Slashdot Mirror
Who Cares if Analog TV Goes Dark?
AVIDJockey writes "Take this with a grain of salt, but earlier this month the Consumer Electronics Association giddily released data showing that of America's 285 million TVs only 12 percent (33.6 million) are used for watching OTA broadcasts. In a further revelation, the CEA's numbers say that approximately 3 million (around 10 percent) aren't used for viewing broadcast television at all. Instead, the electricity gobbled up by these sets is used to play videogames, watch movies on DVD, or view old Jane Fonda exercise tapes."
Roughly 12% of television owners?
Instead, the electricity gobbled up by these sets is used to play videogames, watch movies on DVD, or view old Jane Fonda exercise tapes.
Surely this must be code for something else...
I'll turn into a supernova and burn up everything. Well I'll turn into a black little hole and you'll turn into string.
"Surprisingly, a full six percent indicated that they'd rather watch TV from cable or satellite than eat or have sex."
These were the 6 percent that just found out that Firefly was going to air on SciFi in its intended order.
"Look Lois, the two symbols of the Republican Party: an elephant, and a fat white guy who is threatened by change."
That about covers it for me
"It is a greater offense to steal men's labor, than their clothes"
You don't know much about Web design do you? CEOs routinely blow off Mac users when they design banking and e-commerce sites.
But the warning was in the basement, in the bottom of the bottom drawer of a filing cabinet, in an un-used lavatory with a placard stating "Beware of Leopard."
Do advertisers really give a crap about reaching poor people? I mean, the poor...the thing is, they have no money.
Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
You don't know much about Web design do you? CEOs routinely blow off Mac users when they design banking and e-commerce sites.
Mac users don't have any money, they spent it all buying their macs. And any money they get after that gets blown on gourmet coffee and avant-garde theater.
Slashdot Poll:
Most common use of your TV:
1.) No TV - just a HDTV tuner in my PC (geek answer)
2.) DVD viewing (Dad's answer)
3.) PBS viewing (Mom's answer)
4.) Porn viewing (Slashdot answer)
5.) Stand for my other TV (redneck answer)
6.) Football viewing (no-neck answer)
legal. fun. profitable. pick two.
TV is not a necessity. People can (and have) lived without it.
Blasphemer!!
You may not believe this, but a lot of people do a lot of useful things with their time and also like to have to option of watching TV now and then. Owning a TV doesn't mean you're a slave to it and will never do anything else. That fact that we can all cite examples of someone who just watches TV all the time doesn't refute what I'm saying.
People always talk about this in terms of a (false) dichotomy: Either you're a professional couch potato, or you read 4 novels a week and spend the rest of the time training for the Tour de France. I realize parent didn't outright say this, but his comments sound rooted in this kind of thinking.
One we admit that TV is something that can be used responsibly, the argument that it doesn't matter if poor people can't afford it because it's good for them turns into something incredibly patronizing, which is how I see it.
The elderly might be willing to pay more if they had a digital channel showing Matlock 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.
Owning a TV doesn't mean you're a slave to it and will never do anything else. That fact that we can all cite examples of someone who just watches TV all the time doesn't refute what I'm saying.
OTOH, TV has very little redeeming value. Programming is designed to keep you watching and tuned in. The recent fights by broadcasters against Tivo and against Satellite companys offering network broadcasts from other areas just emphasize the point that TV broadcasters want you to sit on the couch from 6-10pm every night and watch their shows. Owning a TV doesn't mean you're a slave to it, but not owning a TV (or not being able to pick up OTA broadcasts) guarantees you are not a slave to it.
Once we admit that TV is something that can be used responsibly, the argument that it doesn't matter if poor people can't afford it because it's good for them turns into something incredibly patronizing, which is how I see it.
How so? The fact of the matter is there is little downside to not having a TV. It's not a right, it's not a requirement to fit in to society, it's not a requirement for local or national news. I just can't get too upset about a certain percentage of the population not being able to use their TV sets.
Find coupons in Greeley
However, I was able to convince DISH Network to let me keep the local channels for $5/month and drop all of the rest.
That's nothing, I was able to "convince" DISH Network to give me their America's Top 120 package for $37.99/month. Now that I've done that I'm going to try to see if I can get them to give me the Top 180 package for $47.99/month.
I Heart Sorting Networks
"Right, only rich people should be able to watch TV. Those poor people need to get off their butts and breathe some fresh air, maybe get a better job."
OK, I'll take your sarcasm:
Of course poors NEED a very new TV set. Once analog goes dark we will need some other way to put into their heads our single-vision God save USA, Saddam we will make you pay for 11S, our need for consumism through advertisements...
Maybe it is time for the republican and democrat party along with Coca-Cola and Nike to buy a new TV set for all those poor people who really deserve TV access too.