<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:itunes="http://www.itunes.com/dtds/podcast-1.0.dtd"
	xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: FCC Eyes National Broadband Program After Success Of Digital T.V. Transition</title>
	<atom:link href="http://talkradionews.com/2009/07/fcc-eyes-national-broadband-program-after-success-of-digital-tv-tansfe/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://talkradionews.com/2009/07/fcc-eyes-national-broadband-program-after-success-of-digital-tv-tansfe/</link>
	<description>The Talk Radio News Service is the only information news service dedicated to serving the talk radio community.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 22 Mar 2010 04:11:35 -0700</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Douglas Zimmer</title>
		<link>http://talkradionews.com/2009/07/fcc-eyes-national-broadband-program-after-success-of-digital-tv-tansfe/comment-page-1/#comment-45302</link>
		<dc:creator>Douglas Zimmer</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 02 Jul 2009 20:25:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://talkradionews.com/?p=29772#comment-45302</guid>
		<description>The &quot;success&quot; of the digital transition?  My dear mother-in-law used to get eight broadcast channels. Now she gets one, sometimes.  And there are large, cable-inaccessible pockets of the country that have simply given up on receiving television at all.  Please define &quot;success&quot;.  It was certainly &quot;successfully&quot; completed by broadcasters, and was probably &quot;successful&quot; for some cable and satellite companies.  The FCC can pat itself on the back for the challenging task of continuing to exist past the transition date.  But what I&#039;m seeing is a lot of rural and poor people simply ignored and cut out of the calculation.

I&#039;d love to see universal broadband, but considering the FCC&#039;s track record, I suspect it&#039;s just a ploy to make more money for their cable company pals, and that people who don&#039;t make the cut for cost-effective revenue will simply become invisible.

They sure love that February 17 date.  Perhaps it will eventually become one of those dates that will live in infamy.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The &#8220;success&#8221; of the digital transition?  My dear mother-in-law used to get eight broadcast channels. Now she gets one, sometimes.  And there are large, cable-inaccessible pockets of the country that have simply given up on receiving television at all.  Please define &#8220;success&#8221;.  It was certainly &#8220;successfully&#8221; completed by broadcasters, and was probably &#8220;successful&#8221; for some cable and satellite companies.  The FCC can pat itself on the back for the challenging task of continuing to exist past the transition date.  But what I&#8217;m seeing is a lot of rural and poor people simply ignored and cut out of the calculation.</p>
<p>I&#8217;d love to see universal broadband, but considering the FCC&#8217;s track record, I suspect it&#8217;s just a ploy to make more money for their cable company pals, and that people who don&#8217;t make the cut for cost-effective revenue will simply become invisible.</p>
<p>They sure love that February 17 date.  Perhaps it will eventually become one of those dates that will live in infamy.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
