Bahahaha "free TV" going away eh?

[TwixVoy]

This message is not addressed to anyone in particular. Just want to share an observation....

I have to say now that the digital TV conversion is nearing reading articles and posts from ignorant people across the net worried that "free TV" is going away makes me laugh out loud. Like this is some kind of government/corporate plan to make it hard for them to watch TV.

What amazes me is the simple fact these fools don't realize "free TV" will NEVER go away. The corporations and other powers that be simply love it. It is the modern opiate of the masses. It is what keeps the low wage worker happy at the end of the day after being screwed over yet again by his mega corporation that he works for. It is what keeps people in their home instead of out on the streets protesting the past 8 years. It is what feeds the masses the information the corporations want them to believe.

No my little minions don't worry your teevee isn't going away any time soon. Fuck, the government is even willing to hand out millions of dollars to you fools to enable you to buy your little converter to continue to watch. Is the government willing to hand out millions of dollars to help you pay for health care? Bahahahaha! Nope. Trust me the government has a great interest in making sure you get your regular dose of TV. You have nothing to worry about.

[blues90]

1. Why do you call these people fools?

It almost sounds like they are fools to not have cable rather than the rabbit ears. Even if that's not your intent it comes off that way . Why should anyone trust the corporate industry anyway. Look how cable began and what it's become since the beginning of the 80's . it used to be affordable and had enough choices and now you might have 1,000 stations sold in packages and even basic is in different packages and there is not one thing on and old crap repeated over and over . They used to play movies back to back now it's jambed full of crap in between.

So you now pay more and get actually less.

So why should people trust anything when everything becomes a con and then a lie.

The fool is the one who pays through their ass for some cable service and then sits there watching nothing other than a steady flow of propaganda none sense being told how and what to think , what to wear and what to drive and what fucking new pill will change your entire life into a clone.

[conscious evolution]

22. Lobotomized is a better term

Because that is what TV does to viewers.

KILL YOUR TV!!!!!!!!!!

[blues90]

35. yes an electronic lobotomy

I refer to the movie Network which is like the book 1984 which tells what happens and even though it's right out there in plain view and simple language as a warning, people ignore it and classify it as normal.

[BuelahWitch]

2. Alot of older people have a hard time with the converters

Our local cable company gave away tons of free converters to customers in 2007. We were swamped with calls from people who didn't know how to work them, or who would use their old TV remote instead of the one that came with the converter and mess everything up.
The sad thing is, some of these people are shut ins. TV is all they have. I don't have TV right now b/c I can't afford cable, but I can't make fun of these people who don't want the switch just because it doesn't affect me.
Empathy is a good thing. You should try it sometime.

[lonestarnot]

3. Ahhhh gawd...

your post made me :cry: I feel so bad for people whose only entertainment is being shut in watching TV with no one to take them any place, perhaps not feeling like going any place even if there was someone there to take them. Books are a good thing. :)

[BuelahWitch]

11. My mother was that way

I couldn't understand why she could just watch any crap on TV, but she wouldn't read books or magazines at all in her later years. Could have been her eyesight, or that TV was just and easier, more passive entertainment.

[Fire1]

33. In this economy ALOT of people are 'shut in' and not by choice.

Yes, books are a good thing, especially in stirring the imagination but I also want to know what's going on in the minds of others in this world, not just the authors of one particular medium. The combination of sources allows one to make 'informed' decisions and philosophies. So, yes, I want to SEE the kind of propaganda that the government and industries are pushing.

[justgamma]

15. Don't get me started on the "boxes"

My husband is visually impaired. He can't see the buttons on the remote. I finally found an easy to use one with big buttons that he can feel his way around on. Well, they just "upgraded" our cable and we must now have a special remote. 30 pages of instructions and 45 buttons is a little bit much.
He's scared to death to touch it, because if he accidently hits the wrong button, there he'll sit all day with nothing to listen to.
I love the different channels, but I feel for him, when I'm away.

[kiva]

40. My sympathy for your husband.

My mother--who did like her 'stories'--went for four days without TV because she accidentally turned on the VCR and couldn't get her TV remote to work. I stopped by and 'fixed' it for her, but she would never use the VCR again unless I or one of my brothers was visiting. I have an enormous amount of sympathy for people who are struggling to adapt to technology they don't feel comfortable with, and wish there were better ways to help.

[Mind_your_head]

4. I think this particular episode of Star Trek - TNG wasn't just "making stuff up" - it held a message

Image from Star Trek: The Next Generation episode, The Game © 1991 Paramount Pictures, produced by Gene Roddenberry.

<snip>
The episode opens with William Riker visiting Risa and being introduced to a video game...Cadet Wesley Crusher, on vacation from Starfleet Academy, is visiting the Enterprise and notices everyone playing the game (and trying to convince him to play as well)...it addicts people who play it by stimulating the pleasure centers of their brains when they successfully complete each level...Wesley reports to Captain Jean-Luc Picard his suspicions that the game is dangerous. However, Picard is shown (to the audience) afterwards to already be addicted....At the conclusion of the episode,...The crew is then able to discern the purpose of the game: It rendered them extremely susceptible to the power of suggestion, compelling them to aid the games' creators—the Ktarians—in an attempt to take control of the Enterprise (and eventually the Federation).
<snip>

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Game_(TNG_episode)

[Kat45]

12. I remember that episode very well.

It was a good one--quite interesting.

[Deja Q]

20. Ah, yes - wonderbrat Wesley was the one who saved the day _yet again_.

It's okay to tell a moral. But the plot doesn't need to be so bloody trite and two-dimensional to being with!!

Granted, that episode was from season 5. Looking back, season 5 was not one of TNG's highlights... :D (I'm a fan of TNG, but seasons 5 and 6 were by and large grating pablum... often flawed pablum, rendering many of the told "morals" moot.)

[Name removed]

5. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[TwixVoy]

8. Empathy for what?

Allowing mega corporations to dumb down society by making sure everyone gets a regular dose of TV?

NO TV = BETTER SOCIETY.

[Javaman]

10. man, you will never get it, if I have to explain it. I feel sorry for you. nt

[conscious evolution]

24. He gets it.

Someone else needs an explanation.

[Deja Q]

26. Then why not provide the explanation, if you think it is necessary?

[4lbs]

13. Depends on the channels being watched.

If all a person does is watch the 4 major networks, then yeah, I could agree that they might be better served turning off the tube and reading a book.

However, if a person has access to cable TV, then it might do a person good to watch programs on Science Channel, Discovery Channel, National Geographic Channel, Planet Green Channel, Public Broadcasting Channel, and History Channel.

Here in San Diego, our local cable provider also gives, "free" UCSD channel, which airs programs recorded from lectures from classes taught by University of California, San Diego.

Then there is something called ITV, C-SPAN, and C-SPAN2.

EDIT:

Oh by the way, you need to read up on your US History somewhat. The Vietnam War became unpopular very quickly when US citizens saw the horrors of war in their living rooms on television.

Without television, the Vietnam War likely would have lasted years longer.

[Deja Q]

27. Seconded; re: other channels (especially the History and Discovery channels)

Mind you, if they're doing the "reality show" shtick that even the likes of, get this, the "Sci-Fi" channel has done, then it's no longer worth the cost...

[Deja Q]

23. I call "bull" to that.

TV can be used to educate.

TV can be used to tell complex stories.

"Adult" programming doesn't have to be about excessive sex and violence. It can be about complex storylines kids would not be able to work out.

Television that is intellectual or at the very least creative and requiring at least one functioning brain cell is pawned off as being nerdy*, geeky*, or whatever*.

Instead, we get this:

Audiences prefer soap opera, campy drivel, doom and gloom fodder, and/or incoherent toddler scribble. The new "Doctor Who" (BBC Wales, 2005) is a prime example of being dumbed down and dumbing people down. The much vaunted "Battlestar Galactica" (Sci-Fi, 2003?) lost me when the President of Kobol was watching her world get blown to bits by nuclear weapons... and would rather tell her subordinate she has breast cancer, complete with drowning maudlin incidental music to ram home that "Let's make the audience cry for her rather than the situation and finding a way out of it.

All forms of technology are just that. It's the use of the technology that matters.

Lastly, the nerdy and geeky in society are often cast out by others in their age group. If people want a "better society", let's talk about the core problems first. TV is merely tangential.



* "Firefly", "Futurama" (despite being a cartoon), and even the original pilot for "Star Trek" (1964, NBC) were rejected outright or canceled because nobody wanted to watch them. "Futurama" wasn't "Family Guy" and was creative within its context. "Star Trek" got re-worked and still failed. And "Firefly" simply didn't have a chance with mainstream audiences, and niche programming is an apparent sin according to the suits; who can't fathom how a smaller and more loyal audience WILL be there for the long haul and therefore are inevitably going to be more profitable than appealing to the fickle masses that, when their ADHD kicks in, will find the latest song and dance and not be bothered with the fed they're leaving...

[smalll]

6. Wait for it. The end result of the digital takeover WILL be the end of free TV.

It's already been made clear that digital free TV is far more limited than analog was. If you're more than a few miles from the transmitters with digital, you're up a creek.

I grant you that the powers that be like to have Mr. and Mrs. America sucking up to the boob tube. But Mr. and Mrs. America are so addicted by now that most of them are willing to pay an arm and a leg to get it: digital TV is the thin end of the wedge to force us remaining why-do-we-hate-America free-TV deadbeats to start paying for it.

Look how addicted most people are right now: Oohh!! HDTV!!! I can see all the zits on my pornstars!!!

Ooh!!! Big screen!!!

Ooh!!! HBO! Convicts, gangsters and whores! Violence and cuss-words! But somehow, it's today's highbrow! (Or so at least the New York Times tells me.)

... and Ooh!! Cable! "The History Channel" (Which has devolved into Hitler nostalgia and/or Ice Road Truckers) -- "The Learning Channel" (Which has devolved into "What Not To Wear," "Picking Up MILFs at the Supermarket and Teaching Them How To Cook" "Watching Random Chicks Have Babies" and "That Asian/Caucasian Couple In The Suburbs With Their Eight Kids." AND AFTER THE FIRST YEAR, EVERYONE'S WILLING TO PAY $100 A MONTH TO GET IT (not including HBO of course -- for that, you have to pay extra.)

---

Once the changeover happens, and more and more deadbeats (non-cable subscribers) who don't live right under the transmission towers lose their TV, and a lot of them finally give in to paying for TV, it won't be long at all before the TV stations/networks will announce that it's "no longer economical" to send out free-TV over the air -- after all, there's so few people who still take it that way, and most of them are poor and/or old -- not exactly a prime advertising demographic.

And we'll all be forced (even if we just want to watch the occasional McNeil/Lehrer, Antiques Roadshow, The Office or Thirty Rock, and have no interest in the hot-young-doctor/lawyers-boinking-each-other blockbusters) to start paying for TV.

[scarletwoman]

9. Spot on! This whole thing really pisses me off. I live in the boonies, there's no cell phone signal

out here. I'm debating whether it's worth it to spring for a converter box, only to find out that I won't be able to pick up the digital signal anyway.

I like watching the local news and weather, and Bill Moyers on PBS, but I refuse to get a satellite dish and pay for a bunch of channels I would never watch in a million years.

I've lived TV-free for many years at a time in the past, I guess I'll just get used to doing it again.

This whole changeover strikes me as utterly bogus -- it's only happening because someone wants to make more money, and our ever-compliant-to-corporate-desires government is going along with it.

sw

[onenote]

14. i love it when people who don't know what they're talking about post

Its so entertaining. A little grain of truth used to misinform and distort.

So let's consider. The little grain of truth: yes, in a number of instances, the reach of a digital signal will not be as great, or will cover a somewhat different area than, the current utanalog signal. But there also will be more instances in which a station will reach more viewers with its digital signal than with its analog signal. Don't believe me? You can look at the side by side maps yourself. http://www.fcc.gov/dtv/markets/
Thus, is it true that digital signal only work if you are within "a few miles" of the transmitter? Not unless you define a few as around 30 or more miles in most instances, sometimes more. It should be noted further that many broadcasters will not start broadcasting their digital signal in full power until the actual transition occurs -- so that a signal that isn't available today, may in fact be available after the transition. There will be drop offs, but the situation is nowhere near as you suggest.

Also, free over the air television post transition will offer more viewing choices than before. THis is because most broadcasters will offer more than one stream of programming over the same 6 MHz of spectrum that previously was used to deliver a single channel. Its not clear exactly what these new programming channels will contain -- broadcasters are experimenting with time shifting, foreign language programming, additional news, weather, public affairs programming, or simply more entertainment programming.

And while I happen to be one of those people who pay more than $100 for my cable service, that includes a HD DVR, a non HD digital box, optional tiers of movies and sports, and high speed internet. If I so choose, I could downgrade to a more limited service that would give me more than two dozen channels, including all of my local commercial and noncommercial broadcast stations, many of them in HD and standard definition, CSPAN I and CSPAN II, Superstation TBS and WGN from Chicago, and various public,educational and government access channels, together with HBO in HD, for between $50 and $60 dollars, depending on whether I was connnected to my new digital cable ready tv or to an older HD set.

Frankly, the day may come when over the air broadcasting makes no more sense, just as the day is approaching when wireline telephone service may be a thing of the past. Things change. You may long for the days of yore when you could watch quality tv shows like Dukes of Hazzard and Hee Haw on your nineteen inch black and white portable set. But I have a feeling you're part of dwindling minority that feels that way.

[Mind_your_head]

16. I love it when people don't know what they are talking about......

take your screed, for example.

There are MANY millions of people in the united states who don't care whether they have access to tv or not. It's OBVIOUS by the numbers.

People have lived "just fine" without tv for, oh....years, tens of years, THOUSANDS OF YEARS without teevee! I think those w/o a 'box' will survive (maybe even better *heh*) without teevee.

Sorry that that may 'go against your business plan'. (Actually, I have "no sorrow" at all for you!) :P

edit: I added "for you" in the last line. See here (in bold): I have "no sorrow" at all FOR YOU

[onenote]

17. so do you beieve you have to live under a tv tower to get a digital signal

Or do you believe that was misinformation?

[dweller]

7. thank you for your message that keeps the masses ignorant

you forgot your logo





dp

[KharmaTrain]

18. People Actually Will Get MORE Free TeeVee

The Government has, as was par for the course during the boooosh regime, screwed up this transition...one that was laid out 10 years ago and could have gone a lot smoother. They didn't put pressure on manufacturers to include digital tuners in all model and then tried to push for cheap converter boxes that don't perform well...especially with the under-power digital signals that are currently on the air.

In many ways, I see this as another Y2K...lots of rumors and misinformation, but in the end, it will mean little. Those who want/need teevee will have it...and, as you state, it's too much of a goldmine for the large corporations.

The people who are getting screwed (and there's a thread around here about this topic) are "low-end" cable users who are being pushed toward expensive digital cable packages to see what they used to enjoy. If there's anyone banking on this digital mess to continue, it's these people.

Cheers...

[TheMightyFavog]

29. Yeah, here I got...

Two more channels from the local ABC affiliate, a 24-hour local weather channel, and a TV show featuring Old school shows like Emergency!, Dragnet, Ironside, etc, and two more PBS stations, one clled the Wisconsin channel, and one that has kids programming during the day, and cookiing, craft, and building shows on evenings and weekends.

[KharmaTrain]

31. Sounds Like You Get Me-TV...

My elderly mother-in-law never wanted cable...and lived with a very fuzzy picture for years. We offered to buy her cable and she always refused. I put in a digital box for her and she's been enjoying it...not only doubling the number of channels she gets but also eliminating all the snow and ghosts on the screen.

Her favorites are Me-TV...old school shows. We have two of those channels here as well as a 24-hour old movie channel. The bonanza for broadcasters with DTV is that they can run several channels...and with more people able to see it, I expect more diversity on these channels.

Cheers...

[TheMightyFavog]

32. No, it's called Retro Television Network or something like that.

End of Line.

[Deja Q]

19. If that were true, quality TV sets would cost $300. Not $1000.

;)

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

21. They will be $300 in a couple of years. It seems that one thing that has gone down in price

with bells and whistles going up are tvs. Back in 1969 I bought a 13" color tv for $300. 30 years later, I bought a 36" tv with a stand for $300.

The lcd big screen tvs are now $1000 but a few years ago were $15,000. If history of tv prices hold true, the ones that are now $1000 will go down a whole bunch in price too.

[Deja Q]

25. I hope so...

Right now, a Sony 40" set that equals the color and shadow gamut of a CRT TV set is $2000. So it can't be too far long...

[onenote]

28. 26 inch LCD for $330 in today's paper

The prices have come down quite a bit already and will continue to do so. They'll plateau, but there already are new, digital ready, HD (maybe not the highest level of HD, but still enhanced) sets in smaller sizes (less than 30 inches) available for between $300 and $400 dollars. In fact I also saw an ad today for a 32 inch LCD set for $378. There aren't going to be HD sets (even small screens) available for under $200 for a while, but eventually they'll get there.

[Bluenorthwest]

30. While the OP hates culture and artistic expression

when it is available to the elderly, the poor and those who do not live within a 'hipness' parameter of a major city, I think it is wonderful that people in Iowa can see events at Lincoln Center at home and for nothing. I rejoice that our nation could share in history as we watched President Obama take the oath, the OP would prefer if the news came to non Beltway denizens via telegraph or rumor, I guess.
How awful that vile poor folks who can not even afford a ticket to China get to see Olympic events. And the idea that the rabble gets to see the World Series, without paying for it, well, how vulgar is that?
The elitist crap out of the OP is disgusting. Reminds me of an old TV hating pal back in the 80. Always made me turn it off, acted as if TV were a poison gas...then one day I refused to turn it off...for it was time for ' In Living Color' which I loved. My pal freaked the fuck out in a very embarssing way. Homey the Clown blew his mind. He said, and I quote, "when did they integrate television?" as Homey said 'Homey don't play that." When did they integrate TV?
And it went on like that. He thought it was as he last saw it in the early 60's. Expected twin beds, all whites, cigarette commercials. I switched to some pay channel with Apocolypse Now- he had never seen it, he sat mesmerized waiting for commercials that did not come, and enjoyed one of the great films of his time.
Just saying.

The OP thinks that those who can not attend Lincoln Center should not get to see Tosca. Only those who live in or can visit Manhattan, pay hundreds for a ticket (last time I looked, it cost about $50 just to park your car there) and are young and healthy enough to get there,should get to enjoy any cultural or artistic events. Only the rich and strong should have acess to culture, only the Urban dwellers, only the elite of the elite.
Really an arrogant and shortsighted posting. To the OP, I say this: One can attend a great library and leave with Jackie Collins as well, then say "books suck" because one sucked. I heard a Briney Speares CD and decided that all recorded music is vile. I am now against CDs and sound systems. I went to the 'cinema' and it was all car chases and such, so obviously all films are empty and vulgar, worthless and should be ended, today. I mean if one movie is 'Hitman' they all are, and 'To Kill a Mockingbird' should be eradicated as the mind numbing fluff that it is, because it is the same medium as Hitman.
All that time away from TV, you'd think you'd have some time to open your mind in someway. Think about it. Go visit some shut ins.
How often to you read outloud to those with vision impairments? How many times in a week are you there for them?

[Vanje]

41. Like Bluenorthwest said! (edited to add.......

......Mean People Suck!

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

34. We bow to your rhetoric of superiority

and are humbled by being called fools and minions.

Bluster is the opiate of the incompetent.

:hi:

[rvablue]

36. BEST.POST.OF.THE.DAY! Thank you!

And I bet you watch TV?

Just proves the OP wrong. You are much more eloquent than he.

Maybe he should relax and watch a little TV. Might help with his bad case of pendanticism.

[Gidney N Cloyd]

37. RE the "millions of dollars" for the converters... the gov't is MAKING BILLIONS auctioning >>

>> off the analog bandwidth. I think there'd be hell to pay if they didn't kick a little of that back to us to help offset the digital conversion since they're our damned airwaves to begin with.

[Robb]

38. TV has never been free.

You pay for it. With the spare time generations of labor activists fought for you to have.

Your time.

You watch an entertaining program, and are hit with commercials. On your time.

You watch the news, and are hit with more commercials. On your time.

Product placements. Your time.

You are trading your most precious resource -- time away from the work you do to keep bread on the table -- for the entertainment value of people dancing on a screen. You're not spending time with your family. You're not enriching yourself intellectually. You're not learning, at least not at the rate you deserve. You're not building your own wealth.

You're trading your time -- what's it worth? -- to watch commercials. Don't even get me started on product placement.

Doesn't sound like such a good deal in those terms, eh?

[Vanje]

39. Free TV is not going away for you.....but it is for me.

The 60 buck conversion box and the roof antennae (necessary far from town, as I am), and its installation costs, mean I'm not going to be getting any free TV for a while . I just dont have the extra cash around to keep up with the technology. Free TV will have left me behind.
I 'll miss some of my shows, but look forward to catching up on my reading.