They swung the axe at New Jersey Network....Radio & Television

[TheBigA]

The bill abolishes the New Jersey Public Broadcasting Authority and the New Jersey Network Foundation.

Only one problem, as the article continues:

The foundation, however, is a private non-profit corporation that is not subject to dissolution by the government.

Doug Eakeley, former chairman of the foundation, said the provision to dissolve the foundation comes from a misunderstanding.

It derives from a mistaken view that the foundation is somehow the child of the authority, and if you eliminate the authority you have to dissolve the foundation," Eakeley said. "I don’t think anyone has it in for the foundation. Everyone, including the union, appreciates the fact that you have a cross section of the business and civic communities that has for years supported the network. I don’t think you want to lose that resource."

So the Foundation will remain. Why not simply transfer ownership to the Foundation? That's what the City of New York did with WNYC. If that happened, at least ownership would remain in NJ!

 

[nd2023]

Someone should buy WNJO and bring back the oldies to the station with those legendary call letters.

 

[VeteranPD]

How many more outlets for "Antiques Road Show" do we need? As a guy who came from the era of transmitters and towers, I am sad to see these transmission mediums fading to black and DTV is a failure. Analog TV wasn't broken and considering the few who still watch OTA why bother. Still it saddens me.What a "bill of goods" DTV turned out to be and a colossal waste of money.

As far as the future of NJN..I'm sorry so many will be jobless, but NJN has gobbled up fm frequencies like Pac Man and that had to stop. Outside of their evening news and election coverage, it is nothing more than a tap into the PBS pipeline. I have cable, like 95% of everyone else so I already have PBS on WNET and WLIW ...and NJN...enough already.

As far as dividing it between WNET, WHYY and WNYC..those monsters are already big enough. I would hope that these stations would try to go commercial. Granted that would be difficult in this booming ecconomy but there is plenty of programming out there for indies.

If all else fails, let them go dark...Few viewers will even notice. Hopefully policticians will stay out of this process. Politicians can only screw it up. As far as the FCC goes...again...stay out of it. Just approve the sale (if there is one) or takes the tickets back in a year. I agree that the FCC has a death wish for OTA tv so they can sell off even more frequencies.

 

[MickeyD]

No plans by whom? The FCC has plans for it and whomever owns it will cash in on it. I wouldn't think that the NJ legislature would even have this on their radar.

How do you know?

I don't want to pay for it anymore. If it can't stand alone then it is time for it to go away. It is time for the state to live within it's means.

The amount of money this will save won't even pay for the bottled water budget in the state house. Just because YOU don't like something doesn't mean everyone has to agree. You can't pick and choose where your tax money goes.

How do I know? The question should be why don't you know? I will make sure they know I plan to the Governor's office he is easier to reach than you think. If they pulled the plug on NJN nobody would notice BUT you.

 

[TheBigA]

How do I know? The question should be why don't you know?

Huh?

 

[TheBigA]

NJN has gobbled up fm frequencies like Pac Man and that had to stop.

They have a total of 9 FM frequencies, most of which are in low population areas of south Jersey, and most are low power. They got them because no one else wanted them. Their radio operation is a waste. One would think WBGO, as New Jersey's other large public operation, would want them. But they would cost more to run than they'd bring in. And WBGO knows its main audience is east of Newark, not south.

As far as dividing it between WNET, WHYY and WNYC..those monsters are already big enough.

Unfortunately, only the monsters have the money to subsidize the system. We live in a world where we all say we want more mom & pops, but the majority actually use the big boxes. That applies to food, shopping, and media.

We all want to tell others what to do, but no one wants to take the responsibility themselves. So when these stations go away, we'll all complain about the lack of Jersey-centric media. But no one stepped up to the plate when the opportunity was there.

 

[bigtom101]

Someone should buy WNJO and bring back the oldies to the station with those legendary call letters.

http://www.wnjofm.com

 

[ontheair247]

As far as I'm concerned, over the air is the ONLY proper method to distribute and watch television. It's the foundation of all broadcasting.

 

[MickeyD]

As far as I'm concerned, over the air is the ONLY proper method to distribute and watch television. It's the foundation of all broadcasting.

I would agree with the old analog system but not with ATSC (new and improved or not). The problems with transmission were well known and could have been corrected years ago but the decision was political rather than technical to keep this dog.

Most people don't watch TV OTA anymore it is just too much work.

 

[w9wi]

Most people don't watch TV OTA anymore it is just too much work.

Our station (admittedly not non-commercial and not in NJ) is finding an *increase* in OTA viewership. For most people it works; with the poor economy, it's difficult for many people to justify $400/year (or more) for cable; and there are far more OTA program choices than there were with analog.

No, it doesn't work for *everyone*, but it is working for an increasing number of viewers.

 

[TheBigA]

Back to the original topic:

http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2010/11/ny_philadelphia_public_broadca.html



The thing I read here is the state wants all of the advantages of ownership without paying for them. Wouldn't we all? The key sentence:

"The Governor is committed to facilitating a transition of NJN to an entity that will carry on a Jersey-centric broadcast mission without taxpayer subsidy."

That's not always possible. The example I gave earlier of WBGO, which is NJ's primary CPB-qualified radio station, is seeking to move its transmitter and antenna to New York City. Why? That's where most of its members live.

Back in the 80s, there was a big battle about Channel 9. The state wanted the station to become NJ's only commercial VHF. (the other one, Channel 13, is non-commercial). So they fought the big fight, and the station's license was re-assigned to Secaucus. How much Jersey-centric programming do you see on Channel 9?

Let's say they retain the licenses, but turn over operation to someone else. In that case, the state will need some type of agency that monitors and oversees the operation. So it will still cost taxpayers money.

 

[MickeyD]

Most people don't watch TV OTA anymore it is just too much work.

Our station (admittedly not non-commercial and not in NJ) is finding an *increase* in OTA viewership. For most people it works; with the poor economy, it's difficult for many people to justify $400/year (or more) for cable; and there are far more OTA program choices than there were with analog.

No, it doesn't work for *everyone*, but it is working for an increasing number of viewers.

Define "more". Who is going to put up a outside antenna to receive ATSC? I have a condo in northern NJ that is line-of- site with
Empire and I have a hard time receiving it. It just isn't worth the effort or the power used to generate it anymore and I am a TV guy.

 

[hubcity]

Most people don't watch TV OTA anymore it is just too much work.

Our station (admittedly not non-commercial and not in NJ) is finding an *increase* in OTA viewership. For most people it works; with the poor economy, it's difficult for many people to justify $400/year (or more) for cable; and there are far more OTA program choices than there were with analog.

No, it doesn't work for *everyone*, but it is working for an increasing number of viewers.

Define "more". Who is going to put up a outside antenna to receive ATSC? I have a condo in northern NJ that is line-of- site with
Empire and I have a hard time receiving it. It just isn't worth the effort or the power used to generate it anymore and I am a TV guy.

Simply counting the stations that used to be in the VHF range in NYC (2, 4, 5, 7, 9, 11, 13) there were once only seven programming choices, and now there are 15 (not counting 5 and 9's SD simulcasts.) I'd call that "more".

And as far as being worth the effort, you're arguing in favor of making broadcast TV a pay-only service. I think anything that avoids that is worth the effort.

I'm strongly considering putting up an outside antenna in anticipation of the next rights battle between Cablevision and one of the broadcast channels. After getting WNYW clearly during the latest debacle, I'm that much closer to cutting the cable.

 

[MickeyD]

Most people don't watch TV OTA anymore it is just too much work.

Our station (admittedly not non-commercial and not in NJ) is finding an *increase* in OTA viewership. For most people it works; with the poor economy, it's difficult for many people to justify $400/year (or more) for cable; and there are far more OTA program choices than there were with analog

No, it doesn't work for *everyone*, but it is working for an increasing number of viewers.

Define "more". Who is going to put up a outside antenna to receive ATSC? I have a condo in northern NJ that is line-of- site with
Empire and I have a hard time receiving it. It just isn't worth the effort or the power used to generate it anymore and I am a TV guy.

Simply counting the stations that used to be in the VHF range in NYC (2, 4, 5, 7, 9, 11, 13) there were once only seven programming choices, and now there are 15 (not counting 5 and 9's SD simulcasts.) I'd call that "more".

And as far as being worth the effort, you're arguing in favor of making broadcast TV a pay-only service. I think anything that avoids that is worth the effort.

I'm strongly considering putting up an outside antenna in anticipation of the next rights battle between Cablevision and one of the broadcast channels. After getting WNYW clearly during the latest debacle, I'm that much closer to cutting the cable.

I have always believed that content is king and I have seen what is on the other channels and most of it is delayed versions of the station's regular programming or my favorite, channel 25's traffic cams. I have an antenna and cable, and if you can get it to lock up, the digital feed OTA is better, but it is still too unstable for me. This isn't the 50's and most people aren't into putting an antenna on the roof except maybe tech people. They chose the wrong system for transmission and if the FCC gets it's wish OTA TV will be on cable.

 

[hubcity]

Quoted for contrast:

This isn't the 50's and most people aren't into putting an antenna on the roof except maybe tech people.

..versus the prior statement...

Our station (admittedly not non-commercial and not in NJ) is finding an *increase* in OTA viewership.

One of these statements holds more water. I'm thinking it's the latter.

Now for some apocrypha - during the Fox/Cablevision dispute, the whole family settled down to watch Glee OTA. My wife had thought she'd be squinting at a snowy picture and was shocked that she wasn't - she equated "snowy picture" with "antenna." Now she wants an antenna, because she sees us potentially knocking down our cable fees (and if it weren't for the kids and their reliance on Nick/Disney, we'd do it.)

We also booked into a restaurant in NYC based on the blurb on New York Non Stop (WNBC 4.2). That's carried by Cablevision, but we saw it over the air. Since we like escaping to the city on occasion, we like to catch NY Non Stop for a tip or two. Actual VHF reception's a bit trickier, but when I can, I try to catch ThisTV, and I'm looking forward to AntennaTV, both via WPIX. I'm definitely seeing more value in the NYC TV broadcast spectrum than I used to in the 70's.

When an antenna rates high on the WAF (Wife Appreciation Factor) scale, it might be a good idea to pay attention. Granted she needed a "tech person" to show her, but there I was, and here we are.

 

[MickeyD]

Quoted for contrast:

This isn't the 50's and most people aren't into putting an antenna on the roof except maybe tech people.

..versus the prior statement...

Our station (admittedly not non-commercial and not in NJ) is finding an *increase* in OTA viewership.

One of these statements holds more water. I'm thinking it's the latter.

Now for some apocrypha - during the Fox/Cablevision dispute, the whole family settled down to watch Glee OTA. My wife had thought she'd be squinting at a snowy picture and was shocked that she wasn't - she equated "snowy picture" with "antenna." Now she wants an antenna, because she sees us potentially knocking down our cable fees (and if it weren't for the kids and their reliance on Nick/Disney, we'd do it.)

We also booked into a restaurant in NYC based on the blurb on New York Non Stop (WNBC 4.2). That's carried by Cablevision, but we saw it over the air. Since we like escaping to the city on occasion, we like to catch NY Non Stop for a tip or two. Actual VHF reception's a bit trickier, but when I can, I try to catch ThisTV, and I'm looking forward to AntennaTV, both via WPIX. I'm definitely seeing more value in the NYC TV broadcast spectrum than I used to in the 70's.

When an antenna rates high on the WAF (Wife Appreciation Factor) scale, it might be a good idea to pay attention. Granted she needed a "tech person" to show her, but there I was, and here we are.

Interesting vote by the FCC today. They initiated an NPRM so we will have to see how well it is received.
They are going to experiment with OFDM on the OTA signals, and double up on stations so they will be sharing channels. The fun has just begun.

Your average person isn't or cannot erect an outside antenna. Anyplace that is deed restricted WIll allow satelliet dishes but no other antennas of any kind.

http://www.rbr.com/tv-cable/fcc-opens-proceeding-on-television-spectrum.html

 

[w9wi]

Your average person isn't or cannot erect an outside antenna. Anyplace that is deed restricted WIll allow satelliet dishes but no other antennas of any kind.

FWIW such restrictions are not valid, http://www.fcc.gov/mb/facts/otard.html

A landlord or HOA cannot prohibit you from installing a TV antenna in any area under your exclusive use or control. (patio, etc.)

That said, you could certainly suffer a fair amount of "neighbor trouble" if you insist on exercising your legal rights...

In many places, an antenna in the attic will work fine.

I think probably the biggest impediment to the greater use of OTA reception is the difficulty in finding someone who'll sell you a decent antenna. Unfortunately, most consumers believe the salespeople at your average consumer electronics store actually know something about electronics.

 

[MickeyD]

Your average person isn't or cannot erect an outside antenna. Anyplace that is deed restricted WIll allow satelliet dishes but no other antennas of any kind.

FWIW such restrictions are not valid, http://www.fcc.gov/mb/facts/otard.html

A landlord or HOA cannot prohibit you from installing a TV antenna in any area under your exclusive use or control. (patio, etc.)

That said, you could certainly suffer a fair amount of "neighbor trouble" if you insist on exercising your legal rights...

In many places, an antenna in the attic will work fine.

I think probably the biggest impediment to the greater use of OTA reception is the difficulty in finding someone who'll sell you a decent antenna. Unfortunately, most consumers believe the salespeople at your average consumer electronics store actually know something about electronics.

It is just not worth the aggravation and knowing what the FCC has in store why bother? I certainly don't want to endure" face" from my neighbors over an outside antenna. I have Fios and, excpet for one TV in my house, the rest are standard 4:3 TVs.
The pictures from FioS are studio quality.

The shack doesn't sell them anymore and that is pretty much the only retail outlet that exists in my area. If most people put an outside antenna up they would purchase a VHF rather than UHF antenna. Regular people still believe that Channel 2, 4,5,etc..
in NYC are still on those channels.

 

[hubcity]

It is just not worth the aggravation and knowing what the FCC has in store why bother? I certainly don't want to endure" face" from my neighbors over an outside antenna. I have Fios and, excpet for one TV in my house, the rest are standard 4:3 TVs.
The pictures from FioS are studio quality.

The shack doesn't sell them anymore and that is pretty much the only retail outlet that exists in my area. If most people put an outside antenna up they would purchase a VHF rather than UHF antenna. Regular people still believe that Channel 2, 4,5,etc..
in NYC are still on those channels.

You've pointed out definite issues...

- People buy VHF antennas thinking they'll get the stations that used to be on VHF. Makes sense. When I pulled in WWOR all the way from northern Jackson (an event that has guaranteed me bar/kegerator privileges at my sister-in-law's for life) they were surprised to find I was waiting for the channel scan to show a "find" on Channel 38 (or on 44 to get WNYW directly, which is what I really wanted.)

- I only knew how to do that with rabbit ears (actually, the UHF section, of course) because I've been actively doing it at my own house. When I stopped in at Radio Shack one day to see what they were doing, they pointed at the pile of returned amplified rabbit ears - apparently, nobody who bought them to try to pull in the Giants game had the same luck I did. Though tuning an antenna is a bit baroque, it is do-able, but probably beyond the patience of a lot of people - especially those trying to tune with the rabbit ears when they really need to be adjusting the loop.

- And, of course, the guy at Radio Shack had no idea how to give advice on the subject.

I should try popping in at a local appliance/TV store to see if they have a clue. Betcha they do. What I'd really like to see is someone with the knowhow to say "Here ya go" with an antenna that *will* work better than anything you can buy off the shelf yourself. I'd pay $250 for that (especially considering I could offset it by cancelling video from Cablevision.)

-Sean

 

[hubcity]

And by the way...

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/06/business/media/06rabbitears.html?_r=1&src=me&ref=general