[SBE] SBE Digest, Vol 264, Issue 7

[Dennis C. Brown]

Off the top of my head, as objectively as I can, I suggest the following:

     Former FCC Chairman James H. Quello explained what the FCC does, 
thusly:  "We take very difficult legal, technical and economic questions 
and to those questions we give political answers."  For some years, the 
FCC's political thinking has revolved around economics with legal and 
technical considerations often in second and third place.  The FCC is 
thinking in terms of the economic value of spectrum when used for 
various purposes.  It is under political pressure from various interests 
to improve broadband penetration and it is going to do something to 
satisfy those political interests.  SBE's objective should be to 
preserve and advance broadcast engineer employment.  That means that SBE 
should seek to limit the damage to broadcast engineer employment and to 
postpone the date on which any damage occurs.

     Economics:  Economists love to study.  SBE should analyze the 
economics of the proposal, hire economists to counter the proposal, and 
call for a great deal more, years more, study of the economics.  Argue 
the comparative economic merits of reallocating spectrum from someone 
else, rather than from broadcasting.

     Legal:  For the government to share auction proceeds with broadcast 
owners would require amendments to the Communications Act.  SBE should 
be involved in lobbying Congress for the most favorable, most postponed, 
legislation possible.  Broadcast owners will be resistant in proportion 
to the extent that they won't get their "fair share" of the auction 
revenues.  Among the arguments that SBE can raise are that, in the 
United States' current financial position, we can't afford to split the 
auction revenue; and the broadcaster is entitled to no more buyout 
compensation, if any, than current revenues times the number of years 
remaining on its license.  SBE could lobby for protection of 
stakeholders such as broadcast engineers by the government's providing 
copious quantities of funds for occupational retraining and retirement 
compensation.  If there is to be a split of revenues, demand that the 
broadcaster be required to buy out displayed employees.  Recognize that 
there will be a split between broadcasters which want a buyout 
opportunity and those which don't.  Make an ally of the category which 
doesn't want to surrender and take a coordinated position on the economics.

     Technical.  Whatever the plan is, broadcast engineers are the ones 
to show that it won't work.  Call for more, oh my, years more, technical 
study, especially in light of the FCC's surprisingly wrong projections 
of digital VHF propagation and the limited extent of knowledge of ATSC 
reception problems and solutions.

     In short, SBE should use all three avenues, economic, legal, and 
technical to make it difficult for the FCC to act.  SBE's forte is 
engineering but SBE cannot neglect the opportunity to approach the 
problem from all three vectors.

     We need to recognize that this is not the first time that 
reallocation of spectrum to satisfy political demand has been proposed 
or has occurred.  For example, there is no TV Channel 1 because the FCC 
took it from TV and gave it to land mobile and then to the Amateurs.  To 
accommodate Nextel, the FCC forced thousands of small business land 
mobile entrepreneurs to swap channels with Nextel.  To accommodate 
various interests, the FCC reallocated TV spectrum above 700 MHz and 
destroyed some of the value of hundreds of millions of TV receivers.  To 
accommodate the FCC's desire to decrease bandwidth, thousands of land 
mobile radios will become obsolete in the next few months.  We cannot 
underestimate the tenacity of the FCC once it makes a decision.  But it 
makes decisions slowly.  In this case, the slower, the better.

Curt Brown


On 3/16/2010 7:03 PM, Barry Thomas, CPBE CBNT wrote:

> OK... I'm not the moderator but it's safe to say we're officially off topic.  We need to bring it back before we get bounced to the "SBE-CHAT" list.

>

>

> Let's bring it back to the industry...it was proposed on this list that we need to take what we learn about these developments and make our voices heard!  Good points!

>

> Contact your Senators and Reps!  Respond with your vote if you disagree with their position!

>

> But in addition,

>

> - What would you like the Society to do on your behalf?  Is there a compelling member interest that the Society should take an aggressive position on decidedly "industry" issue?

>

>

> Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry

>

> -----Original Message-----

> From: sbe-request at sbe.org

> Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2010 17:29:46

> To:<sbe at sbe.org>

> Subject: SBE Digest, Vol 264, Issue 7

>

> Send SBE mailing list submissions to

> 	sbe at sbe.org

>

> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit

> 	http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/sbe

> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to

> 	sbe-request at sbe.org

>

> You can reach the person managing the list at

> 	sbe-owner at sbe.org

>

> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific

> than "Re: Contents of SBE digest..."

>

>

> SBE Roundtable

>

> Today's Topics:

>

>     1. Re: The future of Broadcasting. (Edwin Bukont)

>     2. Re: The future of Broadcasting. (Francis Martin)

>

>

> ----------------------------------------------------------------------

>

> Message: 1

> Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2010 17:15:35 -0400

> From: Edwin Bukont<ebukont at msn.com>

> Subject: Re: [SBE] The future of Broadcasting.

> To: sbe<sbe at sbe.org>

> Message-ID:<SNT109-W57A1EC33CED4F2A5C84A02A92D0 at phx.gbl>

> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"

>

>

> Oh yeah, that's right, and we never found the exact reason for all those underground cities designed with French and German know how.   You build a shelter for what purpose?

>

> Edwin Bukont CSRE, DRB, CBNT

> V- 240.417.2475; F- 240.368.1265

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

> To: sbe at sbe.org

> Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2010 15:39:28 -0400

> From: a9xw at cs.com

> Subject: Re: [SBE] The future of Broadcasting.

>

>

>

>

>    Hey... we have a freakin war with a county that "has weapons of mass destruction" that NEVER did materialize (surprise!)

> Unless you count the 22 tons of uranium yellow cake that was sent to Canada from Iraq, and the pre war 600 truck convoy to Syria spotted by military satellite.

>

> Henry

>

>

>

>

>

> -----Original Message-----

> From: Dan Slentz<dan_slentz at yahoo.com>

> To: sbe member discussion mail list<sbe at sbe.org>

> Sent: Tue, Mar 16, 2010 2:24 pm

> Subject: Re: [SBE] The future of Broadcasting.

>

>

>

>

>

>

> Please excuse the following tirade.  After reading articles every day about the government deciding TV spectrum should go away so each American can have wireless broadband, I finally exploded!   This might have just been done so I could vent.  But as I read it more calmly, it really does make sense.  I'm going to send it to my congressman and senator.  Also going to send it to an old family friend (Congressman Zach Space).  The government simply MUST stop with involving itself in areas that aren't "broke".  I'd say, when they have everything else fixed, then look for other things to "fix" (or break).

>

> But this is just my opinion.  Nothing more.  Nothing less.

>

>

>

>

>

> This is sickening!  For about 10 years broadcasters have jumped through hoops and converted to the new digital system.. have spent millions of dollars+ and added services.. have built the infrastructure for "TV of the future", and now our government decides it wants our spectrum?!!!  Why at it, why not take away all steel and plastic from car manufacturers?  How about taking away water from all the food growers?

>

> What are TV broadcasters without their spectrum but a cable channel (which, by the way, can be modulated with a $1,000 cable modulator and not a $5,000,000+ transmitter system).  Our government IS OFF THE DEEP END and is become nothing less than the politicians of former Communist Russia.  The government has already taken back channels 59 thru 83 over the years, and now they are looking at taking back the rest?  Bull crap!

>

> The amount of spectrum they say is needed for broadband internet is so short sighted.  They say there will be 100,000,000 homes at 100 mbps for this proposed new service, but in just a few years 100 mbps is going to be the equivalent of "dial-up" in terms of speed.  It wasn't that long ago that have 56k was incredible, but now the amount of data we're pulling (like down-loading a pirated movie) would take hours upon hours to download the old standard.   And they're thinking 100 mbps is going to be enough?!   Whose spectrum do they intend to swipe when that isn't enough???

>

> We wired this nation for phones with 99% of Americans now having it.  Let's look at where we have nearly 100% coverage and determine how we can run high speed data over power lines.  Or let's wire to every house with fiber (look at Verizon FIoS or AT&T.)  The speed of fiber has yet to fully be tapped, and certainly not going to be "crushed" by atmospheric conditions and any other interference (as another national RF network will certainly do).  And when are we going to finally decide that all this RF might just be the cause of the continuously increasing cancer rate.  Think about that!   Who DON'T you know that isn't getting cancer now!   So let's flood every single U.S. house with yet MORE transmitters.   This is freakin' NUTS!

>

> Hey.. U.S. government:..   concern yourself with a national water supply full of toxins and poisons.. .and an increasing lack of water.  Hey... we have a freakin war with a county that "has weapons of mass destruction" that NEVER did materialize (surprise!)    Maybe... just maybe.. our politicians should think about how to get the heck out of THAT mess!   What about the homeless in America?  Wanna give them wireless broadband over the former TV spectrum?    Hey.. here's a NOVEL IDEA... figure out how to help those people?!!    And what about unemployement?????   How about figuring out a way to get people back to work (instead of elmininating another industry - TV).    This is what seriously ticks me off.  Our politicians are NOT focusing on REAL PROBLEMS and REAL CONCERNS.  They are looking ways to screw things up further instead of fixing REAL human issues.

>

> The government is talking about people that aren't even using the internet and saying "if we build it... they will come".    Hey... here's an idea.  If they don't want it.. don't need it.. aren't asking for it..  then KEEP YOUR NOSE OUT OF IT!!!    Here's news for you (gov't)... about 95% of the U.S. population never used the public library.  Didn't see you going door to door with a set of encyclopedias for every American or a library card.  LET the people decide!

>

> Hey politicians!!!  STOP listening to wealthy companies wanting to "do something for Americans" (in other words..  "looking for another way to make money")  and START LISTENING TO THE PEOPLE WHO ELECTED YOU!!!   I haven't seen protests or huge masses saying "give us wireless intenet"... yet somehow you feel this needs to happen.   WAKE THE H*LL UP!   When/if you continue to push the people of this country enough... and continue to think YOU (as politicians) know what's best for US without actually listening to US... then you WILL find a situation that really needs your attention... and that is civil unrest!

>

> I, for one (but not alone), am SICK of this stuff!

>

> STOP pissing around with TV and instead focus half that effort on our polution, our economy, our ecology, our "war problems", our hungry, our homeless.   Any of THESE items seem to be a cause worth fighting for?  Or is the REAL ISSUE and problem that we need wireless 100 mbps across our nation??!!

>

>

>

>

>

>

> From: Gary O'Guinn<garyo at ktuu.com>

> To: sbe member discussion mail list<sbe at sbe.org>

> Sent: Tue, March 16, 2010 12:15:25 PM

> Subject: [SBE] The future of Broadcasting.

>

> I have read most of the comments about the death of Free Over The Air Broadcasting and it seems to me we broadcasters need to step up. According to the majority of comments posted here, most of us feel that this is a direct attack on the principals of our government mixed in with Congressional greed. If all we are going to do is talk about this among ourselves then nothing will be accomplished. If these issues really mean something then we need to take an active approach. Call, write, e-mail your Congressmen (or women). Tell them that if they allow the F.C.C. to proceed along the path they have chosen, these Congressmen cannot count upon your support at the polling booth. Pass the word on to your friends and family members.

>

> You want change in the government then it's time to step up and remind the "Government" that this is a Government of the People, by the People and for the People. Not a People of the Government, by the Government, and for the Government: as it seems that many in Washington would like us to be.

>

> Gary O'Guinn

>

> _______________________________________________

> The SBE Roundtable, SBE at sbe.org

> To unsubscribe, go to http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/options/sbe

>

> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/sbe

>

> _______________________________________________

> The SBE Roundtable, SBE at sbe.org

> To unsubscribe, go to http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/options/sbe

>

> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/sbe

>   		 	   		

> -------------- next part --------------

> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...

> URL:<http://seven.pairlist.net/pipermail/sbe/attachments/20100316/41ef2654/attachment.htm>

>

> ------------------------------

>

> Message: 2

> Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2010 14:29:44 -0700 (PDT)

> From: Francis Martin<ednixon at yahoo.com>

> Subject: Re: [SBE] The future of Broadcasting.

> To: sbe member discussion mail list<sbe at sbe.org>

> Message-ID:<385844.2762.qm at web37508.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

>

> are we not getting off topic here ?

>

>

>

>

> ________________________________

> From: Edwin Bukont<ebukont at msn.com>

> To: sbe<sbe at sbe.org>

> Sent: Tue, March 16, 2010 2:15:35 PM

> Subject: Re: [SBE] The future of Broadcasting.

>

>   Oh yeah, that's right, and we never found the exact reason for all those underground cities designed with French and German know how.   You build a shelter for what purpose?

>

> Edwin Bukont CSRE, DRB, CBNT

> V- 240.417.2475; F- 240.368.1265

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

> ________________________________

>   To: sbe at sbe.org

> Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2010 15:39:28 -0400

> From: a9xw at cs.com

> Subject: Re: [SBE] The future of Broadcasting.

>

>

>

>    Hey... we have a freakin war with a county that "has weapons of mass destruction" that NEVER did materialize (surprise!)

> Unless you count the 22 tons of uranium yellow cake that was sent to Canada from Iraq, and the pre war 600 truck convoy to Syria spotted by military satellite.

>

> Henry

>

>

>

>

> -----Original Message-----

> From: Dan Slentz<dan_slentz at yahoo.com>

> To: sbe member discussion mail list<sbe at sbe.org>

> Sent: Tue, Mar 16, 2010 2:24 pm

> Subject: Re: [SBE] The future of Broadcasting.

>

>

>

> Please excuse the following tirade.  After reading articles every day about the government deciding TV spectrum should go away so each American can have wireless broadband, I finally exploded!   This might have just been done so I could vent.  But as I read it more calmly, it really does make sense.  I'm going to send it to my congressman and senator.  Also going to send it to an old family friend (Congressman Zach Space).  The government simply MUST stop with involving itself in areas that aren't "broke".  I'd say, when they have everything else fixed, then look for other things to "fix" (or break).

>

> But this is just my opinion.  Nothing more.  Nothing less.

>

>

>

>

> This is sickening!  For about 10 years broadcasters have jumped through hoops and converted to the new digital system.. have spent millions of dollars+ and added services.. have built the infrastructure for "TV of the future", and now our government decides it wants our spectrum?!!!  Why at it, why not take away all steel and plastic from car manufacturers?  How about taking away water from all the food growers?

>

> What are TV broadcasters without their spectrum but a cable channel (which, by the way, can be modulated with a $1,000 cable modulator and not a $5,000,000+ transmitter system).  Our government IS OFF THE DEEP END and is become nothing less than the politicians of former Communist Russia.  The government has already taken back channels 59 thru 83 over the years, and now they are looking at taking back the rest?  Bull crap!

>

> The amount of spectrum they say is needed for broadband internet is so short sighted.  They say there will be 100,000,000 homes at 100 mbps for this proposed new service, but in just a few years 100 mbps is going to be the equivalent of "dial-up" in terms of speed.  It wasn't that long ago that have 56k was incredible, but now the amount of data we're pulling (like down-loading a pirated movie) would take hours upon hours to download the old standard.   And they're thinking 100 mbps is going to be enough?!   Whose spectrum do they intend to swipe when that isn't enough???

>

> We wired this nation for phones with 99% of Americans now having it.  Let's look at where we have nearly 100% coverage and determine how we can run high speed data over power lines.  Or let's wire to every house with fiber (look at Verizon FIoS or AT&T.)  The speed of fiber has yet to fully be tapped, and certainly not going to be "crushed" by atmospheric conditions and any other interference (as another national RF network will certainly do).  And when are we going to finally decide that all this RF might just be the cause of the continuously increasing cancer rate.  Think about that!   Who DON'T you know that isn't getting cancer now!   So let's flood every single U.S. house with yet MORE transmitters.   This is freakin' NUTS!

>

> Hey.. U.S. government:..   concern yourself with a national water supply full of toxins and poisons.. .and an increasing lack of water.  Hey... we have a freakin war with a county that "has weapons of mass destruction" that NEVER did materialize (surprise!)    Maybe... just maybe.. our politicians should think about how to get the heck out of THAT mess!   What about the homeless in America?  Wanna give them wireless broadband over the former TV spectrum?    Hey.. here's a NOVEL IDEA... figure out how to help those people?!!    And what about unemployement?????   How about figuring out a way to get people back to work (instead of elmininating another industry - TV).    This is what seriously ticks me off.  Our politicians are NOT focusing on REAL PROBLEMS and REAL CONCERNS.  They are looking ways to screw things up further instead of fixing REAL human issues.

>

> The government is talking about people that aren't even using the internet and saying "if we build it... they will come".    Hey... here's an idea.  If they don't want it.. don't need it.. aren't asking for it..  then KEEP YOUR NOSE OUT OF IT!!!    Here's news for you (gov't)... about 95% of the U.S. population never used the public library.  Didn't see you going door to door with a set of encyclopedias for every American or a library card.  LET the people decide!

>

> Hey politicians!!!  STOP listening to wealthy companies wanting to "do something for Americans" (in other words..  "looking for another way to make money")  and START LISTENING TO THE PEOPLE WHO ELECTED YOU!!!   I haven't seen protests or huge masses saying "give us wireless intenet"... yet somehow you feel this needs to happen.   WAKE THE H*LL UP!   When/if you continue to push the people of this country enough... and continue to think YOU (as politicians) know what's best for US without actually listening to US... then you WILL find a situation that really needs your attention... and that is civil unrest!

>

> I, for one (but not alone), am SICK of this stuff!

>

> STOP pissing around with TV and instead focus half that effort on our polution, our economy, our ecology, our "war problems", our hungry, our homeless.   Any of THESE items seem to be a cause worth fighting for?  Or is the REAL ISSUE and problem that we need wireless 100 mbps across our nation??!!

>

>

>

>

>

> ________________________________

>   From: Gary O'Guinn<garyo at ktuu.com>

> To: sbe member discussion mail list<sbe at sbe.org>

> Sent: Tue, March 16, 2010 12:15:25 PM

> Subject: [SBE] The future of Broadcasting.

>

> I have read most of the comments about the death of Free Over The Air Broadcasting and it seems to me we broadcasters need to step up. According to the majority of comments posted here, most of us feel that this is a direct attack on the principals of our government mixed in with Congressional greed. If all we are going to do is talk about this among ourselves then nothing will be accomplished. If these issues really mean something then we need to take an active approach. Call, write, e-mail your Congressmen (or women). Tell them that if they allow the F.C.C. to proceed along the path they have chosen, these Congressmen cannot count upon your support at the polling booth. Pass the word on to your friends and family members.

>

> You want change in the government then it's time to step up and remind the "Government" that this is a Government of the People, by the People and for the People. Not a People of the Government, by the Government, and for the Government: as it seems that many in Washington would like us to be.

>

> Gary O'Guinn

>

> _______________________________________________

> The SBE Roundtable, SBE at sbe.org

> To unsubscribe, go to http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/options/sbe

>

> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/sbe

>

> _______________________________________________

> The SBE Roundtable, SBE at sbe.org

> To unsubscribe, go to http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/options/sbe

> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/sbe

> -------------- next part --------------

> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...

> URL:<http://seven.pairlist.net/pipermail/sbe/attachments/20100316/2aca6fa9/attachment.html>

>

> ------------------------------

>

> _______________________________________________

> The SBE Roundtable

> SBE mailing list

> SBE at sbe.org

> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/sbe

>

>

> End of SBE Digest, Vol 264, Issue 7

> ***********************************

> _______________________________________________

> The SBE Roundtable, SBE at sbe.org

> To unsubscribe, go to http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/options/sbe

>

> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/sbe

>

>