Question about television channels

[W3XWT]

Although radio had standardized frequency assignments and bandwidth, these were also more of a political consideration than technical necessity. While in Europe, the Copenhagen Convention of 1946 (IIRC) set frequencies and allocations, they were doled out almost as arbitrarily as the Havana (or NARBA) Treaty for North America. TV, on the other hand, offered more opportunity to put an “electronic curtain” around your population while not causing ill-will with neighboring countries. While in the analog era, virtually everything in the Western Hemisphere was NTSC/CCIR system M (except the French territories like St. Pierre et Miquelon), you had two countries go PAL (Brazil and Argentina) for color while another attempted SECAM only to go NTSC later (Cuba). In Europe, look at the channelization differences between east and west. Such was the early recognized power of TV! Or, look at channel 13 in the Florida Keys. Problem with TV is that like all VHF and wideband signals, it’s easy to jam. Unfortunately, jamming also makes you look like a totalitarian political pariah. Anyone remember what happened with Radio Nordzee International on 1367 KHz? As for the political muscle of RCA, how many former FCC Commissioners later became members of the RCA Board of Directors? To some in the 1930’s-1950’s, the FCC was not much more than a subsidiary of RCA… Now, in the digital era, besides the RF considerations, you also have the transmission protocols to deal with. How many countries are adopting ATSC vs. ISDB vs. DVB-T?

[Rinehart]

But even if politicians and the FCC wanted to establish political and social controls on television broadcasting, why did it have to take this particular form? For example, why would it be necessary to have both the audio and the video carrier in the same frequency range, with all the potential problems with beat frequencies? Why not have the video carriers in one part of the broadcast spectrum, and the audio carriers in another? True, the viewer would have to tune them separately, which is maybe a little more effort, but it would remove the need to have a standard for the distance they would have to be separated.