It does seem that the SA mission has eroded somewhat from the previous vision of using satellites . . .
I recall when the gov decided the US should move to UHF and required every new TV set to have a UHF tuner which was little more than a noise generator as the lawmakers had no concept of gain over temperature (G/T). As a result I had TVs for a number of years with useless UHF tuners as I didn't live in a metropolitan area. Appalachia is in some ways like the more unreachable parts of the world. The cable just doesn't reach into each and every side-road or "hollar" and it is very unlikely that fiber ever will. As the spin-doctor enemy of conservatives might say "it's the economy, stupid!" So the bottom line becomes is it more important to reach the unreachable points of the globe or merely profit from the demographics of the reachable? Apparently we are witnessing the answer.
Compare that statement to this current one,". . . as the most effective means of assuring that the Gospel will penetrate every nation, culture and people---Even the most unreachable regions of the world."
The emphasis seems to be more related to how many people will hang in there if SA makes the shift as opposed to reaching the world." According to a recent study by Zogby Survey, 53 percent of Internet users would replace their cable and satellite television connections with broadband TV if they could keep the same channel lineup. IPTV provides viewers value-added services and conveniences such as the ability to set up their own equipment, to retrieve programs that have already aired, much like a personal video recorder, and to utilize Video on Demand – all of which are the key benefits of an IPTV service. "
I recall when the gov decided the US should move to UHF and required every new TV set to have a UHF tuner which was little more than a noise generator as the lawmakers had no concept of gain over temperature (G/T). As a result I had TVs for a number of years with useless UHF tuners as I didn't live in a metropolitan area. Appalachia is in some ways like the more unreachable parts of the world. The cable just doesn't reach into each and every side-road or "hollar" and it is very unlikely that fiber ever will. As the spin-doctor enemy of conservatives might say "it's the economy, stupid!" So the bottom line becomes is it more important to reach the unreachable points of the globe or merely profit from the demographics of the reachable? Apparently we are witnessing the answer.