Hacker News Reader

Comment by tptacek | Hacker News Reader

I think the idea that people in rural markets are watching PBS OTA linear content is a claim that will need to be supported with evidence. Linear television is dead, pretty much everywhere.

View on HN

Sure! I'd love to provide you with evidence.

In West Virginia, a state with a population of 1.8 million, West Virginia Public Broadcasting reported 193,687 weekly TV viewers and 85,933 weekly radio listeners in FY 2023. https://wvpublic.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/WVPB-Annual-...

In New Mexico, a state with a population of 1.8 million, New Mexico PBS reported 720,000 weekly TV viewers in 2024. https://www.newmexicopbs.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/NMPB...

In Montana, a state with a population of 1.1 million, Montana PBS estimated around 250,000 weekly TV viewers and Montana Public Radio estimated 70-80 thousand weekly radio listeners as of a couple weeks ago. https://www.krtv.com/news/montana-and-regional-news/montana-...

Only an anecdote, but when we vacationed in southern West Virginia, we relied on public radio. It's the only thing we could regularly get.

I looked only at the New Mexico numbers, and they seem to be dwarfed by their own streaming numbers through Passport. Those OTA viewers are just going to switch to streaming.

If New Mexicans were truly going to turn en masse to PBS Passport streaming, why haven't they done so already?

– Nearly one in five households lacks any fixed home internet connection. Many of those rely on cellular data that’s unreliable or capped, i.e. not viable for high‑quality streaming. [1]

– Over 20% of residents, especially in rural and tribal areas, live in broadband deserts where wired speeds of 25/3 Mbps simply aren’t available. [2]

– Among tribal communities, up to 80% of individuals may lack internet access altogether. [3]

– Even for those who can stream, broadband plans often cost around $69/month, and Passport itself requires a donation of at least $60/year or $5/month. [1][4] That may not sound like a lot to us, but it’s a non-trivial monthly expense for a family living in the 6th-poorest state in the US. [5]

Public broadcasting remains vital for people without digital access, whether due to infrastructure shortages, affordability, or demographic factors like age and tech comfort. Streaming can complement, but cannot replace, over‑the‑air reach in New Mexico. The same is likely true for overlapping reasons in the other states that OP mentioned.

1. Benton Institute for Broadband & Society. Affordable Broadband for Every Household in New Mexico. https://www.benton.org/blog/affordable-broadband-every-house...

2. Viante New Mexico. Broadband Internet in New Mexico. https://viantenm.org/broadband-internet-in-new-mexico

3. Native American Budget and Policy Institute / UNM. Broadband Access on Tribal Lands in New Mexico. https://nabpi.unm.edu/assets/documents/covid-19-research/nab...

4. PBS Digital Support. What is PBS Passport? https://pbsdigital.freshdesk.com/support/solutions/folders/5...

5. https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/poorest-sta...

good post, thank you.

this thread so patiently explains to us that these people do not even exist. Oh, but not in significant numbers. Oh, but they have other options. Oh, but they will get broadband in 20 years.

Nobody who MATTERS is impacted. Nothing to see here, move along. /s

The NM report says that there were 900,000 total Passport streams in 2024. Because there are 52 weeks in a year, that's an average of only about 17,300 streams per week.

Have you looked any closer at these numbers? This is something like 90% of the entire New Mexico household audience. Does that sound plausible to you?

If you're accusing them of lying on their report because it disagrees with the off-the-cuff remark you made about OTA TV being dead everywhere, then I'm not sure what I can do. I'm not a journalist. Personally I find it inspiring that New Mexico PBS has managed to become one of the most watched PBS stations in the country (often in the top 10 for prime-time viewership) when it serves the 37th most populous state, and feel that it's a great example of how public broadcasting is able to reach underserved communities.

No, I don't think New Mexico PBS is lying. I think it's much more likely that we don't understand the stat we're arguing about. Uh, I'm just going to come out and say it: even in 1995, at the height of linear television, 80+% of the NM market was not watching PBS. Sorry, this doesn't pencil out.

Streaming is not viable in the vast majority of the country. Just because it's available to the vast majority of the population doesn't mean that the minority who live in rural areas don't count.

I watch OTA television.

I listen to linear NPR. But I know what the statistics are. None of this is going to be here 20 years from now.

the important thing about 20 years from now is that it isn't now

A valid point. Plain old tv is the past.

For the small number of people using it, it’s better to spend the money on internet infrastructure to bring them into the current century. Broadcast tv is one step up from old time radio.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com