- July 8th, 2009, 9:27 am
#266205
There is a considerable expense to go digital, as El Scorcho mentioned. I'm guessing plenty of stations are in debt because of the transition, and because of the advertising crash, as Sly Fox mentioned.
On top of those expenses, you need to shell out a ton of money to go HD. It's not just cameras, either (and cameras alone are really expensive, think of all the field cameras and studio cameras that need to be replaced. Those aren't exactly replaced with the types of HD cameras you get at Best Buy).
Once you get the cameras, you're dealing with an entirely new system of gathering video. Back in the day, every station worked on a tape-to-tape system, where you pop a tape out of the camera, pop it into a tape deck and start editing (this was called linear editing). In the digital realm, everything needs to get digitized into a computer for editing (called "non-linear").
Of course, the computers may not be up to code, so you're going to need new computers to handle HD editing. And then it's a question of which editing programs actually allow you to edit in HD. Then what do you do? You need to get the files from the computer on air. You can't dump it down to a Beta tape, which is what used to happen. You need to export the file (and we're talking about new file formats here) into a server. That costs cash, too.
Et cetera. Et cetera.
All in all, you're looking at tens of millions of dollars in expenses. Some stations were prepared and developed long-term plans many, many years ago (check out Charlotte's WRAL, probably the best in the business in regards to technology), others (WSET) weren't.
Oh well.