WMTW Portland Maine - Still broadcasting in SD like it's 1999?

If you watch any local programming on WMTW, Channel 8, in Portland, ME, you would think you think that time travel exists and you would think you are in 1999.

The local news programs produced by WMTW look as if they were produced in the 1990's and quite possibly are still using video tape instead of anything remotely "digital".

Ever since the digital TV (i.e. High Definition) revolution began, WMTW has been behind the times.  They were the last TV station in their market to convert to "HD" in terms of broadcasting from the ABC network, and the last to convert to what THEY consider to be high definition for local news broadcasting.

I gave WMTW some heat on this blog concerning their late arrival but was pleased when they at least figured out how to broadcast the ABC prime time programming in HD (albeit 720p instead of 1080i, but that's an ABC network issue that I'll address later).  But even at that time, the local WMTW news was still in SD.

If you look at Channel 8's local news, you would still think they aren't broadcasting in High Definition, and I'm not convinced that they actually are.

As you probably know, you can see what they consider to be High Definition and compare it to Standard Definition easily by switching between the two channels (whether it's over the air on channel 8.1 and 8.2, or on your cable system comparing the lower channel to the "HD" upper channel).

While WMTW's "HD" channel appears to be better slightly better quality, is it?

Here's what I think is their trick.  Old fashioned SD television was in a 4:3 picture ratio (4 down by 3 across).  HD signals use a 16:9 ratio (16 across by 9 down), hence wider flat screen HD TVs.

If you watch a 4:3 (SD) picture on a 16:9 (HD) TV, there are two options:

• leave the 4:3 ratio and fill in the rest of the screen (sides of the picture) with black bars
• STRETCH the picture to fill the screen but everyone looks short and fat, and generally the image is just horrible

After broadcast TV was forced to go digital in 2009, things changed slightly.  Typically you can watch an HD signal in non-HD mode on your TV but now there will be black bars on the top, bottom, and sides.  The picture doesn't fill the screen but the ratio (16:9) is correct.  So while the picture might be clearer and look right, it doesn't fill the screen and you can't force it to unless you plan to not see the entire picture.

The ONLY other option is for a TV station to broadcast its Standard Definition signal in 16:9.  We usually associate the 16:9 ration with HD, but TV cameras have the capability of recording in the 16:9 ratio even if you are using Standard Definition.

16:9 ratio programming in SD almost looks like HD except the picture quality when compared to real HD is severely lacking, and when compared to old-fashioned 4:3 Standard definition is about the same.

I don't believe that WMTW is broadcasting its locally produced news (or other) programming in real High Definition.

Do a quick comparison.  Watch a newscast on WMTW in HD.  Compare it to any other local channel's news cast.  The difference will ASTOUND you.

Continue watching WMTW and wait for a "remote location" shot.  You will see that the picture quality is even worse because WMTW can't seem to spring for better offsite cameras.

Even if WMTW were broadcasting in full HD, it would be 720p.  This is a choice made by America's broadcasting networks.  NBC, CBS, PBS, and the CW chose 1080i (a better quality picture all around regardless of what some "experts" say - just take a look for yourself).  Fox, and ABC chose 720p.  So each network's affiliates invested in the technology that matched their Parent Company broadcaster.

Some people say that 720p ("p" meaning progressive) is just as good as 1080i ("i" meaning interlaced).  Without going into the difference between progressive and interlaced technologies, in my personal experience in watching TV (which I admit is extensive), 1080i is far superior to 720p especially on larger TV screens (over 32").

But I digress.

The picture quality of WMTW's local news programming SUCKS.  And, their remote shot picture quality is even worse, if that's possible.

I had been laying low because I knew WMTW moving into new studios is Westbrook in September 2014.  I thought that finally, things would improve.  I was disappointed when nothing changed.

As much as I dislike both WCSH channel 6 news, and WGME channel 13 news, I prefer to actually watch either of them over WMTW because the picture quality on WMTW is so bad.  I don't know what WMTW is doing wrong or not doing right.  I just know that what I said many years ago is still true:

"When it comes to TV ratings, whoever has the best HD picture wins"

It's not that complicated.  This is true of cable TV as well.  My cable system does not offer every cable channel in HD.  The non-HD channels are down in the lower numbers.  The High Def channels are on the upper channel numbers.  When I'm channel surfing, I start at the first HD channel - 702 for me - and work upwards.  I don't even look at channels not in HD.

So, for anyone at WMTW, we know that you broadcast in 720p so we understand why your prime time programs are of a lesser quality.  BUT, can you explain why your local news looks no different than it did prior to your "switch" to high definition?

WGME still can't get High Definition right

Anyone who has read this blog for any length of time knows that one of my pet peeves is when a local TV station is not broadcasting in High Definition when they should be. Another thing you might glean from reading this blog is that I often contact our Portland TV stations and let them know when there is a problem with HD broadcasting.

With few exceptions, broadcasting in HD is a pretty simply process for a TV station. Even without all of the very expensive equipment needed to be a 100% high definition TV station, a simple pass-through of an HD feed from the network is child's play compared to what some of the big boys (like Boston and NYC TV stations) deal with.

Stated another way, Portland, Maine TV stations broadcast High Definition when they get a high definition feed from their affiliated network via satellite and simply pass that programming through (either via antenna transmission over-the-air or through cable TV) to your TV set. They can't record HD programming from their network and can't store it for playback later; they can only do this pass through that I describe. Bigger stations in bigger cities with bigger budgets have the sophisticated equipment that allows them to broadcast everything from their local news, to local produced programming (like a news magazine show or a public debate) in High Definition. They can also download/save programming and play it back at a later date/time. Portland stations cannot yet do this.

So that's the set up. Now, on Friday night, I tuned in to "The Late, Late Show with Craig Ferguson" (a pass through HD program from CBS) and I immediately noticed that the show was not in HD. I checked to make sure the show as not a re-run from before that show was being produced in HD, and it was not. I also checked WBZ out of Boston (which happens to be another CBS channel on my channel lineup) and they were broadcasting it in HD. So I knew the problem was with WGME - Channel 13, right here in good old Portland, ME.

I was given a tour of Channel 13 about 2 years ago when they had a different general manager. I saw the control room, where there is literally an on/off switch built into the control board which allows the person running the board to switch to HD when a network program is coming across the satellite in HD. So basically, if CBS is transmitting a high definition program to its affiliates over the satellite, this switch must be in the "ON" position so that when WGME re-transmits that live signal over their antenna to Maine, it is transmitted in HD so that your TV or your cable provider can receive it in HD.

As I mentioned, and as you can read on this blog, WGME, WMTW, and WCSH have all made this same mistake from time to time. When this happened on Friday night, I called WGME. I tried calling WGME several times for about 20 minutes. All I ever got was a phone nobody would answer or the "General" voicemail box. If WGME is on the air, somebody has to be in the building so I have no idea why nobody answered the phone. There have been times in the past when I called WGME, WMTW, and WCSH to let them know they were not transmitting in high definition. I got mixed reception from all of them, (I mean, who is this guy calling us) but the problem got fixed. Usually within seconds, and sometimes before I could finish getting all the words out, the station magically started transmitting in High Definition. Some of them got used to me calling.

But on this past Friday night (6/18/10), I had no such luck with WGME. I wrote an email to Tom Humpage, General Manager, and I am waiting to hear back from him, hopefully on Monday, to explain to me what happened at their station on Friday night.

If WGME had this problem two or three years ago, I could understand. HD in Maine was in its infancy and a lot of mistakes and oversights were made. But after several years, and several situations just like this one occurring, one would think that WGME would have this figured out by now.

It truly amazes me that a TV station can't do something as simple as "turning on the HD switch". It shows a lack of dedication, lack of technical knowledge, lack of qualified staff, and an overall lack of respect for the viewing public. More than half of all US households have the ability to view high definition TV. Those who have seen what high definition is all about don't want to go back to regular TV. Once you have enjoyed HD and once you have paid a lot of money for an HD TV set, you want your programming to be in HD; it's that simple.

I gave up and started watching Craig Ferguson on WBZ out of Boston. I'm sure WGME's advertisers would love to know that.

People who own HD want to watch HD - it's that simple

I've been begging for more HD channels and more HD programming for as long as I've owned an HDTV, which is about 3 years now.

My argument has always been that the broadcaster, whether cable or over-the-air, that airs the most HD programming will win the ratings wars. And I was right.


A recent article on MediaPost goes into more details. Here's the link:

http://www.mediapost.com/publications/?fa=Articles.showArticle&art_aid=116495

I firmly believe that the local TV station in Portland, ME, that gets its news on the air first in HD will take over the local market in viewership. The number of households with high definition TV sets is increasing by leaps and bounds every day, even in this economy. Once you get used to it, regular (or SD) television looks, well, crappy. Once you've experienced high definition you will never want to go back to watching regular TV again.

In the article I referenced above, the data shows that even commercials are in the mix. A certain percentage of men and a bit lower percentage of women, but still some women, notice when a commercial is NOT in high definition and have a negative reaction to it.

I knew I couldn't be alone in my viewing habits and now I have proof. I routinely watch programming in high definition because it's in high definition. And I pick the HD programming over non-HD programming every time unless I absolutely have no choice.

What really gets me is when a TV show is supposed to be in HD but isn't. That makes me angry. And that's why I continually call or write to broadcasters to ask them what their problem is.

Metrocast Cable - Share your horror stories

It is now day 3. I still have not heard from Metrocast with an explanation of what happened on May 19th to Channel 723 (WPFO - Fox 23). I still have not explanation for why every time I call Metrocast (as late as yesterday), I am told that I do not get channel 723. That's interesting since I watch it every day.

I can't even use the words "customer service" when speaking of the department at Metrocast from which I would like to receive a call. There certainly is no service, and they've noted my account as a "pain in the ass" customer.

Here's the reality. The people that take trouble calls there know close to nothing. Just because they are in New Hampshire and don't get channel 723 (they get Fox 25 out of Boston on channel 725) doesn't mean that I don't. How can they NOT KNOW what channels a customer gets. How can they NOT KNOW that the channels I receive are not the same as theirs. I am in another state. They have cable TV operations in several states. I pay them money every month to get these channels, but I am repeatedly told that I don't get channel 723, that's why I am having reception problems with that channel.

This is bordering on complete insanity. How can a company operate, or behave this way.

So every day I will write more and more disparaging comments about Metrocast Cable until I get some answers. Anyone else want to share Metrocast horror stories. Come on, join in on the fun!

And for your folks at Metrocast (that means you Krista, and Brad, and Judy, and Mike, so far), I'M WAITING.