[opendtv] Re: TV Technology: Opinion: Latest U.S. Broadcast Standard Will Founder on Mobile Industry Indifference
- From: Craig Birkmaier <brewmastercraig@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sat, 01 Jul 2017 10:02:03 -0400
On Jun 30, 2017, at 9:57 PM, Manfredi, Albert E <albert.e.manfredi@xxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Craig Birkmaier wrote:
Instead of focusing you energy trying to get the FCC to regulate
broadband as a Title II service, why not focus that energy on
reclaiming ALL of the broadcast spectrum, as nobody uses the
service or needs it anymore?
Sounds like just the type of argument someone in the pockets of the special
interests would make. Grab all the FOTA spectrum, put it in the hands of
companies that want to abolish net neutrality, and simultaneously, abolish
net neutrality.
Only you could turn this around into EXACTLY what I asked you to refrain from -
turning this into a net neutrality discussion.
Cord cutters have given a new lease on life to OTA spectrum usage, probably
only temporarily, but nevertheless there.
Not really. Yes some people - including me - are hooking up antennas to their
TVs to access the broadcast networks. But there is no evidence that people are
spending much time using that antenna.
Most cord cutters are NOT watching the broadcast TV networks; they are watching
Netflix, Hulu and other online content, or they are just saying NO to TV.
The only audience that relies on that antenna are those who cannot afford
broadband OR MVPD service.
Broadcast ratings continue to decline.
But this wouldn't sit well with someone in bed with the special interests. So
let's quick yank that spectrum away.
You need not fear that outcome. There is far too much power related to the
assignment of spectrum to the broadcasters. The "special interests" that keep
broadcasting viable, even as most people access the broadcast networks via a
MVPD service or a broadband catchup service, all work in your neighborhood.
It's the politicians and K-Street lawyers that protect broadcasters, who in
turn protect them. Perhaps this will change now that the lack of integrity of
all of these "actors" is being exposed.
Only one problem. Ad supported linear TV is still producing most
of the revenues of the industry
Ads packaged with prime time content, probably, but people are not consuming
that content linear/live.
Give it up Bert. Linear TV still exceeds 50% of all TV viewing.
Prime Time network shows represent only 30% of the linear TV audience - they
may pick-up some additional viewers with the online catch-up services.
As I pointed out, the revenues for the broadcast networks represent a similar
proportion of TV ad revenues. Retrans consent payments may equal or exceed ad
revenues within a decade.
You conveniently ignore the ad revenues from MVPD services, which now equal or
exceed ad revenues from the broadcasters.
Plus, you don't need OTA spectrum for linear/live distribution anyway. So
your arguments to abolish AND to retain OTA spectrum are both less than
convincing. Besides, tell me this. When I watch prime time TV on, say,
cbs.com, with ads, where do those ad revenues figure? OTT? TV broadcast
networks? Certainly not SVOD.
They represent exactly what I said they did in the previous post - I even
provided a chart with the exact figures.
What's not very likely is that SFNs would make any difference. None of the
reasons given for indifference had anything to do with ease of reception!
Missed it Bert.
The issue is not ease of reception - hopefully ATSC 3.0 would fix that.
The issue is spectral reuse by broadcasters - the ability to serve sub-markets
and to use some of their spectrum to offer two-way services, either directly
with some form of return channel, or indirectly by using the Internet as the
back channel to initiate individual or multicast streams.
Why bother developing apps for smartphone that allow users to report
and view traffic conditions?
Why would this need ATSC 3.0? If broadcasters want to allow people to send
their traffic footage, and then choose what they want to broadcast live, go
right on ahead. ATSC 1.0 is fine too, or the mobile providers can provide
that video to their customers over the cell network. The app is only needed
to get the info to the broadcast source. If then broadcast OTA, it goes to
everyone tuned to that channel and subchannel.
Missed it again. The answer is that people support these traffic apps, both
providing real time input to the cloud, and using the data that is accumulated.
Broadcasters could do this too, but they choose to provide verbal traffic
reports by radio and linear traffic reports on their morning news shows.
I was just using this as an example of something broadcasters could have done,
even with ATSC 1.0, but chose not to.
Interactivity can easily be built into broadcast Apps.
Interactivity requires a two-way comm link, Craig.
No Bert, it does not. Ever used a Keosk?
The MPEG-1 compression standard was used in part to build interactive video
discs. Broadcasters can send all kinds of metadata about the programs they air,
which can be cached locally and used for interaction. The BBC and Sky have done
a lot of this. It is interesting that Apps like Major League Baseball do
exactly this, providing the ability to access stats and information about
players. Apparently some people want this kind of interactivity.
Broadcasters DO NOT want you to interact - they want your full attention so you
will watch the ads. Consumers think otherwise - that is why so many of us are
using our phones, tablets and laptops while the TV is on in the background.
We've already talked about that more than once. TV broadcasters, even with
ATSC 1.0, see A/97, can certainly broadcast software updates for any number
of different brands of TV sets, carousel style. There's already an ATSC 1.0
standard for that. Smartphones? They already have their existing spectrum for
all of this.
There was much more in the ATSC 1.0 updates, like the A-90 data broadcast
standard. But broadcasters could have cared less; their primary concern was
that you subscribed to a MVPD service so they could collect retrans dollars.
And then, there are many features of the base ATSC 1.0 standard, approved by
the FCC, that have never been implemented; some of these features would break
deployed ATSC receivers, as the CE manufacturers did not implement the standard
properly.
We knew this immediately after broadcasters embraced Table 3, after the FCC
deleted it from the standard...
Regards
Craig
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways:
- Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user configuration settings at
FreeLists.org
- By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word
unsubscribe in the subject line.
Other related posts:
