Why It Would Be Difficult For Broadcast TV (OTA) to End

[Jack 1000]

I have been thinking about this and cannot see this happening for a long time. Here is why:

Television is a public trust, at least for people who have over the air TV with an antenna and nothing else: (No cable, no Dish, no U-Verse, no Internet.) Depending on the studies read, there are about 18%-24% of general US population demographics who meet this trend.

TV for people who are disabled, elderly, or on fixed-incomes is a way of life for them. For many it is their only link to the outside world. It's also a traditional way of entertainment and information that is embedded in the culture of public trust. The people with limited resources would create such an uprising about their information security blanket of TV not being free anymore, that I could not see something like this passing.

It would be like taking the Super Bowl or World Series and making them PPV's. This idea has been discussed for the last ten years, but rightly gets shot down because those events are forever embedded in the public trust of tradition and expectations. I cannot imagine how lower income families in droves would allow for such an occurrence.

If Broadcast TV is ended, so does the public trust of OTA television. This may be too much change to accept.

Jack

[bschlafer]

Well said.

Our government rightfully supported the digital conversion to help preserve OTA for future generations.  When corporations both the means and the content, then we will truly be screwed as a society.


*Bill

[ArgMeMatey]

Just like everything else in capitalism, it isn't about what's right or good or traditional; it's about getting somebody to pay.   Tradition doesn't pay the bills.  In the case of OTA, for the viewer that means "getting somebody else to pay".  

The public trust argument holds up only as long as the stations are making a good profit; regulators are telling owners "Hey, you get this valuable spectrum to make money, we're doing you a favor".  When profits go marginal, station owners start saying "Now, we're doing you a favor."  And what do we call TV without profit?  Public TV.  

There's been a lot of news lately about plummeting ad revenues at local stations, and it's been mentioned that Fox wanted more money from TW to offset those declines.  

For some time to come there will be a market for mass-audience sporting events, but if the NFL etc. can get more money from cable-only networks than from OTA networks, the games are going to be on cable.  For smaller-audience and off-peak programming, the OTA future is looking pretty dim.

[bschlafer]

Public Trust = profits?  I would think just the opposite is true.  

Letting companies like Fox and Disney control all ends of the media spectrum will be bad for everyone.  


*Bill

[ArgMeMatey]

Public Trust = profits?  I would think just the opposite is true.  

No, sorry I didn't make my point more clearly.  What I meant was that no for-profit company will operate in the public trust if it's not profitable.  

When they are no longer making enough money, they tell the government "You guys have to loosen up on us because we can't figure out how to make money anymore on the model that's been around since ..."  and that usually means less public service, less real news, and less of whatever they agreed to provide as long as they could balance it with stuff that made them money.  

At that point, the government can say "OK, we'll give you a break" or "Sorry Charlie, you do with what you've got."  If broadcasters are told to make do, they can cut some more corners, but eventually they will not be operating in the spirit of public service to any measurable extent.  

Eventually the business model reaches the breaking point or regulators say "You're violating the terms of your license".  Or both.  And hopefully by then vox populi will have decided what to do in such cases:  Probably some combination of more public funding for stations that are doing well enough, and reassigning spectrum of those that are too far gone.  

Maybe at some point the public trust doctrine will dictate that the best use of this spectrum is not for TV channels as we now have, but a more dynamic wideband system with a small channel for overhead and info, and a large amount of spectrum that can be channelized or even totally packetized as needed based on demand.