Re: Brother, have you been converted?

"Veronique" <veroniqueunique@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message 
news:c16545fc-41e3-4e60-86ee-5c0447cee4a7@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> On May 12, 7:29 am, Estron <est...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> Lots of publicity lately concerning the coming switchover from analog
>> broadcasting to digital only, now scheduled for February 2009 (in the
>> United States).
>>
>> I can understand the commercials for various companies' brands of 
>> converter
>> boxes not exactly telling the whole story.  But the so-called news 
>> stories
>> -- the items that appear as part of the program content, not the 
>> commercial
>> content, of the news -- the ones I've seen are not emphasizing this 
>> point:
>>
>> You only need a converter box (or a digital-receiving set) if you're
>> watching over-the-air broadcast signals, if you're getting your
programs
>> through the antenna.  If you have cable, or if you have satellite TV,
you
>> can have the oldest TV set still working and it will still work without
a
>> converter.
>>
>> I don't know where to find the statistics, but it doesn't seem to me
that
>> many TV viewers are watching over-the-air TV anymore.  One of the
Kansas
>> City stations doesn't even make its over-the-air channel number part of

>> its
>> logo.  The just call themselves "NBC Action News," or "Your NBC Action 
>> News
>> station," which indicates to me that most of their audience doesn't see
>> them on their over-the-air channel, 41.
>>
>> I wonder how many people are buying converter boxes who don't actually 
>> need
>> them.
>
>
> I just read in The Wilson Quarterly thatI am one of only 2% of
> Americans without a TV in the house. I'm surprised, I thought it would
> be a bit higher (like 8%, maybe.)
>
>

We have 2, so you are covered at least statistically.  I know of people
who 
have lots more than we do, but I haven't found anything on tv that would 
justify a need for such complete saturation...
   ...Roy