[SBE] Digital Conversion PSA

[Mike Langner]

The following is not intended to be taken as anything other than a "thought
piece" that may be useful for all of us in broadcasting to hold in
perspective as we continue our careers in American media -- which is
licensed in the Public Interest.



HDTV allows multicasting.  That means, as with cable and satellite, OTA
broadcasters can offer more enticing programming to different sectors of the
audience.

Many viewers, our family included, today watch very little OTA TV.  We are
in the category of "several hundred cable channel" viewers.

Why?

Content.

Indeed, most, if not all viewers are "content driven."

And content is a dirty word!

Diversity of content dilutes audience.

OTA station owners are "revenue driven," and that's not a bad thing.

But when revenue becomes not just the most important thing, but becomes the
only thing, programming is driven by advertisers, not by viewers.

The ideal marketplace for most owners would be they had the one and only TV
service in their market.

Viewers would be forced to watch their channel, their commercials, and drive
their revenues.

Recently retired as I am from commercial broadcasting, I almost retired
several years earlier, when the station cluster manager summoned me to her
office.  She said she'd heard I was helping the local PBS TV station with
their fund drive.

Indeed, I was.  I'm a great fan of Public TV.  It's that content thing again
!!

She expressed to me that unless I stopped helping Public TV in our market
she would fire me.  She explained that Public TV takes viewers away from her
stations and her advertisers.  She thought Public TV should be forced off
the air.

I explained to her that I disagreed, and that if she required as a condition
of continued employment that I abandon supporting Public TV, I would resign
on the spot, clear out my desk, and say goodbye to my co-workers.

She blinked.

I stayed employed.

Still, diverse programming costs more money to produce, and if it does (as
it will) splits the available audience, unless the advertising dollars
increase significantly, the increased costs of additional programming will
negatively affect the broadcasters bottom line.

And for the owners of our broadcast stations, that means increasing
diversity of programming, which inherently provides greater service on our
public airwaves, is a very, very bad thing.

Final observation:  when cable was first coming to our market (Albuquerque,
New Mexico) 40 plus years ago, the managers of our then three OTA commercial
stations editorialized against the city fathers willingness to allow a cable
franchise, and devoted a remarkable amount of "local" public affairs
programming to thinly-disguised diatribes against cable.  It was not a
demonstration of concern for the Public Interest, Convenience, and
Necessity.

For the broadcast station owner, revenue is king.

For the broadcast station viewer/listener, content is king.

And revenue and content do not serve the same interests!

Content will not pay our salaries.

Revenue is of no concern to our viewers/listeners.

Content and revenue will forever be entwined in a sort of uneasy truce, much
like the oriental philosophy of Yin and Yang.

As with all things in live, balance is everything!


Keep those filament burning !!

Oh, I forgot!

Keep those PN junction electrons flowing !!!

Mike/

Mike Langner, CPBE
Albuquerque, NM

  -----Original Message-----
  From: sbe-bounces at sbe.org [mailto:sbe-bounces at sbe.org]On Behalf Of Mason,
Scott C
  Sent: Thursday, October 02, 2008 1:15 PM
  To: sbe member discussion mail list
  Subject: Re: [SBE] Digital Conversion PSA


  With today's economy as bad as it is, the more people that know they can
get FREE off-Air television with more channels than ever ,the more potential
there will be for success.  Too many people now feel like TV is not free as
they are either paying the cable company or a satellite provider as they
forgot what an antenna is.



  If the industry did a better job of telling people they can get beautiful
pictures FREE with only a roof antenna, I think people that struggle to meet
the rent would switch back to over the air TV.  While I can afford cable.  I
don't watch enough TV ( maybe 2 hours a night) to justify cable.  My UHF
roof antenna and Digital TV ( converter box and analog TV in another room)
are just fine, and I don't have a monthly bill.





  From: sbe-bounces at sbe.org [mailto:sbe-bounces at sbe.org] On Behalf Of
McGlothen, Darryl
  Sent: Thursday, October 02, 2008 11:41 AM
  To: sbe member discussion mail list
  Subject: Re: [SBE] Digital Conversion PSA



  'br' makes a valid point: Many frustrated viewers may simply look to other
sources for news and entertainment. With so many choices, television has
become an expensive, frustrating, and confusing alternative. The DTV
Transition only makes this more evident.




----------------------------------------------------------------------------

    From: sbe-bounces at sbe.org [mailto:sbe-bounces at sbe.org] On Behalf Of
A9xw at cs.com
    Sent: Thursday, October 02, 2008 11:21 AM
    To: sbe at sbe.org
    Subject: Re: [SBE] Digital Conversion PSA

    In a message dated 10/2/2008 1:03:58 PM Central Daylight Time,
br at telcen.com writes:






    Or do what I did 5 years ago and quit watching television.



    Naw, I like NCIS and CSI Vegas. wife likes House
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://seven.pairlist.net/pipermail/sbe/attachments/20081002/3a47b7e2/attachment-0001.html>