Was that by any chance Salisbury or Albemarle? Per TVTV.info (which is not always accurate WRT OTA listings), WFMY is carried in Albemarle, and WGHP in Salisbury. They used to get all or almost all of the major Triad stations as well as Charlotte on their cable (verified in the 1979 TVFB for Salisbury, I wouldn't swear my life on Albemarle), in fact, Salisbury would make as much sense in the Triad market as in Charlotte, but a county can be in one and only one DMA, so they end up in the Charlotte market. And we all know how cable providers have trimmed back OOM stations in recent years.
-
Get involved.
We want your input!
Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.
After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.
After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/
Thanks in advance and have fun!
RadioDiscussions Administrators
NAB asks for ATSC 3.0 mandate by 2030
- Thread starter Mediafrog+
- Start date
Meanwhile proponents of 5G Broadcast continue to push the platform. Note they propose an option that would allow ATSC 3.0 and 5G Broadcast to be multiplexed on the same transmitter and signal:
www.lightreading.com
Castanet takes aim at 5G Broadcast
Castanet 5G intends to team with low-power TV stations on a national 5G Broadcast network that coexists with – rather than competes with – ATSC 3.0.
Yes.
Here's the latest update from Lon Seidman who, along with Tyler the Antenna Man, has been a key organizer in opposing the broadcasters' DRM scheme and other anti-consumer tactics:
Industry pushing cheap ATSC 3.0 converter boxes:
www.tvtechnology.com
NextGen TV at CES 2026: Pearl TV Focuses on Low-Cost 'Vanilla’ Converter Boxes
Broadcasters seek to mimic the success of the previous DTV converter box program to bring more affordable access to ATSC 3.0
www.tvtechnology.com
I can’t wait til AntennaMan or someone else on YouTube reviews these. The article mentions that the technology is rolled out in Mexico. @exbloguero, are there many stations in your area that use NextGen TV/ATSC 3.0?Industry pushing cheap ATSC 3.0 converter boxes:
NextGen TV at CES 2026: Pearl TV Focuses on Low-Cost 'Vanilla’ Converter Boxes
Broadcasters seek to mimic the success of the previous DTV converter box program to bring more affordable access to ATSC 3.0
These will almost certainly be single tuner boxes with no recording capabilities. The icing on the cake would be if they include a button to subscribe and pay for DRM'ed broadcasts from your remote. It must be a hoot to sit in on those industry board meetings.
Free is the only price I will payIndustry pushing cheap ATSC 3.0 converter boxes:
NextGen TV at CES 2026: Pearl TV Focuses on Low-Cost 'Vanilla’ Converter Boxes
Broadcasters seek to mimic the success of the previous DTV converter box program to bring more affordable access to ATSC 3.0
I want to be able to record. Not just want to, but have to. Two shows on at the same time, or not at a time I can watch.
If they ever start charging for OTA TV, I'll just watch streaming video, or else break on my very large collection of DVDs and, yes, VHS tapes. I've got enough of that stuff to last me a lifetime.
Lon Seidman's latest video.
Skip to 1:30. He's reporting that Comcast removed the broadcast retransmission fee entry from their rate cards immediately after he recommended that all his viewers download their respective regions' cards to see what their individual retransmission fees were.
Skip to 1:30. He's reporting that Comcast removed the broadcast retransmission fee entry from their rate cards immediately after he recommended that all his viewers download their respective regions' cards to see what their individual retransmission fees were.
I already get 99% of scheduled TV programming from streaming. The only thing I watch live is NCAAF and NHL. If the TV suits begin requiring subs for what is now OTA I will just go that remaining 1% online.
The pro-encryption side makes its argument:
www.tvtechnology.com
MPA Backs ATSC 3.0 Content Security Protections in FCC Comments
The major Hollywood studios said that NextGen TV's DRM features will protect its members' content from piracy
www.tvtechnology.com
Because everybody knows pirates are putting up antennas and recording TV programs in real-time, right?
The same specious argument was made against DAT, that its ability to make perfect digital copies of CDs would lead to rampant piracy. Apparently nobody thought that the need to copy and duplicate it in real-time would inherently place a significant restriction on it, versus bootleg LPs, of which hundreds of copies could be pressed in the time that it takes to copy one tape.
The same specious argument was made against DAT, that its ability to make perfect digital copies of CDs would lead to rampant piracy. Apparently nobody thought that the need to copy and duplicate it in real-time would inherently place a significant restriction on it, versus bootleg LPs, of which hundreds of copies could be pressed in the time that it takes to copy one tape.
The entertainment industry always frames their anti-consumer schemes as security measures. In practice, this one will enable paywalls, device authorization schemes, and restrictions on longstanding lawful consumer uses such as recording and time-shifting.
Since the party that currently controls the FCC always prioritizes the interests of big business and its cash-laden lobbyists over those of consumers or the public interest, it's inevitable that OTA TV is about to become a gate-kept service that no longer resembles broadcasting as we have known it.
The industry now makes so much money through carriage fees and subscriptions to their streaming apps, it's actually in their best interest to push viewers onto paid platforms and they won't mind at all if they lose OTA viewers to them. Blocking OTA reception, time-shifting and personal recording through encryption will be used as a means to that end.
Since the party that currently controls the FCC always prioritizes the interests of big business and its cash-laden lobbyists over those of consumers or the public interest, it's inevitable that OTA TV is about to become a gate-kept service that no longer resembles broadcasting as we have known it.
The industry now makes so much money through carriage fees and subscriptions to their streaming apps, it's actually in their best interest to push viewers onto paid platforms and they won't mind at all if they lose OTA viewers to them. Blocking OTA reception, time-shifting and personal recording through encryption will be used as a means to that end.
IMHO there should ban encryption on the "pubic" airways. Not to get political but it seems like everything the taxpayers "own" is for sale. If Hollywood doesn't want their stuff to be recorded, don't let the TV stations air their program or movie.
I am surprised the studios haven't figured out they can "sell" their stuff encrypted directly on the Internet and not have to split revenue with streaming service, cable company or TV operator unless they own that service or station.
I am surprised the studios haven't figured out they can "sell" their stuff encrypted directly on the Internet and not have to split revenue with streaming service, cable company or TV operator unless they own that service or station.
I'm sure you mean to say "public".
Correct. Sorry ..I was texting at the airport and the Wi-Fi was going in and out at terminal D.
I know this sounds weird but I once had a "Microsoft" cellphone, paid for by my employer, and if you can use the MS office suite it was a breeze. I know some folks hate Bill Gates and Microsoft but I never had to check post. Maybe my mind works like MS Word. When someone finally buys WB Discovery I might have enough money to splurge on an Apple phone.
I know this sounds weird but I once had a "Microsoft" cellphone, paid for by my employer, and if you can use the MS office suite it was a breeze. I know some folks hate Bill Gates and Microsoft but I never had to check post. Maybe my mind works like MS Word. When someone finally buys WB Discovery I might have enough money to splurge on an Apple phone.
Are you talking about the Windows Phone? Never owned one, but when I explored them at the Microsoft store they were intuitive and easy to figure out. Unfortunately their App Store offerings were paltry, which helped kill the platform. The Windows Phone’s close relationship with the much hated Windows 8 OS didn’t help, either.
