CBS affiliate WGME "caught" not broadcasting in 1080i - but Big Brother is watching!

WGME - Channel 13 is in a pickle.  They (or more likely their parent Sinclair Broadcasting) were caught broadcasting a downgraded signal, not up to the standards of being a CBS affiliate.

A while back I noticed the quality of WGME's broadcast had diminished some.  If you own a bigger High Def TV (say, above 40 inches) you are more likely to notice a poor quality picture.

Some people swear there is no difference between 720p and 1080i but those people are wrong.  It's fairly obvious. 

Locally, in Portland, Maine, take a look for yourself.

• NBC, PBS and the CW have an amazing picture (all in 1080i
• ABC, FOX, and MyNetwork have a diminished picture  (all in 720p)

That leaves WGME, the CBS affiliate.  Many of my current TV watching habits were honed over the early days of high definition, based on picture quality.  For example, it took WMTW (ABC-Channel 8) FOREVER to convert to High Definition - so I stopped watching them.

CBS on WGME used to be the hallmark of high quality HD pictures.  But for quite a while now, it has been lacking.  One day I hit the "info" button on my remote and it showed "720p" for the broadcast signal.  I had to stare at it for several minutes.  I thought my cable company was screwing with the CBS signal.  I took the the Internet and double checked.  No, I was right, CBS is broadcasting nationally in 1080i.  So WHY IS MY WGME SIGNAL IN 720P?????

It took until today to find out.  I can't name names or quote anyone.  But apparently WGME has been getting away with this for several (like 4) years.  What I thought was my eyesight going, or the lighting in the room, or my TV crapping out on me, was actually WGME themselves DOWNGRADING the 1080i signal from CBS to 720p.

As it turns out, WGME is "considering" returning to 1080i.

I asked my source specifically why CBS corporate would allow a local affiliate like WGME to screw with its signal, the answer is, they wouldn't.  Big Brother is watching.  And rightly so.

Now, I suspect it took a while for CBS corporate to figure out what was going on but somebody finally noticed.  I believe, and I'm speculating based on what I know, that CBS is forcing WGME back in to the 1080i game.  For WGME is was simply CHEAPER to try to get away with a 720p signal.  Less storage space for audio/video because the files are smaller, less compression, and more room for their current alliance with FOX 23 (who is in 720p and for whom WGME reproduces its own news on FOX 23).  FOX 23 used to ally itself with WCSH (NBC - 1080i) for its local news.  I suspect part of the deal when Fox 23 changed to WGME was that WGME use 720p.  It's all a complicated shell game (read "money") and WGME GOT CAUGHT!.  Or was it SINCLAIR BROADCASTING GROUP WHO HAPPENS TO OWN BOTH WGME AND WPFO (FOX 23) who got caught.

I wish I could say it was I who blew the whistle and called the FCC and CBS Broadcasting.  While I have complained on this site and speculated on a few occasions, I never had real answers.  So it wasn't me.

I am so glad I finally figured out what's been going on.  It's been driving me crazy and it's always great to finally GET answers, even if it could take WGME (or Sinclair Broadcasting) a year to undo the mess they made.

WMTW Channel 8 in Portland Maine - Maine's Total Weather? Are you sure?

WMTW in Portland, ME (Channel 8) has a tag line that it's "Maine's Total Weather".

That can't possibly be true if it's the ONLY station in its market that doesn't broadcast the weather in High Definition (or the entire local news broadcast for that matter).

Here are some screen shots of the 3 major affiliates in Portland. They are just random shots.  Open and look.

NBC WCSH 6

CBS WGME 13

 and finally poor little
ABC WMTW 8

Look at the quality (or lack thereof where appropriate) of each picture.  Channel 8 graphics look the same now as they did 10 years ago.

Now that's not to mention the overall broadcast quality of Channel 8.  When you add PBS to the the mix, Channel 8 is the only local broadcaster in the Portland market using 720p instead of 1080i.  That alone is not WMTW's fault.  Their affiliate parent, ABC, decided years ago when they had a choice, to go with 720p instead of 1080i for their HD broadcasting. (You may look elsewhere on this site or others for an explanation of the difference.)  And it took all local affiliates years to get up to speed with the right technology, studios, makeup, and field cameras needed to be able to broadcast the local new in High Definition

The problem?  WMTW never really caught up.  Their prime time programming from ABC is in 720p.  Some say it's the same quality as 1080i in that the average user can't tell the difference.  I beg to differ - strongly.  Just watch any broadcast or cable channel using 1080i including the other networks, plus cable networks like CNN, etc. and you WILL see the difference.  720p was okay (just okay) for HD TV's that were at most 32 inch screens.  But as TV's get bigger, the difference in quality becomes even more apparent.

As for WMTW, their local news broadcast appears to me to be in the right ratio (16:9 for HD, as opposed to 4:3 for SD) but the quality of the picture appears to be more like 480i or 480p.  These are the picture qualities used prior to HD.  So the picture might look correct (not stretched or oddly proportioned as can happen) but the quality is abysmal.  Many TV stations around the country try to fool the public by broadcasting in a 16:9 ratio, but use a 480i picture quality.  You will see this most prominently in "field" reporting.  The studio cuts to a location piece and suddenly the picture looks awful.  This happens because the field cameras they use are cheap, crappy cameras that can film in the 16:9 ratio, but can't film in high definition.  ANY MODERN SMARTPHONE HAS BETTER BROADCAST QUALITY THAN THE FIELD CAMERAS USED ON WMTW.

In my opinion WMTW should be ASHAMED of the quality of the content they are producing for the public. If you are watching WMTW on a High Def TV on the High Def channel, compare it to the standard definition channel.  Every cable operator has both.  And even if you're not using cable TV in preference of free HDTV over the air, compare channel 8.1 (their supposed HD channel) to channel 8.5 (the SD version), there is very little difference.  On the other hand, do the same with WCSH or WGME.  You will be blown away by the better picture in HD.

I don't watch WMTW for local news/weather any more because the picture quality is so bad.  It's bad in an era of television that has produced unbelievably crisp, clear, high definition TV.  What is WMTW going to do when Ultra HD and 4K HD televisions become norm.  Just like flat screen TV's became so prolific 10 years ago, within 5 years, Ultra HD and 4K will be the norm.  You can't even buy a TV that's not an HD flat screen anymore.  In 4K, watching WMTW will be like watching black and white, grainy, "news reel" footage from the moon walk in 1969  in comparison to every other channel in the Portland market.

If I've said it once, I've said it a thousand times:  Whoever has the best HD wins!

As the choices for watching television get broader each day, and in a world where the almighty advertising dollar still rules, can WMTW really afford NOT to keep up? 

I welcome your comments and opinions

WGME CBS Portland, Maine High Definition downgraded to 720p

I noticed recently that CBS is now broadcasting television shows in 720p instead of 1080i.  I'd like to know, and I am trying to find out, when this began, but more importantly WHY?.

Great debaters take on the topic of 1080i versus 720p ad nauseam; there is no consensus.  But as a long time HD television advocate and industry watcher, in my personal opionion (well, me and my TV's) 1080i is far superior to 720p.  Just take a look at the ABC news cast (720p) and compare it to whatever is on CNN (1080i) at the same time and tell me you don't see a difference.

I was watching the CBS Evening News with Scott Pelley recently and noticed how bad the picture was.  I noticed it on Face the Nation the prior day. I started adjusting the fine tuning of my Samsung High Def (which I hate compared to my Sony, Samsung is SO overrated, but that's a story for another post) because the picture just didn't look right.

I tried everything from contrast to brightness to warm/cool and everything in between.  I tried playing with the various (and useless) built-in "modes" on the Samsung (e.g. Movies, Sports, Gaming, etc.) but nothing worked.

When I finally hit the "info" button while tuned in the CBS, I was shocked to see that CBS was broadcasting in 720p. The info button on my TV tells the viewer what "definition" they are watching. I don't believe it had anything to do with WGME because they (like other broadcast stations) simply rebroadcast the signal as it comes in. But to be honest, I'm not sure. I checked back on several days and several other CBS shows and they were still in 720p. For all I know WGME may have downgraded the signal.  I used the google machine thingy and tried various searches regarding CBS and 720p but literally found nothing on the subject that had now capture my attention greatly.

I'm trying to get some answers and I'm starting with WGME to see if they know (or will even tell me) what's going on.

One of the reasons I even watched CBS is for the picture quality.  It's important to me.  If there is breaking news or a Presidential address, I will watch it on NBC, CBS, PBS, or CNN (all 1080i) instead of ABC or FOX (720p for both) because of the better quality of the picture.  When you spend a lot of money on a High Def TV, you want your content in High Def, yes, but you want it in the BEST high def quality you can get.  When you have a choice, you will go with higher quality every time.

So I've started asking questions and we'll see what I find out.

Thanks for reading.

WMTW in Portand, ME, tries to fool viewers looking for HD

 

I'm not quite sure what is going on over at WMTW in Portland, Maine.  Even though Hearst Television (Heart Communications) has spent millions upon millions upgrading the TV stations it owns so that the local news for each can be broadcast in High Definition (HD), somehow Hearst managed to skip over WMTW - "News 8" in Portland, Maine.

Let's face it - whoever has the most HD wins.  Along time ago I predicted that whichever local TV station in our market (Portland/Lewiston/Auburn) did the local news in HD would win the ratings game (and therefore the advertising revenue).  And I happened to be right.  WCSH-6 broadcast its local news in first, WGME-13 was second, and WMTW has yet to do it.  The ratings match up exactly to this dynamic.

Although WMTW has won many award for its news coverage in the last few years, including a regional Emmy award and the Edward R. Murrow award, it continues to be dead last in the ratings in its official demographic area (Portland/Lewiston/Auburn as cited by the National Association of Broadcasters).

And here is why.

First, keep in mind the the majority of US households now have at least one High Definition television. And if you own one, and have truly experienced REAL HD, there is simply no going back to crappy quality pictures.  Why should we.  The technology has been around for two decades.  It would be comparable to the 1950's and 1960's when Color TV took over Black and White.  Can you imagine if out of 3 local TV stations, two were in color and one was in B&W?  Which would you watch on your new color TV?

After the conversion from Analog TV to Digital TV, local TV stations were still broadcasting their locally produced news in standard definition (SD).  It takes lots of money (for equipment in the studio and for field reporting) and time to prepare for broadcasting local news in HD.  But parent company Hearst put up the funds for what seems like every one of its TV station, except WMTW.

As recently as about 3 weeks ago, WMTW's HD capabilities for the local news was limited to a banner/scroll at the bottom of the screen which mostly had weather info during the broadcast, but the actual on-camera folks, and field reporting, was done in SD - and it looked like hell.

About 3 weeks ago, WMTW "converted" to what uninformed viewers might think is HD, but in fact is not.  WMTW simply changed the aspect ratio from 4:3 (SD) to 16:9 (typically HD but more accurately is simply considered wide screen. You don't have to be in HD to broadcast in wide screen) so that the picture would fill the screen and not look stretched or squished.

However, the quality of the broadcast didn't change.  The local news is in wide screen but IS NOT IN HD.  Nor is the field reporting.  Just compare the onscreen graphics to the info bar at the bottom.  Or compare the picture to one of the other TV station's local news.

I can only imagine that WMTW received many complaints from viewers regarding its lack of local news in HD.  So their solution was to try to fool the viewing audience into assuming the broadcast was now in HD simply because the picture was now in wide screen format.  Well, guess what - IT'S NOT!!!!  There is NOTHING HD about WMTW's news broadcast.  It's just a wider originating picture.  Shame on you WMTW.

I am perplexed as to why WMTW is one of the few, if not the only, Hearst-owned TV stations around the country which has not been converted to full HD for the local news.  I've tried to find out, but simply can not.  And worse now is that because of ratings, WMTW cancelled it's weekday noon newscast due to lack of ratings and was replaced by "The Steve Harvey Show".  Really!?  Are you kidding me??  That show will get cancelled within a few months if not weeks.  Then, WMTW will be showing infomercials instead of a noon newscast.  It's just sad.  And all because the ratings were lost to two other stations who invested in HD technology for the local news cast.  WMTW is also the only local TV station to skip a 5 PM newscast - because nobody is watching in non-HD.  Instead they have the Dr. Phil show at 5 pm which is rebroadcast from an HD uplink.  They can do that, but they can't broadcast the local news in HD.  It's different technology.

The bottom line is that WMTW is dragging in the ratings even though the station wins prestigious awards.  But who would want to watch WMTW news (that looks awful on an HDTV) when the viewer can relax his/her eyes and watch WCSH-6 or WGME-13 local news in GLORIOUS, full HD.  No matter how insipid the news readers are (I simply can not call the people who anchor or report for WCSH or WGME "journalists"), the weather maps on the two HD stations are cool (especially WCSH) and much of the field reporting, which is sometimes local and sometimes rebroadcast from other stations around the country, is crystal clear in HD.

WMTW is losing the ratings game.  By all measurable criteria, they should be winning. But the lack of HD from the live studio news broadcast AND from the field reporting is dragging them down even further.

I tried to reach WMTW for comment about why they switched to 16:9 wide screen but not to HD, and to find out why Hearst's multi-million dollar investments in most stations it owns had not reached WMTW.  I could not get a response.

In defense of WMTW, the station does not refer to its local news as HD and does not use "HD" in any tag lines.  However, switching to a wide screen format as a way to placate the public is one more nail in the coffin, and a bit (or a lot) disingenuous.

WMTW once had one of the biggest viewerships in the country (by share) because its tower was located on top of Mount Washington, the highest place in New England.  They used to reach six or seven states plus the Montreal market.  The fall from grace began when digital TV was mandated and WMTW had to sell it's spot "on the mountain" due to FCC regulations.  They simply could not or would not keep up with current technology.

I'm sure that the local management at WMTW wishes like crazy that their local news was in HD.  I can't imagine it would be otherwise.  So the blame has to be put on the Hearst Corporation.  I wouldn't be surprised if Hearst plans to sell the station and that is why WMTW's newsroom has not been converted to HD.

If anyone out there knows what's going on, I'd truly love a reply to this post so that my readers will understand it as well.

CBS, Sinclair, and WGME pass the buck regarding High Def issues

WGME-13 in Portland, Maine is NOT broadcasting in 1080i High Definition on their HD Channel (13.1).

I didn't notice for a while because I had cable TV, with a cable box.  I remember thinking that WGME's broadcast didn't have the quality I remembered but I don't watch TV that often anymore and figured that since I was using my cable box instead of an antenna, there was a signal degradation.  When I decided it was too expensive and went back to using my old Bessie (TERK Antenna) my Sony Bravia TV told me that Channel 13.1 was in 720p.  Then it hit me.

This confused the heck out of me.  As the second largest broadcaster in the world behind the BBC (UK), CBS Corporation was one of the biggest proponents of 1080i High Definition, investing a lot of money to make 1080i the standard over 720p.  In the end, CBS got what it wanted for CBS affiliates while other Networks, like ABC and Fox went with 720p.  And I know that WGME had been broadcasting in 1080i from back a ways when I only relied on over the air High Definition.  So when I noticed all of this happening last week, I called CBS Corporation in New York and left a message - that was my only option.

CBS itself doesn't own WGME, it is owned by SInclair Broadcasting (better known as the Tea Party broadcasting group).  On the day I left a message with CBS, I went home that night and noticed that WGME was back to broadcasting in 1080i.  I thought that maybe, someone from CBS contacted them.  CBS Affiliates are under contract to rebroadcast network programming in 1080i.  It work the same for whatever network we're talking about whether the contract is for 720p or 1080i.
Now, there is an ongoing debate over which is better, 720p or 1080i.  I can guarantee you, in all my years of researching HD TV, 1080i is superior to 720p.  I can tell the difference from a mile off.  But that's not the point.  The point is that CBS and NBC transmit their HD signals in 1080i, while ABC and Fox broadcast in 720p.  Do me a favor - watch and compare and see if you don't agree.

I worked on getting my antenna in just the right spot for several days (it's what you do when you rely on Over The Air, or OTA, television signals).  So I know that it wasn't a fluke.  WGME didn't slip up one day for a few hours.  They were broadcasting in 720p for I don't know how long and they hoped nobody would notice.

I noticed.

I knew (from previous experience) that if I called the General Manager of WGME that I wouldn't get any answers.  So I called CBS Corporate Offices in New York.  I didn't get to speak to a live person but I left a message with a Rich Shoenholtz in Affiliate Relations.  I never heard back from the guy (I wasn't surprised).  When I didn't hear back I wrote to Craig Clark, the Chief Engineer at WGME to ask about the 720p signal.  I did not hear back from him either.

Today, I called CBS again and talked to a lovely (I'm kidding) woman named Kathleen Powers.  She had absolutely no idea what I was talking about and didn't know High Definition from a hole in the wall.  After I got frustrated trying to explain, she put me on hold and said she talked to "someone" who said that Sinclair Broadcasting owned WGME and I would have to take it up with them.

OK - I don't get it.  WGME is owned by Sinclair but under contract with CBS to rebroadcast the CBS signal in 1080i.  CBS spent a lot of money to make sure they would be in 1080i when the conversion to digital/HDTV took place.  But nobody cares that their affiliate isn't doing what is supposed to be done under a signed contract?  That make absolutely no sense to me.

So I called Sinclair, knowing ahead of time that I would be hard pressed to find someone there who would talk to a lowly consumer.  When I explained why I was calling the receptionist, again, had absolutely NO IDEA what I was talking about and said that an affiliate could use whatever "brand of equipment" they wanted and that I should take it up with WGME.  What!?  Really?!

When I finally explained what High Definition was and the different qualities of High Definition, and that one of their stations was following protocol, she transferred me to the IT department.  The gentleman that answered the phone said that he wasn't the right person to talk to (after I explained again why I was calling) and "transferred" me to dead air by hanging up on me.

As a last resort, I called Tom Humpage, General Manager of WGME.  I left a voice mail and sent him and email since we had emailed each other a few years back about other issues.

As of the date and time of this posting, I have yet to hear back from anyone regarding this issue.

WCSH 6 Morning Report in High Def

It's been several years now since I have watched WCSH Channel 6 in Portland, for my morning news. Watching it was a habit; it's what "people" watched when I first moved to Maine in 2001 and so I got in the habit of watching it. But never really cared much for the hosts.

When Shannon Moss defected to Channel 8 - WMTW, I began watching Channel 8 for my morning news. Channel 8's newscast was professional and easy to watch. The other competition, Channel 13, WGME, was always a distant third in my book, and in the ratings.

Channel 8 took a big bite out of WCSH's domination of the morning news market. WCSH had become stale, and full of big-egoed anchors that often rolled their eyes at news stories and often voiced their right-wing opinions openly; something that is supposed to be an absolute no-no in the world of journalism. But the viewership never questioned Sharon Rose's opinion about certain stories.

OK - jump to today. I've always said that whoever can do the news in HD in our local Portland/Lewiston television market will win the ratings game. Viewers who have HD televisions will, in general, watch an HD broadcast over a standard definition broadcast, even if the HD broadcast wouldn't normally be their first choice in programming.

I will try to be fair. My opinions on WCSH are not a secret. But they did a good job. I caught the broadcast today, Friday, November 4, 2011, when the morning News Center team celebrating their 15th anniversary. Seeing a live news HD broadcast in Maine was a pleasure and something I have been waiting for since I started this blog in 2007 and long before the official transition to Digital TV in this country in 2008. The anchors, Lee Nelson and Sharon Rose, were still as insipid as they've always been. But Lee Nelson actually looked good in his HD makeup. Whoever did it did a great job. Kevin Mannix, the weather forecaster, also looked great. Unfortunately, the unforgiving bright lights and camera lenses of high definition were not so kind to Sharon Rose. She looks like a corpse in HD; the "false eye lashes" were way over the top and appeared like two frightened spiders caught in a flashlight beam.

Like most HD local news broadcasts, field camera work is still in standard definition. That will come in time. But the most impressive addition to WCSH's broadcast was the weather. The new weather maps were large, crisp, and easy to read. New graphics, like three dimensional surface-map icons (take a look at the high and low pressure icons on the map with circular three-dimensional wind circulation) were cool. There seemed to be many new graphic features and they didn't overpower the map; they added functionality to it. Often, when new technology is available, it is used because it is available regardless of the value it adds. Not true with WCSH's weather graphics - job well done.

The other local affiliates in our demographic market, WMTW and WGME, have to make the switch to broadcasting in HD or they will lose a lot of viewers. It is expensive to convert a studio to an HD studio, and the hardware (cameras, editing equipment, etc.) and software needed is extremely expensive and requires a hefty financial commitment from each station's ownership.

I'm happy that Southern Maine finally has an HD news broadcast. I'm disappointed that it was WCSH to do it first, but I have to admit, overall they did a very good job that will only get better as HD broadcasting in local markets matures.

Now come on WMTW!! Let's get with the program (no pun intended). WGME, to me, is out of the running. Even with an HD broadcast they will still be in third place, out of three.

I will continue to watch WMTW for my news. I simply can not stomach the on-air personalities. I will continue to hope that WMTW goes HD for their news and I may check in on WCSH form time to time, just because HD is so much easier on the eyes.

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.

WGME - 60 Minutes not in HD

The October 25, 2009, broadcast of "60 Minutes" was not in high definition on WGME Channel 13 out of Portland, Maine. I wrote to the General Manager, Tom Humpage, who told me "it must be that switch thing again".

Tom is referring to a switch on the console in the TV Control room at the station. It is literally a switch on the control board that can toggle the broadcast between High Definition and Standard Definition.

The person at the console must "flip the switch" in order for HD to go out over the broadcast antenna. In my experience, when I call a local TV station to let them know that somebody forgot to "flip the switch", I usually get (and I've used this analogy before) a guy named Chad munching on a Kit-Kat bar and a drinking a Red Bull who says, "Huh?".

It's not rocket science. When a TV show you are broadcasting should be in HD, and you don't have sophisticated equipment that will flip the HD switch automatically, then FLIP THE SWITCH!

WGME is Portland, ME, seems to be the one TV station in the area that consistently has this problem. I admit that the incidences of the switch not being flipped are much less often than they used to be, but it bothers me that it still happens.

WGME - Oprah not in HD anymore

It took me a while to figure this one out. But with the help of a friend in the business, and Tom Humpage, the GM at WGME, and CBS Television Distribution, I finally put the pieces of the puzzle together.

Last season, Oprah began producing her show in High Definition. Here in Maine, WGME started broadcasting the show in HD around January of 09. When Oprah began her 2009/2010 season earlier this month, WGME no longer broadcast the show in HD. But WCVB out of Boston still broadcasts the show in HD.

Apparently CBS Television Distribution (CTD) changed the way they send the show through the satellite feed to the stations that broadcast Oprah. CTD used to have a 4:00 HD feed which was picked up by WGME and broadcast in HD. This is called a pass-through. Station like WGME all around the country don't have the ability to record shows in High Definition from a satellite feed and play them back at a later time. But they can do a pass-through. Other larger station around the country, like WCVB out of Boston, have the expensive equipment required to record High Definition programs from a satellite feed and play them back at a later date/time.

Beginning September 10, 2009 CTD eliminated its 4:00 Eastern feed in High Definition. So television stations around the country who can only do a pass-through had to revert back to Standard Definition (SD). Stations like WCVB who can record HD from a feed can continue to broadcast Oprah, and other shows, in HD.

I know it all sounds a bit technical but the bottom line is that WGME, and many, many TV stations around the country, have lost their ability to present syndicated shows like Oprah in High Definition because the syndicator has changed the time of the HD feed to an earlier time, therefore disqualifying stations who can only do a pass-through from being able to broadcast Oprah in High Definition. It is not WGME's fault that this has happened. They did not have a choice in the matter. Network Shows in Primetime are sent via satellite feed to affiliate TV stations at the exact time they should be airing. That's how TV Station without the fancy equipment can broadcast High Definition.

The number of households with High Definition TVs is growing rapidly. Therefore, television shows in High Definition are beginning to get higher ratings than shows not in High Definition. So I'm sure WGME would prefer that things went back to the way they used to be. But again, they have no say in the matter. And viewers have nowhere to complain. I guess you could call your congressperson. Good luck.

Craig Ferguson finally goes HD; plus an HD update for Maine

The man who is simply the best in the late night arena, Craig Ferguson, will no longer be able to be the butt of his own jokes about being the only late night show not in High Definition.

Conan O'Brien (Late Night with....) was in HD back when he was still in the 12:30 time slot. His replacement, Jimmy Fallon, continues in High Definition. Jay Leno, David Letterman, and even Nightline on ABC (although it hasn't been that long for Nightline) have all been broadcasting in High Definition for a while. And when Jimmy Kimmel on ABC went high def earlier this year, that left Craig Ferguson on CBS as the only late night show NOT in high definition.

Ferguson made it known, sometimes subtly, sometimes not so subtly, that he didn't appreciate it very much. His self-deprecating humor took pot shots and the bad lighting, second-rate stage, and lack of support from CBS.

Starting this past Monday, August 31, 2009, The Late Late Show with Craig Ferguson is now in high definition. And it's about time. With 53% of American Households having at least one HD television, my predication are coming true.

I predicted that when the viewing public got used to high definition, they would demand it. And it would show in the ratings. The bottom line is - if a TV show is not in HD, it has a lesser chance of being watched. HD buffs, and regular TV viewers with an HD TV, will easily channel surf right past a show that is not in HD and will land on one (and stay there) that is in HD. Viewership equals ratings. Ratings equals advertising dollars.

The same is happening with local news broadcasts. In Southern Maine, where we can receive both local Maine news AND Boston news, the ratings tell the story. Viewers would much rather watch High Definition. So with a choice, viewers are tuning in to WCVB, WBZ, and WHDH (the big three out of Boston), for news. Some data suggests that viewers may check their local (non-HD) channels for weather. But Southern Maine and Southeastern New Hampshire are close enough to being far out suburbs of Boston, so why not watch the Boston news. Most of what Boston has on the news is centered around New England, not just Boston. And since New England is really one big state, it makes sense that viewers who spent a lot of money on an HD TV want to get all of the benefits having one.

Again, not one Maine TV station produces its newscast in HD. The ABC affiliate out of Portland, WMTW, even tries to fake it. They bought some equipment that allows them to cram the entire bottom on an HD picture with weather information, but above that is the standard black bars and second-rate picture quality. They want you to think "HD" because they are partially using the expanse of an HD picture, but it's not really HD.

WCSH, channel 6, our NBC affiliate bought some equipment that would make the on-air transition from non-HD to HD programming less jolting. All they have really been able to accomplish in HD is a 3 to 4 second promo for their on-air talent. Example: "Watch Lee Nelson and the Newscenter Morning Report". A picture of Lee Nelson flashes on the screen, there are background graphics and such, and it's all in HD. But it only lasts 3 seconds. That's all they can do.

Then there is our CBS affiliate, WGME. They call their weather computer "Doppler HD". There is nothing HD about it. This is nothing more than a marketing ploy. Do they think people won't notice that their weather broadcast, and the rest of their news broadcast isn't in HD? Do they think we are that stupid.

This is what we are dealing with in Maine. These TV stations need to man up, or woman up, and invest in an HD infrastructure. Otherwise they will continually lose viewership. I've been saying this for as long as I can remember. Whichever Maine TV station beats the rest to doing the local news in HD will win the ratings war. It's that simple.

A complaint about HDTV reception and Channel 13 - WGME

This is an email I received directly in my inbox from someone very frustrated with HDTV reception:
----------------------------------------------------
I am emailing to complain about this transition that was forced upon us viewers. For those of us who do not have cable or satellite TV, this has quickly become a nuisance. Channel 13, specifically, has most of the shows that I like to watch, yet I cannot maintain signal. I have scanned for channels several times, adjusted my antenna, and was able to improve it to the limited signal that I currently have, but while other stations have a much stronger signal and a consistently clear picture now without all of the annoying pixelation and cuts, I find it especially aggravating that this one station, that I watch the most, cannot maintain a consistent signal. I am amazed to not hear stories of sponsors pulling their ads and dropping their support! Is this ever going to be resolved? Or, are we viewers stuck with this ineffective system?
----------------------------------------------------
I am going to email this user back with my comments but I thought I woud post this here so that others can comment as well.

RSC

Update: Maine Television's Transition to Digital - what's really going on

Although President Obama signed a bill to extend the drop dead date for Analog broadcasting from February 17, 2009 to June 12, 2009, it is NOT a mandate. Broadcast television stations CAN extend their analog broadcasting, but they don't HAVE TO. So what's happening here in Maine? And what's happens beyond the conversion?

The future of Maine's broadcast television stations is in some ways written in stone and in other ways is very "up in the air" so to speak (pun intended).

There is a lot going on that we know about, but as always I am more interested in what we are not being told.

As of February 17, 2009 the following TV stations in Maine will still cease Analog operations and be Digital only. Some listed below have already shut off their analog signal.

WGME - CBS 13
*WPXT - CW - 51
*WPME - MyNetwork - 35
*MPBN - PBS Maine- Channel 10 in most areas except 9 in Orono and 45 in Biddeford
**WPFO - Fox 23
NHPTV - NH Public TV - Several channels
WVII - ABC 7 - Bangor

* Station has already dropped analog signal
** Station will do a flash cut-over from analog to digital on 2/17/09

CONGRATULATIONS, and job well done. I am glad that these stations have a backbone and continue forward on the conversion. The supposed extension to June is plain silliness. Why sign an extension bill if it is non-binding and all it does is cost different people money. It's crazy and unnecessary. The Converter Box Coupon program is not broke. The FCC handed out millions of coupons that were requested, but not really needed by the people who ordered them. And they sent out millions to people who simply let them expire without ever using them. The FCC is accounting for all of these unused and unneeded coupons as if it's money out the door and then claiming they are in the red. It's a bunch of crap. I don't know the percentages because the won't tell me but there must be a huge number of coupons out there that have never and will never be used. So I'd like to see the FCCs books to see if they moved those dollars back into the "cash available" column.

Now these are the TV in Maine stations who don't have a backbone and are using this fake extension as an excuse to hide their sub-standard technological abilities.

WMTW - ABC - 8 - Portland
WCSH - NBC - 6 Portland
WLBZ- NBC - 2 Bangor - owned by WCSH
WABI - CBS - 5 Bangor
The CW - used to be 56 Bangor, now just digital and only standard definition as a sub channel of WABI - The WABI/CW partnership is the most confusing and screwed up setup I have ever seen. I don't even think this CW entity has its own channel number anymore.

So there you have it, the winners and losers. Or is that the whole story?

The real truth is that NOT ONE MAINE TV STATONS is producing any programming in High Definition or even Standard Definition in 16:9 widescreen format. Not ONE. In Boston all three of the big three local affiliates produce their local news in High Definition. And they use Standard Def widescreen cameras for many of the field shots. WCVB even produces the only New England based non-news programming in High Definition. It's called Chronicle and they do an unbelievable job with production values.

Now in my area, WCSH, WMTW, and WGME all produce their news in digital, but standard definition. So all of us with HD televisions have to put up with two black bars on the side of the picture (called pillars). Many HDTV can't streth the picture to fit the screen easily because said black pillars are broadcast as part of the picture. The pillars exists only to fill up the screen. You would think that the people at these TV stations would be EMBARRASSED at this point. Hell, even Oprah and Ellen are in High Definition now, but Maine's crack TV technical directors can't quite figure out how to broadcast these programs in HD to Maine viewers. If Boston can do it why can't Maine? Is it about the money?

Of course it is. But they will blame in on the "economic downturn" or "reduced advertising revenue". The bottom line is that these stations are all owned by some corporate conglomerate. So until Maine's population demands High Definition local programming and refuses to watch the existing, ridiculous 1980's-style "news", then our TV stations will continue to offer sub-standard programming. If they aren't losing viewers, they have not reason to change anything.

Isn't it time we spoke up? Haven't we had to deal with enough with the digital conversion? WE WANT OUR HDTV!!!

Here's the big picture. A lot of people in Maine rely on over-the-air TV broadcasting. They have been forced to buy a new digital TV (and maybe a new antenna) or a converter box (and maybe a new antenna). When they have completed this, and hook it all up, they most likely receive fewer channels than they did before, because digital signals aren't as strong. The FCC promised that consumers would receive the same stations they did before. THIS IS NOT TRUE. The FCC had NO IDEA what they were talking about and did not know how many consumers would be affected by a reduction in the number of channels received. Now add on top of this all of the public service announcements and TV crawlers and news articles that have been going on for almost 2 years. The whole thing has been a major production and in my opinion, since the government started this whole thing, it was bound to be a mess, and it is.

So after all this don't we deserve to have high definition programming all the time, not just digital. Digital TV by itself isn't "better" than high quality analog broadcasting, not to the human eye anyway. So if you're not going to make a real difference and go HD all the way, then why bother. It's like in the old days if they had started selling color TVs and then no programming was in color, wouldn't you be a bit upset after you spent the money on a new set?

The Maine TV stations who are so behind the curve should be ashamed of themselves; I am ashamed and embarrassed by them. Thank goodness I can get the Boston channels from my house.

Am I really ready for Digital TV?

Are you sure you know the Truth about Digital TV and High Definition with an Antenna?

Doug Finck, from WPXT in Portland, ME, said in an email to me "our biggest challenge is not in communicating to the public that we are switching to digital...but the issues about reception"

Doug has been a long time supporter and recently shared the following information which I found most helpful in explaining some of the basic truths about digital TV.

"1. It's all about the antenna. An outside antenna will probably be necessary for many people. The type of antenna, however, is an issue because of the fact that there will be a combination of UHF and VHF digital stations and the viewers will need an antenna capable of receiving both types of transmission (or two antennas).

2. The more powerful and antenna is, the more directional it is. The more directional it is, the more critical it is to point it toward the transmitting antenna for the station they want to watch. Someone living in Lewiston will have to point their antenna in three directions; north for WCBB and WPFO, southwest for WCSH, WMTW and WMEA, and southeast for WGME, WPME and WPXT.

3. Consumers have to understand the need to manually enter all channels WHEN THEIR ANTENNA IS POINTED TOWARD THAT CHANNEL'S TRANSMITTING ANTENNA. Auto-scan is a waste of time and should be ignored or defeated. In the real world, a viewer will have a powerful, directional antenna. They will have to point it toward a specific station's transmitting antenna then enter that station's digital frequency (not the station's analog/marketing channel) to save the station. Then they will go to the next station, move the antenna, enter the digital number and save it. This process will be the only way to get the digital tuner to "see" all of the channels (assuming the viewer can actually get enough of a signal from each station to actually get the picture).

4. Rotors will allow one antenna to be aimed at all of the channels. Multiple antennas (with each one pointed in a specific direction) will also accomplish the same goal (getting the maximum signal from each station). But remember, in this market you're going to need both VHF and UHF receiving capability to get all of the stations!

As far as the cheap converter boxes are concerned, they are designed to downconvert digital signals to be displayed on an analog TV. The tuners are fine for doing that and all of the converter boxes are of equal quality and value. If by more expensive, you're talking about a $150+ box, you're not talking about a converter box, you're describing a digital tuner. There's a huge difference in price, quality and functionality. If you're just looking to buy a digital converter box to be used with an analog TV, buy the cheapest one you can find."

I asked some additional questions regarding whether or not existing TV stations would use continue to use their temporary UHF channel numbers or go back to their regular numbers (the ones the public knows them by). Here was Doug's response:

"Our digital channel is and will remain, 43. Stations will continue to market and refer to themselves by their old analog channel numbers as a way to reduce confusion to viewers. Our move with WPME from digital channel 28 to 35 (our old analog channel) was done for technical reasons (to allow us use the existing channel 35 antenna which is mounted at the highest point on the tower).

Several of the other area stations will be moving back to their analog frequencies (primarily for lower electric power costs), but most will not. This is going to be a confusing issue as viewers try to tune into specific stations and don't know the "real" channel numbers.

WCSH - Analog channel 6...digital channel 44. They will not be moving and even though the digital tuners will tell you that you are watching channel 6, it will actually be receiving that signal on channel 44.

WMTW - Analog channel 8...currently digital channel 45 but they will be
moving back to channel 8 for their digital broadcasting on February 17th.

WGME - Analog channel 13...digital channel 38. They will
not be moving and even though the digital tuners will tell you that you are
watching channel 13, it will actually be receiving that signal on channel 38.

WCBB - Analog channel 10...currently digital channel 17 but they will be
moving back to channel 10 for their digital broadcasting next week.

WPFO - Analog channel 23...they will switch from analog to digital broadcasting on
February 17th, but will remain on channel 23.

WMEA - Analog channel 26...they will switch to digital channel 45 (the current WMTW channel) on February 17th so the tuner will tell you that you're watching channel 26 but it will actually be receiving channel 45.

As viewers have to manually add and delete channels they will need to understand this concept and know the real channel numbers for each station."

Many thanks to Doug for all of his input. We appreciate that he has always been as passionate about getting information out to the public as those at the Maine HDTV Forum.

Channel 13 - WGME - still can't get High Def right

It is really hard to believe that after all this time WGME can't seem to broadcast in high definition when they are supposed to.

If you are a regular on this site you know the troubles we have had with WGME that go way, way back. At one point, it was almost on a nightly basis that I would have to call the control room at WGME to tell them they were not broadcasting in HD, only to have someone there flip the HD switch and hang up without ever asking me who I was or how I knew.

Terry Cole, the General Manager, finally caught on and invited me to come and see their operation. I wrote to him so many times that he actually was interested in fixing the problem. He was, at one time, concerned with the public's perception of their station. During my visit I actually saw the "HD button" which is akin to an on/off switch on the control board. There are a few times during that day that the network feeds from CBS are in HD, and therefore the control room needs to manually switch over to broadcasting in HD. But somehow, they don't get it right and it takes a phone call from me; someone who has no connection to the television industry whatsoever other than I watch TV, to let them know something is wrong.

This happened again last night. I don't even remember the show. Whatever is on CBS at 8:00 was not in HD but should have been. I called and asked to be connected to the control room. Once again I spoke to someone who did not give me his name (I think it was "Chip" and he was munching on a Kit-Kat bar). I explained that WGME was not broadcasting in HD but should be. I was watching channel 13 as I was on the phone. Suddenly the picture burst into full HD color and sound. I don't believe I even got a thank you for letting him know.

In the past, someone along the line would try and convince me how complicated it is. But I have toured this station and as I said, saw the HD "on/off" button. A monkey could do it. Maybe WGME should hire monkey.

Oprah in HD

Well things are starting to come together.  Sort of.

I wrote about "Ellen" being in high definition and now Oprah is as well.  I can see the Oprah show on Channel 5 out of Boston, and Channel 13 out of Portland, Maine, both at 4:00 PM.  Channel 5 has it in HD and Channel 13 does not.

It proves the power of the TV station.  WCVB invested a lot of money to convert their broadcasting capabilities to full HD.  Smaller stations like WGME in Portland don't have that kind of capital.

So again, if you had the choice to watch the same program in HD or not in HD, which would you watch?  If I could only get TV stations to understand this concept and invest the money to go all the way with HD.  

At least I have the ability to watch more and more TV in High Definition.  TV station who don't keep up with the trends will just get lost in the shuffle.

"Doppler HD" is a ploy - There is nothing HD about it

Maybe not everywhere, but here in Maine the term "Doppler HD", as used by one local television station, is nothing but a ploy.

Doppler HD refers to a television stations weather system being able to produce and transmit their weather data to the viewer in brilliant High Definition quality.

Well, if this local affiliate doesn’t have the equipment to produce or transmit the local news in high definition, why would it be any different for the weather segment?

The answer is: It isn't.

I have sources in the industry who have told me that the term "Doppler HD" as it is used at Channel 13, WGME, in Portland, Maine, is nothing but a ploy. They reserved the name -- the "brand" so to speak -- so that some day, when they are actually able to broadcast the local news and weather in high definition, they will be ready, with their pet name for their product. (It’s just a brand name. You know, like how all the TV stations have pet names like “Accu-weather” or “Weather-Plus”)

I certainly understand the idea, but I think it is sad. Not one station in my local TV market (Portland/Lewiston/Auburn -- which, by the way, is rated by size as somewhere between 75 and 100 in the country depending on the day) has any ability to produce and/or transmit their own HD programming. In fact not one station in this state or any other Northern New England state can do it either. I don’t know for sure but as far as I can tell, only a few Boston channels produce their own HD programming. WGME apparently finds it important to "copyright" the name "Doppler HD" for our television market as quickly as possible so somebody else can’t use it. Yes, it is such an attention grabber, such a unique take on weather forecasting in High Definition that they felt the need to copyright it. It’s the same idea as when you were a kid and you had to “call it”. “I call shotgun”, I would say as we piled into the station wagon.

In terms of the weather forecasting itself, I've seen the spots on WGME referring to Doppler HD saying things like "the viewers will be amazed" and "it's like nothing you've ever seen before". Well, that is not necessary true. It looks exactly like what I saw before. It looks exactly like the weather forecast and news I saw last week, last month, and last year. Nothing has changed. So maybe the "tease" spot should say "you won't even notice the new and exciting Doppler HD because we haven't changed anything”.

It is understandable that local television stations, who are dropping their analog signal, are trying to find their way in the new digital TV realm. Television is all about revenue which is based on ratings. Advertisers pay more to air commercials during programming that has a higher viewership. In my dealings with the local affiliates, they don't seem to get it. Those of us with High Definition TVs are craving HD programming. I am lucky enough to live in Southern Maine near the New Hampshire border. My cable channel lineup includes all of the Portland, Maine networks affiliates AND all of the Boston network affiliates. Both the ABC and NBC affiliates in Boston can and do broadcast their local news (including the weather) in High Definition. Maine can only sit back and dream that maybe, someday, hopefully, they will be able to do this. As an HD-phile, I tend to watch the Boston stations rather than the Maine stations simply because they are in High Definition. So what the local Maine affiliates don't seem to understand is that whoever gets the HD technology first will win. The winner will have more viewers, which converts to higher ratings, which in turn, converts to more revenue from advertisers.

So that's the lay of the land. All we are left with here in Maine is one television station in Portland who has reserved a name with the word "High Definition" in the title. There is nothing in high definition during the local news but each and every day, the viewers keep looking at the WGME broadcast thinking "Gee, I'm not sure why I spent money on an HD TV, it looks like the same quality as it did before".

Jeers to WGME for coining the term "Doppler HD". I don't have a problem with what they did; they should just be honest about it.

Hmm. TV stations being honest with the public? I've pushed it too far haven't I?

So the bottom line here is: Don't hold your breath. If you have high definition capabilities at your house, don't wait; don't pull your chair up to within inches of the screen trying to determine if something different is going on. Don't worry yourself thinking something is wrong with your eyes or your glass because they said it was in HD but you just don't see it. It's not there.

And finally, speaking of pulling your chair up closer to the TV, inn Maine, if you want high definition, big screen capabilities in your house, do exactly that.

What's going on with Subchannels in Portland, Maine

I recently received an email from Dave who asked the following:

"I was just wondering if there was any news out there of what the stations are gonna do. I heard about these DTV only networks like RTN and .2 and so on. Any news if any Maine stations are gonna pick those up or anything else?" After a few exchanges, I wrote the following (which has been aggregated) and thought it would be a great addition to this blog.

As far as I know there is not anything new official going on for subchannels with the exception of things I already know about like Weather Plus on NBC (Channel 6 Portland), and News Now on ABC (Channel 8 Portland) and the Maine Visitors Channel on MyNetowork (Channel 35 Portland - actually a pretty cool self-produced subchannel). Only Channel 13 (CBS Portland WGME) hasn't decided what to do. They were supposed to run a Music Channel on 13.2 but that deal fell through. They, along with Fox 23, and CW (Channel 51) would have space for a subchannel like RTN, but I haven't heard anything yet. I'm going to ask my contacts though, because I like the idea. It's better than those Maine Auto King infomercials which drive me CRAZY. Channels already using at least one subchannel won't have enough bandwidth to operate an a third channel. Thanks for bringing it to my attention as something I need to follow up on. I'm going to poke around and see if I can some up with any inside track "news".

I checked with one source I have at one of the network affiliate stations in Portland. He told me something that, after he said it, made perfect sense. The decision as to what is going to be done with their subchannel is dependent solely upon what their parent company and the network says. Due to issues of branding and making sure their affiliates are basically clones of each other, it would be in their best interest to decide on subchannel programming at the corporate level. For example, on WCSH Channel 6 they use Weather Plus on their subchannel. The same is true for Channel 7 in Boston, Channel 30 in Hartford, etc, All of the NBC affiliates are doing the same thing with their subchannel.

Keep in mind that most channels are using their primary channel for digital and/or high definition programming which, because of bandwidth issues, only leaves them with enough room for one other standard definition broadcast. Technically, each station could broadcast up to 4 programs simultaneously, but if they did, each would have to be in standard definition. There is one station I know in my area that is part of the ION network (see Wikipedia) that does this but very, very few Cable companies would even carry the primary channel let alone the subchannels. In addition, the same problem exists for all TV stations using subchannels; they still have to get the cable channels to carry it if they really want to get a return on their investment. Unless there is a revolution where consumers all convert back to "over the air" broadcasting (no cable or satellite), most of these subchannels will never be seen.

Now, when it comes to networks like the CW or MyNetwork, they operate more independently. As I mentioned Channel 35, part of the MyNetwork network, produces and broadcasts their own original programming on channel 35.2 called Maine Visitors Channel (MVC). RTN would be great for someone like the CW Channel 51 or even Fox 23 who may not have finalized plans yet for their subchannel(s). Or if MyNetwork Channel 35 doesn't get the revenue they expect from MVC. MVC was designed to be broadcast to all of the hotels in the Portland area. Channel 35 actually invested in, and installed, digital receivers in the hotels with whom they have agreements so that guests of the hotel could receive MVC in their rooms (which probably all have old analog sets).

So, that's my take on Subchannels in the Portland/Lewiston/Auburn television market. I'd love to hear from anyone who has more info or questions on this topic.

WGME Channel 13 Portland - HD?

Portland's channel 13 - (CBS - WGME) has a very strange definition, to me anyway, of High Definition.

It started a few weeks back with some promos during commercial breaks. WGME touted their new and upcoming HD weather capabilities that would be something "Maine has never seen before".

Then, last evening I was watching something on my DVR that I recorded yesterday afternoon. The weather here was sketchy. Massive, violent thunderstorms, trees down, fires started by downed power lines, just all around chaos. So WGME broke into regularly scheduled programming for a weather updates.

For the first time I heard Charlie Lopresti use the word "HD" as in "HD Doppler". Hmm, HD huh? Well the picture was still in 4:3 aspect ratio (non wide-screen) and the quality of the picture didn't look any different that it usually does (not HD quality).

So what exactly is "HD" about what they are doing. High Definition television is a subset of Digital Television. You need to be in digital format before you can be in HD format. So if your picture is in HD, it is digital; but just because the picture is digital, doesn't mean it's HD.

High Definition means a full 16:9 aspect ration (wide-screen) picture, with full picture resolution at 720p or 108i. Additionally the sound should be in Dolby 5.1 Surround Sound.

I don't know what WGME has planned for the future, but what I saw being touted as HD by WGME was not even close.

It has been long assumed, and I agree, that the first broadcast television station in any particular TV market (in this case the greater Portland/Lewiston/Auburn market) would take the lead in ratings and revenue by the simple fact the people are craving HD programming. And the last piece of the HD puzzle is locally producing HD programming including the local news. So the first one to do it will get the biggest piece of the pie. In the case of WGME, using the term "HD" seems premature. For those of us with HD television sets, you can't fool us. We know what is and what ISN'T high definition.

Don't try and fool us please, it insults our intelligence.

WGME - Portland - Still can't figure out HD

For the second time in a week, I had to call WGME, Channel 13 in Portland, Maine, to let them know, gently, that even though they should be broadcasting in high definition, someone didn't "hit the switch".

For those of you who may not be aware, local network broadcasting stations must control their HD programming from the Master Control panel. When HD programming is available from the network feed, they literally flip a switch (like an On/Off switch) to allow HD programming to be broadcast from their tower.

This all happens because local TV stations can't record and play back HD programming. The equipment to do that is very expensive. So they must rely on a person to "flip a switch" when the HD programming starts coming through the network feed so that their tower broadcasts the programming in High Definition.

That's how simple it is. Eventually, when local TV stations get the proper equipment, and most programming is in HD or at least digital format, this won't be an issue.

But until then, TV stations must hire some young kid named Justin, or Kyle, or Jason, or whatever, who's munching on a Kit-Kat bar and downing a Red Bull, to pretend he knows what he's doing.

That's where I come in. I call that station and ask for Justin, ask him to put the Kit-Kat down, and flip the HD switch. It all happens so fast that by the time I get the sentence out of my mouth, it has been fixed, I'm happy, and Justin is embarrassed.

Suzanne Goucher urges consumers to buy a High Definition TV, Why?

I saw Suzanne Goucher, President and CEO of the Maine Association of Broadcasters, on WCSH 6 during the 6:00pm newscast on Sunday, February 17.

She said the while there are ways that consumers can buy just a digital TV or get a converter box and keep their analog TV, the best choice really is to go out an buy an HDTV because the prices were so reasonable now, and the resolution was so good on a High Def TV, you can "see the little hairs on Tom Brady's adorable little chin".

You're kidding me, right? This is what the president of the Maine Association of Broadcasters uses as a reasonable argument for purchasing a high definition television. High Definition is a subset of digital television. HDTV is in a wide-screen (16:9 ratio as opposed to 4:3) format, and has much better sound quality.

The reality is that yes, HDTVs are cheaper than they were. But the investment to the consumer is still several hundred dollars. The "affordable" HDTVs that you can get at Wal-Mart are inferior in quality; for example at my local Wal-Mart I could not find ONE HDTV that could handle resolutions higher than 720p. Most broadcast networks are providing programming in 1080i.

Further, with the possible exception of PBS in Maine, not one local broadcaster can record HDTV programs from their respective networks and play them back in HDTV.

Let me state it more clearly. A network like ABC sends a feed of a high definition broadcast, live, up to a satellite, at which time, the local station (in our case WMTW) can send that same feed out to the public. They can't record it and play it back later, if they don't send it out in HD format them, they never will. That doesn't even mean that they have to, they have the option to.

Also, not one Maine television station has the ability to broadcast its own local news in High Definition. Now keep in mind that the "rule" is that as of 2/17/09, the FCC has mandated that all broadcast television must be in Digital format. Digital format is a clearer, crisper format than the old analog style TV but just because something is in Digital does not mean it is in High Definition. The rule does not apply to cable channels (or satellite channels if you have something like Dish network or Direct TV). Only broadcast television. That means ABC, NBC, CBS, PBS, MyNetowk, and the CW.

While I agree that if you are going to buy a new TV you should buy an HDTV. But don't buy one thinking that now, or even as of 2/17/09, every TV broadcast will be in high definition. The TV broadcasting industry is simply changing from analog to digital. You TV will either be OK, or not, depending on how you get your signal; either via cable, satellite, or over the air.

High Definition is the next logical thing you need to think about. However, other than the national morning new shows (Today Show, GMA), one soap opera, SOME prime time network shows between 8pm and 11pm, The Tonight Show, Letterman, and Conan, that's it. The broadcast network and all other programming coming from your local TV stations is NOT in high definition. So if you like watching reruns of Everybody Loves Raymond, you're out of luck. The local TV station will stretch the picture out, or you can do it yourself with your shiny new HDTV, but Raymond was never produced in HD and will never be in HD.

There are several cable stations that are supposedly in HD. Many of them have the same problem I describe above in that most of the shows aren't produced in HD so they obviously can't show them in HD; they can just stretch out the picture to fit the 16:9 ration of your HDTV. Some of these same channels do have real High Definition programming.

So there is a lot of misinformation out there. You need to be careful and ask some questions before you buy anything else you will be very disappointed.

In my humble opinion Suzanne Goucher should be spending her time convincing the local Maine television stations to invest in high definition equipment so they can broadcast their local programming in HD, to invest in equipment that will allow them to play back network television shows that were originally in HD, in HD at a later time, and all of the other things they need to do in order to be considered up to date with current technology. This seems like a better use of time than convincing consumers to spend money to see Tom Brady's scruff, only to find out they may never see it.