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."
Awesome! About time. i've been running a great community station for several years without any interference!
Let us not forget how powerful and important college radio can be. College radio certainly falls under this category and has been here for awhile. I was a program director at a college radio station in Hawaii in my college days (KTUH) and, in balance, I believe we offered more to the community than any other station (Public Radio excepted).
shock the monkey
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
This seems like it would be a no-brainer, but I'm glad they're finally waking up to hear the radio.
... tick...tick...tick..)
I played around with broadcast back in my college days, and had some fun, especially knowing that the odds of somebody actually listening in were fairly remote ("free pizza to the next caller!"
And with the size of my CD collection (as well as free MP3's from various places) I think it would be fun to set up a random genre station. Or, as my friends and I have talked about, a mobile station, for when we're taking long road trips.
Support FSF: Stop thinking with your wallet, and think with your imagination. (cc/non-commercial)
If this works, small stations like WGHR would have a chance to get back on the air. Yes, I'm plugging my old college radio station that just got forced off the Atlanta airwaves in the past year, due to the lack of spectrum real estate. It was one of the last remaining Class D stations, but due to recent purchases of several new stations in the area by Susquehanna and Clear Channel, there has been no place left to go. But now the internet has become the only home for the station. Please help support them!
Sometimes I doubt your commitment to Sparkle Motion.
"After significant expense by the taxpayers, the scientists have reported on the same laws of physics that have always existed," deputy director Cheryl Leanza said. "These tiny radio stations are no threat to the current broadcast system. It is now time for Congress to take action based on that analysis."
anyone else notice this portion? makes you wonder who actually expected the laws of physics to bend to the whims of lawmakers and lobbyists?
okay, now flag me as a troll
thanks
2^3 * 31 * 647
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.
As they continue to shut down stations and refuse to give out licenses ??
6 0%257E1965359,00.html
FCC sues to shut down rfb
http://www.reformer.com/Stories/0,1413,102%257E88
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?
Now I just need some BlackJack bubblegum and some old records and I can become HarryHardon!
With narrow bandwidth, limited geographic reach and poor sound quality, why haven't the alternatives to FM radio caught on? There is satellite radio, cable radio, internet radio, yet all combined the size of their audiences pale in comparison to those of good old FM, a technology that hasn't changed for decades.
While advancing leaps and bounds in personal mp3 players, are we skipping the next generation of broadcasted music?
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.
1. What the FCC is proposing - allowing low-power FM stations to locate just three channels away from full-power signals, instead of four channels as is now required - is status quo in most of the world. In Toronto, for instance, a high-power CBC transmitter on 94.1 at the CN Tower coexists just fine with a newer signal on 93.5 just a few blocks away at First Canadian Place. In other parts of the world, spacing is even tighter and yet it still works. London has signals stacked up at 105.2, 105.6, 106.0 and 106.4 with no problems.
2. What the FCC is proposing is already status quo in the U.S., albeit with a catch. Translator stations - signals of up to 250 watts that are only allowed to relay other stations and cannot originate their own programming - are governed by a different set of rules that allow them, in some cases, to nestle up as close as second-adjacent to (0.4 MHz away from) full-power signals. And the FCC recently had a filing window in which it received several thousand applications for such translators, the vast majority of them from a small handful of religious broadcasting networks that will feed them by satellite from Idaho and California. How does this benefit local listeners? You tell me...
3. Very little of what the FCC does is about engineering. Everything the FCC does is about politics, even the engineering parts. It has always been thus.
Scott Fybush - NorthEast Radio Watch
If people don't want to hear what they have to say, they should be asked to just stop listening. There a lot of people that complain about material they should have no right to complain, especially when it is voluntary. On the other hand, if lies are being told, slap them with the law. We must all be careful though. Stations like this won't be making a lot of money like most of the current ones you find, so any fines should be fair. Imagine how easy if would be to shut down one of these small stations with a nice big fine. I'm sure Clearchannel would be a supporter of heavier fines for slander and such.
Not to even mention internet radio, but you can rent time on WBCQ shortwave (transmitter located in Maine) at ridiculously low prices and broadcast to the entire planet. And you can say virtually anything you want, though your listeners are limited to those with enough perception to own a world-band radio. The funny thing is that the owner started out in pirate radio.
"Is this Winkhorst a nova criminal?" "No just a technical sergeant wanted for interrogation."
"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.
Broadcast FM can have excellent sound quality. The reason that most stations sound like shit is the management's desire to sound "louder" than every other station on the dial.
Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
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.
There's a reporter (for an NPR affiliate) who was waiting for the FCC hearings last year on Clear Channel's plans to expand into yet-another-market. The hearings were closed-door, so the reporters were all waiting in the hallway outside. When the Clear Channel rep came through, he introduced himself to the reporters and asked if anyone had questions before he went in.
The reporter asked if he planned to use all the chairs, or just one.
The sounds of silence? - Haverford High's WHHS, around since 1949, must vacate its spot on the FM spectrum.
Editorial | Haverford High Radio -- In the wild, big eats little - or tramples it without noticing. In the world of broadcast radio, the existence of community and student-run school radio stations can be just as brutish and short.
The National Association of Broadcasters, however, went nuts over this idea. They lobbied congress hard, and circulated what they thought radio would sound like with all the added stations. The cds they pushed on uninformed congressmen wildly exagrated any problem and the idea was quickly killed.
One of the things that really angered me about this (and still does) is the fact that NPR fell in step with the NAB. The reasoning for this I can only assume is the fact that listeners of low-power fm would probably come from NPR's listener base and not from some crappy top-40 station. Realizing the possible loss of revenue (fewer pledge drive contributions) NPR acted in this reactionary manner. (I should note that I still support my local NPR stations, but not as happily as previously.)
Hopefully, congress will listen to the FCC on this instead of lobbyists for the NAB. The electro-magnetic spectrum is a public resource. If the public is not getting anything useful from the currently liscensed stations and are being blocked by these same stations when the public attempts to coexist with them, I say we take some of the spectrum back -- and now.
Broadcasting of copyrighted material is allowed as a fair-use
That's not true. Radio and TV stations have to pay royalties to play music. There are several licensing groups but the biggest are ASCAP and BMI.
Anywhere that there is a public performance of copyright music you must pay royalties to the licensing bodies for the songs that you use. This includes background music in stores, music in bars and clubs, elevators, etc.
I have great faith in fools - self confidence my friends call it. - Edgar Allan Poe
Do yourself a favor and find a copy of "FM: The Rise and Fall of Rock Radio" by Richard Neer. It'll answer the question. I'll try to summarize...
Once, due to both inertia and quirks in regulation, radio stations were cheap. Since they were cheap, a radio station owner could get a nice return by targeting a niche market. Management didn't care if they were number 1, in the middle of the pack, or at the bottom in terms of ratings. Everyone could still make a decent return on their investment.
Then, regulations were changed. Radio stations became expensive. The old owners all sold out and made huge profits. The new owners now needed to justify the huge prices they paid. No one could afford to run a station aimed at a niche market. Everyone needed to compete for the maximum ratings.
The radio station that was, for instance, fiftenth in the ratings looked at what the number one radio station was doing and thought "If we did the same thing, maybe we could be number one." Everyone started changing formats like wild. Diversity disappeared. Radio became a wasteland.
Today a commercial radio station can't afford to play anything that isn't main stream. Ownership put serious money on the line to buy the station, now they need to see profits to go with that investment. That money only comes from having a big audience.
Perhaps KBLT, one of the best damn radio stations ever to broadcast in Los Angeles, will be able to legitimize and go back on the air. KBLT was a pirate radio station, but it was much beloved by the folks in Silverlake, Echo Park, Hollywood and Downtown LA who were within range.
At this point the only hope for good radio in Los Angeles is KXLU 88.9 out of Loyola Marymount University. KROQ sucks and has sucked for most of its lifespan, and Indie which holds the space Mars FM and Groove Radio used to take up is a Clear Channel station.
Maybe with low-power radio licenses *finally* making it out there, we might hear a little diversity. Maybe Valley College's station KVCM might even get some people listening to it. It's been on Adelphia Cable for years now but you can't listen to cable radio in your car or on your Walkman.
I wonder how much it costs to set up one of these low-power radio stations? I mean, KBLT wasn't exactly run by rich people...
Knowledge is power. Knowledge shared is power multiplied.