Doug Lung /
09.27.2012 08:57 AM
Concerns Rise Over TV Spectrum Incentive Auctions
There’s a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) for implementing an incentive auction of TV broadcast spectrum on the agenda for this Friday's Open Commission meeting, and broadcasters with no intention of selling spectrum will be analyzing the NPRM to see how the post-auction repacking could impact off-air audience service. 

Legislators will also be watching. Judy Chu, Chair of the Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus; Emanuel Cleaver, II, Chair of the Congressional Black Caucus; and Charles A. Gonzalez, Chair of the Hispanic Congressional Caucus, sent a letter to FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski expressing concern over the repacking.

The letter states: “Given the dependence that our communities place on broadcast television, including Class A and LPTV, maintaining a robust free and local broadcasting system must remain a priority for the FCC. As the FCC drafts rules to implement the incentive auctions and develops the technical plans for the repacking process, we implore the Commission to work with all interested parties to ensure a successful auction. To that end, a fully transparent process that allows interested businesses and consumer groups the opportunity to review and comment on all of the Commission's plans, before any irreversible decision has been made, is critically important.”

As I have explained in recent articles, there are inaccuracies in the way the FCC calculates coverage and interference using FCC Bulletin OET-65 procedures. This could result in lost real world coverage due to interference that's greater than what calculations predict. One of the reasons the DTV transition was so successful was that broadcasters and engineers had an opportunity to tweak the FCC's original Table of Allotments to improve coverage and to negotiate interference agreements with other broadcasters. A successful repacking will require more than giving broadcasters a new channel and forcing them to use new antenna patterns and coverage areas based on calculations with known errors that are not easily corrected. Broadcasters must have time to analyze the FCC's repacking plan and suggest changes. 


Post New Comment
If you are already a member, or would like to receive email alerts as new comments are
made, please login or register.

Enter the code shown above:

(Note: If you cannot read the numbers in the above
image, reload the page to generate a new one.)

Posted by: Anonymous
Mon, 10-01-2012 09:22 PM Report Comment
Too many channels have already been taken away from television use. We are a family that does not have pay TV and rely on our local stations. Already we sometimes can't get our local CW station on channel 31 because there is another channel 31 in the opposite direction that causes interference and blocks out our CW station. The pictures from stations using an antenna are so much better than that of the same stations on cable. We just returned from a year in a city where we were had no choice and had to use cable. I had forgotten how bad cable service is--and we had to pay for it. Please don't let the FCC take away more channels. It is bad enough now and will only get worse if more channels are removed.

Thursday 11:07 AM
The Best Deconstruction of a 4K Shoot You'll Ever Read
With higher resolutions and larger HD screens, wide shots using very wide lenses can be a problem because they allow viewers to see that infinity doesn’t quite resolve into perfect sharpness.

Featured Articles
Discover TV Technology