|
Do not adjust your TV set
05/09/2008 09:33 - (SA)
Alistair Fairweather
On the 1st of November 2011, your trusty old TV will suddenly stop working. Ok, technically it will still work but it won't be able to pick up any programmes unless you've got a special set-top box and (possibly) a fancy new aerial.
Why? Because that's when South Africa's existing free-to-air analogue signal will be switched off, and the much-hyped era of Digital Broadcasting will begin. Its pundits paint it as a new golden age with more channels, better quality, lower costs - the list goes on.
It's a pity then that the majority of us at the receiving end of this revolution don't fully understand it - if we've even heard of it at all. For instance many people believe that they will need to buy one of those expensive LCD or Plasma TVs to watch this new signal.
So before we all rush out and spend the kids' university fund on a TV the size of Table Mountain, let's try to understand this business properly.
This switch over is very like the change from analogue vinyl records (or LPs) to digital Compact Discs (CDs) that happened in the early ?90s. At the time many people upgraded their existing hi-fi sets by adding a CD player, using the same speakers to play music from these two different "signals".
Our TVs are like the "speakers" - as long as they're fed the right "signal" they will carry on doing their job. All they need is the new "player" - in this case a set-top box - to allow them to understand the new signal, they don't need the equivalent of a whole new hi-fi set.
If you're one of the lucky few with DSTV, then this whole issue is moot. You're already watching a digital signal (that's what the "D" stands for), and you won't even notice the change.
Slicker than your average
So what do the rest of us get out of the deal? Quite a bit, in theory. Firstly, digital channels are "smaller" than their cumbersome analogue cousins, so you can fit more of them in the same "space" - just like CDs hold more songs than LPs, even though they are much smaller. Translation: we will have at least ten times more free-to-air channels - around 40 instead of 4.
Secondly, the picture and sound quality should be higher. Like CDs, digital channels are clearer, crisper and better at coping with problems like bad weather.
The problem is that, on closer inspection, these benefits are far more dubious than they sound. The SABC claim that this new regime will allow them to serve all 11 official languages with their own channels as well as launch a whole range of regional channels. Frankly the SABC are struggling to fill their three existing channels with quality local content - how are they going to fill 30?
And then there's the quality issue. If you've got a clunky old TV, then you're hardly going to notice the difference, just like a fancy CD player doesn't transform your cheap, made-in-China speakers into R50 000 Bang & Olufsen orgasmatrons.
But there's a much bigger problem that no one seems very worried about. November 2011 is not an awfully long way off, and by then we're expecting to have every single TV in the country digital ready.
Look north
Let's put this into perspective. In 2001 the US Congress ordered their broadcasters to begin moving to digital by 2003 and switch off analogue signals by 2006. The date has since been moved half a dozen times, and is now set at February 2009.
What's more they are still struggling with problems, including the fact that a third of their population are still unaware of the impending change. Congress has had to approve a $1.5bn subsidy to help poor families afford the set-top boxes, and many people in outlying areas will have to buy expensive aerials to receive the new signal.
Now, while the Americans aren't always models of sobriety and efficiency, they also aren't idiots. If it's taken them nearly seven years to set a final date, shouldn't we be a little worried? And if that doesn't freak you out, how about the fact that our government haven't even agreed on a standard for the set-top boxes, let alone commissioned anyone to manufacture them?
If this goes badly wrong the real victims will be the millions of poor South Africans who are going to be jerked around by this ill-considered leap into the future.
Most people reading this can afford the switch (annoying though it may be), but the poor can barely afford TVs, let alone set-top boxes. They are also the most vulnerable to misinformation and unscrupulous salesmen who will be eager to offload their obsolete stock.
There's no doubt that digital broadcasting is the future - it really is better and more flexible than the old way of doing things. The issue here is how the transition is handled. Change is always painful - but lack of proper thought or planning can only make it much more so.
Send your comments to Alistair.
Disclaimer: News24 encourages freedom of speech and the expression of diverse views. The views of columnists published on News24 are therefore their own and do not necessarily represent the views of News24. News24 editors reserve the right to edit or delete any and all comments received.
- News24
|
