back to article US TV stations bowl sueball directly at FCC's spectrum mega-sale

US television broadcasters are suing the FCC over the regulator's planned auction of TV spectrum space to mobile phone networks. The National Association of Broadcasters (NAB) said it has objections to the framework the watchdog has laid out for an auction in which broadcasters sell off their spectrum space to carriers who …

  1. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    I would like to see or hear an example of this before taking sides. Is this going to affect OTA transmissions? Will it improve communications of cellular or other devices? Will it cost me money? Save me money?

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Here it is in brief

      Frequencies used by channels 31-51 (572 MHz to 698 MHz) will be sold off, and stations currently occupying those frequencies will move down the dial to unused channels. Where possible/necessary, stations will be "repacked" to insure there's no interference between stations getting moved around in different viewing areas, so some channels below 31 will have their frequency changed as well where repacking occurs.

      As part of this the FCC is allowing stations to share channels more easily, so a single channel could have x.1 as a ABC affiliate and x.2 as a CBS affiliate, even if there is not common ownership. This would be attractive to stations in smaller markets as it would cut their costs,. They'd lose the ability to carry subchannels, since two HD channels in one physical 6 MHz RF channel doesn't leave any room for subchannels unless you want to seriously compromise the quality of those HD channels.

      All the costs incurred for moving such as new broadcast equipment and marketing to let people know when the station will change frequencies they'll need to re-scan is supposed to be paid for with the proceeds of the sale.

      It sounds like some stations are worried they'll be forced to a different frequency that doesn't quite have the same range as they do currently. If they were forcing UHF channels to move to VHF that might be true, but I don't think that's supposed to happen. But I guess if a channel 50 moved to channel 14 the range may be marginally reduced, or they might not be allowed to broadcast at the maximum 1000 kw effective on the new frequency. There's also the chance that a station in a flat area that carries up to 100 miles might have its range reduced somewhat if it competes with another station using the same channel 150 miles away (I think the FCC defines viewing areas only up to 75 miles)

  2. earl grey
    WTF?

    this will only screw over OTA viewers

    People who are OTA viewers will not find their stations where they expect them to be; and in fact may lost some of them in crowded markets due to frequency issues. The current digital is no blessing, as the weaker signal means users (like myself) lose the ability to view what used to come through plainly. I say if you're going to force them to digital, bump up the power again so that the signal gets further than 10 feet.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: this will only screw over OTA viewers

      I pick up channels with 100% signal quality over 50 miles away - and that one is even VHF so its only broadcasting at 48 kw effective! If you're having problems, you need a better antenna, or if you do have a good one, help with setting it up properly. There are others that are even further that I still pick up even though my antenna isn't even pointed at them.

      With a high quality outdoor antenna, you should have no problems unless you live behind a mountain or a tall building.

      1. lambda_beta
        Linux

        Re: this will only screw over OTA viewers

        Not sure where you live, but I can hardly pick up stations 20 miles away. The problem is OTA viewers are getting screwed becuse there is more money to be made elsewhere. The FCC has turned into an agency which is completely controlled by the money bag businesses.

    2. Someone Else Silver badge
      Megaphone

      Re: this will only screw over OTA viewers

      Not just OTA viewers.

      If you're a church, or a club, or a stadium, or a theater, or a traveling rock/country/R&B/rap/etc. show, or any of a number of other outfits that use wireless microphone technology, you're right knackered, too. So Lady Gaga will have to incorporate wires into her next meat costume. I wonder how the next presentation of Wicked is gonna work that out?

      (Bullhorn, because that's just about the one wireless technology that won't be affected.)

  3. Henry Wertz 1 Gold badge

    Well...

    They would be selling off 600mhz spectrum. Sprint has a small amount of 1ghz spectrum, and T-Mobile has none. (Hopefully) AT&T and VZW would not pursue this when they already have 700mhz spectrum.

    For historical perspective... we've got VHF 2-7 (VHF low), 8-13 (VHF hi). These aren't used much with digital TV (ATSC can't deal well with the kind of burst noise from motors etc. that VHF gets that UHF pretty much doesn't), unfortunately 3(!) local channels do for me (1 is close and the other 2 just don't come in at all). UHF, originally 14-83. When 850mhz cellular went online this knocked it back to 16-69. Now, it is 16-51 (but channel 51 is also being cleared as an additional guard band.) There couldn't possibly be a need for that many channels here in the midwest, but areas for instance around NYC (with Baltimore, Washington D.C., Philadelphia, Boston, etc. all within close enough proximity to cause potential RF problems) the dial's apparently rather crowded already.

    One thing here that is VERY different than in UK -- when channels went digital here, there was very little reduction in number of actual physical channels being run (there's just about as many digital multiplexes as there were analog channels). The channels here went digital, put the old analog channel (but in HD) on the digital channel, and added maybe one additional channel (one of RTV, MeTV, AntennaTV, ThisTV, which play older movies and TV shows. These all appeared after the digital transition). I haven't heard of a single case where two seperate (analog era) channels have combined onto one multiplex; although it seems like a good way to save loads on the ol' power bill.

  4. Charles 9

    What gets me is why is the spectrum being SOLD? Such a precious and limited resource, you'd think the FCC would instead LEASE the spectrum and keep all the lessees bound to usage rules and the like: always holding the final call. Because once sold, it's extremely hard to buy it back should it be necessary.

    1. Kevin Johnston

      Damned good thinking but it is probably a result of the early auctions where spectrum went for stupid money that I struggle to believe the companies could recover. All governments now see big pound/dollar signs in their time in office obscuring the option of, as you suggest, leasing it which means the other mob may get some benefit from it when you get kicked out of office.

    2. Mike 16

      Lease versus buy

      Well, they could always take the tack they did with Native Americans, granting title "As long as the sun shines and the rivers flow". So sorry about dam construction and nightfall, you're outa here.

      As for "cui bono?", at least from my (hilly area in California) viewpoint, OTA is already pretty dicey, but I'm a little surprised about broadcasters position. As far as I can tell, they have a gravy train with cable saddled with fees to carry "must carry" channels. The way I expect them to go eventually is a single multiplex with about 10 watts xmit, just so they can claim to be OTA, while forcing everybody not on their block to pay for everything, via the cablecos. As it is, Comcast has interpreted "must carry" to countenance "must carry HD content but it's OK to downsample to 480i unless the punter coughs up another $15/mo", and the FCC has apparently agreed.

      As an old fart, I remember when broadcasters lobbied against the very idea of CATV, while advocates argued that it would usher in a wealth of high-quality TV with no advertising. Remind me how that's working out?

  5. DanceMan

    Channel Switching

    A US border station carrying MeTV and Movies! just switched frequencies on UHF last night at 2am local time. Only found the new location when I re-autoprogrammed. I assume it's somehow related to this issue.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Channel Switching

      Its not. Occasionally channels change frequencies for other reasons. For instance, a lot of channel 51s have moved down the dial, because there is unexpected interference with LTE A band.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Other stories you might like