Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
100 words for 100 days: submit your 100 word essay and get published on AlterNet
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Digital TV: A Giveaway to Corporate Media

By Bruce Dixon, Black Agenda Report. Posted August 28, 2008.


The FCC hopes the public won't notice its generous gift to corporate broadcasters: thousands of new channels on publicly owned spectrum.

Share and save this post:
Digg iconDelicious iconReddit iconFark iconYahoo! iconNewsvine! iconFacebook iconNewsTrust icon

More stories by Bruce Dixon

Get AlterNet in
your mailbox!

 
Advertisement

Digital TV means four to ten times as many channels for each and every broadcaster with no obligations to the public. The FCC quietly awarded broadcasters this colossal gift of public property worth $70-$80 billion during the Clinton administration back in 1996. In the 12 years since, under Democratic and Republican presidents alike, corporate broadcasters and their stooges at the FCC have diligently peddled the cover stories that digital TV is all about the advent of high definition television, and that the only nagging questions are how and whether enough converter boxes will be available for consumers who can't or won't buy brand new TVs.

In a final act of brazen misdirection to conceal this grand theft digital, FCC Commissioners are scheduled to tour dozens of cities between now and February 18, 2009, doing a lot of talking, but not much listening.

FCC Anounces 80 City "We're Not Listening" Digital TV Tour

All most of us know about the transition to digital TV are two things. The first thing we know is that some people will need converter boxes on their old TVs to receive the new digital broadcasts. The second thing we know is that digital broadcast technology will enable high definition TV. As far as corporate broadcasters and the FCC are concerned, that's all we need to know, and those are the boundaries of legitimate public discourse.

What the FCC and broadcasters are actively concealing from the public is that digital broadcasting technology enables thousands of new digital TV channels on the public broadcast spectrum, all of which broadcasters have allocated to themselves without the inconvenient public scrutiny issuing thousands of new station licenses might have attracted. Thus minorities and women, local entrepreneurs, colleges and universities, community, civic and labor organizations and local governments who otherwise might acquire a portion of the new digital TV channels and used them to broadcast local news, arts, information and public service in hundreds of U.S. markets have been frozen out of the chance to serve the public over the public's airwaves without even the bother of public explanation or debate.

Utterly captured by the private broadcasters it is supposed to police and regulate, the FCC has been tasked with selling this piece of grand theft digital as a public service, and farmed out the job to the notorious PR firm of Ketchum Communications.

According to PR Watch, Ketchum Communicaitons are past masters of corporate disinformation, responsible for a string of suspect activities including:

  • Drafting ads for tobacco firms denying the links between smoking and disease, and promoting the myth that low-tar cigarettes are somehow less deadly;
  • Co-ordinating PR for the KOOL Jazz Festival, intended to pretty up the name of Big Tobacco;
  • Running fake business-funded science organizations touting the "safety" of pesticides, hormones and food additives;
  • Spying on, smearing and facilitating the firing of pro-environmental FDA scientists;
  • Recommending, as early as the nineties, the labeling of environmentalists as "terrorists", and the suing of investigative journalists, and conducting a 30 city PR blitz against an EPA report on the health;
  • Covertly hiring TV host and syndicated columnist Armstrong Williams to discredit public education and shill for the administration's No Child Left Behind Act, and manufacturing dozens of fake video news releases which were distributed to hundreds of TV stations where they were broadcast as news.

Predictably, Ketchum's elaborate "public education" campaign on digital TV makes no mention of any obligations broadcasters might have to serve the public over publicly owned spectrum. It is calculated to confine public input on the DTV transition to those things the public must do in order to passively consume whatever commercial broadcasters decide to give them.

As part of this campaign, the FCC has announced plans to send staffers and commissioners to 80 cities across the country in what looks suspiciously like a "Not Listening Tour" between now and February 18, 2009. With few exceptions, FCC staffers and commissioners will be totally unprepared to explain their complicity in handing over the digital airwaves to commercial broadcasters who not only don't have programming for the new channels, but who will probably squat on the new frequencies till some profitable use appears. For the most part, the FCC won't be entertaining questions about why broadcasters are not obligated to broadcast news, local public service or other local content on the new channels, or why consumers ought to prize high definition TV over high quality content. The FCC will be talking. But it won't be listening.


Digg!

See more stories tagged with: fcc, corporate media, digital tv, public interest

Bruce Dixon is editor of The Black Commentator.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »

Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Why I did not support Hillary
Posted by: Aeolius38 on Aug 29, 2008 4:36 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Bill Clinton signed the 1996 communications bill, he did not veto it. I consider Bill and Hillary a political team. A vote for Hillary would be endorsement for this kind of betrayal of the public.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Progressives Need to Get Aggressive ... Obama's Honeymoon is so over ...
Posted by: mmckinl on Sep 2, 2008 1:16 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Seems Obama's main man on telecom is an industry front man.

from the article:

"Barack Obama's chief advisor on telecom affairs, a black attorney who has so far raised the Obama campaign at least $500,000, presumably from broadcasters and their lawyers, is William Kennard. As the FCC's general counsel from 1993 to 1996, and its chairman from 1996 to 2001, Kennard is arguably one of the fathers of this monstrously crooked deal, and of the disastrous Telecommunications Act of 1996. Upon leaving government at the beginning of the Bush administration, Kennard became managing director of media buyout operations for the bipartisan Carlyle Group."

Until Progressives and Liberals make themselves heard the Democrats have little reason to listen ...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» No matter if he is polka-dot Posted by: itzamirakul
Will Obama work to REPEAL the phony Telecommunications Act of 1996 that led up to this mess?
Posted by: maxpayne on Sep 2, 2008 1:25 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
And perhaps restore the Fairness Doctrine Ronnie Raygun repealed? I'm guessing the answer is most likely no on either.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» I'm sure he will... Posted by: itzamirakul
Digital TV makes it much more easier to track every single click of your remote control
Posted by: PakiBoy on Sep 2, 2008 6:57 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
as you browse/watch channels and the information is sent back to servers running in the cable head-ends (local cable offices that farm out signals to residenses).

This information is stored in databases (using MAC and IP address of the set-top box) and data-mining is performed to determine the profile of the user.

So there you have it. At least you won't have to deal with telemarketers anymore. They'll buy your profile from Verizon/Comcast et al.

May be government would buy your profile from cable companies to determine whether you lean Republican? May be a potential spouse would want to know if you are some freak with a fetish for S&M porn?

All this and more is going to be easily available, for a price of course.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The FCC Needs to Transition ALL Spectrum to WiFi Internet
Posted by: rfrancis@godisdead.com on Sep 2, 2008 7:32 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The internet is flexible, you can stream video and audio over it as well as send instant text messages and use VoIP.

It is time for the old model of partitioning the spectrum and selling it to companies to retire.

One large interoperable broadband wifi network, that is what the FCC should be focusing on doing with the spectrum. Unfortunately like dinosaurs they do not understand where technology is headed nor how to make the most use out of our public resources.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Those $60 converter boxes don't work too well.
Posted by: PaulK on Sep 2, 2008 9:31 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
First off, I promise you that their price will drop to $40 in six months. Save your money.

We went ahead with the converter boxes anyways, not my idea. Here's the dirt.

The boxes will not pick up one of our local UHF stations. When we want to watch it, we get rid of the converter box. That station will just be gone next February. Fox never was much of a station.

On our prime VHF stations -- NBC, CBS, ABC -- they always conk out just at some critical point. Poof, the video dies, the audio dies too. Then they resume. For football games you can always watch the instant replay, but for Democratic Convention keynote speeches you are left wondering why they're clapping. Also, the all-or-nothing picture makes tuning the TV much more difficult.

PBS is a bright exception. PBS stations currently rebroadcast their few shows on 2 or 4 channels now, where there once was one channel. I've seen a couple of well-made local access shows on the second PBS channel. You still lose out when trying to pick up a distant PBS channel.

So in general I suggest you get broadband for your computer and watch on your computer screen. TV is half dead next February.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: THANKS FOR YOUR ADVICE Posted by: hoorah
No problem here.
Posted by: ABetterFuture on Sep 2, 2008 10:35 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Got the converter box. Yup, it does exactly what it says it does--change a digital signal into an analog one.

Problem is, where once I got snow plus a great deal of picture+sound, now I get MaxHeadroom or nothing (LPB) at all.... :(

We're mounting an outdoor antennae to bring in the signals we like to get. If you aren't being served by cable (and, btw, I wuv my cable internet) you should rethink your options.

DTV over the air is crystal clear if you can get the signal...it's better than cable quality, if you ask me.

Then again, I'm a tad of a miser and didn't gamble my families financial well-being on a real-estate bubble, and I didn't gamble on so-called "Social Security", and I haven't gambled on similiar Ponzii schemes. Fools and their money are soon parted, but if you can get an open-air outlet to dtv (the free kind) minus your 2 $40.00 gift cards, you'll be richly rewarded.

I was a cynic, and I was pleasantly surprised.

edit: be advised that if you don't have the equipment to get the signal, your TV programming WILL stutter/chop

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I AM GLAD TO SEE THAT YOU GUYS ARE BEGINNING TO GET IT. THE AIRWAVES HAVE BEEN ESSENTIALLY
Posted by: Raymond Emerson on Sep 2, 2008 11:26 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
privatized. Remember that Ronald Reagan wanted to give Yosemite to Disney. Privitization means the theift of public property. Yes, the republicans just gave away our bandwidth. Rather they sold it for pennies on the dollar so that their big boys could gouge us with our own air ways.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]