Skip to main content

Insight on Low Power TV in America

As a B&C reader, you’re free to explore a hybrid view of low power TV, from a real low power TV broadcaster who is unsuccessfully dealing with the present FCC’s frozen open TV channels and expired construction permits (CPs) controlled by the FCC LPTV spectrum licensing policy.

That policy is clearly neither governing nor expanding the real potential of free air TV for American consumers, especially with the new ATSC 3.0 format at hand. ATSC 3.0 is a format even a small independent broadcaster like Informed TV can use, just like the national networks.

The videos and print content below show the FCC’s present policy is denying American consumers expanded TV choice and the rights of a real broadcaster, like Informed TV, from owning unused TV channels. Those channels are needed for independent broadcasters to compete and broadcast in both a state and regional TV marketplace.

Related: LPTVs Pitch FCC's O'Rielly on Repack Challenges, Opportunities

The following videos are for both the wireless spectrum industry and U.S. Senate Commerce Subcommittee members with oversight of FCC policy. The aim is to expand their insight on the topic, especially in light of last week’s hearing, which questioned the main wireless spectrum players yet completely ignored the massive TV broadcast spectrum—falsely called low power TV.

Senate policy makers must first expand coverage of our present ATSC TV format before being lost in 3.0 and white space TV. I believe presenters successfully planted 3.0 in the minds of committee members, who are simply trying to help people see what’s happening today. Yet taxpayers/citizens are not marching and protesting for more technology but are calling for usable insight in the world they face daily, which free air TV can provide but only if true independence is allowed for broadcasters.

Please take a look at the video below, which shows the frustration that independent TV broadcasters currently face.


Below is a video of the Senate hearing used as a basis for Informed TV’s video comments—and some insightful videos on the quotations referenced in the first video.

View a reference video that touches on the topics of the FCC, a spectrum speculator, ND Public TV, the policies and actions available to silence a working TV transmitter, and a free air channel that would be watched by thousands of Fargo/Moorhead Citizens in both Minnesota and North Dakota. This is a real-life example of how a local TV broadcaster fights with the FCC. Informed TV, a channel speculator and tower owner trying to be free to broadcast without local or regional censorship, has faced adversity from many sources including local governing bodies.


The video below shows how a local rural broadcaster can draw regional, national and global interest all from a common rural event first publicly broadcast on local TV.


Senators, overseeing wireless spectrum and a public hungry for free air TV choices, need to know the economics for a successful local/regional independent broadcaster. They must be on broadcast towers first, which allow them to compete with network affiliates and public TV outlets on one of the open TV channels 2-36 just repacked by the FCC TV channel spectrum auction.

Senators also need to know OTT revenue for a startup or independent local/regional broadcaster will only be supplemental income. Few OTT broadcasts will ever draw nearly 700,000 views as the sugar beet harvest program did for Informed TV.

Most OTT videos only raise pennies or a few bucks per video. Informed TV has also talked to huge national and regional companies about broadcasting some of their YouTube videos. Videos that they produced at costs up to $250,000 yet have less than 1,000 views on the web. Few corporate leaders, though, understand the power of free air TV broadcasting.

See a few more videos from a one man, one camera TV station, which is simply learning the ropes before professionalizing Informed TV.

Thanks, Alan Roebke