Slashdot Mirror
FCC Supports Neighborhood Radio
RevMike writes "According to this story from the Associated Press, the FCC is recommending to Congress that restrictions on low-power FM stations be relaxed. The FCC found that low-power FM stations can be operated in the gaps of spectrum between major stations without substantially interfering with those major stations. If Congress adopts the FCC's recommendations, it will loosen the stranglehold that companies like ClearChannel have on the airwaves."
i don't if they're going to want to do that. that might lead to increased free speech, creative ideas, and non-biased information
complaints they get because people are not following the law.
I am the Alpha and the Omega-3
ClearChannel will not let go without a fight.
ClearChannel is ranked among the top 5 radio conglomerates in the world.
Allowing neighbourhood radio station, will detoriate the quality on frequencies that ClearChannel has control over. This will be big problem in areas like Mojave Desert etc.
Consensus is good, but informed dictatorship is better
funny, at my university, there is no student voice on the college radio. not even that is a reserved source of speech anymore. i don't doubt that is the case at many other universities as well
This is one of those really cool things I used to think about as a kid, but in light of all the turmoil being caused by, Kazaa, the **AA, et al, I just can't get that excited about it.
Untill we get this Intellectual Property "saga" sorted out, we can pretty much count on any cool uses for tech like this being brought in through the "front door" getting the political axe.
Clear Channel's attempt to keep restrictions where they are, if not to increase them. They probably would use some lame excuse about maintaining the value of their broadcast license. Taxi drivers in Chicago said the same thing, trying to stop the city from permitting more taxis to operate in the city. They wanted to maintain the value of their medallions, which costed up to 40,000 usd.
What?
I've been doing this for a while, and I've known a few guys to get busted, but mostly it's unenforceable as it is. Why not make the law reflect that?
If you chose to operate an FM transmitter outside these parameters, you would be considered a "pirate" in the eyes of the FCC, and you can be discovered, even though these rules are enforced unevenly. Sometimes a 1 watt station goes unnoticed by local licensed broadcasters, so a complaint is never filed and the FCC never finds out about it. Anecdotally, we have also heard of cases where FCC agents have turned a blind eye to 1 to 3 watt stations, if it seemed like they were not bothering any licensed broadcasters. At this level, despite operating at up to 75 times the legal limit, the actual power is so minuscule that the agent decided not to pursue the case. (This is akin to a cop pulling you over for speeding, but deciding to not give you the ticket because they think you're cute. You may be able to get away with it, but let no one fool you into thinking that it is actually legal.)
Some members of Prometheus Radio Radio Project were involved in pirate broadcasting. We did this because we believed that the broadcast regulations of this country are fundamentally unfair. We ran great community radio stations in defiance of the wealth-based structure of our broadcast system. The FCC eventually confiscated our stations, but announced that they had gotten the message of our -civil disobedience and that they were going to create a legalized low power fm radio service. We decided to stop pirating and work with the FCC to build a permanent new community radio service for this country. There is still a movement of unlicensed pirate stations that continues to operate in defiance of the broadcast regulations, which truthfully have only gotten slightly better as a result of LPFM. Morally we are sympathetic to these operations, but from a practical standpoint we do not devote our work to assisting them. We focus our efforts on the stations that are going to be able to become permanent fixtures in their communities, that are able to serve diverse communities because no one needs to worry about having their door busted down for operating without a license.
The people who own congress in this area, NPR and NAB, will not let this happen.
They will haul out their so-called "engineers" that will prove that a 10 watt station interferes with the 100,000 watt station up on the hill. They will drag out their old engineering papers that contradict everything that the FCC has documented. As if the FCC engineers never went to grade school. And a congress person will then have an excuse to throw a wrench in the works. This will happen at the last moment, by attaching a rider to the omnibus funding bill, just like before.
Just remember, you're pledge money is going to buy off a senator somewhere.
Take the cheese to sickbay, the doctor should see it as soon as possible - B'Elanna Torres, "Learning Curve"
Because satellite radio isn't free, cable radio requires cables, and internet radio doesn't scale (and requires an internet connection).
It's hard to be religious when certain people are never incinerated by bolts of lightning.
I would be willing to place many college radio stations above public radio. During the Clinton impeachment hearings all we were getting from publuc radio was...the Clinton impeachment hearings, like there was nothing else happening in the u.s. much less the world. DMCA was being debated around the same time(I think). I heard hardly anything about that. Clipper chip? Bah. Nothing. Other corporate give aways? Zilch. Monsanto? Don't make me laugh.
What?
"Local radio listeners should not be subjected to the inevitable interference that would result from shoehorning more stations onto an already overcrowded radio dial," spokesman Dennis Wharton said.
As if what they're broadcasting is preferable to static. I love the idea that this will give more people a voice. Of course when you start giving out freedoms you have to give them to the weirdos too but that's a small price to pay.
There are several reasons radio is still the dominant player:
1. ubiquity: every car comes from he factory with an radio, you can get a radio for $3 that runs on a single battery
2. simplicity. There's no special antennas, just turn on and tune in.
3. price. AM and FM radio are free (via commercials) and do not require any monthly subscription
4. mobility. You can't take streaming internet radio with you easily
5. locality. radio is community based, if something happens in the area you can get alerts, news, weather. That's not easy to do with satellite or internet streams which are "one size fits all".
When you can get a satellite radio reciever for less than $10 that fits in your pocket with no external antenna and runs for hours if not days on a standard 9v battery, then it will give tower based radio a run for the money.
I find it ironic that many people complain about the homoginization of radio due to companies like Clear Channel, but think that satellite is a better option. If anything, satellite is an even worse case if you want diversification in broadcasting.
Article X: The powers not delegated... by the Constitution...are reserved...to the people
Still, this is a good decision. I would be cool to get some new stations. I would be so cool to be able to tune in Folk, a local/indie station, a station that plays stuff from the 40s or 50s, etc. Right now it's Country, Oldies, Rock, Pop, Rap, etc. All ClearChannel type stuff. I would be nice to hear something new.
Comment forecast: Bits of genius surrounded by a sea of mediocrity.
My only fear is that some idiot doesn't do his homework and step over an existing radio station's frequency. Gifts like this from the FCC are few and far between - it would be nice if independent radio was allowed to flourish without some meathead screwing it up for everyone. Ah my faith in human nature...
"As the intrepid kobold companion continues his journey, he begins to wonder... if priests raises dead, why anybody die?
NPR talk shows tend to lean left, but NPR's jazz and classical music offerings tend to stay out of politics. School stations tend to take the music offerings and leave the news stuff to the same non-profits who run the local PBS station.
Go look up the regulation, HP broadcasting and media
companies are prohibited from obtianing a LPFM license. While that makes perfect sense the clause that prohibits a private individual is just plain wrong. As well as the private individual using his LPFM for commercial purposes.
Got Code?
Since I'm just out of range of RFB I was just scanning through the FM dial to find anything at all to listen to while the NH and VT public radio stations run their news drones. With a high-end receiver I got maybe 10 other stations, all on the same continuum from country to rock. The public interest simply isn't served by having more than three of these stations - the playlists overlap so completely that any three of 'em would be sufficient to rotate the entire playlist of all ten a couple times a week, at least. So what's this crap doing on my airwaves, when there are people literally ready to volunteer both time and transmitters to put better stuff up in the spaces between, or even right in its place?
If spectrum is so limited, why is it filled so redundantly with the same junk? When there's a true shortage of something, it's human nature to use it more carefully.
"with their freedom lost all virtue lose" - Milton
Clear Channel's modus operandi doesn't exactly call for a political view or day-to-day control over anything, they just want all the profits. They distribute a wide range of radio personalites including Rush Limbaugh, Dr. Laura, Art Bell, Jim Rome, Carson Daly, Rick Dees and Ryan Seacrest among the biggest names.
The only reason why right-wing talkers outnumber left-wing talkers is simply because the right-wingers tend to get better ratings. (That doesn't need to mean people agree with the right-wingers... a talk show host who says stupid things argues with all of the tons of callers telling him he's wrong can still be a ratings hit.)
Clear Channel is unabashed in what they do. They're not here to inform. They're not here to entertain. They're here to get people to listen to ads, get people to look at their outdoor billboards, and get people to buy tickets to their concerts. The company exists to make money, and that's the bottom line.
I can't remember, but I think "democracy now" was preempted during the hearings.
What?
At which point someone should pay some number of ClearChannel idiots under the table to purposefully step over an existing low-power station's frequency, "screwing it up for everyone" and allowing low-power stations to go to Congress and argue that the high-power license program be dropped.
My own feeling is that low-power radio will probably be popular: maybe getting us back to the days when individual stations chose their own playlists. Go back to the sixties and seventies, before the RIAA/ClearChannel takeover of music distribution. The DJs and station managers decided what went on the air, and we got to hear a lot of good music that otherwise would have been shitcanned by out-of-touch music company executives. The real danger is that ClearChannel will pull the same tactics it pulled on regular broadcasters, and simply buy them up and add them to their network. I don't see what would prevent that from happening, but then again IANAL and haven't read the FCC's proposal.
The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
If an idiot wants to start his own without a license, then it will be the same as always -- it will be considered a pirate radio station and the operator/owner will face a stiff fine and possible jail terms.
The original reason for the creation of the FCC was the recognition that the airwaves are a limited resource. No regulations on who can use what frequences at what power would have made it a "free speech" situation analogous to attempting to be heard in a noisy room. You're free to speak, for sure, but no one's going to hear you.
If you're trying to tear down the FCC, you're jousting at windmills. If you have issue with the WAY that the FCC handles licenses, then that's another issue - and one which it would be quite productive to lobby on.
Bush: He's Liberal in all the wrong ways.
Honestly, I don't think it would be to either persons benefit to brodcast on the same frequency. This is because 1) The lone-dj would have much lower power equiptment and a very angry fanbase being that their listeners would be from the radio station being broadcast over.
...don't question it!!!