On Sun, Jun 14, 2009 at 10:08 PM, Tony B<[email protected]> wrote: > Someone over the weekend claimed the report from the NAB was bogus > because "what would we expect the NAB to say?". But there were ever > only two sides in the DTV changeover - the FCC and the NAB. If one > party could be said to be more on the consumer's side, it would be the > NAB - no broadcaster was in favor of cutting off a single viewer. Of > course, it's _our_ FCC, so really consumers had two dogs in the fight.
Say what? The consumer had two advocates speaking in their interest, the NAB and the FCC? Are you referring to television in the good 'ole USA? Between the NAB and the FCC, I'd say that consumers had about a half a voice...if that much. The NAB represents the interests of broadcasters...period. As far as the NAB is concerned, the audience for broadcasts, TV and radio, only represent a means of establishing advertising rates. AS for the FCC, it has never had the reputation for being primarily representative of the public interest. The NAB is currently fighting tooth and nail to prevent the public from being able to use any of the unused portion of the spectrum they are broadcasting DTV in, the so called "white space." These portions of the spectrum are public property, and are unused by the TV industry, yet the industry wants to control it. One prominent advocate of public use of available "white space" says this of the NAB: "For decades, [the broadcasters'] policy has been to stifle innovation at all costs and ask questions later and this is no different." An article on this that also touches upon on the attitudes of the NAB: "Broadcasters Sue FCC Over White Space Broadband Decision" http://tinyurl.com/b6xol4 Steve ************************************************************************* ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *************************************************************************
