Slashdot Mirror


In Internet Age, Pirate Radio Arises As Surprising Challenge (ap.org)

K7DAN writes: Just as the demise of terrestrial radio has been greatly exaggerated, so has the assumed parallel death of pirate radio. Due to the failure of licensed stations to meet the needs of many niche communities, pirate radio continues to increase in popularity. Helping facilitate this growth is the weakening power of the FCC to stop it, reports the Associated Press. Rogue stations can cover up to several square miles thanks largely in part to cheaper technology. The appeal? "The DJs sound like you and they talk about things that you're interested in," said Jay Blessed, an online DJ who has listened to various unlicensed stations since she moved from Trinidad to Brooklyn more than a decade ago. "You call them up and say, 'I want to hear this song,' and they play it for you," Blessed said. "It's interactive. It's engaging. It's communal." It's upsetting many congressional members who are urging the FCC to do more about the "unprecedented growth of pirate radio operations." They're accusing said pirates of undermining licensed minority stations while ignoring consumer protection laws that guard against indecency and false advertising.

157 comments

  1. Sounds like a good time to get in on the game by blankinthefill · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I've always wanted to start a pirate radio station just for shits and giggles, and doubly so after watching 'The Boat That Rocked" (watch this one, the UK release, not the US version "Pirate Radio", imo.) The fact that it is apparently infuriating to certain members of congress would just be icing on the the cake...

    1. Re: Sounds like a good time to get in on the game by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Where oh where would we be without the government to protect us?

    2. Re: Sounds like a good time to get in on the game by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      London has more pirate radio now than it did when "Radio London" was being broadcast from a ship moored in the north sea.

      Current radio pirates are putting transmitters on random rooftops getting power spliced from street lighting, and sending the audio over prepay 3g dongles. Whenever they get found, they're replaced almost immediately on a different roof.

      They seem to be funded by paid promotion of night clubs and minicab companies.

    3. Re: Sounds like a good time to get in on the game by Rob+Lister · · Score: 3, Insightful

      We would be without useful radio, television, cell phones--or any other RF-based utility--as we know them today. The airwaves are a finite [public] resource that requires strict regulation to maintain usefulness. If you don't like the way they're governed, change the government. Until then, I applaud enforcing the existing laws.

    4. Re:Sounds like a good time to get in on the game by The+Rizz · · Score: 1

      I've always wanted to start a pirate radio station just for shits and giggles, and doubly so after watching 'The Boat That Rocked" (watch this one, the UK release, not the US version "Pirate Radio", imo.)

      Or, you could watch Pump Up the Volume for an even better movie about pirate radio...

    5. Re: Sounds like a good time to get in on the game by Rob+Lister · · Score: 3, Interesting

      ...we would have developed tech to have radio broadcast in non interfering ways

      If you know of some technology that achieves that and still allows the utility we currently enjoy, do share.

      ... folks would have slid into non overlapping slots in the meantime

      What does finite resource mean to you? There is already a far, far greater demand for slots than there are available slots. Without regulation every slot becomes unusable.

    6. Re: Sounds like a good time to get in on the game by silentcoder · · Score: 3, Informative

      >we would have developed tech to have radio broadcast in non interfering ways

      And when we were done with that, we'd have developed anti-gravity devices and eternal motion machines to generate power with.

      You can't get around the laws of physics. We live in a quantum universe and there is a finite number of frequencies that can exist and absolutely zero way for two things broadcasting on the same frequency not to interfere.
      Maybe we may have developed wifi likes ways of telling sources appart - but that was only possible AFTER we developed networking protocols and digital electronics, both of which depended hugely on tech for early radio to get their start - there is no reasonable way to claim the opposite would have been possible. Digital broadcasting does allow you to put more signals in a smaller band, but we couldn't get there until digital devices got small - which took a long time. Radio was already prominent in homes in the 1940s - when computers took up entire basements.

      Not all public resources can be privatized effectively. And many never should. So how do you then avoid the tragedy of the commons ? The only solution is to regulate access so that nobody can abuse it.

      By the way - you know what would happen if you build an early Marconi/Tesla style morse-transmitter and operated it right now ? You would fill every TV and radio in 3-block radius with static - on *every* channel. It took time to develop tuners.

      Are you seriously suggesting we would have been better off if nobody could operate commercial radio devices until AFTER we developed fine-tuning abilities ? Or if the airwaves, all of them on all channels, simply belonged to whoever bought the strongest transmitter and antenna ? Why would anybody have bothered at all ? You go invest thousands in the equipment to get a station online, and somebody else decides he would rather have your listeners and spends a little more and your entire investment is down the drain - unless you invest even more and build bigger, but then they can too. Every market would either have had no broadcasts at all, or only the broadcasts from whichever broadcaster had the richest investor.

      --
      Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
    7. Re: Sounds like a good time to get in on the game by GrumpySteen · · Score: 1

      We'd be back to this shit... never-ending internal wars between different factions vying to try and take over and become the government, except it would be much worse since we have weapons which are far more effective at killing massive numbers of people than we had back then.

    8. Re: Sounds like a good time to get in on the game by ogdenk · · Score: 5, Interesting

      What does finite resource mean to you? There is already a far, far greater demand for slots than there are available slots. Without regulation every slot becomes unusable.

      Maybe where YOU live but where I live there's only 3 stations and they all suck. There's LOTS of unused spectrum here but micropower pirate radio wouldn't give you more than 3 listeners since your coverage area would be mostly trees.

      Generally pirates do their best to NOT interfere with licensed stations and EAS systems. Stomping on licensed broadcasts is how you get unwanted attention. It's in their best interest to not be a dick. In places like NYC this can be tough though as the spectrum is crowded there. Using a 100W transmitter to cover a small town in the middle of nowhere however, it's pretty easy to play nice with others. The only way you'll get busted that way is if you violate decency laws or manage to steal listeners (or even worse, advertisers) from legit stations.

      This isn't about protecting the spectrum, this is about protecting advertising dollars for ClearChannel. Local community radio is DEAD. Pirate radio is about the only way to avoid listening to canned satellite-fed syndicated bullshit. Large broadcasters fought against LPFM so hard that they effectively killed it.

    9. Re: Sounds like a good time to get in on the game by jellomizer · · Score: 1

      Well if your pirate radio station is interfering with other stations and an emergency happened, you would have blocked important emergency information.

      Also such bandwidth could be reserved for a new station.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    10. Re: Sounds like a good time to get in on the game by postbigbang · · Score: 1, Troll

      No, this is NOT about ClearChannel's revenue, it's about the fact that the 100w station's signal wanders for a far wider, uncontrolled range, then interfering with the fringes of others that have paid for lots of engineering plans, capital infrastructure, and the operational expenses in hopes of a profit from their station.

      There are few locales in the US that aren't highly constrained for new licensees of even LPFM stations. This is about your ego and assholery, not about a supposed fanboi pirate project.

      If you want to podcast or stream, have at it. Enjoy. Lots of those. Tell your friends. Let the three stations that suck in your area fail. Buy one. Do the real work, the real job, pay the real money as an investment, and get the real reward of a following and perhaps profit.

      --
      ---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
    11. Re: Sounds like a good time to get in on the game by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Partial Credit, the ship pile that Corporate radio is and has become is the trigger event for the rise in popularity of pirate radio. If Big Media didnt suck it would face challenge from rogus, but... it does.

    12. Re:Sounds like a good time to get in on the game by l0n3s0m3phr34k · · Score: 0

      Great fun, until the FCC shows up and seizes every piece of electronics in your house, AND hits you with a 4-5 figure fine payable in 30 days.

    13. Re: Sounds like a good time to get in on the game by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So to sum up your post, pirates do their best to avoid stepping on licensed spectrum because it would draw attention to them, therefore if we de-license the spectrum, everyone will do their best to avoid stepping on each other, despite the fact that there is no long a reason not to.

      While not exactly what you said, it is the only thing that makes sense in the context of this thread.

    14. Re: Sounds like a good time to get in on the game by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Soon you'll be saying 'hey you damm kids, get off my lawn!'.

    15. Re: Sounds like a good time to get in on the game by operagost · · Score: 2

      I live in Philadelphia, and there are vast stretches of the FM dial that are devoid of signal. If the third largest radio market has room for low power stations, it's likely nearly all of them do.

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    16. Re: Sounds like a good time to get in on the game by postbigbang · · Score: 3, Informative

      Rich? No.

      Think about community public radio stations. Consider those that make investments into for-profit ones, too.

      Like other confined resources, there is only so much spectrum. It's juvenile to believe that a 100w station doesn't interfere with others.

      Yes, some stations trade for major bucks. It's called: business. Still others are community supported.

      Want the facts? Grow up and understand how we got here, and that the radio waves aren't a private little party. Wanna be a DJ? You can be. Wanna serve your sense of community? You can. There are lots of legal indy radio stations out there. They play by a set of rules designed to allow sharing of the airwaves, through the same set of rules that all people to have FM receivers and HD receivers with great audio fidelity.

      People that live within the constraints of civility understand the need for rules-- because there are lots of people that desire to do whatever the fuck they want for any reason they want, e.g. uncivil behavior. I don't believe in mandated conformance but I do believe in civil rules regarding finite resources.

      --
      ---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
    17. Re: Sounds like a good time to get in on the game by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's a good thing our government is so reserved when it comes to using those weapons to kill lots of people then.

    18. Re: Sounds like a good time to get in on the game by sjames · · Score: 2

      You mean other than that if you are stepping on someone else's signal, they are stepping on yours as well.

    19. Re: Sounds like a good time to get in on the game by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Think about community public radio stations.

      So this is a history lesson?

    20. Re: Sounds like a good time to get in on the game by maird · · Score: 2

      It isn't necessary to get around the laws of physics. In a world with no regulation of useful radio waves live VHF and modulation schemes that permit about 20kHz of stereo music we would have cheaply developed something like an on-air registration service on a fixed frequency (or that was easy to find on-air) that allows random stations to launch their transmitter, register it with some info for receivers and operate on a quiet frequency in the band. Then end-users would start a receiver that looked at the registration service for something interesting to listen to and tune to it's registered frequency. i.e. What the OP suggested.

    21. Re: Sounds like a good time to get in on the game by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We would be without useful radio, television, cell phones--or any other RF-based utility--as we know them today. The airwaves are a finite [public] resource that requires strict regulation to maintain usefulness. If you don't like the way they're governed, change the government. Until then, I applaud enforcing the existing laws.

      They are self-regulating at small scales simply due to nerd population density (people capable of setting up a transmitter, so at least borderline nerds) and transmitter power.

    22. Re: Sounds like a good time to get in on the game by fizzup · · Score: 1

      ...we would have developed tech to have radio broadcast in non interfering ways

      If you know of some technology that achieves that and still allows the utility we currently enjoy, do share.

      Government.

    23. Re: Sounds like a good time to get in on the game by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >>...we would have developed tech to have radio broadcast in non interfering ways
      >If you know of some technology that achieves that and still allows the utility we currently enjoy, do share.
      It's called "frequency hopping spread spectrum."
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frequency-hopping_spread_spectrum

      You're welcome.

    24. Re: Sounds like a good time to get in on the game by CohibaVancouver · · Score: 1

      unmitigated nonsense. we would have developed tech to have radio broadcast in non interfering ways

      Hey Anonymous Coward, do you even know how the physics of Amplitude Modulation (AM) and Frequency Modulation (FM) radio transmission works?

    25. Re: Sounds like a good time to get in on the game by tlhIngan · · Score: 1

      No, this is NOT about ClearChannel's revenue, it's about the fact that the 100w station's signal wanders for a far wider, uncontrolled range, then interfering with the fringes of others that have paid for lots of engineering plans, capital infrastructure, and the operational expenses in hopes of a profit from their station.

      If that is true, then the licensed station takes it up with the FCC who goes and finds said pirate radio station.

      It's how it's always worked. Most licensed stations use hundreds of kW to transmit (which is why you can pick up a signal pretty much anywhere with even the crappiest of radios), and as long as you're sticking with the broadcast band, you're not going to interfere with non-broadcast licensed services like aircraft (unless you have a terrible transmitter).

      FM also has what's called the "capture effect" - if you have two FM stations on the same frequency, the one you hear is the more powerful signal and it acts like the other signal doesn't exist. (It's why aircraft use AM - stepping on another transmission results in a squeal on the receiver).

      And pirates intentionally check to make sure their coverage area doesn't interfere - less chance of getting caught if you're not interfering with licensed services. At best, they'd interfere with low-power FM (which are unlicensed, but not pirate stations that transmit with low power for a small area). But with LPFM, the rules are still the same - it's still unlicensed.

    26. Re: Sounds like a good time to get in on the game by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nothing can replace real time over the air local radio. Pirate stations are a reaction to ClearChannel/iHeartRadio.

      iHeart is going broke, btw, thank Jebus.

      Pirate radio has always been about rebellion against corporate crap. If those stations were giving people a product they wanted to hear there would be no pirate radio.

      You're free market investment argument fails, because... the free market.

      Podcast and streaming?

      I'm old enough to have heard free form FM radio coming from San Francisco station starting around 1971, spontaneous, adventurous, interesting if nothing else.

      In the 1980's, we'd call up a college station late at night and ask for Black Flag and the Brady Bunch, and most the time they'd play both.

      It was local, it was fun, it was a major part of everyone's life. Today you can find a ton of music, but the local flavor is mostly gone, and podcasts lack spontaneity.

      Podcasts are not real time.

      Streams? Now we need an active net connection to listen to radio?

      Streaming services track everything you listen to, and that data is used to create more "hits" that all sound like something they know will sell, compounding the problem.

      You've turned radio into McDonald's. One on every corner, every one just a shitty as the next.

      I wish we had a pirate station here in my part of the desert.

    27. Re: Sounds like a good time to get in on the game by postbigbang · · Score: 1

      It's true that many stations have enormous strength and tall antennas, a historical domination process. But there are many low-power stations, struggling to be heard, especially in the high school, college, community, public media, and specialty areas.

      Your assessment of what pirates covers only ones that think about what they're doing. Many do not. You can make an FM station from an Arduino, put a cheap 100w amp on it, a crappy antenna, and interfere with licensed stations for quite a radius.

      I disagree with your assessment highly, and as an engineer, find the loose-and-fast mentality to be like I said: not civil. Licensed stations pay a lot of $$ for engineering studies subsequently submitted to the FCC to ensure lack of interference. Not a pirate alive does the same thing. It's all about them and their perceived entitlement.

      --
      ---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
    28. Re: Sounds like a good time to get in on the game by postbigbang · · Score: 1

      You need community radio. Such stations really do respond to local tastes and needs. IMHO, NPR is corporate media, although not as awful as ClearChannel, Emmis, etc.

      Starting a community station takes vision, but they do well because as you cite, they fit the local needs, not the automated crap today. Get one of these, rather than the pirate version. Eventually, it's more sustainable for the community.

      --
      ---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
    29. Re: Sounds like a good time to get in on the game by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We found the rat boys. I say we dox him and make his life hell on slashdot every time he post something. Speaking of posting, this is the first time I've seen his name pop up in a convo.

    30. Re: Sounds like a good time to get in on the game by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They are paying a lot of $$$ for laws like this. They aren't giving back to the spectrum. They are taking away and trying their hardest to squeeze every dime from it. This is nothing more than a monopoly doing things that a monopoly does.

      Go the fuck away you piece of shit shill.

    31. Re:Sounds like a good time to get in on the game by DriveDog · · Score: 1

      There is a significant difference between the UK and US version? I recall thinking that the US film seemed a little disjointed, as if something was left out, but enjoyed it nonetheless.

    32. Re: Sounds like a good time to get in on the game by Aighearach · · Score: 1

      Where oh where would we be without the government to protect us?

      In my community they're about 50 miles away, and if a less sarcastic person calls them up and makes a complaint, they drive their truck out and confiscate lots of equipment.

      I don't think anybody has ever complained about pirate radio, though, because there is enough available bandwidth that they're not stepping on the toes of the licensed stations. But they certainly come out here frequently to deal with CD radio enthusiasts running 1000W amps and bleeding over onto people's telephones and home stereos.

      If indeed you were to part a station right next to a licensee and cause a problem, they would roll up and protect that licensee.

      Without them, these same idiots I mentioned above with their black market amplifiers would stomp on every signal on every available band. They'd use it to tunnel their phone calls and shop security video if they could, because internet is for nerds and they're not nerds.

    33. Re: Sounds like a good time to get in on the game by maird · · Score: 1

      Your mistake is assuming that the entire implementation of broadcast radio "bands" would be no different from the implementation of the present AM and FM broadcast bands under the OP's suggestion. There is NO invalid physics in the OP's suggestion, I have been able to do most of what's needed on my ham rigs for decades. It would actually require very little difference to the model of the current bands themselves to implement what the OP is talking about. For example, in the USA if in the 1960's (or whenever VHF/FM stations appeared) the FCC had decided to permit VHF/FM broadcast but didn't want to have any meaningful regulation of broadcast stations it could have worked with the departments that regulate cars and retail purchases so that the only legal receivers that could be found and purchased by "listeners" in the USA had a simple extra feature then the OP's suggestion is easily implemented. All of the broadcast stations (regardless of funding size) would implement stations that were compatible with in-use receivers. So, if receivers operated by "finding" a station by allowing the listener to hear a list of station info currently on-air via a single frequency area registration service (provided as cheaply as possible to the FCC and at no cost to broadcasters and listeners) then the receiver switches to the current on-air broadcast frequency for the station selected by the listener. If that existed then all stations would implement transmitters that would contact the local "registration" stations, register themselves and either be directed to or indicate the transmitter frequency they planned to operate on and begin their transmissions. The registration doesn't have to require any rules (other than compliance with other national laws, i.e. stations that broadcast murders would only be allowed to do so as acts or their output could be used against their operators in court). Back in 1960 (or when VHF/FM was introduced), the registration station might allow 5 to 10s of "station jingle" at 5kHz mono to be provided by the broadcast station and that would be assembled into the station list the listeners would receive via audio recording at the registration station (originally on tape). All directions to actual broadcast channels could be done using something as simple as a sub-audible frequency tone-code overlayed on each "jingle" in the list. Some scanning of the band for what can be received currently allows channels to be "released" automatically at the registration station. The total bandwidth of the registration station would have to exceed 5kHz and there might need to be multiple registration channels to avoid interference but otherwise the technology for all of this was available when VHF/FM broadcast was introduced and it leaves a large part of the band for deployment at random when stations want to go on-air. We still haven't specified any modern style (digital data) coding but it could all be upgraded to digital station registration and selection in the 1990's or later without damaging existing receivers.

    34. Re: Sounds like a good time to get in on the game by Aighearach · · Score: 1

      In my area, the local school district has a full height antenna for their broadcasts. They're not at the same power as the big stations, but they're sure not struggling to be heard unless you're up in the mountains. The college stations are all high power with rebroadcast towers for a hundred miles or so.

      Nobody is struggling to be heard, because the bandwidth is managed by the FCC, and schools have an easy time getting licenses.

      If you put a big amp on a software radio and interfere with something... the FCC 50 miles away has your approximate location already flagged. If you do it repeatedly in a way that is predictable, they'll drive their truck out which can pinpoint the exact apartment you're in fairly easily. They don't need to drive around in circles for that; by the time they're in town, they already know exactly where you are. If you were going to the effort to power up at high power and interfere with stuff, and then power down, their standard spectrum monitoring already tells them what city block you're on. Probably you have a few neighbors who could hear you over their stereo (because you wouldn't have a well-tuned antenna) and would tell them who it was. Sometimes they do have to investigate that way to shut down CBers who cause problems.

      The reality is that pirate stations mostly do know they're doing; they don't do fancy engineering studies, but they do keep track of their output power, what they can receive on nearby frequencies from their broadcast location, etc. Generally because they understand how easy it is to triangulate location from a broadcast signal.

    35. Re: Sounds like a good time to get in on the game by maird · · Score: 1

      That's not without restrictions (there's a limit to geographic station density) but "non-interfering ways" doesn't have to imply stations avoid interference while being on the same or overlapping channels, it can also mean stations are guided automatically into idle channels in a way that avoids interference.

    36. Re: Sounds like a good time to get in on the game by Aighearach · · Score: 1

      There is no way I'm going to give my whole neighborhood, and indeed the whole world, my information about how I use what frequencies for what, and just hope that everybody in the world is some sort of John Galt libertarian God of Benevolence.

      "no regulation" means you don't have all that regulation stuff, it doesn't mean that it just self-organizes in perfect form from the ooze.

      More like, gangs and cliques create their private digital distribution networks and run them enough power to stomp out every other signal in the neighborhood, and if you want to transmit, you can pay them for access.

    37. Re:Sounds like a good time to get in on the game by Aighearach · · Score: 1

      The regional FCC office in my State doesn't do that. If you're a first offender and it is private, non-commercial use, and you didn't interfere with the airport, they simply confiscate everything with a plug, but don't fine you. You can get back things with a plug that are not radio-related... if you cooperated and made an effort to learn the rule you broke.

      A lot of CBers get all their electronics confiscated, and learn not to use 1000W amplifiers. 100W-250W, usually turned down to 10 or 15W, is more than sufficient to be heard, after all. 1000W is a power trip, every time. But it is also expensive...

    38. Re: Sounds like a good time to get in on the game by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "absolutely zero way for two things broadcasting on the same frequency not to interfere."

      Utterly wrong. You can use horizontal polarization on one transmitter, vertical on another and circular on a third.

      Three things broadcasting on the same frequency. No interference.

      You're full of shit, stick to coding.

    39. Re: Sounds like a good time to get in on the game by maird · · Score: 1

      You're missing the point. For one thing I'm not saying it's good or wise, I'm only saying that "we would have developed tech to have radio broadcast in non interfering ways" is not invalid physics and was not at least when VHF/FM broadcast stations appeared. The mistaken assumption about "non-interfering ways" was that some kind of prevention of interference would have been invented for multiple stations operating on the same channel both in-range of a single receiver. Prevention of interference is also possible if stations can be kept on dedicated channels such that none do interfere with each other and that's been easy to implement for decades. It's also NOT self-registration and I wasn't suggesting NO-registration. In fact I was suggesting forced registration of transmitter availability by restricting retail sales of receivers, i.e. broadcasters would comply with a limited set of rules to be compliant with available receivers but otherwise could do what they wanted. The "registration" I suggested doesn't require any part of the broadcaster's identity to be provided. It can be as little as a 5 to 10s "jingle" style audio content at 5kHz mono that identifies the station's broadcast intentions and what channel it plans to operate on. For example, in the following quote apply a music background with the words before the colon sung by a set of three women in harmony and after the colon spoken by a deep voice male "Radio murder : The station with 24 hour live killings on-air", It's not necessary to have the frequency stated in the "jingle", it can be handled easily with a sub-audible tone set that identifies all the known channels and a single one used at station registration and listener channel selection to identify what frequency the station is or will be on. With enough channels then the gang idea fails because the band is large enough to permit listening to something else. The registration is limited to on-air availability of any station and channels become free as stations go off air, i.e. it's not "registration" in the same sense as is currently used.

    40. Re: Sounds like a good time to get in on the game by epyT-R · · Score: 1

      Community radio usually has some sort of political agenda to push in order to get the funding needed. The rest are clearchannel garbage.

      Oh I understand completely how 'we' got here.. (you mean 'they', don't you? most people sure as hell can't afford an FM license) It's called lobbying.

      The criticism most have here isn't over good management of finite bandwidth, it's that it's used as a convenient excuse to shut down competition to the existing market structure. The problem is the state needs to quit selling out to these people. They are the reason FM is lifeless homogenic garbage where 95% of the stations play the same tired old shit over and over and the commercials rival cable in annoyance factor. This is the primary motivator for pirate radio.

    41. Re: Sounds like a good time to get in on the game by postbigbang · · Score: 1

      It's more complicated than lobbying. In the late '40s and early '50s, FM was just born. The FCC gave a few stations incredible turf-- unknowingly setting them up for high future asset value.

      Tall antennas and a lot of power gave them reach. Reach gave them advertising power. Spectrum was set aside for public use, educational use at first, then non-commercial use. Political agenda aside, community radio can be marvelous. So are LPFM stations. The lifeless crap we listen to is driving ClearChannel, Emmis, and others, right into the ground. People cutting cable have also killed local TV stations, and with good reason. We have alternatives.

      I cut my cable long ago. There are a few local decent public media stations in my area, and I listen to them, and they're relevant, if not with their own constant underfunding problems. They play great mixes, have local news, and are focused on their community, because they don't take ads.

      Every single licensed stations has a community advisory board, and you can send your complaints-- even about programming-- to the FCC, where indeed they're required to read them, and make stations address them.

      I believe that the motives of most pirate stations is ego, with a dash of community focus added as ostensible motivation.

      --
      ---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
    42. Re: Sounds like a good time to get in on the game by epyT-R · · Score: 1

      well, hey if clearchannel and the fcc didn't make it so expensive to license, we'd have more.. the problem is that once the community station starts playing ads to pay bills, the game is up. It becomes subsumed until it's no different than the others.

    43. Re: Sounds like a good time to get in on the game by postbigbang · · Score: 1

      Underwriting and sponsorship are the briefest of ads. It's because people won't open their wallets, and electricity, facility, and meager salaries add up to money.

      The FCC also has to ensure that there is staff to review and enforce licensing, the engineering that goes behind it, and the ongoing management of spectrum, as well as common carrier infrastructure, telephony, etc. None of this stuff comes free.

      It's not ClearChannel that's made licensing expensive; an act of Congress allowed networks to own more than their fair share, and then this created a money-making opportunity to conglomerate and share resources, while dumbing down content to suit some MBA's target. The good turf was bought up and subsumed into a pit of trash radio.

      Who to blame: Congress, for allowing the conglomeration and monopolizing of the airwaves by too few organizations. They allow this with telcos, wireless carriers, and many other industry segments.

      The license expense, however, is real. It does take money to run the FCC. Without it, there'd be chaos. This isn't to defend the FCC, rather, to explain that licensing isn't a trivial, go to the license branch sort of activity. I can bounce a beam off the moon from my back yard as a ham radio operator. But I can't do this: run a pirate station-- without consequences. Spectrum management is non-trivial. There are many competing factions wanting spectrum. On a cable, or via the Internet, there is much "spectrum".

      --
      ---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
    44. Re: Sounds like a good time to get in on the game by silentcoder · · Score: 1

      You are by no means describing an absense of regulation. Just a different form of regulation. It nay or may not be better but it is decidedly not what you advertised it as.

      --
      Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
    45. Re:Sounds like a good time to get in on the game by blankinthefill · · Score: 1

      It's significant enough that I found the US version watchable, while I found the UK version enjoyable. (I may be biased in this in that I saw the UK version first, and then the US version.) The disjointedness is absolutely due to scenes that were included in the UK version and not the US version. I honestly don't know why they cut it, because the stuff the cut wasn't exceptionally vulgar or anything of the sort.

    46. Re:Sounds like a good time to get in on the game by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think this is actually a reaction to one gigantic corporation owning 99% of all AM and FM radio stations. Am radio has become a wasteland full of nothing but Rush Limbaugh clones (Rush Limbaugh is an extremely toxic by-product of the First Amendment!). FM radio is even worse...almost all stations playing the same songs and the same commercials at the same times...almost like they are synchronized with each other, all playing the same crap from the same source.

      I think people are tired of corporate radio, and want to hear something different. Pirate stations are catering to that wish.

      And the point of the movie The Boat That Rocked was the UK government's efforts to keep rock and roll off of the airwaves by any means, even when the ship broadcasting was in international waters.

      Many small towns in the U.S. tried something similar by trying to shut down radio stations that played rock and roll music.

      But back on track here, I do not think pirate stations are the answer. The answer is to go back to the way it used to be...one person/corporation could only own one station in any particular market. Corporate radio sucks.

    47. Re:Sounds like a good time to get in on the game by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Damn, you just reminded me about another movie about pirate radio station, but it was much earlier, maybe like 1998ish or 2002'ish, and it was in my shitty eastern europe national tv, or even shittier commercial tv, so it could be everything between late '80s and late '90s. Do you recall this?

    48. Re:Sounds like a good time to get in on the game by l0n3s0m3phr34k · · Score: 1

      Yeah, reading around it seems the only time the FCC gets like this is when specifically prodded by an outside party like Clear Channel.

    49. Re: Sounds like a good time to get in on the game by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just look at the advertising.....the UK version was like "They had a pirate radio station and stuck it to The Man" while the US version was "This summer, one American will free the airwaves for Freedom"...

      Fucking bullshit americans fuck everything up.

    50. Re: Sounds like a good time to get in on the game by ToddInSF · · Score: 1

      No, you're stupid and don't understand the issue at all. Broadcasters have zero interest in interfering with one another, that would be self defeating and HAS NEVER EVER FUCKING HAPPENED.

      Lets be honest here, the ONLY asshats that even report pirates are stupid cunts with too much time on their hands, and those fucking dumbness HAM radio operators. They love to narc. Theya re scum.

      The core problem is the licensed spectrum has been bought up by huge corporations that DO NOT SERVE THE LOCAL COMMUNITIES. Pirates step in and do this necessary work and have to endure the misinformation and idiotic opinions of jackasses like yourself.

      The reason local radio sucks so bad especially in urban areas is the FCC stopped even trying to mitigate the damage corporations with too much money and zero sense sucked up all those licenses depriving them from the local communities and businesses that those licenses are supposed to serve. Another idiotic Reagan Era blunder

    51. Re: Sounds like a good time to get in on the game by beastofburdon · · Score: 1

      [begins slow clap]

    52. Re:Sounds like a good time to get in on the game by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And they ve been attacking me personally in every store I visit since they realized they had actually radioed one popular song was mine and those guys were not supposed to be getting it. Such is life? They manage to send mobs into public restrooms to take me out and nothing to do, no one knows who they are or where they are or who are they killing.

  2. After this post... by LordHighExecutioner · · Score: 1

    ...many pirate stations will be shut down by FCC, just because this piece of news has been posted here. This adds a new dimension to the slashdot effect, after all...

    1. Re:After this post... by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

      This adds a new dimension to the slashdot effect, after all...

      Slashdot has a far smaller readership than it did a decade ago. I don't think the "Slashdot effect" is a real thing anymore.

    2. Re:After this post... by Gussington · · Score: 3, Informative

      Slashdot has a far smaller readership than it did a decade ago. I don't think the "Slashdot effect" is a real thing anymore.

      This probably has more to do with the fact that most web servers these days are no longer behind 128k ISDN lines...

    3. Re:After this post... by Salgak1 · · Score: 1

      Indeed. I'm waiting for Metamucil to buy Slashdot. It will, at least, change WHAT is being Slashvertised. . . . (grin)

    4. Re:After this post... by arth1 · · Score: 2

      This probably has more to do with the fact that most web servers these days are no longer behind 128k ISDN lines...

      Being behind a tiny pipe like ISDN would help prevent the web server from being overwhelmed. The pipe would be saturated, and temporary slowness and timeouts would happen, but in most cases the servers would be just fine.
      With backbone-connected colos, on the other hand, we started to see servers going down, and returning error messages at best, or be out for the day.
      As web servers and their hardware improved, unfortunately, content shifted too and were no longer on the actual web server. High traffic started taking down the back-ends.
      Then single-sign-on happened. And for a short time it became possible to slashdot mulltiple sites or companies, before SSO improved too.

      Three steps for the worse, before it started to get better.

      I kind of miss the days when a small pipe meant that what went over it was pared down to the essentials. Like text and only minimal illustrative images, like in a book. 4k of text can convey a heck of a lot more signal than 40 MB of video, and be spread faster.

    5. Re:After this post... by wardrich86 · · Score: 1

      I think the "Reddit Hug" has become the new "Slashdot Effect"

  3. Desperate need by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    " ignoring consumer protection laws that guard against indecency"

    The 1950s are over. The airwaves are in desperate need of shit, piss, fuck, cunt, cocksucker, motherfucker and tits.

    1. Re: Desperate need by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

      To be fair, a lot of people need a cock sucker with tits... Not just the Internet

    2. Re:Desperate need by Lumpy · · Score: 2

      Howard stern brought those.... and the FCC targeted him only. So he moved to Sirius/XM and now has more subscribers than COMCAST has because it is outside the regulatory world of the FCC.

      This is where the future lies, things that are outside of the FCC's rules from the 1940's -1960's that were put in place by republicans wanting to save the children from talk about nipples. It's why internet radio is growing rapidly as is satellite.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    3. Re:Desperate need by Cytotoxic · · Score: 1

      outside of the FCC's rules from the 1940's -1960's that were put in place by republicans wanting to save the children from talk about nipples.

      Hold up, everybody. Someone is wrong on the internet!

      The FCC was created by the Communications Act of 1934. Signed into law by Franklin D. Roosevelt.

      This law was updated by the Telecommunications Act of 1996. Signed into law by William J. Clinton.

      The commission is designed to have a 3-2 party split - although there have been "independents" from time to time to get around this. For the first 2 decades it was controlled by Democrats. Since then it has switched back and forth, with a roughly even split of control.

      There is no shortage of nannies in either party. The last great moral panic about the entertainment industry was spearheaded by Democrat Tipper Gore. Unless you count Thompson's video game thing. I don't know if he had a party affiliation, other than the nutball party.

      To truly attain the high ground you have to align with one of the fringe parties. Like the Green Party. They have nice, consistent(ish) ideology-based positions. Or the Libertarians. Whatever. The point being, you get to be holier than thou with everybody.

    4. Re:Desperate need by jratcliffe · · Score: 1

      Howard stern brought those.... and the FCC targeted him only. So he moved to Sirius/XM and now has more subscribers than COMCAST has because it is outside the regulatory world of the FCC.

      SiriusXM would be very surprised to hear they were outside of the regulatory world of the FCC, given that it's the FCC that assigned them the spectrum which they use to operate, and without exclusive rights to that spectrum, the service simply wouldn't work.

    5. Re:Desperate need by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 1

      That, and nobody seems to remember Tipper Gore's crusade. People love to make fun of the R,

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    6. Re: Desperate need by Aighearach · · Score: 1

      According to the internet, a lot of people need all 7 of those at the same time.

    7. Re:Desperate need by Aighearach · · Score: 1

      For those of old enough to have been there and young enough to remember, it wasn't a "crusade" it was a batch of failed proposals by a politician's wife. Everybody agreed she had a right to ask for whatever she wanted to ask for, but there was no support for the proposals, no crusade.

      The only reason people even remember the name of the person who proposed music content ratings is because musicians at the time added her name to their songs, because "politicians wife" was still more broadly known than "niche band." And I still listen to some of those musicians. But none of those songs made insightful commentary into that debate.

      A crusade requires a bunch of other people to agree, and go off to fight legendary battles over it. That didn't happen. What did happen was, a lot of record labels agreed to add a voluntary "content advisory" to their packaging, because they understood that it would make them look anti-establishment to teenagers and help sell albums.

    8. Re:Desperate need by Rob+Lister · · Score: 1

      It is regulated differently. You can even say fuck.

    9. Re:Desperate need by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He is right, they made internal rules in the 40's, 50's and 60's to help quell the "negroes" from saying anything inappropriate on the radio in their music.

      The FCC was happy to bend and make internal rules to help racists back then, why do you think that rock and roll took so long to rise up? It was invented by the blacks and the whities did not like it, and did what they could to keep it off the radio as it was "indecent"!

    10. Re:Desperate need by Cytotoxic · · Score: 1

      I'm old enough and I remember. There were congressional hearings. There was huge pressure to pass new laws to regulate speech in the music industry. Rap was becoming popular and crossing over and suburban moms were agitated. Two Live Crew were so horny. They became the sort of lightning rod for the whole thing.

      Then Dee Snyder of Twisted Sister and Frank Zappa made impassioned pleas on behalf of artistic freedom before the committees that helped to turn the tide. But the beast still wanted a skin. So the music industry adapted to the pressure by creating a voluntary labeling system. That was enough to diffuse the situation and allow the world to keep on spinning. There for a while there was a lot of hand wringing over stores carrying CDs/Albums that were labeled - but then there were acts that seemed to be seeking out the label on purpose to gin up sales. Eventually everyone lost interest and moved on.

      But there was a real danger that "The Man" would step in and try to adjudicate music content. It kind of recapitulated the arc of the Film industry before it, with the MPAA eventually adopting a voluntary ratings system to allow congress a fig leaf so they would go away and leave them alone. That system is actually mildly useful, although a real rating system run by independent third parties would probably be better. The music one still has little benefit as far as I can see.

      So if "no laws were passed" counts as "not a crusade" then OK, I suppose. But it was enough pressure brought by enough people to get their elected representatives to move toward obviously unconstitutional censorship laws with enough momentum that the recording industry created their own system in hopes of heading off a federally mandated system of labeling or censorship.

      Which should serve as a cautionary tale for all those who think "that couldn't happen" with their government. There are plenty of examples of stupid to go around. People can get ginned up about just about anything. So the world needs firebrand watchdogs to stand in the breach against government overreach. Folks like Ralph Nader who have fought both industry and government. Or Harvey Silvergate of FIRE. Or Ron Paul. Or Al Goldstein of Screw Magazine. You know..... Nutballs.

      Without Luther Campbell, Dee Snyder et. al. and a capitulation by the industry to form a voluntary rating system, we definitely would have had a federal law mandating such - and probably more. So I wouldn't minimize the moment. It was a pretty big deal, even though it really doesn't directly affect very many people.

    11. Re:Desperate need by Aighearach · · Score: 1

      Congress holds hearings on everything. That doesn't have meaning. Look it up.

      There is no "cautionary tale" because nothing almost happened. If you're looking back to history for cautionary tales... look to all the many things that did happen. The one you're pointing at? A few people tried to do a thing, and predictably failed. The lesson you're claiming that teaches is simply not a lesson taught by that history. Find real examples, and then teach the lesson when those subjects come up.

      All you really teach is that you knew better; you had all the information to see that there was nothing to the claim; people only remember it because songs were written making fun of it and calling out Tipper Gore by name.

      The nonsense at the end about "we definitely would have had a federal law" is an unsupported load of horse shit. The voluntary rating system was enacted because it sells more records when you tell the customers that something is naughty.

    12. Re:Desperate need by Quirkz · · Score: 1

      All you really teach is that you knew better; you had all the information to see that there was nothing to the claim; people only remember it because songs were written making fun of it and calling out Tipper Gore by name.

      I remember Tipper Gore because if you put Kurt Vonnegut, Douglas Adams, and the authors of the Illuminatus! books in a room together they couldn't come up with a name more odd-catchy-seemingly-meaningful-but-probably-pulled-from-a-dictionary than Tipper Gore.

  4. Talk HARD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Wearing only a ____ ring.

    1. Re:Talk HARD by Quirkz · · Score: 1

      One of my favorite movies when younger. Always angried up the blood, in a good way.

      Whatever happened to that conclusion? They wrapped up the movie making it sound like everyone and their cat could have a private radio station. Was that fake? Or have times changed on me?

  5. what if we like indecency and swearing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    and dont want to spend all day thinking about children?

    1. Re:what if we like indecency and swearing by Salgak1 · · Score: 0

      I hear that many Catholic Priests DO spend all day, thinking about the children. . .

    2. Re:what if we like indecency and swearing by Rockoon · · Score: 1

      Its ok to think about the children, so long as they are approved thoughts.

      --
      "His name was James Damore."
    3. Re:what if we like indecency and swearing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Now what's really known as a "radio cut"
      When you can't say "shit" and you can't say "fuck"?
      I really think you wanna hear it
      But the radio staions, see, they still gonna fear it
      Yo! I though this country was based upon freedom of speech
      Freedom of press, freedom of your own religion
      To make your own decsion! That's baloney!
      'Cos if I gotta play by these rules, I'm bein' phony!

      -ATL Freedom of Speech

    4. Re:what if we like indecency and swearing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your "thoughts" are not approved.

  6. This is a problem, why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    We wanted better spectrum use, didn't we? Lots of small stations means more spectrum use. And if they're illegal... work with them to make them legal.

    Instead of repressing the messenger in the form of DJs meeting the needs of the local community, how about reviewing the licensing and all the other petty laws restricting the community?

    1. Re:This is a problem, why? by advocate_one · · Score: 4, Insightful

      how about reviewing the licensing and all the other petty laws restricting the community?

      Don't forget, all those rules are only there to protect the incumbents from newcomers... regulatory capture to impose costs on them...

      --
      Donald 'Duck' Dunn: We had a band powerful enough to turn goat piss into gasoline.
    2. Re:This is a problem, why? by Gussington · · Score: 0

      Don't forget, all those rules are only there to protect the incumbents from newcomers... regulatory capture to impose costs on them...

      I'm not sure if this is a joke or not. I'd like to think it is, but something tells me you are serious.

    3. Re:This is a problem, why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We wanted better spectrum use, didn't we? Lots of small stations means more spectrum use. And if they're illegal... work with them to make them legal.

      Exactly. Where I live, getting a licence for a small station is not that hard. Sure, you have to pass a test to show that you know your "radio stuff", both the tech and the regulations. But that is easy enough, and so there is indeed a bunch of small stations in the cities.

    4. Re:This is a problem, why? by sumdumass · · Score: 1

      He's likely serious. This is the problem or issue when people support deregulation. Outside of a few hardcore idiots, the deregulation cry is about breaking down barriers to entry and participation and not the wild west free for all that it gets portrayed as.

        It is also the battle cry against big government. Just enough to be effective without being a burden to freedom or prosperity.

      The debate on which is better is often more of an emotional one. Often it is derived from a feeling of being powerless on both sides. But regulatory capture is a real thing.

    5. Re:This is a problem, why? by BlueStrat · · Score: 0

      Don't forget, all those rules are only there to protect the incumbents from newcomers... regulatory capture to impose costs on them...

      I'm not sure if this is a joke or not. I'd like to think it is, but something tells me you are serious.

      Beyond necessary regulation to prevent interference, etc he's largely correct. Regulatory capture is a huge problem among regulatory agencies in the US.

      Generally the larger, more powerful, and broad the regulatory agency's power is, the bigger the problem tends to be or become.

      The FCC is no exception.

      Government powerful enough to give you everything you want and need is powerful enough to take it all away...and/or sell it.

      Strat

      --
      Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
    6. Re:This is a problem, why? by silentcoder · · Score: 5, Insightful

      > It is also the battle cry against big government. Just enough to be effective without being a burden to freedom or prosperity.

      Except that this is an absolutely impossible goal. You can't make government smaller. It is a guaranteed disaster. Whenever you try - you just create a power-vaccuum which is readily filled by somebody else. Initially, this is mostly corporations. As you reduce government size towards your mythic level (which is always described but never defined because those who say it will NEVER reach a level they consider "right") the power of those stepping into the resulting vaccuum grows and corporate executives get replaced by warlords (often the same person).

      Now you either end up with a bunch of competing warlords in an endless civil war and your "official government" too small and helpless to actually do anything about it (ala Somalia), or one warlord actually manages to amass enough to quell all the others and you end up with a dictatorship.

      The power you fear in big government is GOING to be wielded, there is NOTHING that ANYBODY could do to stop that. The only choice you DO have, is whether it will be wielded by a representative government accountable to you as a voter, or any of the everything else's which are all MUCH worse.

      This is one reason I am an anarchist. As such I support the biggest government of them all. A government so large that EVERY SINGLE CITIZEN is an equal member of that government. 100% of the population large. And therefore, much less able to oppress anybody - while having both the will and the power to quell oppression from others.

      --
      Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
    7. Re:This is a problem, why? by FudRucker · · Score: 1

      I think low power non-licensed stations should be legal, maybe limit them to 5 watts or 20 watts whatever is prudent so they can cover a few square miles without bleeding over adjacent stations on nearby frequencies, maybe let the unlicensed low power stations have frequencies in the lower half of the FM broadcast band (89 to99) and the high powered licenced stations use the upper half of the FM broadcast band (100 to 108)

      --
      Politics is Treachery, Religion is Brainwashing
    8. Re: This is a problem, why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      What, pray tell, makes you think that the size of the government is at an optimum right now? It's not. It's at a maximum; the maximum amount they can afford to beg, steal or borrow from you. Governments are bureaucracies and will grow until resource constrained. The tea party is the evidence that the constraint was reached, and the berniediots that that the taking rolled back more than trivially.

    9. Re:This is a problem, why? by tom229 · · Score: 1
      I think your fearmongering a bit. How exactly does shrinking the size and responsibility of government, with regard to social programs and the like, devolve into a civil war with an ultimate dictatorship. I think you're ex... Wait...

      This is one reason I am an anarchist.

      Nevermind. I get it now. Jeez, this generation's basement dwellers wake up early.

      --
      If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
    10. Re:This is a problem, why? by l0n3s0m3phr34k · · Score: 2

      To many conservatives, the "optimal government size" is one that operates solely in their benefit and is basically a "middle man contract placement system" to private entities that do all the real work. They want everything to be privatized; because they believe they would be the ones who own those corps. A computer system that matched up governmental tasks to private corporate bidders would probably be enough. No "social services" because if your "wealthy" then you don't need them and screw everyone else. I would say that humans are the dominate species BECAUSE of our cooperation, sharing resources, and empathy...but many conservatives don't believe in evolution and think we humans sprung fully-formed, talking and writing, from dust and a rib-bone...and that human activity can't ever have any lasting effects on the planet because God gave us dominion over the Earth so it's ours to do whatever we want to with.

    11. Re:This is a problem, why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In an anarchy, what stops the warlords from existing that isn't possible under any other system (or lack thereof)?

    12. Re:This is a problem, why? by youngatheart · · Score: 1

      I really like that approach. I was a little conflicted because, on the one hand I do want responsible use of radio spectrum, but on the other:

      • Good: "The DJs sound like you and they talk about things that you're interested in,"
      • Good: "You call them up and say, 'I want to hear this song,' and they play it for you,"
      • Good: "It's interactive. It's engaging. It's communal."
      • Good: It's upsetting many congressional members
    13. Re:This is a problem, why? by thinkwaitfast · · Score: 1

      What about 5 watts and a rotating yagi?

    14. Re:This is a problem, why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is false. All governments in Human history tend toward bloat and corruption irregardless of the starting point (dictatorship, socialist, democracy, etc - it's all the same.) It just takes different amounts of time to fill the power vacuum you describe within each system. Nothing is permanent. To maximize the freedom phase of things the ideal solution is a fresh democracy whenever the old one gets too old, but you can't just get a democracy from a corrupt democracy because you can't vote it in, it has to go through that feudal/dictator/etc phase because that is how Human societies self-organize over time - it takes a certain level of stress before people are willing to sacrifice their potential well-being for that of their progeny. The only real issue here is that nobody wants to pull the bandaid off.

    15. Re:This is a problem, why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can't make government smaller. It is a guaranteed disaster. Whenever you try - you just create a power-vaccuum which is readily filled by somebody else.

      Yes, and hopefully they will compete for that power/marketshare/dominant voice on the matter. And hopefully it will take a while.

      Now you either end up with a bunch of competing warlords in an endless civil war

      Or, since you noted that corporations fill this hole, you have (hopefully many) competing corporate overlords in (hopefully endless) economic war that drives down costs, trims fat, promotes innovation, and generally has all the good bits of capitalism.

      Nobody except a few nutballers are arguing for anarchy and the dissolution of the state. They just want regular people to be able to launch their own radio station, or Uber to compete with regular taxis, or car dealerships to go fuck themselves. And you're right, you'll never get a consistant answer about how much government is best. Everyone has their own views. But there's a median that keeps most people happy and promotes the best economy.

      Oh wait, you ARE an anarchist. One that somehow pretends that everyone will be equal and for some reason "quell oppression". Pft.

    16. Re:This is a problem, why? by Cytotoxic · · Score: 1

      You have it backwards.

      If the government has lots and lots of power - either through regulation or spending - what happens next? What do you do if you are running a company and you have competition and there is a big, powerful government with guns and stuff just sitting right there? What do the wealthy and powerful do when the government has lots of money and power? Just sit there and take it?

      No, they didn't get to be the rich and powerful by being stupid. They proceed to use their wealth and power to bend the government toward doing their work for them. Whether through sweetheart no-bid contracts (e.g. Halliburton) , or arcane tax rules (Insurance Industry), or oddly specific regulations (casket sales, hair braiding, taxi cabs, etc., etc.), they are going to do what they can to get a bigger piece of the pie.

      When faced with this, most people clamor for the government to have more power - to clamp down on these abuses by industry. But ask yourself - why are there so many more lobbyists in Washington than there used to be? Government hasn't lost any power. They've grown exponentially. And so have the high-priced lobbyists.

      Why? Because that's where the money is. FedX and UPS use government regulators to fight each other because they can. The mortuary industry uses government to prevent competition.

      We see this all the time in the tech industry. Ever hear of net neutrality? How many big companies have their lobbyists working overtime on various sides of that argument? How many of them are trying to use government to gain an advantage? How many are trying to stop someone else from using government to put them at a disadvantage?

      The more power the government has over an area, the more likely it is to be corrupted - because the incentives are greater.

      I don't think anyone fails to recognize the problems with Taxi regulations in places like New York, where a taxi medallion is worth a fortune. The gap in services caused by an artificial monopoly leaves an opening for companies like Uber, Lyft and tons of gypsies cab operators. So is the solution to have more regulations? Or would it be better to have smaller government just set simple rules for operating a livery service and enforce those fairly - other than that, stay out of it. Instead of tightly controlling the number of cabs, let the private sector work that part out.

      Smaller government doesn't mean no government. It means smaller. Smaller, less powerful and less money to spend means less attractive to those who would use the power of government for their own plunder.

    17. Re: This is a problem, why? by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 1

      It is beyond its Maximum, which is why we are in a constant deficit spending situation. The moment a surplus appears, it disappears just as quickly. Budgets that are growing are called "Drastically cut" when they go up by 1% instead of the requested 9%, and programs and departments in government that have long since served their purpose are still around.

      Governments are bureaucracies and will grow until resource constrained.

      Nope, they grow. Period. And people get into a tizzy fit if they don't grow. Democrats cry "Republicans want grandma to eat dog food" and Republicans cry "Democrats want every illegal on welfare". We are in a perpetual state of hyperbole that is so obviously meaningless, yet people still drink that Kool-Aide

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    18. Re:This is a problem, why? by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 1

      Yeah, there's no hyperbole in anything you said /sarcasm

      Meanwhile, Bernie measures success in the formation of bread lines, because without lines, only the Rich can buy bread. (yes, he actually said that).

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    19. Re:This is a problem, why? by BlueStrat · · Score: 1

      Beyond necessary regulation to prevent interference, etc he's largely correct. Regulatory capture is a huge problem among regulatory agencies in the US.

      Generally the larger, more powerful, and broad the regulatory agency's power is, the bigger the problem tends to be or become.

      The FCC is no exception.

      Government powerful enough to give you everything you want and need is powerful enough to take it all away...and/or sell it.

      Modded "Troll"?

      Really?

      "I disagree" =/= "Troll"

      Aren't you intelligent enough to form a cogent argument, Mr. AnonyMod?

      Must be a Trump or Sanders/Hildebeast supporter. "The government is horrible & corrupt! Give it broad new powers and more of those other peoples' money!"

      Strat

      --
      Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
    20. Re:This is a problem, why? by ToddInSF · · Score: 1

      I am so sick of all you size queens going on and on about "big government", and how everything's all about size.

      Quality often reigns over quantity.

    21. Re:This is a problem, why? by silentcoder · · Score: 2

      I actually agree with you. The size of the government is utterly unimportant. Even the taxrate is mostly unimportant.

      What does matter is whether the government does a good job, wheher you get decent value for your taxes. As long as whatever your taxes buy would have cost you more in the private sector, or be worse quality, or both (as in the case of healthcare), it's better to buy it with more taxes because even though your taxrate is higher - you spend less money - it also has the advantage that you can provide these services to people who would not be able to access them in the private sector.

      That really IS an advantage for everybody. Take healthcare again: making healthcare universally available means your odds of being infected with some virulent plague is greatly reduced because it can't spread like wildfire among an untreated homeless population who can't afford to be treated for it (and thus slip through the radar of quarantine systems and the like).
      Same goes with things like water supply. Making sure everybody has access to clean, fresh water protects the entire population from diseases like cholera.

      --
      Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
    22. Re:This is a problem, why? by Gussington · · Score: 1

      Smaller government doesn't mean no government. It means smaller. Smaller, less powerful and less money to spend means less attractive to those who would use the power of government for their own plunder.

      Smaller than what? This is the problem with using such vague goals, you never really know if you've achieved it or not.
      How do you measure the size of a government? What's the SI unit for that, and how do you decide what the appropriate number should be?
      And if you have an ideal number, what is your response to the guy next to you who claims your number is too big, and that we really need a 'smaller govt'?
      The whole concept is just meaningless.

    23. Re:This is a problem, why? by ToddInSF · · Score: 1

      So the core problem are the usual culprits. Corruption, exploitation and profiteering. If you have issues with government having those properties, then you must take issue with corporations and financial institutions possessing the same attributes.

      Biggest problem with the healthcare issue is our fucked up greed based healthcare system, which the ACA has utterly failed to address much less mitigate. We were promised that the Affordable Care Act would address the issues you point out - people not being able to access healthcare. Now we have people paying for health insurance that CAN STILL NOT ACCESS AFFORDABLE CARE. And the drug companies are still up to their typical criminal activities, getting fines levied on them paying the fines, and continuing to do business as usual. Just like the banks. So we have equally corrupt government and corporations basically working together to find ways to fuck us over. Yay.

  7. Service Regulation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Protecting licenses that costs hundreds of thousands, sometimes millions. Now where does that sound familiar from....

    Oh, I know! A million dollar medallion for taxi drivers in large cities like New York!

    I think what Uber does there is say: "Screw that, we're just going to drive anyway"

    I guess that's what pirate radio stations will be saying. "Screw that, we're going to provide service to people anyway."

  8. Who? by stephanruby · · Score: 5, Funny

    Who are these lucky constituents that won't have to worry about false advertising anymore?

    You have to admire those Members of Congress, they go after the most hard-to-find targets first. It doesn't matter if those "pirate" radio stations only reach 0.0005% of their own constituency or operate just a couple of hours a month with little or no advertising of any kind. You have to admire the kind of motivation those Members of Congress have at wanting to stamp out those tiny little cockroaches.

    If I were the shopping channel network, or ABC, or an internet advertising agency, I would be shaking in my boots right now. After all, if those Members of Congress spend so much of their time and energy going after those little guys, it's only a matter of time before they start noticing all the false advertising going on the biggest licensed television and radio networks, with diamond dealers, phone carriers, cable providers, weight loss products, Duracell batteries, and the list goes on...

    1. Re:Who? by Gussington · · Score: 1

      You have to admire those Members of Congress, they go after the most hard-to-find targets first.

      How do you expect this to work?
      If you have an issue you should be able to contact your local congressperson and if legitimate, have them represent your views at a higher level. This is precisely how democracy is supposed to work and you are complaining about it?

    2. Re:Who? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Someone complain, authorities stomp their boots. So, if you hate the shopping channel network, complain loudly of every bit of "not exactly true" advertising. That is, write actual letters to the regulators, not just e-mail. Always point out the laws that apply and the possible punishments (be it fines or loss of licenced spectrum). Create a facebook group so others like you can help point out bad advertising and/or write letters of complaint. Big guys can be trodden flat too, it just takes more time.

    3. Re:Who? by stephanruby · · Score: 1

      How do you expect this to work?

      If you have an issue you should be able to contact your local congressperson and if legitimate, have them represent your views at a higher level.

      Since mainstream broadcasters play such a critical role in which candidate gets airtime and which candidate doesn't, I believe Members of Congress are beholden to their interests.

      I don't think the complaints about pirate radio stations are legitimate, but then I pick the battles I can win.

      This is precisely how democracy is supposed to work and you are complaining about it?

      I vote. I write letters. And I also complain.

      That being said, not every issue I care about has critical mass enough to have forward momentum.

  9. KPFZ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    KPFZ in Lake County, California started as a pirate station. Then they went legal low-power, and now they cover a large portion of the county (covering the whole thing is tricky due to terrain).

    So it isn't necessarily just a hobby--if your pirate station really gets traction and meets a need, it can "go legit".

  10. Last Year's News by Gussington · · Score: 1

    I noticed the letter is dated June 2015. Must be a slow "News" day...

  11. radio for everyone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's easy as fuck to run a pirate radio station today, just install PiFM on a Raspberry and you're on the air.

  12. obZZ by Sooner+Boomer · · Score: 3, Informative

    Do you remember
    back in nineteen sixty-six?
    Country Jesus, hillbilly blues,
    that's where I learned my licks.
    Oh, from coast to coast and line to line
    in every county there,
    I'm talkin' 'bout that outlaw X
    is cuttin' through the air.

    --
    Chaos maximizes locally around me.
    1. Re:obZZ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      ...Town to town, up and down the dial.

      Maybe you and me were never meant to be,

      Just maybe think of me once in a while.

    2. Re:obZZ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Y'all wanna hear Dusty Hill sing for ya right here?

  13. False advertizing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "False advertizing"? Are they implying that there is advertising that does NOT lie and cheat?

    BrandX washes whiter, BrandY protects your colors.
    The truth: BrandX makes color vanish along with the dirt, while BrandY doesn't get your laundry clean.

  14. Ministry concern about deviation from party line by swb · · Score: 1

    Wow, TFS makes it really hard to feel that what they're really afraid of is the public gaining access to information diverging from the establishment talking points and entertainment not supporting the current corporate entertainment products.

    Maybe that was the intended conclusion I'm supposed to draw, but I can't say I wouldn't have drawn that conclusion anyway.

    The funniest thing is "false advertising"? WTF? Do "officials" think current marking practices are a bastion of transparent and unvarnished truth, free from deliberate deception and manipulation?

  15. They have another side of the issue by TheDarkMaster · · Score: 1

    Usually official radio channels are provided only for the "friends of government" or local politicians. Nobody wishing to create a truly community radio gets authorization and can only operate clandestinely. A radio channel for the holders of power is seen only as a "political tool" and they do not admit that they could fall into the "wrong hands" (common people).

    --
    Religion: The greatest weapon of mass destruction of all time
  16. Congress is 100% at fault for this. by Lumpy · · Score: 2

    Those fuckers killed the low power FM license because they catered to Clear channel and their other benefactors.

    All of the pirate radio "problem" is 100% the fault of Congress. Those are the scumbags that need to be fined and put in jail first.

    Give us an affordable low power FM license ability and 95% of those pirate stations would go legit.

    --
    Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
  17. Tips for a pirate radio operator... by Lumpy · · Score: 2

    First you need to build your radio station into a box that you can place at the top of a taller building. get one of the 10-20 watt china transmitters and build a nice 5/8's wave antenna like a J pole out of copper pipe. putall of it inside a sealed plastic box and use a raspberry PI for the audio source.

    Now use a USB stick to hold your radio station audio files plug it all in and splice into power you can find up there. if you paint it all to look like it belongs it will not get dismantled for years.

    Bonus points, give it a WIFI accesspoint so you can simply drive there and point a gain antenna at the location to upload new content.

    Now when the FCC raids the station you will not get arrested as it's not your property and if you are smart you have no evidence behind that it's yours. Yes you are out your $400 of gear (if you buy good stuff with filters) but that is a lot cheaper than the $40,000 fine and possible jail time.

    Social engineer your way in to set it up. you are here from dish network, etc....

    --
    Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    1. Re:Tips for a pirate radio operator... by swb · · Score: 1

      I think tops of buildings are somewhat hard to get into, and the power you might find up there is probably not tap-friendly 115v but some kind of high voltage 3 phase used with air handlers or other mechanical systems.

      It'd be great if just being near a window was good enough, there are probably plenty of offices where you could stash the box near a window and get easy wall power.

      I wonder if a better idea wouldn't be finding a tall tree and placing the box in it as if it was some kind of bird's nest, either a purpose built box built for larger birds or camouflage it from the ground as an actual raptor nest but have the transmitter in it with a solar panel.

      I'm guessing power consumption for 20 watts of radio transmission would make most compact solar setups ineffective but perhaps if you had a decent location solar added to a couple of deep cycle marine batteries would give you a deep enough reserve to not have to change batteries more than once a week, especially if you didn't transmit in the day and limited to a few hours at night.

    2. Re:Tips for a pirate radio operator... by NixieBunny · · Score: 2

      I actually built and ran a pirate radio station in Tucson 15-20 years ago, Radio Limbo 103.3. I agree with your tip, but I took it a step further. The transmitter was a 1 watt unit that we hiked way up into the mountains north of town, giving it a 3000 foot elevation advantage. We transmitted through a Yagi made from a modified FM receiving antenna. The uplink was on UHF, and the rig was solar powered. It covered most of the city (about a 10 mile radius in the preferred direction) reasonably well.

      The other thing we did, which really made the station great, was to get about a hundred DJs to volunteer for 1 or 2 hour slots, to make the programming interesting.

      --
      The determined Real Programmer can write Fortran programs in any language.
    3. Re:Tips for a pirate radio operator... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      and the power you might find up there is probably not tap-friendly 115v but some kind of high voltage 3 phase used with air handlers or other mechanical systems.

      Just a pure wild-assed guess, but there's probably a couple of 115v outlet for janitors and maintenance workers to plug-in their tools, lights and stuff.

    4. Re:Tips for a pirate radio operator... by DriveDog · · Score: 1

      It would be easier for someone to unplug some questionable-looking device than to even bother paying attention to something hardwired into a circuit (for that outlet or a lamp or something). But that may increase the amount of installation gear the interloper need carry to the site for installation.

    5. Re:Tips for a pirate radio operator... by Lumpy · · Score: 1

      Trivial to convert a rooftop HVAC power to 120V. and it's also trivial to gain access to the roof if you are carrying a big box and some tools and are dressed as a service person.

      "Hi I'm dave from XYZ inspections. I need access to the roof really quick so I can check the HVAC units for leaks. I'll be only a few minutes." 99% of the time a random custodian will let you up there without question.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
  18. Anarchy by Tenebrousedge · · Score: 1

    A government so large that EVERY SINGLE CITIZEN is an equal member of that government.

    This sounds more like the definition of democracy. Perhaps you can clarify?

    --
    Those who advocate genocide deserve every protection afforded by law, and none afforded by common human decency.
    1. Re:Anarchy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Exactly. "Democracy" comes from Greek demokratia, a combination of demos (common people) and kratos (rule, power).

    2. Re: Anarchy by silentcoder · · Score: 2

      Direct democracy is a synonym for anarchism

      --
      Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
  19. Stranger Danger by JimSadler · · Score: 2

    As a youth back in 1960 I built a radio broadcast rig and used it for only a very few minutes before cars with funny antennas and a helicopter started searching my block. I rushed to unplug the rig and get it one mile away and turn it on at a friends house for a few seconds to keep the searchers from triangulating my location. I was astounded at the speed at which there was a response. It is hard to imagine how pirate stations are able to exist these days. One way might be to run it from the back of a van that is kept in motion.

    1. Re:Stranger Danger by Tailhook · · Score: 1

      The lawyer/engineer ratio at the FCC — as at every other Federal agency — has shifted and the number of field agents actually capable of investigating is now very small. The FCC has been shutting down field offices for years and focusing the money on Washington staff.

      --
      Maw! Fire up the karma burner!
    2. Re:Stranger Danger by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I call bullshit on the helicopters in the 1960 being used by the FCC.

      Cool story, though.

    3. Re:Stranger Danger by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're a rambling old man, no such thing ever happened.

  20. I ran a pirate radio once... by l0n3s0m3phr34k · · Score: 2

    it was fun. But what was even more fun was trolling Clear Channel, when we went into their local corporate HQ to talk about marketing...and I brought up their repeated helping the FCC in busting "pirate radio" stations. Just do a search of "clear channel busting pirate radio" and you'll find scores of stories. Once they even set up a media server to capture a signal and sent the link to the FCC along with the complaint. NPR is also an opponent of low-power FM. But, be warned, Clear Channel will aggressively pursue any signals they can find and have a very cozy relationship with the FCC enforcement arm.

    1. Re:I ran a pirate radio once... by Gilgaron · · Score: 2

      It is funny how enforcement works in industry, I worked in a food QA lab for a while and was surprised at the number of competitors products we received. I found out that they ran chemistry authenticity on it and would report to the government if they were lying about the contents, nutrition info, etc.

    2. Re:I ran a pirate radio once... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "regulatory capture".

      Well, at least you know the term for it now.

  21. Gov't is more powerful than corps by bretts · · Score: 1

    You can't make government smaller. It is a guaranteed disaster. Whenever you try - you just create a power-vaccuum which is readily filled by somebody else. Initially, this is mostly corporations.

    That's a good thing, because corporations have fewer powers than governments, and they'd have even fewer still if they were not protected by an absolute maze of regulations.

    Further, almost everyone misses the point of "small government": it means reduce the functions government assumes so that it does not become a self-interested actor. It's not about size as in number of people or budget, but size as in scope of abilities.

    1. Re: Gov't is more powerful than corps by silentcoder · · Score: 1

      In other words: exactly what you should not shrink. And if you think corporations are less powerful than governments you are seriously naive. Governments cant avoid every law that constrains them by doing whatever they want to do in another country
        and corporations do not need to worry about reelection.
      When corps poison the drinking water - they get a slap on the wrist. But I promise you the governor of michigan will not get elected again. We have power over government. Corps have power over us. Governments ended slavery. Corps continue it to this day.

      --
      Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
  22. Re:Service Regulation by operagost · · Score: 1

    Indeed.

    The FCC has only one real use in this area: preventing interference.

    False advertising? That's the FTC. How much advertising happens on pirate radio, anyway?

    --

    Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
  23. Pirate radio by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The original pirate radio stations (way back when in the country I come from) were broadcasting from a ship outside the 12 mile limit. The government had difficulty shutting it down as it didnt have jurisdiction in international waters.
    I am not sure how that would work here in the US where the nearest ocean is over 1000 miles away.

    1. Re:Pirate radio by PPH · · Score: 1

      I am not sure how that would work here in the US where the nearest ocean is over 1000 miles away.

      Border Blasters. 1000 miles isn't a big problem if your regulatory agency is corrupt and you can pump out a megawatt of rf power.

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
    2. Re:Pirate radio by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The original pirate radio stations (way back when in the country I come from) were broadcasting from a ship outside the 12 mile limit. The government had difficulty shutting it down as it didnt have jurisdiction in international waters.
      I am not sure how that would work here in the US where the nearest ocean is over 1000 miles away.

      Considering most of the US populace lives on the coasts, it wouldn't be too difficult to set one up in a listener-dense location. Sure, you're probably not going to be reaching people in Nevada from the Pacific or Northern Kentucky from the Atlantic, but you'll still be reaching millions of people on the coasts. Only real danger is the military "accidentally" sinking your pirate radio ship after you're mistaken for a terrorist vessel.

    3. Re:Pirate radio by Phreakiture · · Score: 1

      Border blasters were an interesting phenomenon, but they are dependent on running on AM in order to get the kind of distance you describe. FM won't travel that far, no matter how much power you throw into it. It simply won't travel over the horizon except under rare propagation conditions.

      And, to be clear, it's not the AM-ness or the FM-ness that makes it so, but the fact that AM broadcasting is done on some pretty low frequencies, around 1 MHz, and these will both diffract and reflect to reach places that an FM signal, two orders of magnitude higher in frequency, just won't go (though notably, the FM band is comparatively superior at getting inside of buildings).

      --
      www.wavefront-av.com
    4. Re:Pirate radio by PPH · · Score: 1

      Higher frequencies (VHF and UHF) are also conducive to tropospheric ducting.

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
    5. Re:Pirate radio by Phreakiture · · Score: 1

      Yes they are, and it's a really cool phenomenon when it happens. Unfortunately, it happens too rarely to be useful in this context. Skywave propagation, on the other hand, will work pretty reliably on the AM band as soon as the sun sets, and groundwave will work day and night, every day and every night.

      --
      www.wavefront-av.com
  24. The problem with pirate radio... by Viol8 · · Score: 1

    ... at least here in London is that a lot of them now are run by not very bright egotistical and/or criminal (other than just illegal broadcasting) individuals who don't give a stuff about anyone else on the band. They'll cause interference to or even stomp over legit and other pirate stations alike. A minority of them are also a front for other far worse criminal activities.

  25. Screw the FCC (indy stations) by DaveMikulec · · Score: 1

    We've got a great indy station in Lexington, WRFL, that recently increased their power but had to shape their signal so as to not step on the toes of the local religious stations who rule the airwaves down here. As a result, even though I'm only 30 miles away and could normally get their signal, I cannot because it's being blocked for the fundys. Radio here is all but dead.

    --
    "Shall we play a game?" -W.O.P.R.
  26. where is the proof? by jsepeta · · Score: 1

    sadly, the politician-class is not held to be accountable for making up complete bullshit when urging new laws to protect against the population using our first amendment rights.

    --
    Remember kids, if you're not paying for the service, YOU ARE THE PRODUCT THAT IS BEING SOLD.
  27. Re:Service Regulation by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 1

    False advertising? That's the FTC.

    We're in an election year, the airwaves are filled with false advertising. Unfortunately it is POLITICAL speech and legal to spew lies under the guise of electioneering.

    So in essence, you're not correct ;)

    --
    Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
  28. In other words by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The politician is not getting his cut.

  29. Simple solution... by BigU+03C0mpin · · Score: 1

    Break up the ClearChannel/IHeartRadio monopoly.

    I really miss listening to radio since it was the way I used to discover new music. These days within two songs I can tell if a station is owned by ClearChannel since it's ALWAYS the exact same robotic programming designed to keep the largest possible audience. Plus its almost always the same songs for most of the programming hour. The problem is people have more choice, so that kind of monotonous programming is a dinosaur.

    I live in San Diego and the spectrum is nearly full here. I've tried to scan it, but honestly stopping every 200-400 hertz takes longer to find a station than anywhere I'm driving (and that's about a 20 minute minimum). 90% of it is useless redundant programming unless I want to listen to Mexican oldies (which I don't). The local rock station plays Pop, Hip-Hop and the occasional R&B song. Plus there's the DJ who stops every 2 songs to monologue with some "after the break find out which band blah blah blah" to hook you for the commercials which tend to take up at least 20 minutes per hour. All told I'd be surprised if they played more than 30 minutes of music per hour. Not to mention the requisite 3 Led Zeppelin and 2-3 Pink Floyd songs per hour, which at this point have a pavlovian response for me to change the station. All told you get maybe 1-2 new songs in an hours worth of programming, and even then it's probably some made to sell band instead of some band with actual talent.

    It's no wonder why pirate radio would be taking off. I've always wanted to run a radio station from the days I started doing college radio. I was actually thinking about it just two days ago, it's simple, cheap and relatively available to just about anyone. I would love to stumble across one that fit a format I like.

    1. Re:Simple solution... by BigU+03C0mpin · · Score: 1

      ^^ Kilohertz, not Hertz.

  30. Pirates some kind of regulatory body by k6mfw · · Score: 1

    Perhaps there is an unwritten code among pirate stations but reading in Gordon West's GROL book has an interesting mention. In the early days of radio (1920s or 30s) the Supreme Court ruled Commerce Dept does not have enforcement powers over radio stations (those pre-FCC laws had a lot of holes I guess). Radio stations had a field day, they used whatever power they wanted, operated whenever they wanted, changed frequencies on the whim. Result was chaos and interference that caused many listeners to put away their receivers and sales tanked (typical tragedy of the commons). When FCC was created, a lot more thought was put into its implementation.

    However, as BigU+03C0mpin said, breakup the Clear Channel monopoly. There was a time when FCC required AM and FM broadcast band have a balance of station types. Rock, country, classical, news, jazz, etc. I'm thinking it has been years since I've listened to broadcast radio, it just doesn't do anything for me. But all these pirate stations sound interesting and they have an audience. I assume many of these stations are willing to be legit but the entry barriers are simply too high. Maybe KFAT will make a comeback. They were a marginal country station in Gilroy in 1970s, they scrounged flea markets and garage sales for obscure country records. Their bumpsticker, "I found it! And it's hard to find too." (they were relatively low power).

    --
    mfwright@batnet.com
  31. Slavery is stronger than ever by bretts · · Score: 1
    1. Re:Slavery is stronger than ever by silentcoder · · Score: 1

      I'm aware of that, and have read some other pieces on the topic. At least 70% of all chocolate is picked by child slaves for example. That's exactly what I meant by "corporations continue it to this day". The last government to sanction it stopped doing so more than a century-and-a-half ago, and fought a civil war to achieve that. It's not legal anywhere in the world.

      But it still happens... wherever they have "small government". Because it turns out one of the things that "small government" is too small to do is to actually fight slavers.

      Slavery was legally ended in the US in the 1850's but it didn't actually end in PRACTISE until 1939. When finally government was big enough to crack down on it properly. No president before FDR had the ability to take down slavers once and for all. The system between the civil war and 1939 was frighteningly ingenius. Cops would walk around the streets looking for able-looking black men, then arrest them on the flimsiest excuse. The black man would be brought before a corrupt judge and fined a fee he could never afford. Then some wealthy white "benefactor" would offer to pay the fine, and let the black guy work it off. Of course food, and shelter would be added to the debt, and the "payment" was always less than those. Voila - lifelong forced labour backed by the local police. This form of slavery mined all the raw materials for the American rail network. Alabama's coal mines were operated this way as well. Just another little dirty heritage of fossil fuels.
      It took the republican's favorite example of the ultimate expander of government to end it. Which was no coincidence, the government had to first be big enough.

      Why do we have continuing slavery in the DRC ? India ? The Amazon ? And on such a massive scale too (the slaves in the world today outnumber the population of Washington state). Why is slave industries responsible for more CO2 emissions than all legitimate industries combined ? It's really simple: those countries have governments that are too small for the conditions over which they govern. The DRC government lacks the power to end slavery in the rural areas - they aren't powerful enough to fight the warlords that rule there and so cannot end the slave labour that operates there. The Indian police force is far too small, it can barely maintain civil order in the urban areas - there are no men to spare to fight slavers in the rural rock mines (almost every headstone in every graveyard in the world was mined by slaves). The Brazilian government has never yet been able to to muster a military powerful enough to stop the clear-cutters, how would they muster one powerful enough to stop those clearcutters from using the very natives they displace as they clearcut as slaves afterwards ?

      Hell - in Brazil it's not unusual to come across an army base in the amazon with nothing but corpses. The clearcutters actually murder all the soldiers in the area with impunity to keep them from interfering with their "business".

      --
      Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
  32. Re:Service Regulation by eric_harris_76 · · Score: 1

    And I'm told that a growing body of increasingly comprehensive and consistent case law was on the verge of making the Communications Act of 1934 unnecessary.

    Fortunately, our Wise Solons in the Congress stopped that, just in time.

    Otherwise, there would be no fig leaf of "preventing interference" to justify the FCC's existence.

    --
    There's no time like the present. Well, the past used to be.