Explain the 3.0 debate (likely scenarios)

[comfortably_numb]

Let's take tonight's Chiefs v Chargers game, for example. There's no good reason why this game shouldn't be OTA. Anywhere except Kansas City and Los Angeles, you have to watch it on YouTube. If you're in one of those two cities, you can watch it over the air. Absolutely stupid. Show it on both platforms to reach the widest audience if you want.

 

[osu1991]

Who wants to watch illegal streams of OTA content? Who's pirating the Wheel of Fortune?

In the USA, probably nobody, but you'd be surprised how popular those are for people outside the country. Even now that the UK, Australia and Canada have started or restarted their own various versions of Jeopardy, Wheel and Family Feud, the US versions are highly requested on sites for downloading media. Same for Survivor, Amazing Race, The Voice, Idol, DWTS etc…some people like to see all the versions from around the world or just compare them to their own versions.

 

[TNGuy84]

"Is it likely that all rabbit ear TV will cease to be free? Or cease to even exist?"
If the current chairman is sincere about what he stated a few years back about carving up more UHF TV, it could hasten the end of OTA TV as we know it. They could potentially sell off one last chunk of spectrum and distribute out a few channels to the current lighthouse set up, which would mean you'd point your antenna at a few towers and get all of your stations from one market, or they sell off the remaining UHF spectrum and force stations to go to streaming unless they want to fight over the small VHF spectrum.

Congressional leaders met a few months back about utilizing more spectrum for 6G because you know we have to beat China. Who knows, maybe Carr might suggests carving up UHF TV because we need it so bad for keeping ahead in the mobile market dominance or something?