Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Who Cares if Analog TV Goes Dark?

Posted by timothy on from the world-may-not-immediately-end dept.

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."

6 of 827 comments (clear)

  1. -1 Troll by XorNand · · Score: 5, Insightful


    Only 12? Funny perspective you seem to have..

    If a CEO embraced a plan to cull 12% of the company's existing customer base in one fell swoop, the board would having him packing his office into boxes the next day. Bah... consider the source: Home Theater Magazine. This article is just brash, elitest techogeek strutting: "Well, who doesn't have a digital capable TV nowadays anyhow? Luddites!".

    --
    Entrepreneur : (noun), French for "unemployed"
    1. Re:-1 Troll by bhtooefr · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I'm in an interesting situation. I've got cable Internet access, but no cable TV - can't afford it, and don't see the need for it.

      I can pick up NBC, ABC (sorta), CBS, and PBS (kinda) with my antenna. Between NBC and CBS, I've got enough to watch (yes, I watch the lame shows.)

      However, when analog broadcast goes dark, I'm simply not going to HAVE a TV. I've got cable Internet - if I want to watch a certain show, I can run BitTorrent.

    2. Re:-1 Troll by Dukael_Mikakis · · Score: 5, Insightful

      True. But what about those who can't afford a computer or the internet (or don't know how to use them effectively) who still watch a 20 year old set and for whom upgrading will be a significant expense?

      You and I probably have very reasonable alternatives to analog TV (I have cable, you can BitTorrent), but I'm sure that many of these 30 mn sets still on analog don't.

    3. Re:-1 Troll by indifferent+children · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Advertisers already know the income breakdown of their audiences. Nielsen doesn't just give a 'share' number to the advertisers; a lot of demographic data goes with it (race, income, gender, education-level, etc). So no, this won't give the advertisers better data. It will just lock them out of advertising to the poor.

      Don't neglect the bread-and-circuses value of TV for the poor. Right now, they watch 5+ hours of cheap, mindless entertainment every night. If you take that away, what are they going to do with those 5 hours? They might just wake up and realize how much they are being crapped on by our economic and legal systems. They might decide that there is a small group of people at the top who are responsible.

      --
      Censorship is telling a man he can't have a steak just because a baby can't chew it. --Mark Twain
    4. Re:-1 Troll by DaveJay · · Score: 5, Insightful

      What about senior citizens on a limited budget, with limited mobility? For those people who have few entertainment options open to them, television is often their only companion.

      Just something to think about.

  2. Elder Viewers by thegoofy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You have to remember who is in that 12%. Most elderly viewers are the ones less likely to spend money on a new TV Set or that fancy shmancy cable. They are also the most likely to vote.