Talk:Captain Midnight broadcast signal intrusion/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

Stub

I have major major changes to the page.

I believe that it no longer violates Wikipedia's rue on spamming/self promotion because it now focuses on the incident, not Mr. MacDougall.

I have also added new factual material that I have personal knowledge about.

Picture

This article would be much better with a picture of the incident. Does one exist?

I've put one up. Mike Richardson 07:56, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

More possible changes

Since Wikipedia has standards for bios of living people, suggest we change this entry to focus on the "Captain Midnight Satellite Jamming Incident", not Mr. McDougall.

In particular, I would like to add back most of the text from the 8/06 version that focuses on the incident:

"On the evening of April 27, 1986, at 12:32am HBO's showing of The Falcon and the Snowman film was interrupted by a jamming signal protesting HBO's recent change in scrambling and charging for its satellite signal. John R. MacDougall, also known as Captain Midnight, was identified by an FCC investigation as the perpetrator of this incident and pleaded guilty to a federal misdemeanor, receiving a suspended sentence and $5,000 fine.

Cable television program distributors, such as HBO, started to use C band domestic satellites in the 1970s for video distribution to cable TV systems across the US as an alternative to mailing tapes or using expensive terrestrial microwave systems. Originally, the technology needed to receive such signals was expensive and unauthorized signal use was not a problem. As equipment costs rapidly decreased, home equipment for C band reception became affordable and unauthorized signal use became an issue - particularly with respect to the terms of CATV programmers' contracts with movie studios.

In the mid-1980s, controversy erupted in the cable programming world as cable program distributors began scrambling their programming and charging fees to home satellite dish owners who accessed the same satellite signals cable operators received and paid for. Many satellite dish owners were forced to purchase descrambling equipment at a cost of hundreds of dollars or paying monthly or annual subscription fees to cable programming providers. Programming costs for home dish owners were often higher than fees paid by cable subscribers, despite dish owners being responsible for owning and servicing their own equipment.

When HBO scrambled its signal, it offered subscriptions to home dish owners for $12.95 per month, which was either equal to or slightly higher than what cable subscribers paid. Dish owners felt they were being asked to pay a price that was designed to be anti-competitive, and it triggered a national movement among dish owners to more strongly regulate the cable industry and force them to stop anti-competitive pricing. While many dish owners called their elected officials, one took a more confrontational approach

MacDougall, a satellite TV dealer in Ocala, Florida, was working at Central Florida Teleport, a company that uplinks services to satellites. He was overseeing the uplink of the movie Pee-wee's Big Adventureon the evening of the incident. At the end of his shift, he swung the dish back in to its storage position, pointing directly upward which happened to be the location of Galaxy 1, the satellite that carries HBO. As a protest against the introduction of high fees and scrambling equipment, he transmitted a signal onto the satellite that overrode HBO's video signal.

The text message that appeared on the sets of HBO subscribers across the Eastern time zone. (The last line was in a smaller font than the earlier lines, a fact that was later very helpful in the technical investigation.): 

   GOODEVENING HBO
   FROM CAPTAIN MIDNIGHT
   $12.95/MONTH?
   NO WAY!
   (SHOWTIME/MOVIE CHANNEL BEWARE)

MacDougall chose the name "Captain Midnight" from a movie he had recently seen, On the Air Live with Captain Midnight.

The incidents raised concerns from both video distributors using satellites that their business might be disrupted and satellite owners that the large jamming signals might permanently damage their satellites and require premature replacement at large costs. Investigators of the FCC's Field Operations Bureau identified MacDougall within a week of the incident using what Time magazine (August 4, 1986 issue) called "high-tech, Holmesian detective work".

The investigation proceeded on two parallel tracks: a nationwide "shoeleather" investigation that focusing on following up tips and a technical investigation that searched the US for the equipment used in the incident. The "shoeleather" investigation first identified Central Florida as a likely source of the jamming based on a tip from someone overhearing a telephone call at a group of pay phones in the area. (The person who was overheard was claiming to be the perpetrator, but apparently was just someone MacDougall had talked to.)

The technical investigation identified possible sites that had adequate transmitter power, technically eirp, to cause the jamming and identified the model of character generator used to generate the message - narrowing possible sources to a few sites that had both adequate eirp and the correct character generator. FCC investigators then used a novel "fingerprinting" technique to match the text in a recording of the actual incident to the specific character generator MacDougall had access to.

In making his guilty plea, MacDougall may not have realized that there were legal ambiguities in the law and regulations then in effect about whether he had actually violated the law since Central Florida Teleport had a valid FCC license. He pleaded guilty to a violation of 47 U.S.C. 301 that requires a license to transmit. FCC Rules have since been clarified and 18 U.S.C. 1367 now clearly makes satellite jamming a felony.

In September 1987, the Playboy satellite channel was jammed in a roughly similar way but with text from Scriptures. Thomas Haynie, an employee of the Christian Broadcasting Network, was identified by the FCC as the perpetrator of the incident and was ultimately convicted by a federal jury of violating the new satellite law. He received a suspended sentence based on the Federal Sentencing Guidelines in effect at the time of the incident - which are now different.

New technology allows satellite operators to locate quickly the geographic location of satellite uplink signals and serves as a deterrent to future incidents. This technology was not available at the time of the Captain Midnight and Playboy incidents.

Today, MacDougall owns MacDougall Electronics in Ocala, a satellite dish dealer. The FCC's Field Operations Bureau is now called the Enforcement Bureau."

Lucky with the timing

$5,000 and a year of probation? If someone were to do that exact thing today, they'd be fined into bankruptcy, tossed in jail, and charged with a form of terrorism. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.206.80.66 (talk) 01:21, 2 March 2007 (UTC).

Uplink Dish Position

There is no way the dish would of been pointing straight up. The satellites in geosync orbit are located above the equator...last time i checked, Florida wasn't THAT close to the euqator (although it may feel like it). A better explanation is that due to the terrain of florida, if you stick a satellite dish straight up, it will fill with rain, and since florida is mostly sand, euventually, the satellite and concrete slab would sink. Another thing about uplink satellites is that they have a waveguide sticking out of the center, they're not one solid parabola like a recieving dish...and i'm sure getting water down in there might not be such a good idea. The satellite dishes rest position was more than likely closer to a 45 degree angle as it probably had a drainage system..and it just so happened that when it was at it's angled rest position, it happened to be at the galaxy 1 location. Dewdude 03:02, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Can you find a reliable source for that? Might be worth something if it checks. SchuminWeb (Talk) 19:16, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Galaxy I was very low on the Florida horizon. If memory serves it was at 131W and Satcom III where the rest of the primary cable channels were located was at 134W. Regardless the stowage position of the antenna it is very unlikey to have coincidentally been aligned with G1, from Florida or anywhere else. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 32.151.152.247 (talk) 13:19, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Length of Message

How long did Captain Midnight's message appear on-screen to customers? Wouldn't that be important to the story? For some reason it's been completely overlooked. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.46.14.98 (talk • contribs)

Good question. I don't know, but it needs to be added if it can be sourced. SchuminWeb (Talk) 23:05, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
You mean showing a computerized message? I was wondering that too. Maybe with a Timex Sinclair script, displayed over a code that shows color bars. Virtually any old computer could probably do the job. —Coastergeekperson04's talk@Aug/05/08 21:01

Convicted?

The thingie on the right says "Arrested and Convicted", but the article text talks about plea bargain. So which one is correct? It's quite misleading, plea bargain is not the same thing as being convicted. --Beta M (talk) 15:09, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

A plea bargain is a BETTER conviction than a "normal" conviction where you are found guilty by a jury. In the latter, the jury has to be convinced you are guilty. In the former, YOU are convinced that you can't avoid being found guilty. When you cop a plea, you are officially admitting guilt, and are found guilty. That's pretty much the definition of "conviction." Fnj2 (talk) 02:57, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

Textfiles.com Article

Would it be appropriate to link to a much more detailed account of this incident hosted at textfiles.com? The thing is that there is no author or copyright information on the file. I don't know if it would be appropriate to link to it. The file originally made the rounds on the BBS' of the day. The link is here http://www.textfiles.com/100/captmidn.txt 65.12.135.63 06:22, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

This is better than the actual Wikipedia article! 108.9.52.84 (talk) 01:26, 4 May 2012 (UTC)


Requested move (September 2014)

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: not moved. Jenks24 (talk) 13:25, 9 September 2014 (UTC)


Captain Midnight (HBO) → John R. MacDougall – this title is not consistent with WP:COMMONNAME; true, he is well known by this nickname, but this is not like a stage name, pen name, etc.; this was just a name he used to conceal his identity; not consistent with WP:UCN. Relisted. Jenks24 (talk) 12:20, 25 August 2014 (UTC) Qxukhgiels (talk) 22:22, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

  • weak support as nom Gregkaye (talk) 15:24, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Weak oppose WP:OFFICIALNAME we don't use the subject's real name just because it is their real name. The nom-de-guerre of this person is well known per your own rationale, if the criminal alias of a person is well known, it would be the name that people looking for the topic would use (ie. D. B. Cooper, Billy the Kid, etc). -- 65.94.169.222 (talk) 07:24, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Oppose - The subject is known entirely for their actions as "Captain Midnight". It's not that he's well known by this name -- he's pretty much entirely known by that. Hell, the article could and maybe even should be on the event rather than the person, in line with the Max Headroom incident.--Yaksar (let's chat) 18:30, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Oppose. The main focus of the article is not the life of John MacDougall, but rather the notable single incident he enacted under this pseudonym. -- Infrogmation (talk) 22:38, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Requested move- 6 October 2014

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: no consensus to move the page, per the discussion below. Dekimasuよ! 01:32, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Captain Midnight (HBO) → Attack of Captain Midnight – article is about the event, not the person. Qxukhgiels (talk) 14:44, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

  • oppose Attack of Captain Midnight does not seem to be at all a common name used to describe this event. Perhaps something like "Max Headroom Jamming Incident" might work?--Yaksar (let's chat) 16:57, 6 October 2014 (UTC)
    •  Comment: the Max Headroom broadcast signal intrusion was a different incident. -- Infrogmation (talk) 20:14, 6 October 2014 (UTC)
      • Hahah whoops, my thoughts got ahead of my fingers. I meant to write "something like what we use for the Max Headroom incident, such as 'Captain Midnight Jamming incident".--Yaksar (let's chat) 20:38, 6 October 2014 (UTC)
        • Does this mean that you do not support this page being moved at all?Qxukhgiels (talk) 22:32, 6 October 2014 (UTC)
          • Not necessarily. I just don't support this particular move.--Yaksar (let's chat) 23:37, 6 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Oppose. If uniformity were desired I guess the title would be something like "Captain Midnight HBO signal intrusion". The suggested new title "Attack of Captain Midnight" has a dramatic snap, but sounds like a show episode or comic book of Captain Midnight; it no specification that it is the HBO incident, and hence is less rather than more specific than the current title. -- Infrogmation (talk) 20:10, 9 October 2014 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Unclear Text

Satellite dish owners began protests over scrambling saying that clear signals from cable channels would become difficult to receive.

I don't understand what is being said... Why would unencrypted channels be difficult to receive??? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.62.5.27 (talk) 10:51, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

Requested move 29 December 2014

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Moved. There was a similar video piracy incident documented in another article. It has been sitting at the title Max Headroom broadcast signal intrusion since 2008 without apparent controversy. Anyone who wants 'HBO' to be in the title of this incident might consider creating a redirect. EdJohnston (talk) 20:09, 26 January 2015 (UTC)


Captain Midnight (HBO) → Captain Midnight broadcast signal intrusion – Per previous discussions, this is a title that has been agreed on. Compare Max Headroom broadcast signal intrusion. --Relisted. George Ho (talk) 05:12, 16 January 2015 (UTC) Qxukhgiels (talk) 16:00, 29 December 2014 (UTC) Qxukhgiels (talk) 16:00, 29 December 2014 (UTC)

  • Comment there are two move requests from 2014 that are in /Archive 2 from September 2014, and October 2014, both proposed by Qxukhgiels, that people may wish to inspect. -- 65.94.40.137 (talk) 05:51, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
    No, these have nothing to do with this one; those were for different titles. This title was even suggested in both requests. Qxukhgiels (talk) 19:01, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
  • The suggested title in the prior discussion included "HBO" -- 65.94.40.137 (talk) 05:00, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Note: The referenced previous discussions have been moved to /Archive 1. Steel1943 (talk) 03:02, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Playboy Channel Intrusion

A few months after the HBO incident there was another well publicized incident involving the Playboy channel where viewers were advised to "repent their sins" [1]. 94.0.215.193 (talk) 13:43, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

Copy edit

I have accepted the request to copy edit this article. I will keep you posted on how things are progressing! David Thibault (talk) 19:11, 26 September 2017 (UTC)

@MWright96: Copyediting completed! I have posted some queries below. Please review them carefully, and if you have any questions please don't hesitate to ask. David Thibault (talk) 00:19, 30 September 2017 (UTC)

Copy editing queries

Lead

  • I made the following change in the second paragraph. Please review it to make sure I did not change the intended meaning:
The jamming brought received much attention to in American society, with one executive dubbing the intrusion as an act of "video terrorism".
  • That change has not changed the meaning in any way MWright96 (talk) 07:47, 30 September 2017 (UTC)
 Resolved David Thibault (talk) 21:15, 30 September 2017 (UTC)

Background

Scrambling of satellite transmissions

  • In the first paragraph, I recommend the following revision (please review to make sure the meaning is the same):
Original: “Starting in the 1970s, a small community of satellite television enthusiasts (mostly engineers) shared the technology and knowledge on how to construct their own satellite dishes and remove pay television from the airwaves without additional financial cost to the public. This was not illegal at the time and restaurant and hotel chains used the feeds to distribute programming to guests and patrons without charge.”
Possible revision: “Starting in the 1970s, a small community of satellite television enthusiasts (mostly engineers) shared the technology and knowledge on how to construct satellite dishes, as well as how to access pay television from the airwaves for free. This was not illegal at the time, and restaurant and hotel chains made use of this technology to distribute programming to guests and patrons without charge.”
  • I’ve reworded the text in the second and third paragraphs for clarity. My understanding is that satellite dish owners were going to have to both a: buy a descrambler, and b: pay monthly or annual subscription fees. Please review the text carefully to ensure that the meaning has not been changed.
Am happy with the changes that have been made. MWright96 (talk) 12:47, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
 Resolved David Thibault (talk) 19:44, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
  • At the very end of the third paragraph, the acronym does not match the name of the association:
“the Satellite Television Industry Association (SPACE)”
  • This appears to be unusual as ref 29 gives the organization's acronyms as SPACE MWright96 (talk) 07:47, 30 September 2017 (UTC)
  • I googled "Satellite Television Industry Association" and the top result is a website for the "SBCA". It appears that the acronym SPACE refers to "Society for Private and Commercial Earth Stations", which seems to be another name for the Satellite Television Industry Association. As you only mention the association two times in the article (once here, and once by acronym only near the end of the article), I recommend eliminating the acronym and using only one of the full terms.
David Thibault (talk) 21:31, 30 September 2017 (UTC)
Used the full term of Satellite Television Industry Association in place of the acronym. MWright96 (talk) 12:47, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
 Resolved David Thibault (talk) 19:44, 1 October 2017 (UTC)

John R. MacDougall

  • In the first paragraph, should it read that MacDougall was “studying in a management engineering program”?
 Resolved David Thibault (talk) 21:34, 30 September 2017 (UTC)
  • I deleted the following text, which appeared at the end of the first paragraph:
“…primarily due to his reputation of having vast experience in electronics that attracted him to the city.”
It appears to be a quote from a source, and doesn’t fit with the rest of the sentence. I also don’t think it’s necessary anyway, as it is already implied in the paragraph that MacDougall has experience with technical work.
David Thibault (talk) 21:34, 30 September 2017 (UTC)
The removal is fine by me MWright96 (talk) 12:47, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
 Resolved David Thibault (talk) 19:45, 1 October 2017 (UTC)

Investigation

  • In the first paragraph, changed “Channel” to “transponder”. Okay?
 Resolved David Thibault (talk) 22:10, 30 September 2017 (UTC)
  • In the third paragraph, it’s unclear who was in charge of the investigation. Were the FBI and FCC conducting separate investigations? The word “investigators” also appears near the beginning and end of the paragraph, but it’s unclear whether these are FBI or FCC investigators. I recommend adding clarifying text so readers know who’s who.
    • Have clarified to say that the FCC were the agency that did the bulk of the investigating and that the FBI were assisting them. MWright96 (talk) 07:47, 30 September 2017 (UTC)
 Resolved David Thibault (talk) 22:44, 30 September 2017 (UTC)
  • The following section of text from the third paragraph may need to be revised so that the events appear in chronological order:
“Later, the FBI determined which teleport uplink site had the capability to override the HBO signal. That narrowed it down to two uplink sites…”
  • Additional text throughout the third paragraph may also need attention so that events are presented as they occurred.
  • Done and it should be somewhat improved from previous versions MWright96 (talk) 07:47, 30 September 2017 (UTC)
 Resolved David Thibault (talk) 22:44, 30 September 2017 (UTC)
  • I’m concerned that Reference 19 (Williams 2010) is not a reliable source. Information stated in the third paragraph in particular that uses Reference 19 seems to contract information from the Reference 23 source, which I consulted (e.g. two uplink sites vs. 580). I recommend revisions to eliminate text that uses Reference 18 (appearing throughout the section), and relying on References 22, 23, and 24 instead.
    •  Done MWright96 (talk) 07:47, 30 September 2017 (UTC)
    • I've read through the section and made some minor edits. It looks good!
I made one revision that I need you to sign off on (appearing near the beginning of the fourth paragraph):
"That They narrowed it down to 580 uplink sites that had sufficiently large antennas that had the capability of broadcasting the signal."
David Thibault (talk) 22:10, 30 September 2017 (UTC)
 Done MWright96 (talk) 12:47, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
 Resolved David Thibault (talk) 19:56, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
Also, I noticed you are still using the reference for Williams 2010 in two spots. Are you fine with this?
David Thibault (talk) 22:10, 30 September 2017 (UTC)
Yes, as long as the book is not used to source the information for the main part of the investigation. MWright96 (talk) 12:47, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
 Resolved David Thibault (talk) 19:53, 1 October 2017 (UTC)

Aftermath

  • The following sentence, appearing near the end of the second paragraph, may need to be revised. I’ve included a possible revision (but only if the intended meaning is preserved).
Original: “MacDougall found the constant media attention difficult to deal with, and could not stay at his home for a short period of time.”
Possible revision: “MacDougall found the constant media attention difficult to deal with, and was regularly bothered at home.”
  • Revision looks better and has been changed accordingly MWright96 (talk) 06:08, 30 September 2017 (UTC)
 Resolved David Thibault (talk) 22:12, 30 September 2017 (UTC)

Bibliography

  • The last entry in the bibliography should be revised so the publication date (2006) appears after the publications title. I realize that “2006” already in fact appears in the publication title, but the date should still appear in the same place as it does with the other entries in the list to achieve consistency.
    • Done this and the author for that book has been added MWright96 (talk) 07:47, 30 September 2017 (UTC)
 Resolved David Thibault (talk) 22:20, 30 September 2017 (UTC)

Notes and References

Notes

  • For consistency within the article, I recommend the following revisions to Note 2:
    • Changing “Standard Time” to read “Eastern Standard Time”.
    • Changing “Daylight Saving Time” to read “Eastern Daylight Time”.
    • Changing “DST” to read “EDT”.
  • In Note 2, the date should be written as month/day.
    •  Done MWright96 (talk) 06:08, 30 September 2017 (UTC)
    • Looks good. I also recommend adding the acronym (EDT) after "Eastern Daylight Time", since the acronym does appear later in the sentence.
David Thibault (talk) 22:28, 30 September 2017 (UTC)
 Done MWright96 (talk) 12:47, 1 October 2017 (UTC)

References

  • In References 1 and 22, the middle initials of the authors should appear after their first names (e.g. Ewalt, David M.).
    •  Done MWright96 (talk) 06:08, 30 September 2017 (UTC)
    • Reference 1 will need to be revised again. The middle initial should appear after the first name: Ewalt, David M.
David Thibault (talk) 22:38, 30 September 2017 (UTC)
 Done MWright96 (talk) 12:47, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
  • In Reference 8, should the word “will” in the subtitle be capitalized?
  • Wright 2012 should only appear under one reference number. It presently appears under numbers 9, 18, 20, and 39.
  • In Reference 27, should “United Press International” be italicized? Is it the title of a publication?
    • United Press International is the agency that published the work MWright96 (talk) 07:47, 30 September 2017 (UTC)
 Resolved David Thibault (talk) 22:38, 30 September 2017 (UTC)
  • The entry for reference 29 needs to be revised (author’s middle name does not need to be mentioned).

David Thibault (talk) 00:14, 30 September 2017 (UTC)

  • @David Thibault: Thank you for your copy-editing queries. I have implemented the where possible to help further improvements be made to the article before GAN. MWright96 (talk) 07:47, 30 September 2017 (UTC)
  • @MWright96: The revisions you've made look good! I've marked the queries above that require further attention. Some of them only require you to sign off on them. David Thibault (talk) 22:47, 30 September 2017 (UTC)
    • @David Thibault: That should be everything on the list dealt with MWright96 (talk) 12:47, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
    • @MWright96: Everything looks good. It was a pleasure to work on the article! I hope it succeeds in achieving Good article status! David Thibault (talk) 20:02, 1 October 2017 (UTC)

People who falsely claimed to be the perpetrator

In the Investigation section, the article currently states,

In the days after the jamming, more than 200 people called the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) to "confess" that they were Captain Midnight.

This sentence has two citations. The first source, in Forbes, does say "over 200". But the second, Mental Floss, says only "several". -⁠-⁠173.129.239.16 (talk) 15:39, 27 April 2019 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Captain_Midnight_broadcast_signal_intrusion/Archive_1&oldid=1144959853"