The View From the Outback© 2000 Richard C. Rhodes
A great deal of what we read in newspapers, magazines, and books, and what we see in the movies and on TV is written and produced in New York City or Los Angeles. Much of the "political wisdom" comes from the PR machines of the White House, the Congress, and from the Washington media corps. In short, one might conclude that all knowledge, wisdom, and wit are confined to those who inhabit New York City, Washington DC, or Hollywood. I am now a senior citizen. My experience was gained in many cities in the U.S. and in about 30 foreign countries. That experience has included the U.S. Marines, law school, the ATF, the CIA, Fortune 500 executive, writer, public speaker, educator, editor, and publisher - for openers. For over 20 years, I have written articles off and on for various magazines and newspapers. I've had an enormous number of letters published in major national publications. The Outback is the rural area in Northeast Texas where I have lived for the past 13 years. Every couple of weeks I will attempt to post a new set of musings from the Outback. Click on a Topic to go directly to that topic. If you think that "fiscal year" is spelled "physical year," you may be a Redneck. In the Outback for May 15, 2002, was a piece entitled "Halle Berry - First Half-Black Woman to Win an Academy Award." Read it. It is by no means racist. During her Oscar acceptance speech, as far as I can reconstruct it, she thanked the black community for standing behind her, but did not mention or thank her mother - who is white. Recently, on "Oprah," Halle was talking about the breakup of her second marriage and how her mother had helped counsel her. A picture of Halle and her white mother flashed on the screen for a few seconds. I can never recall Halle acknowledging in such a public way that her mother is white, even if it was unspoken. Her marriage may be on the rocks, but at least she is coming to grips with her own ethnicity. My theme in the piece I cited is that no matter how little black blood you have, you are considered to be black. This has many consequences. Like I said, read it. (www.home.earthlink.net/~rickhgtx/outbac58.html) What is wrong with the news people and pundits who keep talking about Sen. John McCain becoming a VP candidate with Sen. John Kerry? Sen. McCain is one of the most forthright people in Congress, with little room left for where he stands. He has repeatedly said that "under no circumstances will I be a Vice Presidential candidate." If he breaks that oath, I will be shocked and stunned beyond belief. So, find something else to put in the paper and clutter up the airwaves. He said that his wife (I think it was) has a T-shirt that says "What part of NO do you not understand?" Update: June 11, 2204. Now, The Washington Post reports that: "Although Kerry has made no formal offer to
McCain to join the Democratic ticket, their most recent conversation came within the last two weeks, according to these sources, and the purpose of the discussions appeared to have been to gauge McCain's interest." What the hell is the matter with Kerry? Now, he has sunk to the same depths of stupidity as the Washington pundits and TV talking heads. To quote the T-shirt, "Sen. Kerry, what part of NO do you not understand?" On May 17, 2004, the WSJ reported that: "Technology stocks dropped early Monday as news of an assassination in Baghdad weighed on the markets." Just what does the assassination of the head of the ruling council in Iraq have to do with the long-term value of tech stocks? I have followed the market for about 55 years, since I ran a project in high-school to track stocks for a class (and was part of the reason I received a graduation medal in History and Economics from the American Legion). And still, I can find no rhyme or reason to the market. It consistently seems to be driven by emotion, rather than facts. And there are imponderables to the average investor, such as when unemployment goes down, the market drops the next day. Good news drives the market down? What the hell is this all about, we ask? This is no way to give confidence to investors, especially small investors and those with 401K plans. In the Outback for Jan. 7, 2003, (www.home.earthlink.net/~rickhgtx/outbac74.htm) I wrote a piece called "Bias on NBC News re Thimerosal Lawsuits." Thimerosal was an additive used in vaccines that people were claiming lead to Autism in children. In the Outback for April 11, 2004, in "Lawyers Are Ruining This Country," (www.home.earthlink.net/~rickhgtx/outbac89.htm) I wrote the following: "Class-action lawsuits, based on very questionable scientific claims, nearly destroyed the vaccine manufacturing industry. The results are still seen today in the small number of companies that are in the vaccine business." Now, we see reports that five large studies, that tracked thousands of children here and abroad since 2001, found no association between autism and thimerosal. Lawsuits against vaccine makers continue to drive people out of the business and raise the cost of developing vaccines. Some advice for celebrities. Don't go on JEOPARDY!. Tim Russert, moderator of "Meet the Press"; Christie Todd Whitman, former Gov. of N.J. and Administrator of the EPA; and Tavis Smiley, talk-show host; were on celebrity JEOPARDY!. The final question was: "In 1958, how many U.S. Senators were there?" It seemed to me that it was early enough that Alaska and Hawaii had not become states, so we had 48 states with two senators each. My guess was 96 senators. Tim Russert's answer was 98, Christie Whitman's answer was 46 ("I did it by states," she said. Even at that, 46 states was wrong). Tavis Smiley wrote down 100. The answer was 96, with 48 states in existence in 1958. Anybody for sneaking into the archives and erasing that tape? In a letter-to-the-editor on Aug. 13, 2000, to The Dallas Morning News, I suggested that Secretary of State might be the wrong position for Gen. Colin Powell. I suggested that Secretary of Defense might be a better job for him. Think about how the Iraq war might have turned out differently (or not have happened) had Colin Powell been Secretary of Defense. Interrogators of Saddam Hussein have said that he fears torture at the hands of his Iraqi enemies if handed over for trial. Here is part of my April 21, 2003 column, "Justice for Saddam and Sons": The full text is at: www.home.earthlink.net/~rickhgtx/outbac79.html#topic1 It may be that some of the prisoner who have been mistreated by U.S. personnel in Iraq are some that tortured Iraqi citizens on behalf of Saddam. That is no excuse for our people abusing them. We should turn them over to the Iraqis and let them beat senseless the ones they recognize as their former tormentors. The International Trade Commission ruled unanimously to charge duties of between 5% and 26% on most Chinese-made TV sets with screens 21 inches or larger, after determining that many Chinese TVs were sold in the U.S. at less than fair-market value. Flat-panel and microdisplay televisions will be exempt from the new duties. The highest duties, at around 26%, will be assessed against Sichuan Changhong Electric Co., a large Chinese TV-set maker. The company has made sets largely for Apex Digital Inc. of California. This latter gave me a chuckle, since I reported earlier that I bought a 27-inch Apex TV for about $175 with features not even contained on set of much higher value. I knew that it was sold at "less than fair-market value." Now it is official. Jimmy Fallon will not return to "Saturday Night Live" on NBC. Finally. He was an anchor around the neck of the delightful Tina Fey on Weekend Update. Has was inept and insecure, and it must have driven Tina nuts to share Update with Jimmy. Senor Fallon can now join Norm Macdonald in obscurity, after trying several ventures before Hollywood and TV discover that he has no talent. It is not hard to be funny when lampooning the news. I would love to do it. With no humility, I know I would be great, since I have been behind the mike and in front of the camera enough to know that I share Tina's impishness. But, I'm an old geezer and probably could not find my way to the airport to get to NYC. They might try Don Pardo (I think he is their aging announcer), as he would also draw a few old geezers to the show. You know, old geezers - the ones who actually have the money to spend on the advertised products. Or they could try auditions at Starbucks, where SNL could surely find somebody who can do a better job than was done by Fallon. More news. "The Drew Carey Show" has been cancelled. Drew Carey had a TV show? Whoopi Goldberg's show on NBC has been cancelled. Whoopi had a TV show? Who knew? CBS is going to favor us with yet another sitcom with Jason Alexander (George on "Seinfeld"). When are they going to face the fact that he has very few comedic or acting skills? The ensemble carried Jason and shielded him from real scrutiny on "Seinfeld." Eight weeks and out? Even KFC realized that he could not sell chicken convincingly on TV. The battle over whether to allow re-importation of prescription drugs from countries like Canada and Mexico is really hardball. Just when the proponents of the measure think they are making headway, they discover that the U.S. pharmaceutical industry has a plan to keep our drug prices high. Restrict the exports to Canada, so that there is no surplus of drugs available for import in the United States. To be effective, the restrictions will no doubt affect the availability of prescription drugs for Canadians. Donald MacArthur, secretary general of the European Association of Euro-Pharmaceutical Companies said that Europeans have been trading prescription drugs between countries without problems for more than 20 years. "There has never been one confirmed case of a counterfeit drug reaching a patient as a result of parallel trade," he said. If you watch the hearings, both sides make good cases. Campaign contributions from the U.S. pharmaceutical industry may ultimately decide the issue. Here's a happy thought for the supporters of Pres. Bush. Writing in Accuracy in Media (www.aim.org) on May 10, Paul M. Weyrich discussed the Senate seats that might go the Democrats in the 2004 election. He summed it all up in one prescient sentence: "A Democrat Senate would block most measures passed by the House and would spend its time investigating Bush." No wonder we are trying so hard to get a "real" democratic government in Iraq. Somebody has to set a good example. If you are a regular watcher of "Wheel of Fortune," you realize that when Pat Sajak spins the wheel during the final round he lands on the $5,000 space many more times than chance would predict. He has been doing this job for 20 years or so. I think it is a game he plays. He tries to see how many times he can land on the $5,000 space. It is so much fun to give away other people's money. With all the bad news about eating white bread, white rice, white pasta, and other refined carbohydrates, why do so many fast-food chains still put their sandwiches on white buns? Of the outlets here or near to the Outback, Subway gives you some choices. On my way back from Paris the other day, I stopped in three country stores and tried to buy a loaf of 100% whole wheat bread. All they had was white bread. As I have said many times, word gets to the Outback slowly. The popularity of low-carb diets has put a dent in profits in many food companies. Interstate Bakeries Corp., which makes Hostess cupcakes and Twinkies, Wonder bread (a white bread, which is a refined carbo) etc., and Krispy Kreme come to mind. I am delighted that Interstate Bakeries is losing sales. A long time ago, I complained bitterly about the cost of Twinkies (inside of which I used to feed the heart pill to my dog). I wrote Alan Greenspan at the Federal Reserve and told him that the simplest indicator for inflation was the cost of Twinkies, since if sugar, water, and flour were up 25% (apparently, since Twinkies are unconscionably priced), then we were heading for inflation. Tastykakes is coming out with a no-sugar version of some products, in response the the low-carb craze. Eat an apple or a small box of raisins instead of a Twinkie or a cupcake. Save money and improve your health. All we ever hear from the shrieking environmentalists is how the world's forests, wetlands, and so on, are being reduced by corporate greed, neglect, and bad government policy. The following sentence caught my eye in reporting on the Cicada infestation. "Cicadas are dependent on trees, so it has been good news for the insects that there is more forest in the eastern United States now than there has been in 100 years. It pays to buy good stuff. I unpacked my Osterizer blender from a move and placed in on the counter top. A week later, I whipped up a fruit smoothie. The ingredients consisted of frozen strawberries and blueberries, soy powder, soy milk, and honey. During the blending, I heard some loud metallic-like-sounds and thought it was the frozen strawberries being pulverized. I poured the thick mixture into a glass, with a considerable amount left in the blender container. After one sip of the delicious brew, I decided not to pig out, but to pour the remaining smoothie into a thermos cup and put it in the fridge. When the blender contained was empty, I discovered what the noise had been. In the bottom were several pieces of an "F" connector used to connect coaxial cable to your TV, etc. Obviously, my packing discipline leaves something to be desired. The blades of the Osterizer had shredded this metal "F" connector, and one blade was only very slightly bent. I wanted no part of ingesting "F" connector parts. First, I tried filtering the thick smoothie through a paper coffee filter. Useless. Next, I tried straining it through a sieve. Equally useless. Now the counter was covered in puddles of bluish smoothie. Reluctantly, I poured all the smoothie down the drain. I made The Three Stooges look like astronauts. As noted in earlier editions of the Outback, I watch "American Idol" only now and then for a few minutes at a time. Now that the very talented LaToya London was voted off, leaving two contestants of questionable talent, the ugly truth about the voting is starting to come out. A co-host of a radio show in Honolulu, when speaking of native daughter Jasmine Trias said: "We hear people say they have voted much more than 100 times." A lady appeared on a TV show and said that she had "gotten through" (voted) 200-300 times until last week - when Jasmine was voted off. We now learn that millions of votes are never registered because the phone lines are jammed, that computer-generated dialers cast votes over and over for favorite contestants, and that most AT&T text-messages, which cost 10-cents each, all appear to get through (AT&T is a sponsor of the show). There are sites where you bet on the outcome, which invites manipulation of the outcome, including hacking into the vote-tally database. It has also been mentioned that AT&T has the capability to screen out multiple votes, but chooses not to. Too costly. How "American Idol" can continue to be popular with the useless voting system in place is a good question. It seems to me that FOX ought to dump the voting, since there are too many problems to ever make it truly legitimate, and use a panel of seven or more judges who have broad experience in the music industry. Judges who are simply celebrities should not be used. Maybe they could use the 10-point system for each performance, such as done in the Olympic judging of events like gymnastics. Then, the total points from the panel of judges would determine the outcome, perhaps leveling the playing field a little more. Paula Abdul was on with Craig Kilborn the other night. She waffled all over the place about LaToya London getting voted off. "Maybe people thought she was safe and didn't bother to vote," as I recall - among other ridiculous rationalizations for the useless voting procedure. She wants to keep her job as a judge. A judge? She, Simon, and Randy are not judges, they are commentators. They have no vote. They are window dressing. I still have to question why people watch "American Idol." Once in a while I will record a show and fast forward through it to see if there is any content. A few songs get sung, but I can never recall a show that has so much filler, otherwise known as drivel, to take up up a half hour or an hour of airtime. Yet, people keep coming back for more filler. It's incredible. As much as I despise frivolous lawsuits and especially frivolous class-action lawsuits, an idea came to me last night. All the contestants who have ever been voted off "American Idol" should start a class-action suit against FOX alleging fraud, misrepresentation, and breach of contract. The basis for such a suit? That FOX put forward the idea to the contestants that this was a "talent contest." And that in view of the distortions in the voting process caused by overburdened phone lines, auto-dialing, mulitple voting, the disparity between phone voting and text-message voting, there is no way that the vote can accurately represent a vote for the "most talented performer." So, to the law firm of Dewey, Cheatum, and Howe, get on this right away. For a long time, my home phone number was on both the Texas and FTC do-not-call lists. That appeared to cut the telemarketing to a trickle, except for charities and poll takers. Then, I put my house up for sale and cancelled my phone. Now, I have moved back into the house and have a new phone number. Again, I listed on both the Texas and FTC lists, but it takes three-mopnths for those lists to start taking effect. My FTC listing is now over three months old, but I still got calls. One call I got nearly every day was from a caller that showed a Caller-ID number but only left a message asking me to call an 800 number. No way! I tried calling the number listed on the caller ID, after pressing *67 to block my outgoing caller ID. (* 67 does NOT block your Caller-ID to an 800 number!) I never could get that number to answer. Every day I get a call from whomever this is. So, I shut off my answering machine and just let the phone ring. I picked up only if I knew the caller or it seemed like it might be a private call from my area. Still, the idiots with the phony Caller-ID number and the message I knew would be "call the 800 number" kept calling. A new strategy was called for. I wrote a script of nearly two minutes and put it on my answering machine, but it was an OUTGOING message only. No beep and no way to leave me a message. Here is my message: "The number you have called is on both the Texas do-not-call-list and the FTC do-not-call list. I do not accept calls that show Out of Area or Private Caller. For telemarketers, put this number on your own internal do-not-call list. You may have dialed this number by mistake. If so, my last name begins with the letters RH. If this is a personal call and I did not pick up once I saw your Caller-ID, I will call you back at the number shown on the screen. The answering machine is turned off. You can thank the telemarketers for that. I also do not accept calls from charitable organizations, since there are so many telephone scams. And I do not accept calls from poll takers, since I have no opinions I care to share with you. I do not accept calls from political parties. Private callers who have permanently disabled outgoing Caller-ID can do a one-time enabling of Caller-ID by pressing Star 82 (*82) and try your call again. If outgoing Caller-ID is not available in your area and you called to tell me that I inherited a million dollars, that's the price I pay for privacy. This is an outgoing message only. The answering machine is turned off. " (end of message) Within about two days, the telemarketing calls slowed nearly to a stop. Although I am sure that I am not yet out of the woods. Two called as I was writing this! The truth is that I get only a couple of personal calls a week on my landline phone, which I use several hours a day for Internet access. But, just about the time I zone-out for five minutes to prepare to take my blood pressure, the damn telemarketers call. Friends and family normally call my cell phone, although I did get one sales call from a Dallas newspaper. The caller was actually in Nevada! Talk about outsourcing. I let him know I did not appreciate him calling me (I did not admit it was my cell) and told him to put me on his do-not-call list. He said he would, and hung up quickly. About the only personal calls I have gotten have been from friends whom I told to dial my number and listen to my message. They loved it and all said it was the best laugh of the day. Now, they have the message text from this Web column, and can use all or parts of it, if they choose to do so. Unlike that egomaniac Donald Trump who tried to trademark, copyright, or patent "You're fired," my outgoing phone message is "open source," just like LINUX. What follows is a story of a visit I made to an ER in a nearby city. I voluntarily came to the ER because I had good reasons to think that I might be suffering from Carbon Monoxide poisoning (from a gas space heater in an adjoining
duplex). I had the classic symptoms the days prior; headache, nausea, dizziness - none of which I normally exhibit. I signed in at the ER as seeking help for "Possible Carbon Monoxide Poisoning." I presented my Medicare information and information on a very complete supplemental health policy I have. I had done some research and knew that the classic treatment was to take a blood sample for Carbon Monoxide and to administer Oxygen. That's it. Period. It was a slow day in ER, and I was one of the few patients. I did not complain of any other problems! I did note that I had recently switched to a different blood pressure medicine, that I had driven 30 miles in the rain to get to the ER, that the mere visit to ER was full of anxiety, and that my blood pressure would no doubt be very high. Also, I said that I was most likely in Atrial Fibrillation, with a heart rate of around 80 (which is very mild), and that I was under the care of a cardiologist and was NOT complaining of any chest pain or any other cardio symptoms or problems. First, it took them about 2 hours to take the blood test for the possible presence of Carbon Monoxide. All this time I was on a mild Oxygen intake through the usual nose tubes. This may or may not be standard procedure. Logic leads one to believe that the blood test ought to come soon after admittance to see if you have Carbon Monoxide in your blood. But logic and medical practide may be at variance. They insisted that I get chest X-rays. What for I asked? I got some mumbo-jumbo, which I could not comprehend, and they told me that I could refuse, But, I knew that if I got into a confrontation, my blood presssure would start back up and I might be there for a much longer time. So, I gave in and off I went for chest X-rays. Next, they took another blood sample, which resulted in a 4-page summary. The first blood test for Carbon Monoxide is the one I was lead to believe was very specific for traces of Carbon Monoxide had already come back negative. Days later, I was able to get a copy of a blood test, and I not sure if it contained the results of the first or second blood test - or both. It ran to four pages. I have had dozens of blood tests over the years, but never one whose results ran to four pages. Later I ran into a lab tech who said that of the four pages of blood results only four line entries had to do with the (a) test for Carbon Monoxide. I did not come in for my annual physical or a cardiac workup. I said that I wanted to be tested for possbile Carbon Monoxide poisoning. I repeat that to make the point again and again that I began to feel that I was becoming a "cash cow" for ER on a slow day. Next they did an EKG, although I was not complaining of any cardio-vascular problems. I had already told them I was in mild AFIB. I figured that the EKG was given: because it was possibly called for since I had previous heart surgery and current AFIB and Carbon Monoxide can affect the heart, or it was a "cover-our-ass" test or one used to pad the bill. Again, the blood tests had already been negative for Carbon Monoxide. So how could an absence of Carbon Monoxide have affected my heart? Later, I asked the Physician Assistant (the highest ranking person who attended me) what my EKG showed. "You were in AFIB," he said. "How fast was my heart rate?" "About 83," he said. "That is what I told you when I walked in the door," I said. A blank stare. Later, my cardiologist questioned the need for an EKG for a complain of "possible Carbon Monoxide poisoning," especially since the blood tests had apparently been negative for Carbon Monoxide. They were not going to let me go until my BP dropped into at least a near-normal range. So, I was eyeballing my heart rate and BP on the color monitor. I called to the nurse when I saw the BP had gone down substantially. She came in and mumbled something about the cuff not working, took it off, and put it back on. When I mentioned that I had seen a low BP in the lower left of the monitor screen, she said, "Oh, I was looking in the wrong place." Comforting.
I had to ask what the X-rays showed, since I did not know why they took them in the first place. Nobody volunteered to tell me the results. The PA, a very young and somewhat arrogant man, told me that one of the blood tests and
the X-rays showed that I had mild Congestive Heart Failure - and an enlarged heart. "Nothing to worry about," he said. Well, thanks. If I had not asked, I would have never known about the "results" of the gratuitous X-rays and the second blood test. Once again, this was not a cardio visit , nor my annual physical exam. It was a Carbon Monoxide visit! I asked the Physician Assistant what specific marker in the blood test lead him to conclude that I had mild CHF. He looked at me with disdain, like I had a lot of nerve to ask about my tests. (I later learned from some hospital staff that my PA was considered to be somewhat of a know-it-all "smartass.") He told me the name of the specific marker. When I got home, I researched the blood marker. It was in fact an often-used marker, along with other diagnostics, to point to possible CHF. But, it also can be the result of the heart being out of rhythm, such as the Atrial Fibrillation (AFIB) that I was experiencing. My value of this marker was just barely over the normal range. I felt really depressed for a long time about this CHF thing. I dreaded going to see my cardiologist. I did not want more bad news. My cardiologist, who enjoys a fine international reputation, has never come to the conclusion that I have Congestive Heart Failure. On my next visit to him, after the ER episode, and after a heart Echocardiogram (with a very experinced technician in his own office suite) an EKG, listening to my heart, looking at the X-Rays from the ER visit, and blood tests, he said that I simply did not have any signs of Congestive Heart Failure, as the Physician's Assistant in ER had commented to me. In fact, as usual, my Ejection Fraction was way up there in the normal range. CHF patients have very low ejection fractions, that is, the amount of blood pumped out with each stroke. The Echocardiogram also showed other "good signs" that I did not have CHF, which we did not pursue in depth at the time. And he said he has little faith in the blood marker (by itself) I was told was an indication of Congestive Heart Failure, especially since mine was just barely above the normal range. To re relevant, it would have had to have been much, much higher. My cardiologist could see no justification or excuse for taking X-Rays for possible carbon-monoxide poisoning - when I had no other complaints. Also there was really little justification for the cardio-vascular tests that were done, since I told the ER staff that I knew I had high BP and AFIB (an irregular heart rhythm) at the time of the visit and was under the care of a cardiologist. What were they going to prove with those tests? We all knew the answers when I walked in the door. I had already confessed. With all this cardio-vascular testing in the ER, I don't recall anybody ever putting a stethoscope to my chest or back to listen to my heart or lungs. My cardiologist said that it was probable that the EKG was either for running up the bill or covering their ass, since I had said my heart was out of rhythm (but at a very slow rate). A common thing I live with from day to day - with nobody following me around doing EKGs, taking X-Rays, or running four-page blood scans. I do heavy lifting, walk a mile or more without being winded, do floor exercises, and free weights. After my internationally-respected cardiologist listened to my story, looked at the X-Rays and at the mild elevation in the blood marker told to me by the PA in ER as a marker for Congestive Heart Failure, and looked at the bill from ER, I asked why the PA in ER had said that I had Congestive Heart Failure. In the most animated manner I have ever seen him, he said, "He was simply wrong!" He is prepared to back that up in any way that I need as I proceed with my complaint and possible lawsuit against the ER, the PA, and the hospital. I view all of the cardio-vascular tests, possibly the second blood test, and the X-rays as gratuitous - and now think it was mostly done to pad the bill. I complained only of possible Carbon Monoxide poisoning. The bill came to about $1750. I had already prepared a letter, which I was going to send to the hospital administrator, the Medicare fraud unit, my supplemental insurance carrier. Also there will ge copies to Tommy Thompson at Health and Human Services, and to appropriate members of House and Senate committees with oversight over health care, suggesting that once the ER discovered I had both Medicare and a very generous supplemental policy, they spared no test to run up my bill. Since my subsquent visit to my cardiologist, I am revising that letter, which will contain stronger terms and conclusions. Then, I got a bill for $431 relating to treatment by the Physician Assistant, with whom I spoke in total for about one minute - and who falsely told me I had Congestive Heart Failure. The bill came from out of state and listed only a PO Box and an 800 number. I searched the Internet for the organization that sent the bill, but could find no trace of them. My first instinct was that somebody sent me a fraudulent bill, hoping it looked legitimate and that I would pay by return check. In all the years I have received medical statements, I have never seen a bill like it, and if it is legitimate, never has my combined insurance failed to pay such a bill. Later, I checked at the hospital and was told that the $452 bill for "Emergency Room Visit" is standard, and the that Physician Assistants bill separately. That is why I got yet another bill for $431 from some outfit in Pennsylvania claiming to represent the PA. Now that I have had a thorough cardio workup by my cardiologist, I am more pissed than ever at the battery of useless tests and the misdiagnosis I got in ER. They picked the wrong guy to play "doctor (or fake doctor) and nurse" with - at a cost of over $2100. For what should have been a simple blood test for Carbon Monoxide and maybe a little Oxygen - and a $5 pill to bring my BP down enough to discharge me. If I had been in ER for a heart attack, a stroke, or broken up in an auto accident, and required intensive care, the bill I got, or even a higher one, would have been reasonable. At the Association of Physicians Assistant's Web site (noted below), I found the following: "As of January 1, 1998, Medicare pays the PAs’ employers for medical services provided by PAs in all settings at 85 percent of the physician’s fee schedule. This includes hospitals (inpatient, outpatient, and emergency departments), nursing facilities, home, offices and clinics, and first assisting at surgery. Assignment is mandatory and state law determines supervision and scope of practice. In the past, Medicare gave hospitals two options for covering services by hospital-employed PAs. Services provided by PAs could be billed under Medicare Part B as a professional service, or the PA's salary could be included in the hospital's cost reports and covered under Medicare Part A." My supplemental policy usually pays any balance not covered by Medicare. So, I have my work cut out for me. This will be an interesting inquiry. If I am right about padding the bill, multiply this 10,000 times and it is not hard to see why Medicare is in trouble and health-care costs are so high. While in the ER, I had to fill out some forms, and one box was for my doctor, my GP in that city. I told them that he was not the one treating my BP or my cardio, that my cardiologist did that in another city. When I got ready to check out of ER, I was handed a paper that said that my local GP doctor had been notified that I had come into the ER with high BP. I have seen my GP once in five years. But, I went by his office to see if the hospital had called about my BP the day I was in ER. They said no word had come to them from ER. The ER notice to me was a juvenile bluff to get me to talk to my doctor about my BP, even it was not the doctor treating me for the condition. What is this, kindergarten? My Patient Discharge Instructions, the one that said my local GP had been advised that I came into ER with high BP, says: "Your emergency care provider was ",Dr. XXXXX XXXXXX." Not only is this man incompetent and arrogant and condescening and failed to wear a badge with his name and title, he had the nerve to represent himself as a Doctor on my checkout sheet. As I prowled the halls of the hospitals two campuses in search of answers about my tests and my bill, once again I heard from staff that my "Phony Doctor, who is a Physicians Assistant, is considered to be a jerk. Some comfort in that. At least I am not alone. All in all, I think I have a good legal case for malfeasance or malpractice, misrepresentation (PA representing himself as Doctor), abuse and possible fraud of Medicare and my supplemental insurance carrier (unnecessary tests) and the emotional distress I went through in the weeks before I had an appointment with my cardiologist - because I thought that in addition to my known problems, I now had Congestive Heart Failure. Ironically, I had been planning a move to the city where the ER is located, partly because I thought I might get better health care, and emergency care, than I would taking my chances on calling 911 from here in the Outback. My ER visit and the ensuing bills helped me decide that I might as well stay in my house in the Outback and take my chances. If I call 911, I will be taken to a different ER in another city. Information about Physician Assistants (from their Web site at www. aapa.org): Most PA programs require applicants to have previous health-care experience and some college education. Commonly, EMTs, paramedics, and nurses apply to PA programs. The average length of formal training is 26 months. PAs are not required to do an internship or residency. The physician has complete responsibility for the care of the patient. PAs share that responsibility with the supervising physician. One of the guidelines listed on the Web page is that the patient should be made aware at all times whether they are being cared for by a physician or a physician assistant (PA). (During my several hours in ER, I don't think the attending PA wore a badge or nameplate. I had to ask who he was, and a nurse told me he was a PA. There may have been an M.D. in the room at times, but I don't recall seeing him or her.) This experience has made me resolve to get involved somehow in bringing more attention to Medicare abuse and fraud - and medical insurance abuse and fraud in general - with the AARP, in my column, in newspapers, or however. As a former Federal criminal investigator, I have said for years that Medicare could probably cut its costs by about 40% if there were more investigators to look into abuse and fraud - and if more patients were trained in what to be on the lookout for during various doctor and hospital visits. For every $50,000 spent on investigations, probably a million bucks could be saved. That's a good return on investment. But, with the government, there is too much of a tendency to view all these reimbursements as play money. Well, playtime is rapidly coming to a close, or seniors will fail to get adequate health care. No ice-cream shop or hamburger joint could stay in business working with the fiscal irresponsibility displayed by the Federal government. To be continued .... This is not a balanced primer on HDTV. It is obviously biased toward Digital Light Processing (DLP) HDTV sets. In addition to front and rear projection home HDTV sets, there are 95 digital movie-house cinema systems in North America and 220 worldwide using the Texas Instruments (TI) "DLP Cinema" technology. Sony has announced a competitive product for use in cinemas. A few fish are thrown in the boat along the way to help you sort through some of the jargon and hype in the HDTV industry. For those in the market for an HDTV set, I have seen in person and researched to death the sets using DLP (Digital Light Processing) with a chip from Texas Instruments. Incredible picture, with no burn-in. All discussions here will presume that the set is the 16:9 aspect ratio, which is wider than it is high. Although many are getting on the DLP bandwagon, such as Toshiba, Hitachi, Panasonic and more, Samsung was the first to adopt the TI chip in its slim rear-projection TVs. Samsung is now selling (in every outlet I can find) the HLN version of the DLP set. The newer HLP version, which will include a next-generation DLP chip and a new color wheel is on the verge of being shipped (reports vary from June-Oct.). The new color wheel might not even make it in the first round of HLP sets. Stores may try to sell you an HLN and tell you that it is "state of the art," until they clear out their inventories. Hold out for the Samsung HLP series - possibly the one with the newer 7-segment color wheel. Unless they make you an offer on a closeout HLN that you cannot refuse. That is, if you decide you want a DLP set - and if you are leaning toward a Samsung. By the time the majority of the Samsungs HLPs are in the store, others like the new Toshiba DLPs may turn your head. One caveat if you buy a Samsung HLN series DLP at a closeout. In about February, 2004, Samsung began shipping DLP sets with a new electronics board and a new remote control, a bridge between the HLN and future HLP series. The later HLNs were designated with a W1, such as HLNxxxxW1. Apparently, you have to look on the shipping box to find the W1 designation or know what the W1 series remote looks like (I do not know). In any case, don't accept an HLN at closeout unless it is the HLN with the W1 suffix. As of May 22, 2004, I cannot find a single online vendor who has a Samsung HLP set in stock, only HLNs. Two list the HLP and say it is "coming." There is competition in DLP sets, but for now Samsung is clearly the one to beat. For example, Toshiba has announced a new line of DLP sets that have the folks on the HDTV forums buzzing with anticipation. There will be two different DLP chips in the Samsung HLP series. The HD3 DLP chip is designed for high-volume, low-cost production sets. The other new chip is the HD2+. The HD2+ has much better contrast and brightness than does the HD3 chip, among other things. The HD2+ is a more costly chip and will appear in the sets I am leaning toward buying. It appears that the HLP numbering scheme is that a set with an HD3 DLP chip are in the "63/67 series" and sets with the HD2+ are in the "70/77 series." The "7" on the end of the new Samsung line refers to the sets that will have a DTV tuner incorporated and the CableCARD slot. This is further complicated because Samsung will supply different models to "national" and "regional" accounts. They also talk of a distinction with respect to distribution to the "Pro group," and "select A/V specialty retailers." I am a former marketing director in a $9 billion company, and I have never seen such a convoluted marketing scheme. What this all means to you and me I am not sure until the sets hit the floor. I am losing my patience with Samsung. Some DLP sets (Samsung and others) have inputs for computers, so that you can use your big DLP as a computer monitor. Couch-potato surfing. Of course, gamers can see remarkable graphics on a DLP set. Toward the end of the year, TI will introduce the xHD3 DLP chip. It will provide a resolution of 1920x1080 pixels and thus will support 1080(i)(p) HDTV programs, although I have read comments that the chip may not actually achieve 1920x1080 resolution. To put that into perspective, my 19-inch Samsung LCD computer monitor has a resolution of 1280x1024 and has a brilliant and super-sharp rendition of graphics and streaming media. The HD3 and HD2+ provide a resolution of 1280x720 and will support only up to 720p HDTV. NBC and CBS broadcast in 1080i, while ABC uses 720p. HDNet and Discovery HD, both transmit in 1080i. In August of 2004, FOX will begin broadcasting in 720p. The 720p format is said to provide the smoothest motion rendition, and 1080i the highest resolution. ESPN uses 720p, which lends credence to the argument that 720p is better where there is a lot of fast movement. TVs, like the Samsung DLP HLN and HLP series, automatically convert 1080i to 720p, which is the native resolution of the DLP chip used. For background on HDTV and the various formats, go to one of the HDTV sites that offers a primer on HDTV, such as www.hdtvinfoport.com and the HDTV section of www.avsforum.com. Crutchfield.com has an excellent set of tutorials on HDTV at: www.crutchfieldadvisor.com/reviews/S-X0nEeGBBCwU/hdtv. Also there is a good buyers guide at: www.digiupdate.com/100_Selecting_HD_Display.html. Some program material looks better in 720p and some looks better in 1080i. The 1080i (interlaced) format displays more lines and thus delivers more information, and produces sharper pictures when the image is "still" or has little motion. Manufacturers have generally preferred the interlaced format because more lines of resolution can be delivered with less bandwidth, resulting in lower costs. Many viewers prefer the 720p format because its full frame, progressive scanning, enables it to reproduce fast-moving action and graphics without blurring the image. An ABC engineer, Randy Hoffner, wrote a paper in which he went into great detail about the various HDTV formats - and why ABC chose to transmit in 720p. Here are two summary sentences: "720P, when compared with 1080i, provides better dynamic resolution, better motion rendition, the absence of interlace artifacts, and the absence of compression artifacts. It makes brighter pictures with a higher contrast ratio than 1080i." NBC's HDTV Web page mentions the 720p and 1080i formats and says only: "NBC broadcasts HDTV in the 1080i format, which provides the highest possible resolution to our audience. But you don't have to worry - any HDTV receiver will receive both formats." (editor: receive yes, display no). In a quick search of the CBS HDTV Web page, I could not find any explanation or justification for CBS choosing 1080i. Interlaced versus progressive: An interlaced-scanned picture frame contains only every other horizontal line. The next frame fills in the missing lines to complete the picture. A progressive scanned picture frame contains all the picture information at one time. Your "plain old analog TV" displays at 480i. A progressive-scan DVD player displays 480p. As noted HDTV 1080i is an interlaced picture and 720p is a progressive picture. A little common sense will tell you why motion might be more blurred on 1080i than on 720p. The 1080i picture has to be drawn on the screen twice, and in that instant of the redrawing, motion may tend to get out of sync or blurred. One knowledgeable source says that 1080i, for all its hype, is really 540i, that is, it only paints 540 lines with each frame scan, whereas 720p paints 720 lines with each frame scan. A good point to consider. Thus, I have no problem with buying a 720p DLP or 720p LCD, for example, which have a native resolution of 720p. Samsung put out a press release in connection with the Home Electronics Show on May 21-23, 2004. New sets utilizing the HD3 DLP chip will debut in June or July in 46 to 63-inch sizes, e.g., HLP4663W for the 46-inch model, with a suggested retail price of $3299. The HLP5063W (HD3 DLP chip) has a MSRP of $3699. The sets using the more expensive HD2+ DLP chip will debut around the end of July in 50 and 56-inch models, with a suggested retail price of $4299 for the 50-inch set. Why there is no mention of the HLP4674W, with an HD2+ DLP chip, which was announced at the earlier Consumer Electronics Show at an MSRP of $3799, is a mystery. On May 8, 2004, I got an e-mail from a helpful fellow named Joe who had e-mailed the marketing guy at Samsung and asked what happened to the 46-inch sets with the HD2+ chip announced at CES. The response was that Samsung is going to incorporate a Digital TV Tuner (DTV) tuner and the new CableCARD slot in the set. It will be designated the HLP4677W, with a MSRP of $3800. It is delayed until Sept./Oct. to incorporate the new features. This will get a jump on the FCC’s digital tuner mandate requirement that calls for 50 percent of all digital television displays measuring 36-inches and larger to have integrated ATSC terrestrial (over-the-air) broadcast tuners starting July 1, 2005. With regard to CableCARD, each cable operator will have a secure card for their programming. The card will eliminate the need for a set-top box for Digital cable and HDTV programming. It is also referred to as "plug and play" by some. If you change cable operators, you just pull the CableCARD, turn it in, and get a new one from the new cable vendor. At a Congressional hearing, a rep of the cable industry promised that the CableCARDs would be sold at cost plus an 11% or so markup, and that rumors of price gouging are wrong. I heard him say it! I saw his lips move. But I would like to see their invoices when it comes to "cost." Sets with CableCARDs should appear in stores in June/July. That's great for people who have cable, but is useless for those on satellite TV - as is having a built-in tuner, because the satellite receiver or DVR is your HDTV tuner. Also, the current CableCARD standard is a one-way deal, meaning you can't use interactive features, such as ordering a PPV show with your remote or upcoming video-on-demand services. For now, your digital cable box may make more sense for you. A two-way CableCARD standard may make it into sets in 2006 - is the best bet. Perhaps Samsung is trying to better contrast their DLP HD3 sets, with the cheaper DLP chip, lower contrast ratio, etc. with their "high end" sets with the DLP HD2+. I would think that a consumer would not want to buy an HLP DLP using the HD3 chip until he or she could compare it with one of the HLP set with the better HD2+ DLP chip. If the tentative pricing holds, the 46-inch HLP DLP with the better HD2+ chip will be about $500 more that its HD3 sibling. Over the life of the set, $500 is not a lot to quibble about for the "high-end" set. Probably more DLP variety will actually be offered between now and August, 2004. (See press release at: wwww.samsungusa.com) If Samsung keeps messing with our heads about which models they are actually going to produce, perhaps the sensible route is to wait until the HLPs are in stock and the current HLN series will be sold at deeply-discounted prices. One salesman at a major retailer said he thought that once the HLP series was in stock (or on a truck), the current HLN 43-inch model, for example, might sell for just above cost, which he estimated might be "out-the-door" at around $1700. That is just one man's observation, mind you. Maybe he really never saw an invoice. As noted earlier: In about February, 2004, Samsung began shipping DLP sets with a new electronics board and a new remote control, a bridge between the HLN and future HLP series. The later HLNs were designated with a W1, such as HLNxxxxW1. Apparently, you have to look on the shipping box to find the W1 designation or know what the W1 series remote looks like (I do not know). In any case, don't accept an HLN at closeout unless it is the HLN with the W1 suffix. Now, I can hardly wait to see the new Toshiba DLP sets. Of the 10 sets announced, ALL will have the better-grade HD2+ DLP chip. Some will be HDTV monitors, which is all you need for satellite, and some will integrate an off-air tuner and slot for CableCARD. For example, the 46-inch HDTV monitor will sell at a suggested MSRP of $2999.99 and ship in August. As I said before, I am a little tired, as I am sure are others, like Joe who sent me the e-mail, with Samsung chasing its tail with its introduction of its new line of HLP DLP sets. My son and I viewed 43-inch and 46-inch Samsung DLP HLN series sets recently, and they were simply gorgeous - bright, clear, with wide viewing angles for those on the couch at the side of the living room, etc. So, at a good price, I would have no problem buying a 43 or 46-inch HLN (W1 suffix) Samsung and wait for Samsung to make up its mind on what they are really going to produce - and for the prices to come down. A one-year old HLN still ought to fetch a pretty good price, since other than the illuminating bulb eventually needing replacement, the set ought to look as good as the day it left the showroom. Just consider it rent. By the way, current DVD disks are not HiDef, but play either 480i or 480p. Older DVD players output data in 480i, to be compatible with older analog TV sets. The "progressive scan" DVD players can play both 480i for display on older analog TVs, or 480p for display on HDTV sets. While not HD, the 480p DVDs look very good on an HDTV set. It costs only a few bucks more to buy a "progressive scan" DVD player - and one that will also play MP3 music from the CD-Rs you burned on your computer. More expensive DVD players can upconvert the 480 image to 720p/1080i and may have an HDMI output to match the latest input on HDTV sets. Whether these upconverted HDMI players produce significantly better DVD pics on your HDTV, I don't know. But, they look good on paper. Carry one of your DVDs to the store and see if you can get a demo on different types of DVD players hooked into the kind of HDTV set you favor. The majority of local full-power TV stations are now broadcasting digital TV (DTV), but not all of it is HDTV (HiDef). For example, FOX has been running many programs at 480p, which is equivalent to a progressive 480p DVD player quality. These broadcasts are often referred to as digital TV in SD mode, or standard definition. Some networks provide only Dolby Surround Pro Logic sound. The trend is to provide Dolby 5.1 Surround sound, which of course allows for speakers on the sides, in the middle, a sub-woofer and two rear speakers. Recent power amplifiers and receivers provide decoders for both types of Dolby - and more. The switching is automatic when it detects a specific type of Dolby being transmitted. The few DVDs I have do provide for a Dolby 5.1 soundtrack, if your gear will decode it. Now, there are 6.l and 7.1 amplifiers, but I have not come across a TV or HDTV program that has more than a Dolby 5.1 soundtrack. Get somebody in a big store to tell you why you need 6.1 or 7.1 channel amps and speakers. I plan to let them try. Who knows?
(June 11, 2004: With little coaxing, and after days of Web research, I bought a Yamaha 7.1 x 120 watt per-channel receiver, mostly because it has scads of inputs that my older Yamaha set did not have (in particular fiber-optic jacks [toslink] for nearly every individual input (for digital audio), some of the new Dolby sound iterations, inputs for both Cable/Sat TV, and Digital (HDTV), and should not be obsolete for many, many years. I should live so long - I hope. Also, with my favorite upcoming DLP sets slipping their delivery dates, I had to do something with the money that was burning a hole in my billfold. I will be reviewing the Yamaha TX-V2400 (MSRP $999) in due time. So far, it is like sitting in the cockpit of a 747. Which switch to push first? I have played it on standard digital (not HDTV) satellite TV, DVD, CD, AM/FM and all are effortless, intuitive using the remote - and sound great on my 5.1 speaker system. And just two cables going to my TV. Don't count on me spending $300 for another pair of rear/side speakers for 7.1, since I buy no movies on DVD and about three music DVDs a year. Check the Yamaha Web site for "authorized dealers," since you get a 2-year warranty, but from non-authorized dealers your warranty is good for the first 3 minutes you have it, whether you have turned it on or not. You get the point.) I personally would not buy a plasma screen, even if I were rich and did not have good sense. They are much more expensive than tube-type, LCD or DLP HDTV sets. They are subject to burn-in of persistent logos, etc. on the screen. There are many reports that they hum at high altitudes. And they have a shorter half-life than tube-type, LCD, or DLP screens. The half-life is the time it takes for the set to be only half as bright as when it was new. The average plasma probably has a half-life of 10,000 to 20,000 hours - and it is a gradual process. One source, who sells plasma, says that the half-life of plasma screens is 30,000 hours. Maybe. We don't know, since they are too new to have accumulated any long-term data. The most important thing to remember is that some plasma screens sold do not reach a resolution of 1280x720 (needed for the 720p format), which means that they are not truly HDTV screens! Update Nov. 25, 2005: Since I wrote this section, plasma TVs have improved their quality and lifespan dramatically, and the prices have come down to where they are close to competitive with my favorite, DLP. Today, I would not hesitate to buy a plasma HDTV if the price was right. The half-life of an LCD HDTV is about 30,000 to 40,000 hours. The DLP sets appear to maintain their brightness over the long term. Every couple of years, you may have to replace the bulb inside the DLP set - and it is not cheap. Plasma screens were over-hyped as the "TV you can hang on the wall," and once you get over that hurdle, there is little reason to buy one. The DLP rear projection sets are about 15 inches deep. The LCD HDTV sets are also slim from front to back. Many people are very happy with their LCD HDTV sets, like the Sony Grand Wega, Toshiba, Sharp, Samsung, Panasonic, and so on. You should look at them and compare them to the DLP sets. Try to view HDTV programming, Standard Definition analog programming (you will still be watching some shows in the old analog format for a couple more years), and DVD material. Like their computer-monitor counterparts, LCD monitors with slow pixel-response time may tend to smear with fast-moving action. Top of the line LCDs often note they have 16ms pixel-response time. My recollection is that my Samsung LCD computer monitor has 16ms response and its smears with fast moving objects or fast scrolling. From a distant part of my brain, it seems to me that "gamers" were saying a while back that they need a 12ms response time or less (if such are now available). Anyway, look at a hockey game or the like on an LCD set, or run a Cube of Xbox in the store to see how it does with fast motion. Samsung will release a 46-inch LCD in August with a resolution of 1920x1080, which will display HDTV up to the maximum of 1080i. It will retail for around $10,000! Sharp has also announced a 45-inch LCD HDTV with a resolution of 1920x1080, presumably at a very high price. But, more and more, it would seem that the DLP sets (xHD3 chip) promised by the end of 2004, with resolution of 1920x1080, will be the sets to beat. If you have an LCD computer screen, it has a "native resolution," and looks best only when set at its native resolution. So, one has to wonder how the new 1920x1080 LCD sets and the next generation DLP xHD3 chip from TI, which will have a native resolution of 1920x1080 required for 1080i HDTV, will fare when they are asked to display HDTV at 720p, which requires an entirely different - and lower - resolution. Since native 720p sets are now down-converting 1080i to 720p, one has to trust that the engineers have all this figured out. Measure the distance from your normal viewing area at home and take a tape measure with you and view the HDTV sets from the same distance. I have a 32-inch picture tube set that looks fine at my viewing distance, but I may go to a 46-inch HDTV from the information I have been reading about viewing distance.
Picture-tube (CRT) HDTV sets have some advantages. Most display up to 1080i programming. Some will not display 720p, but convert 720p to 1080i. If you are watching a fast-moving sport, I am not sure how well the 720p to 1080i conversion works - since I don't own an HDTV set - yet. Shop carefully and read the manual, since not all salespersons know what formats a CRT, LCD, DLP, or Plasma screens will display. I asked a salesman if a certain CRT HDTV set, which could display 1080i could also display 720p. He said nobody ever asked him that question. A look at the spec sheet indicated that the set would display 1080i, but not 720p. Presumably, the 720p is upconverted to 1080i. To me, this upconversion, downconversion thing is the most confusing and arcane bit of HDTV technology. How well does it work? What are the tradeoffs? I intend to spend a lot of time sorting this out. It is very confusing. CRT HDTV sets are much cheaper than LCD, DLP, or Plasma sets. If you get through the first 90 days without a failure, you can probably look forward to many years of a bright and trouble-free picture. But ... in ham-radio, we call such things "boat anchors." They are inordinately heavy (many weigh over 200 pounds!) , bulky, and use a lot of power. As most buyers comment on the forums, "Make sure you know where you want to put it, because it will probably stay there forever." Sometimes, the space you have available simply is not enough for a big tube-type HDTV. Conversely, you may be able to fit an LCD or DLP set into your current entertainment center. LCOS chips (Liquid Crystal on Silicon) have had fits and starts, with Intel introducing its LCOS technology at CES in 2004. LCOS is more or less a mix of micromirror (DLP) and LCD technologies, and the sets typically use three color chips - which should do away with some of the "artifacts" and potential noise produced by sets with rotating color wheels. From an Intel press release: "Other innovative technologies include the company's Liquid Crystal on Silicon (LCOS) capability, designed to dramatically improve the appearance of large-screen displays at lower cost. Code-named Cayley, Intel's LCOS technology is expected to be available in large-screen displays as early as this year (2004). The displays are anticipated to decline in cost to achieve price points of less than $2,000 next year (2005)." The Intel LCOS will be able to display 720p (1280 x 768 pixels), 1080p (1920 x 1080 pixels) and beyond. There is currently no 1080p (progressive, as opposed to 180i interlaced) over-the-air programming, but when it comes, it will be awesome. Check your birth certificate and probable lifespan to see if you might be in the 1080p window of opportunity. If you live fairly close to the transmitting antennas in big cities, you might be able to get good over-the-air (OTA) HDTV signals. That is, if your deed or homeowner's association restrictions do not prohibit outside antennas. You may have to try to find space in the attic for an antenna. Some folks get good HDTV reception on a set-top antenna, but they are fairly close to the transmitting towers. If you have access to cable, there are some good suppliers of HDTV programming. Comcast has a DVR for HDTV. Here in the Outback, there is no cable. We are too far from Dallas to get a solid HDTV OTA signal. If we want HDTV, we must get it from satellite. Both DirecTV and DishNetwork have HDTV DVR receivers that will record HDTV programming on a hard drive, with pause, rewind, and 30-second skip features that have been on the standard DVR receivers for years. Dish halted production for a while, with some unexplained problems - but is shipping again. DirecTV is second to the market with its HDTV DVR receiver, but it is getting good early reviews. It is based on a TiVo recorder. I will probably eventually buy the DishNetwork DVR for HDTV once I get my HDTV set, because I already have DishNetwork antenna dishes. As noted, DishNetwork produced a limited quantity of their DVR 921 and then halted production for a while to correct "some problems." They are still in short supply and you must get on a list. The DirecTV DVR - based on TiVo - is getting good reviews from its users. All of this is now complicated by the showing at a trade show of a prototype of a DishNetwork DVR 942, which will receive both HDTV and standard satellite programs, and over-the-air HDTV and analog TV, and has a hard-drive for recording. It will be cheaper than the Dish DVR 921 - and hopefully work better. In the meantime, there is also a DishNetwork 811 which receives HDTV and standard satellite programs, as well as over-the-air HDTV and analog programming. It is priced at $399 as an add-on, but www.dishdepot.com is offering a lower price if you trade in one of your older Dish receivers (I have a closet full). With all the problems with the Dish DVR 921 and now the announcement of the DVR 942, I will probably order a Dish 811 for HDTV and continue to also use my Dish DVR 510 for standard digital satellite TV. When Dish finally sorts out what it is doing with its HDTV DVRs, I will rethink the situation. And take another look at where DirecTV is with its HDTV programming and receivers. Both DirecTV and DishNetwork offer package deals for HDTV setups for new customers. DirecTV is now owned by Rupert Murdoch. Although Charlie Ergen insists that DishNetwork will be the leader in HDTV technology and programming, I might advise someone starting fresh to go with DirecTV. Deeper pockets, for one thing. Although - I did read a comment on a forum that the compression mode used by DishNetwork produces a better HDTV picture than DirecTV. And, I also read a column that suggested that Rupert Murdoch is not all that excited about HDTV. He will be, if he listens to his customers. His DirecTV is launching another satellite that is ostensibly ready for both HDTV and satellite Internet service. The satellite Internet service he inherited is not well regarded. I speak from long experience with that "maddening pile of bolts and nuts." Longer-range wireless Internet is now a reality - even in the Outback - and this will further erode the already small market there is for personal-use satellite Internet.
Now, we learn that DirecTV has sold all of its stake in TiVo and that a subsidiary of News Corp. (Murdoch), NDS Group PLC, makes set-top boxes. Hmmmm. Draw your own conclusions about the future of the current crop of TiVo-based HDTV boxes used by DirecTV for DVR on HDTV. Maybe the long-term future of DishNetwork's pile of HDTV DVR silicon is looking up. If you live in a city with more than one network station transmitting HDTV, the DirecTV DVR has one advantage over the DishNetwork DVR-921 DVR. The DirecTV HD TiVo DVR (HR10-250) has two Over-the-Air (OTA 8VSB) ATSC tuners. These allow you to view one OTA HD program while recording another. There are also two satellite tuners. At any one time, two of the four tuners can be active for recording. The DishNetwork DVR-921 has one OTA tuner and two satellite tuners, and can do picture-in-picture of SD only. On either HD DVR, you can watch an already recorded show while recording two other shows at the same time. DirecTV HD TiVo has "season pass," which will record your favorite show each week - even if it changes time or day. The DishNetwork DVR-921 is working on providing this feature in the future via a software download. The DirecTV HD DVR HR10-250 can "pause" for 30 minutes. The DishNetwork 921 can "pause" for two hours. Pressing Pause halts the program, but it is still buffered onto the hard drive, so you can resume where you left off or back up or fast-forward. As a long-time user, I find the two-hour pause of DishNetwork to be a significant plus. If you pause and get engrossed in something else, when the pause buffer is full, the buffer content is dumped, and the set reverts to Live. Thirty minutes versus two hours is very significant. The DishNetwork remote is IR and UHF (radio). The DirecTV remote is IR only. It gets a little confusing for those with no previous DVR experience. You can download the manuals from www.dishnetwork.com (DVR-921) and www.2150.com/directv/files/hr10_250_manual.zip (HR10-250). Best that you have broadband. Long files. I was perhaps the first user of DirecTV in my county, as a friend owned the store and got me one of the first setups. I abandoned DirecTV when they refused to aggressively fight the dropping of CBS and NBC stations. The rule was that even if all we got was a crappy picture from the rather distant NBC and CBS stations, they were dropped from DirecTV. DishNetwork, it seems to me, simply ignored the rulings of a misguided Federal court in Florida and set me up with Networks from both the East and West coasts. I didn't ask any legal questions. Just set me up. Finally, we are allowed to get the Dallas local network stations because we are in the "Dallas DMA." I am now on my third generation of DishNetwork DVRs. The consensus of those on the forums is that DishNetwork rushes equipment to market and then the customer acts as a "beta tester." I think this is a fair statement. Consider, for example, the many problems with the initial release of the DVR-921 for HDTV and the production hold, which has now been released. I had my share of problems with the first two generations of the DishNetwork DVRs, the 501 and 508. My 510 is almost without glitches and records up to 100 hours of Standard Definition digital TV. DishNetwork issues frequent software downloads that correct bugs or add new features. I presume DirecTV does, too. Is this progress, or a failure to get it right the first time? The more I read about the DirecTV HDTV DVR (HR10-250), the less sure I am about DishNetwork. Recently, I had a short-term subscription to analog cable programming in another city (you had to take the basic cable programs to get the cable modem!), and I had DishNetwork digital satellite at the same location. The cable analog signals were much poorer than the satellite signals - not as sharp and often filled with "noise." The ABC analog network feed on cable from a Dallas station was simply pathetic, like you were viewing and over-the-air picture from 100 miles with an outside antenna. Cable is now going digital and HDTV, and none too soon. Satellite was starting to eat their lunch on quality and price. The only really good thing about the cable service I had was the cable modem, which for an Internet freak like me was like dying and going to heaven. Satellite TV does fade in heavy rain, but I have seen cable go wobbly in heavy rain, since they often download their feed from a satellite. While shopping, we discussed viewing distance for DLP sets with several people. Displays of 720p and 1080i each have different optimum viewing distances. Since the current crop of DLP sets have a native resolution that is essentially 720p HDTV, that makes the choice a little easier. One source is from an article on CNet.com - "The Ultimate TV Buying Guide" (without discussing whether their tip is for 720p or 1080i). They say that you can sit as close as 1.5 times the HDTV 16:9 screen's diagonal measurement and no further away than three times. So, for a 42-inch screen, they suggest a minimum of 5.3 feet and a maximum of 10.5 feet. Another source, which cites Gary Merson at "The Pefect Vision," makes a distinction between viewing 720p and 1080i. They use the height of the actual screen, not the diagonal, to do the math. For 1080i programs, measure the height in inches and multiply by 3.2, and for 720p measure the screen height and multiply by 4.8. Thus, viewing a 720p source, as you would be with a DLP set, a 43-inch diagonal set has a height of about 21-inches. So, 21x4.8=100.8 inches or 8.4 feet for the optimum viewing distance. All this "optimum distance" stuff has to do with getting too close and seeing "grain" or other distractions, and getting too far away and losing the feeling of being immersed in the picture. We were able to test view 43 and 46-inch sets from about 12 feet down to a "dog's eye view." There really is a sweet spot. So, if your furniture layout is fixed, you better take your tape measure and find out which set size looks best at your viewing distance. Before you buy anything, spend some time reading the HDTV sites I noted, and if you are thinking of satellite, browse www.dbstalk.com and www.dbsforums.com. There is not enough HD content to satisfy most people. There are some stupid FCC rules about what HDTV stations you can get from satellite, which may be addressed in the update to the Satellite Home Viewers Act. For example, as it stands now, I can't get ABC and NBC HDTV from DishNetwork or DirecTV. So it will be CBS and the HDTV "packages" like Discovery, HBO, ESPN, HDNet, or whatever. There is the upstart VOOM, but you have to get their equipment and they have so few customers at this time, that I would be leery of making any kind of a commitment. It's a programming nightmare for now. The HDTV-capable TV sets are expensive, and the HDTV DVRs from DishNetwork and DirecTV cost $1000. Make sure you know what you are doing before you spend this kind of money. I am not sure I know what I am doing, and I have been researching this for about a year. Now he tell us. An afterthought. It is becoming more and more popular to use a computer UPS (uninterruptible power supply) to power Digital Video Recorders (DVRs). I have one in line. It has spike protection, and with frequent power outages here in the Outback, my DVR will continue to record for about an hour even though the TV and A/V system have gone dark. It is the same idea as with a computer. It will still work without the monitor being turned on, you just can't see anything. We forget how many keyboard shortcuts there are, since we are mostly locked into using a mouse. Gay TV Shoved Down Your ThroatsViacom has announced plans for a new cable-network channel (LOGO) featuring gay and lesbian material. This is going to cause problems for Viacom, and here is why I think so. Not too long ago, DishNetwork, the DBS satellite TV provider, pulled all Viacom programming from its satellite when DishNetwork's Charlie Ergen felt he was not getting a fair offer from Viacom for its "package." Viacom owns CBS, MTV, Nickelodeon, and Comedy Central. Using CBS as a bargaining chip, Viacom insists that DishNetwork and others take their complete package. They cannot get just CBS, or CBS and Comedy Central. They must take the whole package. After a few days, DishNetwork and Viacom came to an agreement and the Viacom programming came back on Dish's satellite. This was more than a contract dispute. It focused the public's attention on the pernicious practice of forcing carriers to take the whole Viacom package, or nothing at all. The same with the ESPN package, Disney, Fox, and so on. Viacom is not the only provider to "leverage" (read that as "use extortion") their popular channels to be able to include their less popular in a package. DishNetwork viewers bombarded Viacom, the FCC, and their representatives in Congress with complaints about this strong-arm packaging concept. Parent's groups complained that families were forced to pay for MTV, even though they thought the MTV programming was too sexual and otherwise too explicit. About this time, there were hearings in Congress about "packages" versus "a la carte." A majority of consumers want to be able to pick only the channels they are likely to watch - and not be forced to pay for channels they will never watch - or channels they end up blocking from viewing by their children. The industry reps whined and complained that it would be too expensive, cumbersome, and confusing to offer a la carte programming. And that the smaller channels would go out of business due to lack of support. Isn't that the basis of capitalism? Yes, I watched the hearing. I know, get a life. (Of the 60 channels that I am forced to subscribe to with DishNetwork, I watch about 15 -Viacom's MTV and Nickelodeon are not on the watch list - and that is probably pretty common. The same is doubtless true with DirecTV and many cable package offerings.) In a letter, Commerce Committee Chairman Joe Barton (R-Tex.) was joined by ranking member John D. Dingell (D-Mich.), Fred Upton (R-Mich.), Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.) and Nathan Deal (R-Ga.) in asking FCC Chairman Michael K. Powell to have his agency determine - within six months - whether a la carte pricing would be technologically and economically feasible. In addition, there is a movement to prohibit providers from using a major network channel as a bargaining chip in negotiations. Aside from a full a la-carte approach, at least the providers should be required to offer their network programs as a separate item. So, CBS would be a choice by itself, for example. I was not privy to the negotiations, but I read and saw enough to be pretty certain that Viacom extracted an overall higher fee for the package by using CBS as leverage. By offering a gay and lesbian channel, Viacom has increased their exposure to complaints about their use of "packaging," if we can presume that the gay LOGO channel will be part of the package that includes CBS, MTV, Nickelodeon, and Comedy Central. Religious and parental groups are going to be more vociferous about this than any complaint they have about MTV being forced on them by Viacom. Although some say that the gay and lesbian lifestyle has become accepted in the mainstream of society, I disagree. Tolerated, perhaps, but not accepted. Even though they may not be homophobic, a majority of people do not want a gay and lesbian lifestyle glorified or depicted as the norm. The success of "Will and Grace," (which I find offensive and in poor taste) and "Queer Eye For The Straight Guy" has emboldened producers to plan more gay and lesbian programming. It would be interesting to know how many writers, producers, directors, and actors in Hollywood are gay. Almost without fear of contradiction, I am sure that if the percentages were known, they would far exceed the percentage of gays and lesbians in society as a whole. Aside from the obvious "gay" shows, there are countless mentions of gays or gay themes salted away in ostensibly straight programming. It is part of a subliminal effort to get us "comfortable" with gays on TV and in the movies. Viacom did not waste any time plugging LOGO on one of their other shows. On May 26, 2004, David Letterman on CBS did a humorous bit about LOGO, which he said was being put on the air by MTV. He carefully avoided mentioning that LOGO is a Viacom property, which also owns CBS. Do we look stupid, David? Don't you feel like a whore doing the bidding of Viacom so blatantly? Just one more reason why the concentration of several media properties in the hands of one company is a bad idea. It will be a long haul to a la carte programming. One industry cable president said it would cost $30 billion dollars to make that transition for the industry. Talk is cheap. Where did he get that figure? At a minimum, the FCC ought to mandate that network channels cannot be used as part of a package by the original provider, thus taking away the simple extortion that now exists in negotiations with the cable and satellite companies. As a compromise, we ought to at least get smaller groups or tiers to chose from. Many ask for tiers or packages based on categories of viewing, networks, sports, movies, educational, shopping, and so on. For example, there is a "basic cable" (analog) package that has only the networks and a few cable stations, that costs about $12 a month in North Texas. The lowest you can buy in on DishNetwork or DirecTV is about 60 channels, with a cost of around $35 a month (with the addition of the networks out of Dallas). I have no problem with the $35 a month. But to get about three channels that I would like from the next tier, I would have to subscribe to 120 channels (some are just digital music) for about $5 more a month. To pick up a couple more channels I would like, I would have to subscribe to 180 channels, and another increase of $10 per month. Subscribing to 180 channels just to watch about 20 channels! It makes little sense to the consumer. Now, with HDTV, there is an HDTV package that makes sense, but it is one of the few things that makes sense in cable and satellite TV pricing. If you would like to contact the folks at Viacom about "packaging" or the gay and lesbian channel LOGO, you can find names and address on my Media Guide (see link below). You can also e-mail comments to the FCC at www.fcc.gov COPYRIGHT 2000 Richard C. Rhodes You are welcome to quote sections from this page - or the whole page, as long as the source URL is included. Of course, I would be flattered if anyone linked to this page. It is very hard to be the writer, editor, fact checker, copy editor, and publisher of anything. So, I beg your forgiveness for the many mistakes that creep in. Suggested Reading From Past Columns Click Here for Suggested Reading List Archive of Back Issues Media List of Addresses and e-mails Postal Service State Abbreviations, etc. Postal Service Abbreviations - Richard C. Rhodes End |