Members of the US Senate and House of Representatives from many border-area states have written to the FCC to make sure their local broadcast television stations are not harmed in the process of carrying out incentive auctions, and the New Hampshire delegation has now joined the parade.
The members stated their support for the over-arching goal of promoting wireless broadband.
However, they stated, “Television audiences in our state rely on their local stations every day for news, emergency information, sports and entertainment. Given our proximity to the northern border, and with the majority of our states viewers served by the dense Boston designated market area, channel realignment poses challenges for our state and could even put viewers at risk.”
They concluded, “We ask that the commission work diligently to preserce viewer access during any reassignment of television channels. We hope you will allow the public to review and understand these proposed changes, and we ask that you keep us apprised.”
Senators Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH) and Kelly Ayotte (R-NH), and Reps Ann Kuster (D-NH) and Carol Shea-Porter (D-NH) signed the letter, representing the sum and total of the state’s representation on Capitol Hill.
RBR-TVBR observation: Money simply cannot buy this kind of free promotion. The loss of local TV would not be a mere inconvenience; it “could even put viewers at risk.” You can’t say that about any old medium. Thanks, New Hampshire, for the plug for local broadcast television!
Whether a severe nor’easter like the blizzard of 78 or a hurricane like the 1938 event, all these events would tear our telephone & utility poles & knock out the internet for days if not weeks..
Many cell towers are quite remote to guarantee they are on high terrain ( I know as I rent & survey towers in the northeast).
That said most TV stations have a hard core generator & staffs that are willing to bunk down at the main transmit site to make sure TV keeps running & informing.
TV is the CORE & CENTER of our electronic lives & any diminishment of it
is just a plain bad idea.
TV ends at Channel 51 right now. The FCC should NOT drop to Channel 31 which is rumored, it should be in the mid 40’s .
Even then it’s gonna be tight for sure !!!!
Also the buyers of the frequencies should be required to build out in 24 months or lose the channel.
No warehousing of frequencies…use it or lose it !!!!!
Dan Viles
It’s not just the more densely populated areas that will be hurt by the repacking proposal that would eliminate more TV frequencies. Out here on the plains we are already losing some signals due to the loss of channels 52 to 69. Signals go a lot further than the circles on a map indicate and some stations are already too close to other stations on the same channel with interference resulting in a loss of service. We have tornadoes out here and rely on local TV stations for life saving weather information. It is a service that cable does not provide and cable needs wires on poles which can be damaged. We have our battery powered TV set with an antenna that we can take anywhere and keep informed. The loss of channels 32 to 51 would be a disaster in itself.
Comments are closed.