Television a right?
Brent Finnegan -- March 9th, 2009
On today’s Morning Edition, NPR featured a story about how the digital TV switch is leaving some people in rural areas, like Bergton, in the the dark.
The loss of the local television signal has some wondering whether television is a right. Locals say the only other detailed source of local news, weather and emergency broadcasts in the Bergton area is a radio station that doesn’t reach the region after dark and before sunrise … There’s no cable service in the area, and some say they can’t afford satellite subscriptions.
Tracey Jones is the manager of WHSV in Harrisonburg, Va., which has provided local television service in the Bergton area. She says she’s committed to providing that signal somehow. But as she considers the cost of upgrading, converting and maintaining the translator, she wonders about providing subsidized satellite subscriptions instead.
As I review the voting preferences for the majority of folks up Bergton way I feel compelled to remind them that there is nothing free and that you can not simultaneously call the president a Socialist…and insist on free TV.
What we really need to do is run affordable broadband into the area with the faint hope that it might be used to expand perspectives in the north county.
It probably comes as no surprise that I agree with Jeff Jarvis when he predicts the eventual death of broadcast media won’t be far behind print. Could be years, maybe even decades, but if there’s a national broadband policy similar to the federal mandates to run electricity to the boonies, other delivery methods will eventually become obsolete.
I’m not sure if TV, Internet or electricity are “rights,” but certainly rural children without without those things are at a distinct disadvantage in this society.
A “right” no. In my opinion rights would include food, shelter, and other basic needs. So free TV is not a right. Now I do think some free service whether it be television or radio needs to be available to people in all areas for emergency notification purposes, but I would assume people in Bergton can hear WSVA which would be a better source for that information anyway.
The problem with WSVA in regards to this conversation is that it is at too low a wattage at night to reach the fine residents of Bergton, Criders and half of what is generally considered the listening area. Mark Obenshain was right when he said that the area is in a media blackout.
Maybe local legislators should think about getting the power increased at night so that they can get local information rather than radio out of Buffalo. Of course that will be an uphill battle considering the thoughts of the Obama administration on radio.
TV is not a right. But at the same time, you’ve got to look at how the digital TV switch came about. It is inevitable, sure, but that the government pulled the plug while the patient was still alive is troubling.
Karl,
The Obama administration likes radio just fine. They just don’t care much for some of the idiots being broadcast.
I have it from good sources that President Obama loves to listen to the morning news on WSVA, just to hear your reporting. ;o)
Popular legend remembers Nero playing the fiddle while Rome burned…sound familiar Lowell?
I know about Nero, but you’ll have to explain what you’re saying to me.
Never mind . . . without tele…never mind . . .
I think public television is a right, as is public radio. I think a PBS signal should be made to reach everyone in the USA.
>Locals say the only other detailed source of local news, weather and emergency broadcasts in the Bergton area is a radio station that doesn’t reach the region after dark and before sunrise.
Ironically that story was run on a local NPR station that puts a city-grade signal into Bergton.
A few points to bring up:
-The digital switch was lobbied for by the broadcast industry. Anyone within that industry bemoaning the strain on their budgets should be laughed at.
-The cable broadcast industry has repeatedly refused (though they were beaten in some cases) to allow their product to be viewed on satellite because they didn’t like competition. SO when they recommend that their previous viewers get their program through satellite so that they don’t have to up their transmission, laugh again.
-Again, this switch was lobbied for by cable because this digital transmission is far easier to produce and to CONTROL.
Renee, by your logic then so is owning a television and/or radio. Who gets to pay for everyone’s sets?
Those are not rights, they are privileges, to be earned by working for those items.
Frank, do you feel the same way about the USPS? :) Should the government be funding any initiatives that are only accessible to a subset of the population?
No, I didn’t mean owning, just having the signal available. So if you own a TV, you can at least tune in to PBS for free, or if you own a radio, I think you should be able to get an NPR signal no matter where you live.
Perhaps the argument could be framed that society is best served when citizens are informed about said society. Ergo access to basic news media is good for society.
My thoughts on the USPS, you want to use it, then pay for it. I prefer UPS although more but much more efficient. Swim or sink…
As for my thoughts about “basic news media” access…all depends on which side is pushing the news to market. I think we learned a lesson surrounding this past election coverage. I don’t think the people were fed both sides…as usual.
Nuff said.
Frank, that’s quite a can of worms/right propoganda. Some might say love it or leave it, not me though. I just like to poke fun.
I’d personally like to fund the news in a similar manner as we fund public education and for the same cause. Then again I might get called a socialist by someone who routinely praises the armed forces, police, firemen and the educators of our nation who are the ultimate expression of partial socialism.
Check out the Keith Olberman piece on detention centers being worse than Gitmo
msnbc.com
Sorry wrong feed