Oh, brother -- you had to see this coming, didn't you? Soon after details of the California Energy Commission's proposed TV efficiency standards
leaked out, the Consumer Electronics Association (CEA) has fired back a shocking press release in order to sound the alarm and get people in opposition. According to its "research," setting arbitrary limits on television electricity usage will end up costing California $50 million annually in state tax revenue and will destroy some 4,600 jobs in the TV sales, distribution and installation business. In the CEA's eyes, this proposal "eliminates consumer choice and will remove 25 percent of televisions from the market." Naturally, all of these assertions pay no attention whatsoever to the environment, and while we won't bother with inserting any politics here, we'd advise hitting the read link just to see what blatant bias looks like in its purest form.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
iamjoecollector @ Apr 11th 2009 12:03AM
Reading that release, I did not see one reliable "fact" anywhere. It contained a lot of guess work, conjecture and speculation. Too many coulds and mights to be reliable. Did the firm simply take the total sales in numbers and dollars,subtract the number of TV's that didn't meet the standards and then call it a day? Frankly, your "average consumer" doesn't care what tv they get as long as they get on they like. I guess we can't expect much from industry whores that are bought and sold based on what they will and will not say regardless of verifiable facts and critical analysis.
AisforAwesome @ Apr 11th 2009 1:52AM
as someone who works in electronics retail, i can see that there is distinct consumer demand for energy efficient TVs, so laws like these are IMHO completely obnoxious.
if the tendency was that TVs were getting less and less energy efficient, i can understand such laws, but they just aren't.
all these laws are going to do is just add one more blow to the chin of the nearly defeated plasma. it's bad enough that i'm not going to be able to sell KUROs anymore, are you going to take my VIERAs away too??
John @ Apr 11th 2009 3:26AM
Well, I just can't help myself...
If you're the one-in-a-million salesman that actually pushes plasma, you might want to start lobbying your fellow salesmen, in addition to the customer. Seems like there are a whole lot of sheep out there without a shepherd, and they all believe what they heard 10 years ago. I appreciate your efforts though, as I hope plasma survives long enough till something better than LCD comes along.
AisforAwesome @ Apr 12th 2009 1:21PM
haha, yeah, I actually do push plasmas to my coworkers as well -- of the 6 of us, 3 are pro-plasma, 2 are neutral, and 1 is pro-lcd... and the pro-lcd guy's only reason is that they are "brighter"
one thing that I don't think many people realize, is that most CONSUMERS think that lcd is better -- at least 80% of our plasma sales are uphill battles, so earning the trust of our customers is paramount -- let's face it, during heavy traffic times, customers aren't going to get that sort of one-on-one attention, and they're typically going to walk our the door with exactly what they asked for, not what is better
trust me, I'm extremely fearful about the current state of HDTV. we get more and more customers that demand lcd every day, and think that i'm pulling a fast one on them when i recommend plasma -- how frustrated do you think I get when that happens? it's exasperating!
oh well, Panasonic has some fantastic offerings this year, here's to hoping that they crush the competition!
zto @ Apr 11th 2009 3:54AM
This is as much BS as LCDs pushing out Plasmas.
Sadly the average consumer is a moron and listens to clueless sales reps.
The reason why HDTVs were made was for better picture quality - why on earth someone will spend money (sometimes actually more ) to buy an inferior LCD picture, than a Plasma one is beyond me.
Most of us want to conserve power - fine, but the difference between plasma and lcd these days in power consumption is not all that much. And if you're so hardcore on saving energy - DO NOT BUY a TV, but rather go outside and watch nature - I hear watching your actual surroundings is better than 1080p and you won't be wasting any energy at all.
Guy Incognito @ Apr 11th 2009 4:28AM
This sounds like the same whining and crying that every industry does when they don't want to change.
The auto industry did the same thing when they said that seat belts, front air bags, side air bags, anti-lock brakes, crumple zones, etc. were just too expensive and would "DOOM" the industry.
It was easier for GM to hire a prostitute and try to smear Ralph Nader's reputation than to actually, like, build a safer car. It was cheaper for Ford to pay out lawsuits for the deaths due to the Pinto than to recall the thing and make it safe for people to drive.
Gallo @ Apr 11th 2009 9:11AM
Sorry, I love my LCD.
jp @ Apr 11th 2009 12:08PM
The CEA's bias doesn't remotely compare to the large scale scam job of the environmentalist doom's day political juggernaut. The mere fact that so many people agree with Al Gore and his ilk without a basic understanding of climate science (or reason) is scary enough.
The main difference is that the CEA cannot FORCE you to use their products, but the government can (and does).
EQC @ Apr 12th 2009 11:23PM
You are, of course, free to believe whatever you want. But, I hope you at least understand that whether or not human-released CO2 causes "global warming" isn't the issue. The issues are: pollution is bad, waste is bad, and over-using the Earth's resources without thought to what happens when they run out is bad.
If you care about the environment, other humans, or your own financial situation, then avoiding waste and pollution is a good thing. Disagreeing with Al Gore's tactics shouldn't alter that...
And just because I found this interesting: "global warming" is an old-ish term...scientists go with "climate change" now, indicating that some places might get colder, some warmer, some might get more rain, others less. One interesting piece of this puzzle: while it can never be 100% proven, there are strong links between the drought that caused a decade of starvation in Ethiopia, and certain types of pollution from industrialized countries:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/2042856.stm
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines02/0721-07.htm
sure, "absolute proof" isn't there, and it probably never will be. There will always be doubt...but too many people don't care at all, and think nothing of wasting energy and other resources just because they don't like Al Gore's beliefs or tactics.