Digital Side Channels Conundrum

[Carmine5]

Today's addition of RBR did an article on the topic of digital side channels (both DTV and HD Radio) and made this observation:

"The sales hook for broadcasters has always been their ability to aggregate a large audience. If a broadcaster figured out today how to break even on a side channel, it would probably be at the expense of its flagship audience – obviously a net loss...neither (radio or DTV) should attempt to be niche-based cluster of programming services -- that is the m.o. of cable and satellite, and broadcasters should let them have it."

http://www.rbr.com/media-news/xm_sirius_slithers_along.html

So the dilemma on side channels is that a station runs the risk of diluting its audience and its main product with more offerings. Which goes back to what was suggested earlier that these side channels can probably be best put to use through an LMA allowing community or LPFM broadcasting.

Another option is to simply switch them off and focus on creating a stronger, better sounding main channel product while not "hissing" on their neighbors with interference due to having a more complex signal.

C5

 

[LinoNYC]

Today's addition of RBR did an article on the topic of digital side channels (both DTV and HD Radio) and made this observation:

"The sales hook for broadcasters has always been their ability to aggregate a large audience. If a broadcaster figured out today how to break even on a side channel, it would probably be at the expense of its flagship audience – obviously a net loss...neither (radio or DTV) should attempt to be niche-based cluster of programming services -- that is the m.o. of cable and satellite, and broadcasters should let them have it."

http://www.rbr.com/media-news/xm_sirius_slithers_along.html

So the dilemma on side channels is that a station runs the risk of diluting its audience and its main product with more offerings. Which goes back to what was suggested earlier that these side channels can probably be best put to use through an LMA allowing community or LPFM broadcasting.

Another option is to simply switch them off and focus on creating a stronger, better sounding main channel product while not "hissing" on their neighbors with interference due to having a more complex signal.

C5

This is one of those strawman arguments that gets made periodically.

Here in New York there is no duplication of of main vs. hd channels. None.

This reasoning is often a Trojan Horse argument against hd radio. If it is sincere, it stems from flawed, outdated and arrogant thinking that you can offer limited format options and people will be corralled into listening to "something".

Eight years ago it might have had some flicker of truth, today it's ridiculous.

Lino

 

[KB1OKL]

Today's addition of RBR did an article on the topic of digital side channels (both DTV and HD Radio) and made this observation:

"The sales hook for broadcasters has always been their ability to aggregate a large audience. If a broadcaster figured out today how to break even on a side channel, it would probably be at the expense of its flagship audience – obviously a net loss...neither (radio or DTV) should attempt to be niche-based cluster of programming services -- that is the m.o. of cable and satellite, and broadcasters should let them have it."

http://www.rbr.com/media-news/xm_sirius_slithers_along.html

So the dilemma on side channels is that a station runs the risk of diluting its audience and its main product with more offerings. Which goes back to what was suggested earlier that these side channels can probably be best put to use through an LMA allowing community or LPFM broadcasting.

Another option is to simply switch them off and focus on creating a stronger, better sounding main channel product while not "hissing" on their neighbors with interference due to having a more complex signal.

C5

This is one of those strawman arguments that gets made periodically.

Here in New York there is no duplication of of main vs. hd channels. None.

This reasoning is often a Trojan Horse argument against hd radio. If it is sincere, it stems from flawed, outdated and arrogant thinking that you can offer limited format options and people will be corralled into listening to "something".

Eight years ago it might have had some flicker of truth, today it's ridiculous.

Lino

Makes sense to me, how many variations of the three or four formats being used today can you put in the same market?

Oh I see,
Classic rock 1970-71.
Classic Rock 1971-72
Classic Rock 1972-73
The all Deep Purple Channel, Purple All The Time!
Classic Zep! Thud, thud Thud!
And then for the soft rockers:
Abba sings for you 24 hours a Day!
Barry Manilow warbles in the morning and in the night for all you romantics out there.

 

[Len14043]

This is one of those strawman arguments that gets made periodically.

Here in New York there is no duplication of of main vs. hd channels. None.

This reasoning is often a Trojan Horse argument against hd radio. If it is sincere, it stems from flawed, outdated and arrogant thinking that you can offer limited format options and people will be corralled into listening to "something".

Eight years ago it might have had some flicker of truth, today it's ridiculous.

Lino

Lino,
A station in Buffalo duplicates (at least it did a few months ago) the main channel with a 5-10 minute delay. This is neat because if you like a song, you can hear it again on the HD-2.

 

[Carmine5]

Yeah, this a real non-issue. A Trojan horse.

Digital side channels are making so much money for broadcasters and offering so much creative programming that KTLA-TV in L.A. ended up shutting their 2nd digital channel off and other stations have yet to start there secondary digital channels.

As for radio, The Infinite Dial reports this:

"One of HD-2's challenges seems just to be staying on the air."

Apparently, some stations are pulling the plug on their HD-2 channels or are broadcasting intermittently.

Digital side channels might one day make money and sense but now they are little more than a drain on a station's resources.

C5

 

[TheRover]

I, like others, do NOT currently like what is programmed musically on the "MAIN" radio channels....

So, by adding a "niche" HS side channel.... you DO pick up listenters, some form the "Main " Channels, and, some who were not listening at all, to the malaise on the Main Channels.....

Niche programming is what the Digital Age allows.....

Why can't you see that ?????

 

[KB1OKL]

This is one of those strawman arguments that gets made periodically.

Here in New York there is no duplication of of main vs. hd channels. None.

This reasoning is often a Trojan Horse argument against hd radio. If it is sincere, it stems from flawed, outdated and arrogant thinking that you can offer limited format options and people will be corralled into listening to "something".

Eight years ago it might have had some flicker of truth, today it's ridiculous.

Lino

Lino,
A station in Buffalo duplicates (at least it did a few months ago) the main channel with a 5-10 minute delay. This is neat because if you like a song, you can hear it again on the HD-2.

If they have a third channel can you hear it a third time 5-10 minutes later?

 

[Savage]

How about "The HD-2 and HD-3 Dropout Recovery Channels?"

If the HD craps out because of unreliable reception you can try again 5 minutes later!

They could be promoted as HD Second and Third Chance Channels!

 

[w9wi]

In many cases, DTV is using the side channels as a means to deliver a program to cable. If OTA viewers choose to watch it direct, so much the better. (though I know of at least one station that's using conditional access to provide their side channel *only* to the cable operators -- that way they don't have to run EAS or E/I programming)

At our station, the side channel is running Telemundo. I don't think it's siphoning much if any viewership off the main (NBC) channel. It seems to be selling pretty well too. (though I don't know what rates we're getting)

=========================================================

I do wonder about the financial model for HD Radio HD2 and HD3 channels. I would expect, given the choice of HD2/HD3 formats on most stations, they *do* siphon listenership from the main program -- and since the vast majority of HD2/HD3 stations are running commercial-free, that audience isn't being sold.

At what point do stations have to start trying to sell time on their HD2/HD3s? *Can* they sell time on HD2/HD3? (is there enough audience?) At what point does the cost of continuing to program the side channels (especially RIAA fees) force stations' hands?

Seems to me right now the only thing on commercial HD2/HD3 right now that makes economic sense are simulcasts of news/talk AM stations whose own signals don't penetrate buildings adequately.

 

[Carmine5]

In many cases, DTV is using the side channels as a means to deliver a program to cable. If OTA viewers choose to watch it direct, so much the better. (though I know of at least one station that's using conditional access to provide their side channel *only* to the cable operators -- that way they don't have to run EAS or E/I programming)

At our station, the side channel is running Telemundo. I don't think it's siphoning much if any viewership off the main (NBC) channel. It seems to be selling pretty well too. (though I don't know what rates we're getting)

=========================================================

I do wonder about the financial model for HD Radio HD2 and HD3 channels. I would expect, given the choice of HD2/HD3 formats on most stations, they *do* siphon listenership from the main program -- and since the vast majority of HD2/HD3 stations are running commercial-free, that audience isn't being sold.

At what point do stations have to start trying to sell time on their HD2/HD3s? *Can* they sell time on HD2/HD3? (is there enough audience?) At what point does the cost of continuing to program the side channels (especially RIAA fees) force stations' hands?

Seems to me right now the only thing on commercial HD2/HD3 right now that makes economic sense are simulcasts of news/talk AM stations whose own signals don't penetrate buildings adequately.

I watch HDTV by way of an antenna and I can tell you that in L.A. almost none of these side channels are being used. The few that are in use have either sat fed programming like Qubo (stuff that can't get on cable) or, in the case of KNBC, they're running a weather channel and raw news feed. In most cases none are airing commercials.

And as far as I know, cable operators and satellite providers like Direct TV are under no obligation to carry these digital side channels, just the primary one. Since most households have either one of these services, who would be watching these side channels, anyway?

In the past, both TV and radio whined that they were being beat out in the channel accumulation wars by satellite and cable. Now that they have a few extra channels they're at a loss as to what to do with them or how to monetize them.

I'm not saying that digital side channels are useless. They certainly can have a place in narrowcasting or niche programming or re-broadcasting another signal, like AM. But I feel that these channels should be leased to content providers not affiliated with the host station, and preferably local content providers. Same holds true for an AM station. Let these providers focus on programming the channel while the host station collects "rent". It's better than a station diluting its efforts with substandard or "throw away" programming, as has been happening.

As far as I know the gloves are off on selling time on HD2/3 channels. It can be done, but how many are listening right now? Maybe it can offered as part of a package along with the primary channel.

Of course, the problem with HD2/3 channels, as has been discussed, is their being too weak to penetrate buildings. That's partly what the 10 db increase is all about.

C5

 

[PhilJSmith67]

HD 1, 2, and 3 all have the same problem penetrating buildings, it's not just a phenomena unique to HD-2 and 3. However, HD-1 has the analog audio to fall back on, so instead of having occasional dropouts in a barely-receivable environment, the HD-1 channel will "drop out" to analog FM.

 

[w9wi]

And as far as I know, cable operators and satellite providers like Direct TV are under no obligation to carry these digital side channels, just the primary one. Since most households have either one of these services, who would be watching these side channels, anyway?

They aren't obligated by must-carry, but stations that elect for retransmission consent instead can (and often do) make carraige of side channels part of the deal. So they're obligated by private contract rather than by act of FCC or Congress.

Between Telemundo, WKRN's weather channel, and Doc on PBS 8-2, I think we have some worthwhile TV side channels here in Nashville.