Digital migration; time for clarity

A somewhat general mention is often made in passing on the social and economic benefits to be derived from Botswana’s choice.
It is impossible to engage on a meaningful dialogue, much less an honest debate when government itself does not clearly spell out what those socio-economic benefits really are going to be.
Having said that, we should as Batswana be worried that all relevant expert information so far available makes the case that while Botswana Government is well within its rights to choose whatever technology they so prefer, there are serious dangers with the technology of ISDB-T as preferred by the Office of President.
There are many grey areas which have not been addressed.
Ordinarily, this technological piece of debate should be spearheaded by the official state ministry responsible for technology which is Works, Transport and Technology.
But bizarrely we see it being pursued spuriously in all its lopsided logic from a natural political ministry for Presidential Affairs and Public Administration.
We most probably shall never know why.
Under normal circumstances that would be of little concern and indeed consequence since all ministries are ultimately responsible to one person; the State President.
But there is nothing normal about circumstances surrounding Digital Migration in Botswana.
Government, in this case the Ministry for Presidential Affairs and Public Administration has gone against expert advice of engineers and other technologists.
We see the Ministry for Presidential Affairs getting pricklier and ever more irascible every time anybody dares to ask for clarity on the question of Digital Migration.
Across the world there is consensus among broadcasting engineering experts that of the technologies from which to choose, DVB-T2 is much more robust and even efficient than government’s choice of ISDB-T.
Engineers across the globe speak of how DVB-T2 technology saves power.
And we need not remind anybody, much less the Government of Botswana on the importance of saving energy, given the country’s continued erratic, unreliable and supply as witnessed over the last two years.
And those are not the only concerns.
As Batswana we should, we should be worried that by going it alone, our government has denied the nation the benefits that come as part of what economists call “economies of scale.”
In simper terms this means that the more one produces the cheaper it gets. We are a nation of just less than two million people.
Of that number, less than half a million own television sets.
This exposes television sets owners to extreme costs that can be avoided especially because no extra reception quality is promised from the choice our Government has made.
We have failed to take advantage of the safety that comes with numbers.
It’s not too late yet for our Government to reconsider its decision.
But as one expert recently said in Dubai where an international conference was held to discuss Digital Migration, “Botswana should avoid reaching a point of no return. Being the only country in the world to adopt ISBD-T running on 8 MHZ comes at a cost. There is no doubt that the technology will work. But when you look at the costs to the consumer it really is not worth it. As an engineer my immediate suspicion is that there has been misunderstanding. If it is the president who made the decision then he most probably was not given all the options, at least not clearly.”
The technology that government adopted is offered by the Japanese. That, to our government may be consolation enough given the fact that the world over the Japanese are known to be technologically savvy.
But that is not the issue here.
At issue are the real costs that would have to be borne by the consumer on adopting this kind of technology vis-à-vis the other available options.
We hear that the Directorate on Corruption and Economic Crime is investigating circumstances surrounding the choice made by Government.
We hope the investigation by DCEC will look at who really made the decision, what informed them and what technical expertise they had at the time of making the choice on behalf of the nation.
If politicians; both present and past are found to have failed the nation they should face the music.
Companies from the developed world who often sell technology to third world countries are often excessively aggressive in their marketing pitches.
Over and above saying how good their technology packages are against their competitors they often offer a whole suite of other packages extended accompanying their technology.
It is not rare to also find them arriving bearing gifts for the officials with whom they are directly dealing with on the other end.
We are not saying this is what the Japanese did, but only that DCEC should look at all possibilities that could have influenced out Botswana officials and their political leadership.
We call on government to not only re-evaluate its position but also allow for more information, more clarity and less propaganda to reach the public as has been case thus far.