The broadcast industry is at a crucial juncture. The National Association of Broadcasters (NAB) is urging the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to set a definitive schedule for phasing out the aging ATSC 1.0 standard and embracing NextGen TV technology (ATSC 3.0).
The NAB's petition suggests sunsetting ATSC 1.0 in major markets by 2028, aiming for a complete transition by 2030. This has elicited diverse responses from broadcasters, technology providers, and industry groups. Ed Czarnecki, VP of government affairs at Digital Alert Systems, notes, “Honestly, I think many things are up in the air right now. We’re in a time of enormous transition here in the Washington, D.C. area, in the regulatory and political space.”
Despite existing regulatory hurdles, broadcast technology vendors and station groups have already launched NextGen TV services in markets covering roughly 76% of U.S. households. Broadcast executives are optimistic that the new FCC leadership will establish the necessary regulatory structure to accelerate the transition. Czarnecki adds, “The NAB has made an ambitious proposal that I hope is taken seriously to sunset ATSC 1.0 in favor of ATSC 3.0 in major markets in approximately five years by 2028. That likely has been offered as the initiation of a major conversation.”
Rob Folliard, SVP of government relations and distribution at Gray Media, underscores the need for clear regulations: “I think the FCC is going to be extremely pro-innovation and giving broadcasters the flexibility to launch in more markets, setting a hard date for a transition.”
While the Consumer Technology Association has voiced criticism of the NAB's proposal—especially the mandatory ATSC 3.0 tuner requirement for all new televisions—broadcast vendors see regulatory action as crucial for market expansion. Anne Schelle, managing director of Pearl TV, explains, “It’s complex in the sense that it’s bringing an integrated IP broadcast signal to devices that need a new infrastructure on the device to receive it. That takes time… we’re on that curve of what’s typical for any device to get the supply chain going and adopting the technology. Regarding the arc, we’re ahead of the curve. It just takes time. And so scale is where things take off, and a component on the scale is having a favorable regulatory environment where there’s certainty regarding a transition.”
Technology vendors collaborating with broadcasters on ATSC 3.0 implementation highlight specific regulatory constraints hindering adoption. Czarnecki points to the current “lighthouse station” model, where one station in a market broadcasts in ATSC 3.0 while others simulcast its signal, as a limitation. He states, “If one station is providing ATSC 3.0 and everybody else is riding on that with a simulcast requirement, that really does not provide a whole lot of room for innovation.”
Mary Crebassa, VP of major accounts at LTN, which has aided in ATSC 3.0 deployment in 69 markets, notes that smaller broadcasters encounter financial obstacles that regulatory action could potentially alleviate. Crebassa expresses hope, “We’re hoping, with our fingers crossed, that the new administration will give us some guidance on when we need to cut over to ATSC 3.0. Will they subsidize the broadcasters for doing this, just like when we went from analog to digital, the government did subsidize some of it?”
For Digital Alert Systems, which provides emergency alert systems to a significant portion of U.S. television stations, current regulations have hampered the deployment of advanced alerting capabilities. Czarnecki clarifies, “To go to ATSC 3.0, you don’t have to change our equipment. If you want to do advanced emergency information, the software is already on all these devices. It just has to be enabled.”
Industry leaders stress the importance of coordinated efforts among broadcasters, technology vendors, and consumer electronics manufacturers as the FCC considers regulatory adjustments. Czarnecki emphasizes, “One thing I think that could greatly enhance the ATSC 3.0 project conservation is greater coordination across these various voices. Though they may have different business cases, different priorities for ATSC 3.0, there needs to be a greater common agenda.”
Schelle highlights the substantial technical progress achieved through past collaboration, stating, “There’s a lot of coordination and collaboration that’s been occurring amongst the ecosystem of players for six years now.” This collaboration has included interoperability testing, which Folliard describes as “tremendous learning opportunities.” He explains, “We hosted a bunch of manufacturers at our low power facility in Tallahassee where we could work with them, see what was working, tested on every different TV to see how the encoders worked. Sinclair has done a lot of that great work, too, with hosting these interops where you just get all the engineers together in a room, and you just start seeing what works.”
The regulatory discussion highlights the tension between voluntary market-driven approaches and government mandates. Czarnecki observes, “It’s a fascinating dynamic. We’ve got a pro-innovation and anti-regulatory administration, but now we’re asking for more regulation to free up innovation.”
Folliard makes a strong case for regulatory action: “If we are still broadcasting in ATSC 1.0 in five, 10 years, then we’ve got some issues, because our technology was developed in the late 80s. We need to modernize for the IP era that we’ve been in for the last 20 years.”
Schelle expresses optimism: “I’m excited about this year because we’ve got a favorable administration that will make some noise about a transition. And I think that’s really going to sort of put a lot of fuel into the rocket ship.”
As the FCC deliberates on the NAB petition, stakeholders in the broadcast industry eagerly await decisions that could finally establish the regulatory framework needed to finalize television's digital transformation.