Various proposals to recover a chunk of the broadcast spectrum reserved for television continue to be considered by various players in Washington, DC. As noted in earlier posts, the shift to digital television was supposed to free up some spectrum, and previous channel reconfigurations have allowed the FCC to take back. About one-third of previously allocated spectrum has already been returned to the FCC for reallocation. The current proposals would reduce local broadcast television spectrum by another 40% or so.
While the previous re-allocations were able to be accommodated with some minor shifting of channel assignments, the NAB estimates that some 40% of local TV stations operate on one of the channels proposed for reallocation, and remove much of the spectrum used by low-power TV stations and the retransmitters used to extend signals in rural areas. As such, it's being strongly opposed by both commercial and noncommercial broadcasters, who note correctly that this reallocation would be costly, besides perhaps hampering any future local TV broadcasting expansion.
Driving the change is the need for appropriate spectrum to roll out nationwide broadband WiFi services, and a desire for the funds thought to be coming from auctioning off that spectrum. At times, the reallocation and proposals for auction have been included as straight revenue enhancements, some proposals suggest that instead of straight revenue auctions, that potential spectrum buyers pay TV stations who agree to move (since both proposed services are local, there is no need for a broad national plan).
However, if reallocation is seen more as a revenue resource than as a beneficial shift in services allocations, I'm afraid there will be a push for a much bigger spectrum grab with little consideration given to the actual costs of making the transition, much less the social cost in terms of limiting local television options and availability.
Source: TV Channel Squeeze Proposed to Pay for Tax Cuts. Broadcast Newsroom
No comments:
Post a Comment