I've got my wife convinced once the switch occurs we're just going to have to buy that new 50" HiDef Plasma TV. My motto? Change is. Learn how to use it to your advantage.

By BPB on 1/23/2009 1:27:34 PM , Rating: 2
Sorry, that doesn't sell with me. If you rely that much on your TV for the sake of yourself/family/business, then shame on your for NOT being prepared for the switch.

As to the car, I can't imagine that ever happening, ever. Then again, who's the president now? Never mind....

RE: I believe someone already made the comment....
By Suntan on 1/23/2009 1:50:38 PM , Rating: 3
you'd be pissed and want compensation.

Gee, and just think about the people that would be pissed if a major disaster occurs and once again the responders from different locations couldn’t have a practical system of sharing information amongst themselves because once again we delayed this transition so frequencies could be freed up for just such a purpose.

Suddenly, Frank and Betty’s need to watch Jeopardy before the evening news is not so important in the grand scheme of things.


By mmatis on 1/23/2009 7:21:18 PM , Rating: 2
THW Jeopardy and that Canuck buttwipe Trebek. We want Vanna!!!

By Keeir on 1/23/2009 3:59:18 PM , Rating: 2
And considering how much they made off selling the spectrum, I think they can afford to give some of it back to the taxpayers.

You act as if governement money was not -your- money. Whether they distribute the money "back" to taxpayers, the money is most likely going to displace other money that would have been needed to be taken from taxpayers...

By foolsgambit11 on 1/23/2009 4:31:58 PM , Rating: 2
Consider this hypothetical situation, if you bought a car that got less than 20 mpg, then a year later the government said you may no longer drive any car that gets less then 20 mpg, you'd be pissed and want compensatio

Unfortunately, that metaphor just doesn't relate to this situation. It's more like you bought a car that uses normal gas, and then Shell stations start carrying a different type of gas, one that requires you to use a different fuel filter. You could still go to Exxon or Chevron stations. But let's say there are only Shell stations near you. Well, that Shell station has a limited-time offer to replace customers' fuel filters for free. If you miss the limited-time offer, you'll have to pay $40-$60 for the filter yourself. Oh, and the free filter program wasn't really free, it was funded by the station jacking up the price of a gallon of gas by a nickel or something for everyone.

By ebakke on 1/23/2009 5:37:54 PM , Rating: 2

By superflex on 1/23/2009 9:55:38 PM , Rating: 2

By Bateluer on 1/23/2009 2:14:27 PM , Rating: 2
I agree fully. TV is NOT essential for ANYTHING. If you need a warning, emergency broadcast system, your best bet is still a battery operated weather radio. Any survival kit has one, and any guide for a DITY kit will list one as essential.

There comes a time when you just need to kill the old tech for the sake of the new, improved tech.

Verizon Lawsuit
By zombiexl on 1/23/2009 10:51:18 AM , Rating: 2
So as soon as this passed the house we can expect a Verizon lawsuit that will cost tax-payers even more money than the idiots in DC are already shelling out (and planning to shell out) on bail outs.

I hate the US government. I swear they are the best example of being promoted to your highest level of incompetence.

RE: Verizon Lawsuit
By TheSpaniard on 1/23/2009 11:09:17 AM , Rating: 2
while I agree that Verizon should sue....

they have to prove loss...

loss of reasonable use?

not likely seeing as how the federal government said they have until 2014 to get it up and running... unless they need the open bandwith to get started

RE: Verizon Lawsuit
By omnicronx on 1/23/2009 11:13:46 AM , Rating: 2
most UHF channels 60-67 (which is all of block A-E of the 700MHZ spectrum) in many geographical are already clear. Verizon has already stated they are nowhere near to deployment, and with this block clear in many places, they can begin testing, especially since the C block is in the upper echelon of the available spectrum, so interference should be minimal.

In case you were wondering, most OTA analogue channels are VHF as they have the ability to travel further with less power. (which is where the OTA HD channels on UHF will be reassigned to after the switch)

This is why (or so I assume) that the government will be able to delay the transition, without bringing any lawsuits to the table.

RE: Verizon Lawsuit
By sprockkets on 1/23/2009 1:33:17 PM , Rating: 2
You may hate them, but I can assure you, if you were on the other side, you would love it.

In the word of some infamous movies....
By cscpianoman on 1/23/2009 11:02:56 AM , Rating: 2

Why!? Can any politician answer with a "real" reason? I'm sorry, catering to the 100,000 or even 500,000 people who refused to buy or were ignorant enough not to "buy" the convertor box is not enough. Make the switch and watch how fast each of those stragglers makes a purchase.

Tics=Blood-sucking creatures
Is there a statement that is more true?

By b534202 on 1/23/2009 12:40:08 PM , Rating: 2
The real reason is Obama asserting his authority. Anything that happened in Bush's administration, he has to CHANGE.

By sprockkets on 1/23/2009 1:25:13 PM , Rating: 2
Politics means two faced.

By foolsgambit11 on 1/23/2009 4:43:41 PM , Rating: 2
Con = Opposite(Pro)
Congress = Opposite(Progress)

Of course, the etymology of both is totally different. Politics coming from politikos (of the state or citizens), from polis (city - like metropolis). Congress from con- (with), rather than from contra- (against). And the -gress from gradus (step). So it means something like 'stepping together'. Although the Latin word congressus can also mean 'a hostile encounter'.

Enough greco-roman etymology! Time for wrestling!

No TV left behind.
By Denithor on 1/23/2009 12:02:28 PM , Rating: 2
And about as useful as the "No child left behind" program has turned out to be. Kids who cannot pass end-of-grade testing? Advance 'em. Cannot read or write? No problem, here's your diploma...

RE: No TV left behind.
By FITCamaro on 1/23/2009 12:57:03 PM , Rating: 2
"No child left behind" has been a disaster in Florida.

"Oh you can't read junior? Well we don't want to hurt your feeling or make you get made fun of by failing you. So do you promise to try really hard if we graduate you?"

"Yes mam."

"Ok. You can graduate."

RE: No TV left behind.
By foolsgambit11 on 1/23/2009 4:47:38 PM , Rating: 2
That was happening well before NCLB. Besides, NCLB sets standards for schools as a whole, not individual students, so schools can make decisions to advance individual students if they still feel the school as a whole will make the grade on the standardized tests.

The problem with NCLB is that it increases the cost of education and encourages 'teaching to the test' rather than teaching for real comprehension.

Unfair to the TV stations
By DarthKaos on 1/23/2009 10:13:42 AM , Rating: 3
Why are we so worried about this? If people don't have TV they can get important news from radio or the newspaper. The only thing they will miss out on is watching their favorite shows on TV.

If this gets delayed, it could be a huge issue for TV stations. Say your station can't afford to broadcast both digital and analog. You stop broadcasting analog but all the other stations keep broadcasting both. Now you loose viewers that may not come back.

They need to just let this happen. People will cope. It is only TV. It is not like people will go without food, shelter, or water.

RE: Unfair to the TV stations
By bobny1 on 1/24/2009 2:14:44 PM , Rating: 2
I seriously dought the broadcasters are going to dilate the switch if they already have their equipment in place. They woulded probably agree before making the investment. Unless the government is willing to pay and they are not in that position right now. I have a friend who is a producer for NBC in NYC and they have being working hard for the past few months upgrading the entire system.

Digital TV Is Good
By whirabomber on 1/23/2009 10:06:38 AM , Rating: 2
My folks are fortunate enough to have reception of about 10-12 channels that all but 1 has been offering digital TV for the last 4-6 months. Each station at a minimum offers 3 channels. The big 3 (CBS, ABC, NBC) offer 4, with one channel being a weather channel, and one (ABC) offering a high def channel.

In the end, the TV consumer is getting a lot more, and the channels who are going to broadcast are already offering digital channels, so other than costing TV stations money to maintain the analog equipment I don't see what a delay would achieve.

RE: Digital TV Is Good
By paulpod on 1/23/2009 9:49:44 PM , Rating: 2
Oh come on. You must not have spent much time with DTV. The subchannel content is completely useless and is broadcast in less-than-YouTube quality.

On top of that, bandwidth taken by the subchannels robs the main HD channel of quality. Even the slightest amount of motion causes HD channels to break up into macroblocks, which I think are 16x16 pixels. That means 1080i ends up at a resolution of 120x68 pixels TOTAL. Couple that with things like scores at the top of a game and crawls at the bottom and you have real program content running WAY below the quality of a good analog broadcast.

The FCC should admit that divided bandwith was a mistake and give each station a second UHF channel for the extra stuff. They should also set quality requirements that a broadcasted signal look EXACTLY like what the director is seeing in the control room. By the 1990's, this was largely possible with analog TV. Of course, late in the 90's stations started using internal digital processing to save money that massively degraded the "analog" broadcast before it ever hit the tower. It has been almost 15 years since anyone has seen a proper NTSC picture.

Regarding another "aspect" of DTV, it goes without saying that the FCC should also require embedded aspect ratio control signals to convertors boxes (and cable companies) so that a viewer will never see a broadcast with content cut off or with extra black space. This should apply to commercials.

Finally, 720p broadcast quality is an atrosity. Even on a 1440x900 TV, football on CBS and NBC is dramatically clearer (when things are not moving) than Fox. A wide, crowd shot is NEVER impressive in 720p the way it is in 1080i. 720p must be phased out by the FCC for people to think that DTV is worth the expense and effort. The do-it-on-the-cheap mindset of 720p results in a picture that is not even close to 720p quality.

Fear the radio
By zombiexl on 1/23/2009 10:47:50 AM , Rating: 2
Senate Commerce Committee Chairman John Rockefeller said, "There are 16 million people out there where it's going to go black, their TV sets," Rockefeller said. "I don't want that to happen."

Hell no he doesnt want it to happen. Then those people might turn to the radio and hear some right biased news instead of the left biased news on TV.

Disclaimer: I know FOX news is right biased, but those with cable are the people he's referring to.

RE: Fear the radio
By FITCamaro on 1/23/2009 1:24:26 PM , Rating: 2
They could listen to a guy like Mark Levin.

Come ON Already!!!!!
By snownpaint on 1/23/2009 1:29:55 PM , Rating: 2
Another sign of the Gov'ts great job of holding people hands to get things done. God Forbid, people take initiative.

*They have been blasting commercials on network (off-air) TV about this for a year, costing millions of dollars..

*It has been in the news for over 2 years, easy.

*Handing out rebate coupons for a year to help cover the cost, more millions..

Now they want to prolong it. amazing..

When the person's TV stops working, maybe they'll get the box then.

I seriously think this world caters too much to the idiots of it..

RE: Come ON Already!!!!!
By SillyCon Volley on 1/23/2009 2:23:38 PM , Rating: 2

We have been talking about this for years - YEARS! And what about the millions of us who have already switch, brought new TV's (three of them in my case - 32", 42" and 50") just to get better quality. Studio's and TV stations have already made the switch. We are talking about a $40 coupon... It's not like they CAN"T go buy the convertor. I saw plenty of them in the Malls this past weekend. I say, punish the procrastinators and reward the adopters. Better yet, the 6 million of you that didn't pay attention, pay for Cable or Satellite (a more expensive option) because you didn't want to get rid of your 19" RCA from the 1980's!

give me a break
By LumbergTech on 1/23/2009 3:23:52 PM , Rating: 2
just do the goddamn transition already im just getting annoyed

RE: give me a break
By room200 on 1/23/2009 3:53:13 PM , Rating: 1
I would like for the transition to happen, but just the same as there are many who keep harping on the fact that some people don't NEED television and that it's not a necessity, the same is true of digital tv. You're not going to die over not having full digital tv,so stop bitching. Obama delays this miniscule thing (in the general scheme of all the problems we have), and some morons are already pronouncing his administration as failed. If you supported him and this was enough to make you change your mind, that's really a sad commentary on your knowledge of anything political.

This country is too hell bent on the "us" vs. "them" kind of mentality. THAT'S one of the big problems in this country. One of the facts of life about living in this wonderful country is that you have to pay taxes, lot's of them, and some of it will always go where you don't think it should. Get over it and stop bitching. That's life.

Not surprising, really...
By Erudite on 1/23/2009 10:03:46 AM , Rating: 2
I wonder if they'll ever manage to go completely digital...

No matter how long you wait, there will always be people who have sat around and not gotten the converters they need. They could push this back to 2012, give out coupons that don't expire, (probably even send the coupons to every household without requiring a sign-up) and you'd still have people that couldn't watch any TV after the switch, because they didn't get their converter.

Ridiculous. As long as they keep pushing it back because some people aren't ready, it will never happen.

(I know that eventually it will happen even if people aren't ready, but I'm so tired of this. It's BS. I want to start being able to watch the DTV channels which at the moment I can't get well enough to watch.)

Food for thought
By Casual Observer on 1/23/2009 11:31:15 AM , Rating: 2
"I smell brains"
(from: Night of the living dead)

... and we elected them!

By tcunning on 1/23/2009 5:17:12 PM , Rating: 2
...there are a lot of people who are too stupid to even watch television.

1/2 power transmission
By Kary on 1/23/2009 5:35:12 PM , Rating: 2
I wouldn't care if they kept transmitting Digit AND Analog forever..EXCEPT I'm in a rural area and with the economy down the stations have been broadcasting both at half power.. now it is difficult to get EITHER.

Grrrr, make the durn switch already... I deal in electronics and I'm sick of having to explain to people why their TV's quit working BEFORE the dang deadline.

By ggordonliddy on 1/23/2009 10:17:50 PM , Rating: 2
When the nation has even $1 of foreign debt, there is NO excuse for giving anyone even 1 penny to WATCH F'ING TV!!!! This absurd thinking will destroy our country. WATCHING TV IS NOT A RIGHT!!!

The only point of this is to get the vote of the recipients.

By scrapsma54 on 1/25/2009 1:13:52 PM , Rating: 2
Most of these 6.5 million viewers are probably thinking they have to switch to a HD television when in reality they have a television hooked up to cable.

Simple solution
By Schmide on 1/25/2009 4:25:29 PM , Rating: 2
Make the switch. Keep PBS analog, people will either get smarter not watching Jerry Springer of find a way to get a box.

"You can bet that Sony built a long-term business plan about being successful in Japan and that business plan is crumbling." -- Peter Moore, 24 hours before his Microsoft resignation

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki