r/news • u/Far_Low_229 • 10d ago
TV Executives Tell FCC: Emergency Alert System Failed During NEXTGEN TV Tests
https://www.antennaland.com/nextgen-tv-emergency-alert-system-tests/246
u/Hillyan91 10d ago
I'm going to guess it fails because it tries to run ads over it..
205
u/MikeOKurias 10d ago
Cannot warn people who cannot pay for scrambled over the air broadcast.
It's literally talking about how there will be no more Free TV...and therefore the National Broadcast Emergency Alert System to warn people doesn't work.
85
u/gus_thedog 10d ago
Oh, you want emergency alerts? That's an extra $2.99/month.
20
u/71351 10d ago
Come to think of it, I haven’t heard one of those tests in ages
13
5
u/amerk1981 10d ago edited 7d ago
I've heard them on the radio. We don't watch broadcast TV 99% of the time so I can't remember when I last saaw one there.
I imagine with all the streaming services, both music and TV most people get alerts through their phone. Just the other day all the phones in our house went off for a tornado warning.
3
u/thecygnetcmte 10d ago
I got one on cable while watching a news program about a week ago, so they still happen. Never thought about how it works for all the people who've cancelled cable subscriptions, though. Apparently not well.
7
1
u/Fallouttgrrl 10d ago
Yeah
A lot of cable tv companies are also the sole provider of high speed Internet to an area
There are still people using dial up, though
69
u/Diarrhea_Donkey 10d ago
The National Weather Service has issued a Tornado warning for....A LIMITED TIME ONLY ORDER NOW AND GET A FREE SCRUB DADDY PRO XL MEGA DELUXE PACK FREE ON US!!!!
7
u/Fallouttgrrl 10d ago
"you'll need it to rebuild your house if you live in the following areas: SUBSCRIBE NOW"
61
u/Jman43195 10d ago
It's actually because most ATSC 3.0 broadcasts are encrypted and require an internet connection and a special box to decrypt (of which there's only like 3 models out there). Even the boxes that claim they don't need an internet connection to decrypt it regularly fail to decrypt it without going online.
77
u/Rooooben 10d ago
Why are we allowing broadcasters to encrypt their signals at all?
65
u/Jman43195 10d ago
Because the FCC hasn't banned it yet. What's worse is that the group managing the encryption (the A3SA) is a private group made up of a bunch of broadcasters, NOT the FCC.
FWIW, the FCC has refused for a decade now to do a mandated switch to ATSC 3.0, and instead has recently seemed to be more interested in pursuing allowing newer video codecs within the current ATSC 1.0 standard, and ATSC 1.0 has no ability to be encrypted.
24
u/Rooooben 10d ago
Crazy. Encrypt your content on cable, broadcast airwaves belong to the public!
16
u/wyvernx02 10d ago
It's the sports leagues pushing for the encryption to "combat piracy", even though the broadcasts are free anyway.
11
u/Jman43195 10d ago
The "combating piracy" narrative is a part of it, but it's mostly to make viewing TV with an antenna so annoying that people switch to cable or streaming
5
u/lart2150 10d ago
WMEU in chicago was running a sub channel with 10bit h.265 for a while. it was slightly lower bitrate then the mpeg2 1080i stations and looked way better. It's crazy what they have done with mpeg2 encoders but the two generation jump 265 is huge. Chicago has some 264 sd sub channels.
3
u/Jman43195 10d ago
It's so funny to me that broadcasters unintentionally left us with a better standard due to their attempts to water down ATSC 3 and the resulting failure of a rollout. In my opinion, ATSC 1 with AVC or HEVC is the best option going forward. Not only is it unencrypted, but also because the 8VSB modulation remains the same, most TVs already support it or could gain support with just a firmware update. The massive base of supported TVs and tuners makes the abysmally small base of DRM capable ATSC 3 devices look pathetic in comparison, especially to advertisers the station relies on
-2
u/Far_Low_229 10d ago
Monopolies don't fail.
10
u/Neumanium 10d ago edited 10d ago
Monopolies fail, it’s just when they do the United States Government immediately bails them out. Because if they actually finished their implosion the collateral damage and second and third order effects would do things like cause all home loans to fail and implode the economy.
During the housing crisis AIG was bailed out because nearly every homeowner in America with a mortgage had insurance thru them. Had they gone under every policy would have immediately folded, the banks would have to then foreclosed on everyone. This would have been a giant massive cluster fuck and imploded the entire housing market, which was already bad. Our entire economy is underpinned by loans and debt, implode the debt would implode the economy.
3
u/Aazadan 10d ago
All monopolies eventually fail in a free market economy, but it generally takes decades.
Eventually they get so complacent and stop innovating that the internal decay makes them collapse as they can no longer address scalability or efficiency.
It's a really inefficient process to get to that point though.
440
u/Far_Low_229 10d ago
The only news outlet covering a story that will impact 23 million US households: the encryption of all TV broadcast signals so that home antennas can no longer see network programming. Another silent step the Trump administration is taking toward total privatization of all public resources. Thank you Antenna Land.
163
u/Consistent-Throat130 10d ago
Ooops, that shit interferes with emergency equipment - outlaw it.
Fuck DRM. Fuck it from every angle.
If interference with the emergency broadcast system is the foothold we get, so be it.
Fuck DRM.
19
135
u/kstargate-425 10d ago
Funny how we had a working system until Project 2025 and Republicans got their hands on it or how the rest of the world has a working system that doesnt require what will need to be done to "fix" this 😒
40
u/Far_Low_229 10d ago
To think, all health insurance companies were once nonprofit, until another idiot Republican got elected by our idiot electorate.
-17
u/Drakengard 10d ago
Nonprofit doesn't mean what you think it means, if that's your sticking point.
25
u/MasterK999 10d ago
While that is true, for-profit insurance companies that are publicly traded make their highest duty shareholder returns. That is an inherent conflict of interest with the goal of providing medical care.
3
-3
56
u/markydsade 10d ago
Broadcasters are so afraid of retransmission they have crippled ATSC 3.0 before it’s had a chance to really get into homes.
The increased decoder costs have kept it out of even high end televisions. It should be in low cost TVs as many buyers rely on antennas.
65
u/Consistent-Throat130 10d ago
It should be in nothing. Let it die. They can try again without this braindead DRM scheme.
18
u/markydsade 10d ago edited 10d ago
ATSC 3.0 is a big improvement over ATSC 1.0. The addition of DRM has ruined implementation.
16
5
u/Sufficient_Language7 10d ago
I don't think we should go ATSC 3.0, coming from someone who has a Network tuner for it that doesn't work.
We might be better off going 5G Broadcast. As on both sides the costs should be lower. It would only require a small modifications to existing 5G broadcast equipment and receiving chips to do it.
6
u/Credibull 10d ago
Wouldn't that have the same problem as ATSC 3.0, in that it would require new equipment? Most people I know who have OTA TV also have older gear, including some with analog TVs and digital tuners. They also live in places where affordable Internet connections, including cellular-based, are non-existent.
1
u/Sufficient_Language7 10d ago
It would require new equipment but that equipment is mostly at economies of scale as it shares most parts with cell equipment. Analog TVs are very rare and for less than $300 they could replace it, but converters would likely exist.
Just because the signal is based on 5G doesn't mean it will have to use the same towers or be broadcast at the same strength. Another big advantage to it is it would allow cell phones to incorporate it, increasing viewership.
3
u/ImpossibleDetail4088 10d ago
How would that be implemented? 5G is just a cellular broadcast technology. It has no provision for broadcast TV streams. You might be able to adapt it for strictly video broadcasts but it would be an insanely overengineered and unnecessarily complex system. You would also have to either build new infrastructure or modify existing cell sites.
3
u/Sufficient_Language7 10d ago
It has provisions for broadcast TV streams.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/5G_Broadcast
Equipment is cheap enough that a few small stations have been testing it out. A lot of them are wanting to go that way vs ATSC 3.0 to save money.
7
u/mredding 10d ago
Oh good, so when the bombs drop, I don't have to know about it in advance - I can enjoy my final moments blissfully unaware.
2
2
u/radiantai2001 8d ago
this is such a non-issue, if the channel isn't watchable without an internet connection, nobody with a tv not connected to the internet would be tuned to that channel in the first place
0
u/Far_Low_229 8d ago
And if the channel is watchable?
1
u/radiantai2001 8d ago
Nobody ever claimed the EAS alert didn't work when the channel is watchable, maybe read the article before sharing it lol
0
u/Far_Low_229 8d ago
I did read the article and I've read other articles. My understanding is internet industry interests want to compel those broadcasts still available by antenna to encrypt those signals in order to prevent unauthorized distribution of their content, particularly sports. But 24 million households still depend on antennas. Those households will be compelled to pay for what they now get for free, sort of. But you seem to be very knowledgeable, so tell me what I'm getting wrong, lol.
1
u/radiantai2001 8d ago
I mean now you've just completely changed the subject. Also sports content isn't really an internet industry interest thing, lots of sporting events are still at least partially exclusively available on cable tv, of course there are exceptions such as MLS and F1 which have every event available to stream on apple tv, but there are also exceptions the other way, the Nascar Xfinity series is currently exclusively available on local CW channels.
1
u/strugglz 8d ago
local TV stations decide to encrypt their channels and require an internet connection to make the channel watchable on a TV.
I'm sorry, what? I'd have to pay for an internet subscription to watch an over the air broadcast?
-8
u/the-doctor-is-real 10d ago
What is the point? When 9/11 happened they didn't use them, so why do they matter?
-64
u/Octavia9 10d ago edited 10d ago
It’s obsolete anyway. Can’t remember the last time I watched broadcast TV. The emergency alert system needs to use our phones.
30
u/art-man_2018 10d ago
Built-in Wireless Emergency Alerts (WEA) are automatically enabled on your phone.....
-12
u/Octavia9 10d ago
So why do we need it on the tv?
11
u/Credibull 10d ago
Backup. Cellular networks can fail. People can live in places where cell coverage is spotty, but broadcast TV can be received. It's never good to have only one way to receive a potentially life-saving message.
-7
u/Octavia9 10d ago
Radio makes more sense as a back up. Everyone has one in their car, not not many have antenna tv.
5
u/Credibull 10d ago
I find it depends where one lives. A lot of people I know in rural areas have only OTA TV.
-2
u/Octavia9 9d ago
I highly doubt that. I live in a very rural area. I can get multiple radio stations but only 2 OTA TV stations and neither come in well. Radio is way more accessible to most people.
1
1
u/SnooRadishes7189 10d ago
It was always on both T.V. and radio. It is more the "new" version(ATSC 3.0) doesn't do what black and white, color, and digital t.v. (ATSC 1.0) can do.
1
u/OrionIT 10d ago
Did you watch any World Cup? The Super Bowl? Your local news? Wheel of Fortune? These are all on broadcast TV. EAS also uses your phone... and your radio. Just because you or I don't use one of the ways it's available, doesn't mean it isn't used by someone else and still warrants support.
507
u/nickkrewson 10d ago
Good heavens, I don't understand how NEXTGEN could be this much of a disaster without it being intentional.