Yeah, that should add about a half-dozen listeners...
Two stupid questions: Why would an internet connection be necessary if one is equipped for ATSC 3.0 via an antenna? And could I assume that a device (something that used to be called "a radio") be required that's separate from a NextGen TV?
If one wants to take advantage of all the TV features of an ATSC 3.0 TV, one needs an Internet connection too. All they're doing is embedding extra audio packets (53kbps) into the ATSC package. That same thing could be done with ATSC 1.0 now, but who would bother trying to hear it when those same radio broadcasts are already available without buying an expensive new TV?
Since nobody, including consumers and even cable companies seem to be interested in this technical boondoggle, they're just scrambling around trying to come up with some sort of magic bullet. Hey, I've got an idea! Let's do radio broadcasts on a digital signal over the air! Get the promotions department to issue a press release..
You mean like HD Radio already does? Or how about RDS for analog FM? In fact, I'm pretty sure KPLZ already does RDS.
Answer: If you have an ATSC 3.0 tuner in Seattle, you can also receive the Sinclair radio stations via a separate bit stream. Why would you want to? That is the question. A solution in search of a problem.
How many consumers do you think would actually want to "mess around" with listening to local radio stations via an ATSC 3.0-modulated signal?
I'd bet that consumers might tune in once just to see what kind of content is there, and then never bother to tune in again (hence "messing around" with it once.)
Why would consumers select an audio stream that they can hear on their clock or car radio? It's not like that's something unique.
The answer to that question from my point of view is probably the majority of users on this board but nobody else, and as I said earlier, it really doesn't make a lot of sense in Seattle when many of the fm stations are already available on cable. Those that listen to KVI or KOMO might enjoy it, but probably already have ways to access that content. Here in Portland though, and from what I understand about many markets, none of the radio stations are on the cable system. While I think the music choice channels do a pretty good job, I'd prefer to listen to a local radio station rather than an iPod I can't control. Since we don't have a radio in the kitchen anymore, the only option I'd have is to either remember to take one out when I go out there or the TV. If pulling up K103 via ATSC3 was as easy as punching in 970 into my remote, I could see a use for this in some markets.
I look at it the same way that you probably looked at radio on Comcast cable. There are a handful of listeners who might be interested in it, more who might drop by just to see what those channels are for, and many who could not care any less. To be fair, I would say that radio on Comcast served more of a purpose, as I'm sure that there were some who liked receiving radio stations this way in challenging regions. There really is no difference for ATSC though, as this is just another form of offering these stations over the air.
