Ofcom: HD should use "existing spectrum"

[BGonaSTICK]

Ofcom's spectrum policy chief has argued against reserving spectrum for high definition services on digital terrestrial television.

Philip Rutnam, partner in charge of spectrum policy at the regulator, said that HDTV should be "delivered using the broadcasters' existing spectrum" because Ofcom considers it "in the best interests of viewers."

In a letter to The Guardian, Rutnam said that Ofcom is "keen to see that all public service broadcasters - not just the BBC - can offer HDTV to digital terrestrial television viewers. There are two ways of achieving this. These broadcasters could simply be granted some of the highly-valued radio spectrum that will be freed-up when we complete the switch to all-digital television in 2012. Alternatively, HDTV could be delivered using the broadcasters' existing spectrum.

"Ofcom believes that it is in the best interests of viewers and the broadcasters to pursue the second option. Using the broadcasters' existing spectrum will ensure they can deliver HDTV services before the London Olympics and at lower cost than using new spectrum, which is good news for programming budgets. In addition, it will allow the spectrum that will be freed up through digital television switchover to be used for new services such as innovative mobile applications, wireless broadband and local television. This is the kind of "technological fix" that is fair to all: broadcasters, viewers, taxpayers and new media industries.

"Creating the capacity for HDTV is a complex issue that requires work from both Ofcom and the broadcasters. But we believe it is a prize worth aiming for."

The letter has plunged Ofcom back into the controversy surrounding what to do with frequences previously used by analogue TV after digital switchover. DS forum members have posted angry responses to Rutnam's letter: one branded Ofcom's position as being "in the best interests of the Treasury", while another argued that Rutnam's position was "[a]nother example of this regulator being frankly painfully incompetent." Another questioned: "Which broadcaster is going to give up 4 channels to get 1 that only a small proportion of viewers can receive? None of the commercial broadcasters are going to do it alone."

Ofcom and the UK's public service broadcasters are currently at odds over the future of HD on digital terrestrial. Ofcom's official position is that there is sufficient capacity for 6 HD channels to be launched on DTT in addition to an auctioning-off of frequencies previously used for analogue television; however, the HDforAll alliance for broadcasters, equipment manufacturers and several MPs are worried that such an auction would render the provision of HD on DTT an impossibility.

Source: Digital Spy

[ltmltm]

wow just wow why cant the government just move ofcons office to mosside then the country be rid of them within the week

Originally Posted by BGonaSTICK

"Ofcom believes that it is in the best interests of viewers and the broadcasters to pursue the second option. Using the broadcasters' existing spectrum will ensure they can deliver HDTV services before the London Olympics and at lower cost than using new spectrum, which is good news for programming budgets. In addition, it will allow the spectrum that will be freed up through digital television switchover to be used for new services such as innovative mobile applications, wireless broadband and local television. This is the kind of "technological fix" that is fair to all: broadcasters, viewers, taxpayers and new media industries.

B*LLSH*T

[BGonaSTICK]

It would certainly be refreshing if the government puppets just come out and explained the reasoning in terms of cold hard cash instead of everyone playing silly bu99ers and having to read between the lines all the time.

I hate this patronising guff.

They think they can just keep rewording and rephrasing whatever it is that they're going to do anyway until someone either accidentally signs something off or just loses the will to live and gives in.

A bit like the European Constitution. Now don't get me started on that!

Nobody understood it in the first place but didn't like the sound of it so voted to reject it.
Response? Thumb through a thesaurus and replace/re-arrange all the controversial words, rename the whole thing to cause everyone symptoms of narcolepsy, and then impose it without the referendum that was promised.

Reform Treaty my arse. Do you know what the current draft is officially entitled?

"The Draft Treaty Amending the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty Establishing the European Community".

WTF?!?

I told you not to get me started. Now I've gone totally O/T!

>