Enough Already: The Analog Truth About Digital
.
a blogumn by Jordan Weeks
The imminent switch of all television broadcasts from analog and digital signals to digital-only signals has less to do with “more available bandwidth” and “better quality” (which, unless maybe you’re dropping five or six grand on a serious goddammm set is a complete fairytale…and even then the shit doesn’t look quite right…) and a lot more to do with corporate control and monitoring of what viewers watch. [There’s no supposing or guessing about this; it’s just fact at this point.] Yes, the ol’ U.S.A. is about to become a test-market of several hundred million Nielsen families, whether you like it or not. And, no, this time nobody’s getting paid to share his or her viewing choices. Oh, also, cable and media companies will be able to regulate what you can and cannot record on a TiVO or other DVR device…all kindsa’ fun stuff ahead.
I know what you’re wondering: Is there any significance to the fact that the “switchover” (like it’s no big deal – just someone flicking a switch at Comcast or Warner…) is government-mandated, that the United States government is MANDATING the complete eradication of analog television broadcasting? Nah; probably not, right? I mean – they just want everyone to have the greatest, clearest doggone television picture possible…because they ALWAYS want people to have great stuff and they always want to help everybody, especially in a material sense. They ALWAYS do that shit. And for absolutely no benefit to them. Yep. Our elected leaders are nothing if not reliably generous and altruistic, and always promoting the very best, cutting-edge technology. Yep. That’s our Uncle Sam. Just be careful not to take the last piece of candy from the dish in his living-room…or to sit on his lap. Actually, you probably shouldn’t look at him – at least not directly. In fact, it’s probably better if you don’t TALK to Uncle Sam. Just…know he’s there and…be afraid of him.
President Barack Obama has made some kind of motion to push-back the mandatory analog-to-digital switch from February 17 to some time in June, I believe, and, as one of my friends recently wondered, “Who GIVES a fuck?!”
“Who GIVES a fuck?!” indeed. Pretty much everyone I know is goddammm HORRIFIED about the nature of this mandated switchover. The point my friend was making here was not one of complacency, but rather one of disgust, at the notion that the switchover is happening AT ALL.
Obama should not be pushing the switchover back; he should be STOPPING it. It’s well within his reach as president to put the kaibash [SP!?!] on such bureaucratic Big Brother-ing nonsense, and the fact that he’s not calling “bullshit” on this is pretty fuckkking concerning. It means he’s either cool with it, which is a really bad sign, or that he doesn’t really know what’s up, why the switch is happening – which, at the very least, is to give advertisers and programming executives a direct fucking I.V. line to your exact viewing habits, your likes and dislikes, and for what you are and are not a sucker, marketing-wise – and that’s certainly no MORE comforting.
You see, there’s SO much bandwidth available with a digital signal that in addition to information being delivered TO your cable-box, information regarding whatever you’re watching at a given moment can be run OUT of your cable box, to, oh, let’s say an office somewhere where somebody, or more likely some kind of program, would be able to keep track of everything you’re watching, in fact, of everything you’ve watched, and to predict what you will watch in the future. You know – like the buying-suggestions on Amazon, and the History function on your computer [on which you’re SURE you’ve deleted all those porn-site addresses…right?].
But, come on – nobody’s actually DOING that, right? I mean, that’d be some pretty sinister, misanthropic shit, and there’s no WAY that’s happening in this country. And there’s CERTAINLY no way our government would let that kinda’ shit happen. I mean – telephone line-tapping is for our own GOOD; we KNOW that. And if a completely innocent, private, U.S.-born citizen says something on his own phone-line like, “Al Quaeda”, for whatever reason, and someone listening to a tap on that line reads that as “chatter”, and that person winds-up in Gitmo, or in that new fun place in Saudi Arabia, then it just means that we’re that much safer. Right? I mean – one life isn’t worth shit, is it?, as long as the collective “we” are safe.
By the way – does it feel like the collective “we” might be getting smaller with each passing hour? Or is it getting bigger? I don’t know. Maybe it’s all just a fog of love created by Obama’s election that’ll clear as soon as the sun comes up. “Tomorrow, tomorrow…” (“…tomorrow…”)
Good luck, everybody.
PEEEEEACE…
.
The original switcheroo was supposed to be in 2006! They had to delay when they realized the infrastructure wasn't there.
Do you think there should be no digital, or no mandated digital? The government's been dying to auction off the rights of the old analog spectrum for other uses for years.
No – just no MANDATED digital. Of course people should have the option to have a digital signal if they so choose. I mean, right now cable's really tough to get if you don't get a digital package, but you don't HAVE to get one just to be able to get some kind of reception on your analog T.V., regardless of its fidelity. So, no – I'm not at ALL saying "no digital". I'm not saying "no"-ANYTHING. I'm just saying that it's really jacked-up that the government is mandating that everyone who has a TV has it, or they will have no broadcast signal on their T.V.'s, that after the switch-over, at the government's behest, there will cease to be analog television broadcasts. That's "all".
It's like the whole smoking-ban phenomenon. If you're a non-smoker, is it healthier to be in a restaurant where smoking isn't allowed? Sure, it probably is. (This is some weak "for the greater-good" Mike Bloomberg crap.) But does that mean that a privately owned and run establishment – say a bar or restaurant or hotel – should be forced by LAW, either state or federal, to be entirely non-smoking? No. Absolutely not. An establishment's proprietors should be free to decide for themselves whether they want to allow smoking or not, or have a non-smoking section, etc. Because it is, quite literally, their business.
And the mandated digital-signal crap is even worse than the smoking-ban in a way, because it's NOT being left up to the states, it's coming straight from Washington and affecting every single person who doesn't currently have a digital-signal T.V. setup.
Anyway – long live digital-signal television. But down with the king who makes it the only game in town. PEEEEEACE…
The original switcheroo was supposed to be in 2006! They had to delay when they realized the infrastructure wasn't there.
Do you think there should be no digital, or no mandated digital? The government's been dying to auction off the rights of the old analog spectrum for other uses for years.
No – just no MANDATED digital. Of course people should have the option to have a digital signal if they so choose. I mean, right now cable's really tough to get if you don't get a digital package, but you don't HAVE to get one just to be able to get some kind of reception on your analog T.V., regardless of its fidelity. So, no – I'm not at ALL saying "no digital". I'm not saying "no"-ANYTHING. I'm just saying that it's really jacked-up that the government is mandating that everyone who has a TV has it, or they will have no broadcast signal on their T.V.'s, that after the switch-over, at the government's behest, there will cease to be analog television broadcasts. That's "all".
It's like the whole smoking-ban phenomenon. If you're a non-smoker, is it healthier to be in a restaurant where smoking isn't allowed? Sure, it probably is. (This is some weak "for the greater-good" Mike Bloomberg crap.) But does that mean that a privately owned and run establishment – say a bar or restaurant or hotel – should be forced by LAW, either state or federal, to be entirely non-smoking? No. Absolutely not. An establishment's proprietors should be free to decide for themselves whether they want to allow smoking or not, or have a non-smoking section, etc. Because it is, quite literally, their business.
And the mandated digital-signal crap is even worse than the smoking-ban in a way, because it's NOT being left up to the states, it's coming straight from Washington and affecting every single person who doesn't currently have a digital-signal T.V. setup.
Anyway – long live digital-signal television. But down with the king who makes it the only game in town. PEEEEEACE…
Please don't flame me, Jordan, but I absolutely LOVE where marketing is going these days. Yes, analyze my viewing and internet habits. Yes, send me coupons for shit I actually want! I love that I need new bras and Victoria Secret just sent me a 20% off coupon. I love that "The Nest," which chimed in right after "The Knot" is now sending me messages about "The Bump." I love that I rarely get sent stuff in the mail for things I don't want our need any more. I can't bear that I have to watch a constant stream of "old people" commercials on CNN — the only channel I actually watch live. I can't wait til the day, when they get my age and lifestyle off of my DVR and start putting in commercials for stuff I actually might buy.
I don't want to be wiretapped or monitored by the government in any sort of way. I agree with you there. However, that's ALWAYS been a problem, and will only become more of one with or w/o the digital conversion.
I will do anything not to go back to the old ways of advertising free-for-all. I remember getting reams and reams of junk mail pre-internet domination. Now the grocery store and CVS analyze what I buy from my card and give me a coupon for something I might actually buy on every receipt. I LOVE THAT and can't wait for marketing to get even more targeted.
Holy fuck.
I mean… Holy fuck.
Please don't flame me, Jordan, but I absolutely LOVE where marketing is going these days. Yes, analyze my viewing and internet habits. Yes, send me coupons for shit I actually want! I love that I need new bras and Victoria Secret just sent me a 20% off coupon. I love that "The Nest," which chimed in right after "The Knot" is now sending me messages about "The Bump." I love that I rarely get sent stuff in the mail for things I don't want our need any more. I can't bear that I have to watch a constant stream of "old people" commercials on CNN — the only channel I actually watch live. I can't wait til the day, when they get my age and lifestyle off of my DVR and start putting in commercials for stuff I actually might buy.
I don't want to be wiretapped or monitored by the government in any sort of way. I agree with you there. However, that's ALWAYS been a problem, and will only become more of one with or w/o the digital conversion.
I will do anything not to go back to the old ways of advertising free-for-all. I remember getting reams and reams of junk mail pre-internet domination. Now the grocery store and CVS analyze what I buy from my card and give me a coupon for something I might actually buy on every receipt. I LOVE THAT and can't wait for marketing to get even more targeted.
Holy fuck.
I mean… Holy fuck.
I think the switch great too. I really don't give a poop if THEY know that I watch reality shows, buy lots of cat food, and drive a reliable family car. The U.S. is WAY behind many other countries with the digital switchover. It makes me sad when alarmist people (and I am not saying you, in particular) are constantly anxious and wary of what the government is monitoring. That is a sad, paranoid, way to live.
Oh, and digital HD TVs start at $229.99 at Best Buy. They don't cost 5 or 6 grand anymore. But don't use your credit card, or Best Buy rewards card, because then THEY will know you gave in! :)
I think the switch great too. I really don't give a poop if THEY know that I watch reality shows, buy lots of cat food, and drive a reliable family car. The U.S. is WAY behind many other countries with the digital switchover. It makes me sad when alarmist people (and I am not saying you, in particular) are constantly anxious and wary of what the government is monitoring. That is a sad, paranoid, way to live.
Oh, and digital HD TVs start at $229.99 at Best Buy. They don't cost 5 or 6 grand anymore. But don't use your credit card, or Best Buy rewards card, because then THEY will know you gave in! :)
This is the most paranoid posting I've seen! This is not about government control or some sort of conspiracy to tap american households. Truth be told, when it comes down to it, the US is sometimes last in the technology game. HDTV sets were all over Europe in the early part of 2000s when you couldn't even find one at Best Buy for under $2000. Now they are the only sets you can find at BestBuy or CostCo and cost under $300.
Now for some entertainment. If you go on youtube, you can find news reports about HDTV and how the government stood down from switching over in the early 1990s(I personally enjoy the newscast on the future with a thing called the INTERNET). US is not the only country making the move forward with Digital TV. Everyone is doing it, but for the first time, we might be a bit ahead of it (by 3 years at most as Britain will follow in 2012). My aussie family was laughing at us last year when they visited me and saw we hadn't made much stride to new tv technology.
I think it's bull that the President has pushed off the switch over cause a few lazy folks have yet to go buy a simple little box to hook up to the TV. They have been given enough of a heads up and this has been on the radar for a long time. I can't watch the Simpson's late at night without twenty adds (which I TIVO pass) about it.
All the switch over requires of you is to buy a simple box for $40 and plug it into your TV. End of story. You do not need to buy Charter, Time Warner, DirectTv, DishTV or any corporate subscription. You do not need to buy a DVR (Although they are life changing in regards that I now watch TV when I want, and not when the network tells me). It's not that bad folks…. trust me. The move is not hurting anyone or anything! It's just growing pains, and in time we are all going to have to change. Remember what Obama was campaigning about was Change… and this is just that…. Change, for the better.
Australia. That's a good one.
This is the most paranoid posting I've seen! This is not about government control or some sort of conspiracy to tap american households. Truth be told, when it comes down to it, the US is sometimes last in the technology game. HDTV sets were all over Europe in the early part of 2000s when you couldn't even find one at Best Buy for under $2000. Now they are the only sets you can find at BestBuy or CostCo and cost under $300.
Now for some entertainment. If you go on youtube, you can find news reports about HDTV and how the government stood down from switching over in the early 1990s(I personally enjoy the newscast on the future with a thing called the INTERNET). US is not the only country making the move forward with Digital TV. Everyone is doing it, but for the first time, we might be a bit ahead of it (by 3 years at most as Britain will follow in 2012). My aussie family was laughing at us last year when they visited me and saw we hadn't made much stride to new tv technology.
I think it's bull that the President has pushed off the switch over cause a few lazy folks have yet to go buy a simple little box to hook up to the TV. They have been given enough of a heads up and this has been on the radar for a long time. I can't watch the Simpson's late at night without twenty adds (which I TIVO pass) about it.
All the switch over requires of you is to buy a simple box for $40 and plug it into your TV. End of story. You do not need to buy Charter, Time Warner, DirectTv, DishTV or any corporate subscription. You do not need to buy a DVR (Although they are life changing in regards that I now watch TV when I want, and not when the network tells me). It's not that bad folks…. trust me. The move is not hurting anyone or anything! It's just growing pains, and in time we are all going to have to change. Remember what Obama was campaigning about was Change… and this is just that…. Change, for the better.
Australia. That's a good one.
Wow. Okay. Lost cause here. Sadly, I'm not that much of a pessimist that I'm just gonna' let it go at that. Or I'm just too much of an asshole to let these absurd, "Well, I'm getting raped, so I might as well enjoy it" sentiments be the last word on a page containing something I wrote for a REASON. Whatever the case…
*Good luck with the "switch" and everything that follows it, because you're welcoming it all with open arms, and I hope you remember that in ten years.
*I think you mean "they" when you write 'THEY'; when you're alleging that something is inaccurate or non-existent through sarcasm, one traditionally, or typically, uses quotation-marks. But then again, you're clearly not someone who could be classified as traditional, or typical, what with all of the reality T.V. shows you watch, or cat food you buy, or family cars you drive… (Using all-caps just makes it seem as if you're shouting, and that's kind of unnecessarily alarmist.)
*You make an invaluable point. It's important for the U.S. to keep-up with "many other countries", especially in the realm of completely unnecessary and functionally questionable across-the-board bans on things like analog television broadcasts and incandescent light-bulbs (which is on the way, slated for something like 2012 or 2014). It's important for the U.S. to "keep-up" with these other countries because we're a nation that must follow, not lead. We are a country to whom nobody should look for any kind of example, technological, social, political, or otherwise, and one which most certainly needs guidance from the infallible rest of the world – from places like England and Australia. God knows they have everything figured-out, and we can only applaud their respective histories of tolerance and technological innovation.
*In case you couldn't figure this out by reading what I wrote – which sometimes is the best way to do this – eat shit with your "$229.99 digital HDTV at Best Buy". First of all, I don't give a flying rat's ass HOW much a digital-T.V. is, never mind the fact that $229.99 is a SHITLOAD of money for some people (though I'm so glad it's just a drop in the bucket for your money-fat ass, Janice…). Two years ago you could get a T.V. at Target for $40. A brand-new one, too, folks. Now if you want a T.V., that $229.99 Best Buy deal is the fuckkking BASELINE price, or close to it. I think I saw some kinda' T.V. somewhere for around $175. But that's nowhere near $40 the last time I checked. And as far as the quality of these sets…
*I cannot get over how everybody just immediately agreed that any HDTV has better picture-quality than any analog T.V. Just WATCH one of these $229.99 HDTV's. You can see the goddammm pixels, for fuck-sake, and often there's a shitload of weird ghosting in the picture – they're a fuckkkin' MESS. And, pardon me, Janice, but the picture-quality does NOT improve until you kick-out around 5 or 6 grand. And I've even seen some sets in THAT range that suck worse than Janice's concept of picture-quality, understanding of techno-politics, or grasp of U.S. history.
And on that note, I bid you a fond "adieu"… (I used quotation-marks there because that word's in a different language that the rest of the words I used when I wrote these thoughts I had onto the page that you're reading using fundamental typing skills and computer magic.)
Oh – and I hope to God above and Jesus Christ in Heaven that you don't think anything I wrote here is about "you, in particular," Janice. Because it's not, not at all. Not even when I refer to you by name. That's just how I always address the plural "you", or "you-all", or "everybody". I believe the French say "tout le mond". To which I say, "Oui, mes amis."
Get bent, tout le mond!
Wow. Okay. Lost cause here. Sadly, I'm not that much of a pessimist that I'm just gonna' let it go at that. Or I'm just too much of an asshole to let these absurd, "Well, I'm getting raped, so I might as well enjoy it" sentiments be the last word on a page containing something I wrote for a REASON. Whatever the case…
*Good luck with the "switch" and everything that follows it, because you're welcoming it all with open arms, and I hope you remember that in ten years.
*I think you mean "they" when you write 'THEY'; when you're alleging that something is inaccurate or non-existent through sarcasm, one traditionally, or typically, uses quotation-marks. But then again, you're clearly not someone who could be classified as traditional, or typical, what with all of the reality T.V. shows you watch, or cat food you buy, or family cars you drive… (Using all-caps just makes it seem as if you're shouting, and that's kind of unnecessarily alarmist.)
*You make an invaluable point. It's important for the U.S. to keep-up with "many other countries", especially in the realm of completely unnecessary and functionally questionable across-the-board bans on things like analog television broadcasts and incandescent light-bulbs (which is on the way, slated for something like 2012 or 2014). It's important for the U.S. to "keep-up" with these other countries because we're a nation that must follow, not lead. We are a country to whom nobody should look for any kind of example, technological, social, political, or otherwise, and one which most certainly needs guidance from the infallible rest of the world – from places like England and Australia. God knows they have everything figured-out, and we can only applaud their respective histories of tolerance and technological innovation.
*In case you couldn't figure this out by reading what I wrote – which sometimes is the best way to do this – eat shit with your "$229.99 digital HDTV at Best Buy". First of all, I don't give a flying rat's ass HOW much a digital-T.V. is, never mind the fact that $229.99 is a SHITLOAD of money for some people (though I'm so glad it's just a drop in the bucket for your money-fat ass, Janice…). Two years ago you could get a T.V. at Target for $40. A brand-new one, too, folks. Now if you want a T.V., that $229.99 Best Buy deal is the fuckkking BASELINE price, or close to it. I think I saw some kinda' T.V. somewhere for around $175. But that's nowhere near $40 the last time I checked. And as far as the quality of these sets…
*I cannot get over how everybody just immediately agreed that any HDTV has better picture-quality than any analog T.V. Just WATCH one of these $229.99 HDTV's. You can see the goddammm pixels, for fuck-sake, and often there's a shitload of weird ghosting in the picture – they're a fuckkkin' MESS. And, pardon me, Janice, but the picture-quality does NOT improve until you kick-out around 5 or 6 grand. And I've even seen some sets in THAT range that suck worse than Janice's concept of picture-quality, understanding of techno-politics, or grasp of U.S. history.
And on that note, I bid you a fond "adieu"… (I used quotation-marks there because that word's in a different language that the rest of the words I used when I wrote these thoughts I had onto the page that you're reading using fundamental typing skills and computer magic.)
Oh – and I hope to God above and Jesus Christ in Heaven that you don't think anything I wrote here is about "you, in particular," Janice. Because it's not, not at all. Not even when I refer to you by name. That's just how I always address the plural "you", or "you-all", or "everybody". I believe the French say "tout le mond". To which I say, "Oui, mes amis."
Get bent, tout le mond!
LOL….Wow….Jordan…
You need to step away from the computer, take another Xanax, and go find some human to human contact. Though, given your tirade and the way you went off on Janice, I'm guessing you are a complete and utter LOON who sits in front of a computer all day spouting off their idiotic, left wing lunacies, and has very little human contact. And clearly, a $229 TV is going to seem expensive to you because you are not a grown up with a real job. Maybe if you'd quit your typical liberal whining and go get a decent paying job, and stop expecting handouts from the gov't, you could afford a TV. But don't worry — you voted for Obama, and he is going to fix EVERYTHING!!
YOU ARE A FREAK.
Yeah. I know. If only I weren't so liberal… And if only everyone had it all figured-out like you do… You're so kind, and have such a lovely way with words.
And how magnanimous of you to insult everybody who works 40 + hours a week who has the nerve to think $229 is a lot for a T.V.
Flowers to the Left and Right.
LOL….Wow….Jordan…
You need to step away from the computer, take another Xanax, and go find some human to human contact. Though, given your tirade and the way you went off on Janice, I'm guessing you are a complete and utter LOON who sits in front of a computer all day spouting off their idiotic, left wing lunacies, and has very little human contact. And clearly, a $229 TV is going to seem expensive to you because you are not a grown up with a real job. Maybe if you'd quit your typical liberal whining and go get a decent paying job, and stop expecting handouts from the gov't, you could afford a TV. But don't worry — you voted for Obama, and he is going to fix EVERYTHING!!
YOU ARE A FREAK.
Yeah. I know. If only I weren't so liberal… And if only everyone had it all figured-out like you do… You're so kind, and have such a lovely way with words.
And how magnanimous of you to insult everybody who works 40 + hours a week who has the nerve to think $229 is a lot for a T.V.
Flowers to the Left and Right.
Hi Everyone, while I love a great debate about current issues, I don't feel severe personal attacks have any place in an intelligent debate. Flame War Over. If you can't make your point without a personal attack, don't comment. And we live and breathe for comments on Fierce and Nerdy, so you know I'm serious when I say that. Thanks so much, etc
Hi Everyone, while I love a great debate about current issues, I don't feel severe personal attacks have any place in an intelligent debate. Flame War Over. If you can't make your point without a personal attack, don't comment. And we live and breathe for comments on Fierce and Nerdy, so you know I'm serious when I say that. Thanks so much, etc
I just want to try and add a few Digital TV facts to this post.
If you have Cable or Satellite TV, you are already digital. The Cable and Satellite companies do know what you are watching, what you record to your dvr and they do sell that info to anyone who wants it. So that's not paranoid, it's a fact. If that bothers you, don't have cable or satellite TV.
What this transition is about is the over-the-air transition of television. It's literally about the rabbit ears on your TV; it has nothing to do with your cable or Satellite.
The government owns all the radio waves including the ones television are broadcast on. The reason the government is pushing so hard for this is due to the fact that they want to sell the bandwidth for billions of dollars. With analog you need a lot more space to put a smaller amount of data over the air.
If you continue to get your television through the over-the-air signal, they will not be able to tell what you are watching with this transition. It is a one-way signal, analog or digital it's only one way.
I have always been outraged with the fact that we give away the current bandwidth that TV is broadcast on. Television stations pay next to nothing for their use even as they make millions by broadcasting commercials on airways owned by the government. This digital transition does make it a little better, but the TV stations still don't pay a fair amount for their use of a smaller bandwidth.
I just want to try and add a few Digital TV facts to this post.
If you have Cable or Satellite TV, you are already digital. The Cable and Satellite companies do know what you are watching, what you record to your dvr and they do sell that info to anyone who wants it. So that's not paranoid, it's a fact. If that bothers you, don't have cable or satellite TV.
What this transition is about is the over-the-air transition of television. It's literally about the rabbit ears on your TV; it has nothing to do with your cable or Satellite.
The government owns all the radio waves including the ones television are broadcast on. The reason the government is pushing so hard for this is due to the fact that they want to sell the bandwidth for billions of dollars. With analog you need a lot more space to put a smaller amount of data over the air.
If you continue to get your television through the over-the-air signal, they will not be able to tell what you are watching with this transition. It is a one-way signal, analog or digital it's only one way.
I have always been outraged with the fact that we give away the current bandwidth that TV is broadcast on. Television stations pay next to nothing for their use even as they make millions by broadcasting commercials on airways owned by the government. This digital transition does make it a little better, but the TV stations still don't pay a fair amount for their use of a smaller bandwidth.
Awww Damien, I guess you don't inspire "JORDAN" like I do. You didn't get a rambling, psychotic rant:( I was hoping for another good laugh. (Notice I am using quotation marks to imply that something (or someone) is inaccurate or non-existent.) I used the all-caps for added dramatic effect (or should I say affect, since it will clearly affect Jordan in an off-the-deep-end kind of way?).
Awww Damien, I guess you don't inspire "JORDAN" like I do. You didn't get a rambling, psychotic rant:( I was hoping for another good laugh. (Notice I am using quotation marks to imply that something (or someone) is inaccurate or non-existent.) I used the all-caps for added dramatic effect (or should I say affect, since it will clearly affect Jordan in an off-the-deep-end kind of way?).