Tyler the AntennaMan and I recently traveled to Washington, D.C. to meet with the FCC’s media bureau about the push to encrypt over-the-air television. In my latest video I run through the slide deck I presented to the FCC, and Tyler did the same with his presentation on his channel.
Broadcasters are hoping to make it harder for viewers to watch without paying subscription fees, and we wanted to make sure the concerns many of you raised were heard directly by the Commission. We paid our own way for travel, hotel, and meals, despite accusations from one broadcaster that Tyler was somehow on the take. The reality is that we were supported only by our viewers, who are equally frustrated by the ATSC 3.0 DRM roll-out.
The FCC doesn’t hold big public hearings for these kinds of decisions. Instead, they rely on docket filings and meetings with stakeholders. That’s why this visit mattered. The bureau staff listened closely, asked thoughtful questions, and took notes. It was clear they are trying to get a full picture before advising the commissioners, who will eventually make the decision about when ATSC 1.0 will be sunset and the ATSC 3.0 era beings.
My portion of the presentation centered on why DRM is the main obstacle to consumer adoption of ATSC 3.0. The technology has been on the air in many major markets for years, but tuners remain scarce and expensive. In contrast, ATSC 1.0 tuners are inexpensive, often around $20, and easy to build because compliance is limited to FCC standards. ATSC 3.0 requires not only FCC compliance but also certifications from NextGenTV and approval from the A3SA, with costs so high that small businesses are effectively shut out.
This leads to situations where a basic ATSC 3.0 tuner costs upwards of $90, compared to $22 for an ATSC 1.0 device with identical functionality (including DVR features). And even when people buy these devices, they often ship with outdated software—one box I tested was four years behind on its Android security updates. Meanwhile, only three operating systems currently support ATSC 3.0 DRM, leaving much of the market, including Roku’s large share, without access.
I also shared with the FCC what I found at Walmart and Best Buy. Walmart, which accounts for more than a third of U.S. TV sales, didn’t stock a single ATSC 3.0-capable television. Best Buy had a few, but only in the high-end section, and even then the support wasn’t advertised. Shoppers wouldn’t know about it unless they asked. On the other hand, antenna sales remain strong, with valuable retail space dedicated to them, and even ATSC 1.0 tuners were sold out on my last visit to Walmart.
Despite the challenges, many existing devices can handle unencrypted ATSC 3.0 signals, including older TVs, Roku models, Apple TV, Nvidia Shield, Xbox, iPhones, and iPads. I showed examples of all of these working fine with unencrypted broadcasts. Encryption is the barrier. Without it, adoption could grow quickly and cheaply, as inexpensive tuner boxes could be developed for broad compatibility. Instead, enthusiasts remain the only group experimenting with ATSC 3.0, mostly through devices like the HDHomeRun.
Broadcasters want to mandate the inclusion of expensive tuners in new TVs, but I argued that the real fix is simpler: drop DRM. Years have already been lost to this failed experiment, and open signals would encourage innovation and adoption much more effectively. The FCC now has to weigh the evidence, and I expect strong pushback from broadcasters in their docket responses. Whatever happens next, the commissioners will need clear evidence before making their decision, and I believe we’ve shown that DRM is the central issue holding back this transition.
Tyler’s portion of the presentation is available on his channel, and I’ll continue watching the docket for developments. The debate over the future of free, over-the-air television is far from over.