Out of the Blue
Vacant Channels Could Fuzz Up Free TV. Broadcasters See Red Over White Spaces
By Ted Hearn -- Multichannel News, 11/4/2007 7:00:00 PM
Washington — When a group of companies with a combined market value of nearly $1 trillion decides it wants a favor from the federal government, it shouldn’t have trouble making quick time of the opposition.
Such a super-wealthy group is the White Spaces Coalition, formed by the likes of Google, Microsoft, Intel, Dell and Hewlett-Packard. Their goal is to provide advanced wireless communications services on vacant TV channels without having to secure licenses from the FCC at auction.
But the alliance of deep-pocketed technology giants has fallen far short of instant success, mainly because its quest for access to highly valuable radio waves has clashed with the interests of the country’s 1,756 full-power TV stations.
The White Spaces Coalition’s chief obstacle has been the National Association of Broadcasters, a formidable trade group that by reputation probably has $1 trillion in political value on the line, if clout in the nation’s capital can be translated into dollars.
NAB’s power stems from the fact that thousands of radio and TV stations have been key suppliers of electronic news in every state and congressional district for decades. As candidates for elective office who rely heavily on TV and radio to reach voters, members of Congress understand broadcasters’ unique power to influence the public mind. Except for the very brave, lawmakers do not cross the NAB with impunity.
For the past two years, the NAB has been trying to derail a proposal by the White Spaces Coalition that would allow anyone to use airwaves allocated to broadcast TV but not being used by any TV station.
| AT ISSUE: White Spaces | |
|---|---|
|
SOURCE: Multichannel News research |
|
| What’s at Stake: | Dozens of unused TV channels unused in all 210 TV markets |
| Why They’re There: | TV stations need space between channels to prevent signals from colliding |
| What’s Proposed: | Reusing the space for wireless communications of video and other content to portable devices |
| Who Wants It: | Tech coalition including Google, Microsoft and Intel |
| On What Basis: | Free, unlicensed usage |
| Opposed: | National Association of Broadcasters, which represents hundreds of local TV stations whose channel assignments abut white spaces |
| Status: | FCC is conducting a second round of tests on portable devices submitted by Microsoft and Philips Electronics, to determine whether interference occurs |
The vacant TV space could be used to transmit video, documents, text messages and other digital content, wirelessly, to and between handheld devices.
According to the New America Foundation, which supports the White Spaces Coalition, 52% of the TV channels in Las Vegas are unused; 40% in Dallas, Texas; and 30% in Trenton, N.J.
Since each channel represents 6 Megahertz of spectrum, Las Vegas would have about 150 MHz for unlicensed operations. The FCC is planning to auction 60 MHz of similar spectrum in January, with revenue expected to exceed $10 billion.
The NAB insists that sharing the broadcast band would imperil over-the-air television because signal interference would be rampant and unstoppable, as unlicensed users wouldn’t have to answer to anyone — including the FCC.
“Only in Washington would we have to make the case for interference-free TV,” said NAB president David Rehr. “Millions of Americans will suffer if unlicensed devices in the TV band threaten their ability to watch America’s great broadcast programming.”
Exploitation of vacant TV channels would drive wireless innovation and improve the chances of delivering affordable broadband access to rural areas, where spread-out populations can deter companies from offering service, the NAB’s opponents said.
“We think this presents a great opportunity to allow technology companies to innovate and create other technologies for consumers to use,” said Microsoft senior public relations director Ginny Terzano. “It will allow for more wide use of broadband in underserved areas, both in rural and urban areas.”
This current spectrum-use fight might be the first of many in the years ahead for the NAB. The fundamental problem for TV stations is that they have nearly exclusive access to some of the most prized spectrum in the FCC’s inventory; their use of it is highly inefficient; and the number of U.S. homes that rely exclusively on free, over-the-air TV is small and shrinking.
According to the NAB, 19 million out of 110 million U.S. TV households rely exclusively on free TV. The Consumer Electronics Association’s estimate is much lower, at between 11 million and 13 million.
“[Regulators] will increasingly question why this nation is setting aside tens of billions of dollars of spectrum for maybe less than 10% of the people when it all could be consolidated over satellite bands or cable,” said Michael Calabrese, vice president and director of the Wireless Future Program at the New America Foundation. Google chairman and CEO Eric Schmidt is a New America board member.
TV stations, however, are hoping that mobile reception of their signals will tip the spectrum utilization debate in their favor. DTV signals can’t be received directly by mobile devices. However, Samsung Electronics has invented a technology that would permit mobile reception.
STATIC DING
The policy debate on white spaces has blurred traditional lines of division in the electronic media.
The NAB enlisted the aid of the National Cable & Telecommunications Association after cable companies and equipment suppliers expressed concern that set-top boxes imperfectly attached to TVs, DVD players, and DVRs could encounter harmful interference from unlicensed operations of wireless communications services in the broadcast TV spectrum band.
And the issue has been far from easy for FCC Chairman Kevin Martin. On the one hand, Martin wants to be viewed as someone who fed the growth of broadband deployment and competition; on the other, he doesn’t want digital television to flop on his watch because he backed the White Spaces Coalition. Under federal law, all full-power TV stations must transmit programming exclusively in the digital format after Feb. 17, 2009.
“If the devices work without interfering with broadcasting, that will enable us to more efficiently utilize the spectrum. Obviously, if they create interference with broadcasters, you wouldn’t want to jeopardize the DTV transition,” said a neutral Martin.
The U.S. has 210 local TV markets and each one has 67 channels allocated to over-the-air TV. Without proper spacing, TV signals in the same market would collide with those in adjacent territories. As a result, Americans on average have access to just seven to 13 channels of over-the-air TV. The majority of channels not in use have been called white spaces, from which the coalition takes its name.
The white-spaces spectrum is some of the best for wireless communications.
Because digital technology makes more efficient use of spectrum than analog transmission, Congress decided to reclaim about 27% of broadcast TV channels effective in early 2009. Some of that spectrum will be auctioned for billions of dollars and some handed out free to police, fire and emergency units for their mobile broadband needs.
On Capitol Hill, bills in support of the White Spaces Coalition have not gone far. That’s probably because some lawmakers want to auction the white-spaces spectrum, not turn it into a wireless communications commons owned by no one.
According to a study by telecommunications consultants Charles Jackson and Dorothy Robyn, funded by Qualcomm, an auction of white-spaces spectrum would reap the U.S. Treasury as much as $6 billion.
The white-spaces action is really at the FCC, which is testing to see if prototypes of devices for pulling in content over the vacant channels that have been submitted by Microsoft and coalition partner Philips Electronics N.A. can sense TV signals and not interfere with them. The first round did not go well. Martin has called for a new round.
“We are confident that the use of unlicensed spectrum in the television space can be achieved without interference,” Microsoft’s Terzano said.
Broadcasters, upset that the FCC is doing more testing, are certain no technology exists today that permits secondary use of the TV band by portable devices without bad things happening to TV signals.
“This idea that somehow some low-grade interference is not a problem is crazy. It’s goofy on the face of it,” said Alan Frank, president of Post-Newsweek Stations. “You’ll have a consumer revolt. It’s a bad idea.”
RUNNING INTERFERENCE
Several years ago, the NAB got Congress to kill FCC rules designed to create new low-power radio stations in the FM band. The trade group might try that tactic again if the FCC determines that the white spaces can be exploited without injury to local TV signals.
“If the FCC were to approve white spaces, I think we have to make the case to Congress, because there is no question the FCC study showed interference,” said Barrington Broadcasting Group CEO James Yager. “How many times do you have to study something? You can’t keep redoing it and changing the definition of interference.”
The FCC released the first test results on July 31. It’s unclear when the second round of results will be made public.
Although the white-spaces issue presents problems for cable operators and their set-top vendors, a political solution could be at hand.
From cable’s perspective, unlicensed devices operating on broadcast channels 3 and 4 could harm the picture quality of television sets connected to cable set-top boxes and other standalone external devices that have not all been snugly attached to one another, including DVDs and DVRs.
“It’s a big concern for manufacturers and the cable industry,” said Mary Brown, director of technology and spectrum policy for Cisco Systems, a major cable set-top box supplier under the Scientific Atlanta brand.
Signal interference is a threat especially if consumers have failed to ensure that all the connections are tight and impervious to entry of electrical “noise.” Just having the back of a cable set-top pressed against a wall or cabinet is enough to harm sheathing or loosen connectors.
“At that point, you can have signals in the atmosphere around the set-top box that will produce interference to your television reception,” Brown said.
Cisco is not inalterably opposed to the unlicensed use of broadcast white spaces unless FCC testing shows that the interference problem is too grave to permit entry.
“We’re pleased the FCC is going to do more testing before reaching a final decision,” Brown said.
Set-top boxes use TV set channels 3 and 4 to tune in programming sent by the cable operator.
In an effort to eliminate any risk to operators’ equipment, Cisco has crafted a proposal that it calls “notching,” which would preclude the use of channels 2 through 6 by any unlicensed devices.
“Just stay away from that. That is the most prudent course,” Brown said.
Calabrese, of the New America Foundation, is skeptical about Cisco’s claims, arguing signal ingress issues were within the power of cable consumers to eliminate with little effort.
“That’s something under a consumer’s control. You can tighten the connection or they’ll start selling cables that are better insulated,” Calabrese said.
Nevertheless, Calabrese said he wasn’t opposed to Cisco’s notching proposal because the optimal zone for unlicensed operations in the broadcast ban was from channel 21 to channel 41.
“We are fine with the Cisco coalition,” Calabrese said.
SHARED SPECTRUM
The effort to force TV stations to share their spectrum could be the front end of a much larger struggle to end free, over-the-air TV in the U.S. Spectrum-hungry innovators are trying to pound home to policymakers that 96 million U.S. homes have at least one TV set connected to cable or satellite TV services, and 245 million Americans go about their business with a wireless phone or PDA that returns Web searches at crawling speed, according to CTIA, the Wireless Association.
Meanwhile, TV stations directly serve no more than 19 million homes. Under the FCC’s digital-TV allocation scheme, each TV market would have spectrum for 49 digital TV stations. But much of the space still is likely to go unused.
“Nobody has 49 channels of over-the-air digital TV. The average is eight [stations] per market,” said Thomas Hazlett, professor of law and economics at George Mason University, who has long advocated payment plans to move TV stations to pay-TV platforms.
In Washington today, the political reality is that the NAB’s power keeps growing even while consumer reliance on free TV declines — a paradox that policymakers refuse to confront because it is so hard to take on the NAB when lawmakers want to be on good terms with their local TV and radio stations.
“They are afraid of the broadcast lobby,” said J.H. Snider, affiliated researcher at Columbia University’s Institute for Tele-Information and author of Speak Softly and Carry a Big Stick: How Local TV Broadcasters Exert Political Power.
Surprised by the tenacity of the White Spaces Coalition, TV stations are already taking steps to ensure they never forfeit their TV licenses involuntarily.
How so? They want desperately to become an integral part of the mobile video revolution by ensuring that digital TV signals work with mobile devices.
“The local broadcasters have a chance to get in and occupy that space; but if they don’t do it, others will and they really will lose their window of opportunity,” said Samsung Electronics vice president of public affairs John Godfrey.
The DTV transmission standard adopted by the FCC in late 1996 did not accommodate mobility. A digital TV set in a moving car couldn’t receive and display local DTV signals. In April, Samsung unveiled a technology that will allow portable devices to receive a DTV signal directly from the broadcast tower. Samsung has asked the Advanced Television Systems Committee — the industry panel that approved the DTV broadcast standard called 8-VSB (vestigial sideband) — to embraced its technology called A-VSB.
“There really needs to be an ATSC standard. We expect a decision in 2008,” Godfrey said, predicting that the cost to retrofit a TV tower with A-VSB capability would be less than $100,000.
“It’s cheap,” he added. “The up-front cost to deploy mobile service is really low, compared with a new entrant who comes in and has to buy licenses and deploy new networks.”
TV stations’ own introduction of mobile video service is another reason NAB is protesting the population of vacant TV channels with services feeding millions of video-capable portable devices.
“There are portable devices that will be broadcaster-friendly,” said John Taylor, vice president of public affairs for LG Electronics USA, a leading DTV set maker.
FUZZY FEARS
The opportunity could be enormous. Jupiter Research predicts there will be 120 million mobile TV users around the world by 2012, compared with 12 million today.
At the same time, broadcasters resist the characterization that their agenda to keep out unlicensed devices isn’t really about fuzzy signals.
“It’s not protecting turf. It’s protecting consumers against interference,” said David Donovan, president of the Association of Maximum Service Television, a technology adviser to NAB.
Rep. Jay Inslee (D-Wash.), whose district includes Microsoft’s Redmond campus, said he has focused so hard on passing his bill in support of the White Spaces Coalition he hasn’t had time to consider the larger question: whether to yank TV stations’ spectrum at some point.
“First steps first,” Inslee said. “I just think it’s way premature to say that we’re going to jump over white spaces to some massive reallocation like that.”
FCC commissioner Robert McDowell indicated that he’s troubled that the issue will be resolved based on political clout, not on the merits.
“We should let science, and science alone, drive our decisions,” McDowell said. Nonetheless, he expects TV stations to hang on to their spectrum “until it is pried from their cold, dead hands.”
No related content found.
VIEW ALL GALLERIES
