AM radio news migrating to FM

[mvcg66b3r]

A recent trend in radio has been the migration of news/talk stations from the AM band to FM.

Over the last few months, I have been involved with my station - WDEL-AM in Wilmington, Delaware - making the move to an FM dial position. After broadcasting on 1150AM for more than 90 years, we launched 101.7 WDEL-FM, a straight simulcast of our existing programming on AM, on April 1st (no joke).

The theory behind the addition of the FM frequency is quite simple. The goal is to increase the station’s reach beyond the limitations of the AM dial – whether those limits be geographic boundaries or demographic ones (do young people today even know what AM radio is??), which in turn should increase the audience, which means bigger ratings, which should lead to larger revenues, which the news director in me hopes will mean more resources to cover news.

http://rtdna.org/article/am_radio_news_migrating_to_fm#.VVppl_lViko

From Powell E. Way ([email protected]) on the ABDX Yahoo group:

In some cases the AM has greater range than the FM. WMAL's surely doesn't and WSBB-FM now with the 50,000 watt upgrade doesn't cover the western part of the Atlanta metro very well.

And some FM simulcasts like WHIO-FM and the aforementioned WDEL-FM don't even cover the whole market.

Also, some news/talk stations like WIBC Indianapolis and KIRO Seattle are now heard only on FM.

 

[K.M. Richards]

It won't happen in L.A., as David Gleason pointed out in the KTWV thread on the Los Angeles board several weeks ago:
http://www.radiodiscussions.com/sho...he-Wave-quot&p=6041960&viewfull=1#post6041960

 

[Oscar Madison]

There goes the neighborhood.

Surprised the migration took so long, although WTOP made the move a decade ago and CBC Radio One started moving way before that. Other countries have also abandoned "medium wave." The US, as in many other areas, is at the back of the line.

This is sort of like when a number of stores and other businesses in Detroit shut their downtown locations and moved to the 'burbs.

AM had a run of over 100 years. Just about every other technology and enterprise from then is now gone. No tears for AM. It had a good run. What's sad is it won't get a decent burial; it will be debased by preachers and infomercials.

 

[landtuna]

As long as the preachers and spammercials stay on AM it will be very convenient to ignore them.

 

[davideduardo]

Surprised the migration took so long, although WTOP made the move a decade ago and CBC Radio One started moving way before that. Other countries have also abandoned "medium wave." The US, as in many other areas, is at the back of the line.

WTOP moved to FM principally because the AM signal does not cover the market. They were supplementing coverage with some edge-of-market signals, and finally figured that going to FM was the answer. DC, of course, has no AM that covers the entire market day and night.

In our neighboring nations, the regulatory body has found FM channels for AMs that want to move. The US has so overpopulated the dial that there is no place for the AMs to migrage to.

In the case of the CBC, in a number of instances they kept the AM where it was the better choice. And then, again, the CBC is a government entity.

To the south, Mexico's congress declared AM no longer viable and to save "jobs and investments" ordered the regulatory body to make FM channels available to as many FMs as possible. That meant 85% of all AMs. The rest are in three or four congested cities where no FM channel is available or on the US border where treaty based regulations won't permit all stations to move.

In most of the rest of the world, where there are many commercial stations, market forces are being allowed to determine the continued viability of AM.

 

[Oscar Madison]

WJSV/WTOP did manage to "cover the market" on AM for some 70 years.

If, as you say, DC and other markets have no AM that "covers the entire market," that alone shows AM is not viable.

The CBC is not government entity. It is a crown corporation. And 740 AM did not cover the entire Toronto market, especially downtown. When WTOP, then owned by the Mormon Church, goes to FM, you seem to assume it was a wise and rational decision. When a so-called "government entity" does essentially the same thing for the same reason, you object. I hope this is not an assumption based on anti-government bias.

Today's world of corporations and international trade is something Adam Smith never envisioned. He lived in a different world. Those who quote him may live in a fantasy world. The idea of "market forces" is inconsistent with a regulated and licensed industry. And given some numbers you have cited in the past, the "market" of listeners and advertisers has already voted "thumbs down" on the viability of AM. Listenership and revenue are and have been nose-diving. I get that AM may have a nostalgic appeal for some but it's like keeping Granny alive on machines in the nursing home instead of letting her go in peace and with dignity.

 

[vchimpanzee]

WTOP moved to FM principally because the AM signal does not cover the market.

50,000 watts doesn't cover the market?

WBT-AM in Charlotte, though, had to add an FM since the nighttime signal doe not cover areas to the west, even though it can be heard from Canada o Cuba.

 

[davideduardo]

50,000 watts doesn't cover the market?

50 kw on 1500 is not a very big signal. In fact, 1 kw on 550 covers as much as 50 kw on 1500. In the case of WTOP in DC, the bad ground conductivity and the directional pattern at night made the signal very, very deficient.

WBT-AM in Charlotte, though, had to add an FM since the nighttime signal doe not cover areas to the west, even though it can be heard from Canada o Cuba.

WBT 1110 does along an arc from about 320º to 210º. It does not do at all well on the other side of the pattern due to KFAB in Omaha and XERED in Mexico City which it severely protects.

 

[Jul]

I won't be shocked if KYW newsradio goes on FM, someday.

 

[davideduardo]

WJSV/WTOP did manage to "cover the market" on AM for some 70 years.

No, it did not. As the market area expanded due to urban sprawl after W.W. II, more and more population ended up outside the effective signal area. And as noise levels increased due to new electrical and electronic devices ranging from fluorescent bulbs to TVs, the coverage became even more limited. By the 60's, it missed really significant parts of the market even in the daytime and at night it was miserable.

If, as you say, DC and other markets have no AM that "covers the entire market," that alone shows AM is not viable.

The stations with decent signals are still viable. WCBS. KFI. KOA. WGN. But in the top 100 markets, there are only about 170 stations that cover at least 80% of the market day and night with a usable signal. That means most markets only have one or two viable signals; the rest are not able to cover all the market so can not compete. That is not a technology problem; it is a licencing problem that dates back to the FCC's assessment of power and coverage needs back in the early to mid 30's.

The CBC is not government entity. It is a crown corporation. And 740 AM did not cover the entire Toronto market, especially downtown.

Same thing. CBC is a quasi-governmental entity, which depends to the greatest extent on the government.

740 was increasingly noisy in downtown Toronto because they built the site too far out of the central area of the city. That turned out to be a nice thing if you were in Owens Bay, but not so nice if you were on Younge St. downtown in an office building. Built in the right place, 740 is as good for Toronto as 660 is for New York City.

When WTOP, then owned by the Mormon Church, goes to FM, you seem to assume it was a wise and rational decision. When a so-called "government entity" does essentially the same thing for the same reason, you object. I hope this is not an assumption based on anti-government bias.

WTOP did the right thing because there was no way to fix 1500. 740, properly built at the right location, could have adequately covered Toronto. The problem in DC was being directional on a horrible frequency. The problem in Toronto was not putting the transmitter for a beautiful low-dial-position AM in the right place because they wanted to get regional coverage and city coverage from one site.

Today's world of corporations and international trade is something Adam Smith never envisioned. He lived in a different world. Those who quote him may live in a fantasy world. The idea of "market forces" is inconsistent with a regulated and licensed industry. And given some numbers you have cited in the past, the "market" of listeners and advertisers has already voted "thumbs down" on the viability of AM.

The remaining life of AM will be dependent on the market and the ability of the few large market full signal stations as well as the small market community stations to be appealing. If you look at the rated markets, those big stations are still doing very very well and should do so for some time.

A good example on how this a market issue can be seen in, of all places, Buenos Aires. There are about a dozen stations in that market of 17 million which have 50 to 100 kw on good dial positions such as 590, 630, 710, 790, 870, 910, 990, 1030, 1070 and so on. They are either non-directional or purposely directional over the metro area. They are well programmed with news, talk and sports formats. And the AM share in that market is just a tiny bit under 50% of all listening.

If our FCC had taken a different perspective on power, US AM stations might still be in a much more significant position overall in the market.

Listenership and revenue are and have been nose-diving.

That is not so. AM has been eroding since the mid-70s' when FM stations with a greater variety of formats and, in most cases, better coverage, started to dominate. It was in 1977 that FM passed the 50% mark in listening. Today, AM is at around 17% of listening. 10 years ago it was around 20%.

That's not a nose-dive. It is more like a very gentle glide path.

I get that AM may have a nostalgic appeal for some but it's like keeping Granny alive on machines in the nursing home instead of letting her go in peace and with dignity.

As long as 10 of the 30 highest billing stations in the US are AM, I think that there are plenty of AMs that are not ready to be put in a museum.

 

[davideduardo]

I won't be shocked if KYW newsradio goes on FM, someday.

Given the current performance of the CBS cluster in Philly, it looks like that will be quite a while away.

 

[Oscar Madison]

No, it did not. As the market area expanded due to urban sprawl after W.W. II, more and more population ended up outside the effective signal area. And as noise levels increased due to new electrical and electronic devices ranging from fluorescent bulbs to TVs, the coverage became even more limited. By the 60's, it missed really significant parts of the market even in the daytime and at night it was miserable.



The stations with decent signals are still viable. WCBS. KFI. KOA. WGN. But in the top 100 markets, there are only about 170 stations that cover at least 80% of the market day and night with a usable signal. That means most markets only have one or two viable signals; the rest are not able to cover all the market so can not compete. That is not a technology problem; it is a licencing problem that dates back to the FCC's assessment of power and coverage needs back in the early to mid 30's.



Same thing. CBC is a quasi-governmental entity, which depends to the greatest extent on the government.

740 was increasingly noisy in downtown Toronto because they built the site too far out of the central area of the city. That turned out to be a nice thing if you were in Owens Bay, but not so nice if you were on Younge St. downtown in an office building. Built in the right place, 740 is as good for Toronto as 660 is for New York City.



WTOP did the right thing because there was no way to fix 1500. 740, properly built at the right location, could have adequately covered Toronto. The problem in DC was being directional on a horrible frequency. The problem in Toronto was not putting the transmitter for a beautiful low-dial-position AM in the right place because they wanted to get regional coverage and city coverage from one site.



The remaining life of AM will be dependent on the market and the ability of the few large market full signal stations as well as the small market community stations to be appealing. If you look at the rated markets, those big stations are still doing very very well and should do so for some time.

A good example on how this a market issue can be seen in, of all places, Buenos Aires. There are about a dozen stations in that market of 17 million which have 50 to 100 kw on good dial positions such as 590, 630, 710, 790, 870, 910, 990, 1030, 1070 and so on. They are either non-directional or purposely directional over the metro area. They are well programmed with news, talk and sports formats. And the AM share in that market is just a tiny bit under 50% of all listening.

If our FCC had taken a different perspective on power, US AM stations might still be in a much more significant position overall in the market.



That is not so. AM has been eroding since the mid-70s' when FM stations with a greater variety of formats and, in most cases, better coverage, started to dominate. It was in 1977 that FM passed the 50% mark in listening. Today, AM is at around 17% of listening. 10 years ago it was around 20%.

That's not a nose-dive. It is more like a very gentle glide path.



As long as 10 of the 30 highest billing stations in the US are AM, I think that there are plenty of AMs that are not ready to be put in a museum.

For the record, KYW is one of those stations that does not cover it's designated market. Bucks County is a dead zone and there are other holes, as well.

The still viable stations you cite as examples of stations which cover there markets are all I-A. You say there are 170 which can cover 80 per cent and that's still not very good. AM is inferior technology, and obsolete technology. The solution is not to shut down all but 170 stations and let them go to super power. The solution - before it was too late - would have been to expand the FM band, migrate to FM, require all new receivers to receive the expanded band and eventually to shut down analog FM, too. If the FCC had done this 20 or 30 years ago, terrestrial radio might have a chance of survival. If the FCC had done that as well as keep broadcast regs from that era in place.

 

[davideduardo]

For the record, KYW is one of those stations that does not cover it's designated market. Bucks County is a dead zone and there are other holes, as well.

It just barely passes BIA's criteria for "viable" based on percentage of population covered.

The still viable stations you cite as examples of stations which cover there markets are all I-A.

Not so. There are quite a few regional channel stations that have viable signals that cover at least 80% of the population day and night. KLAC in LA would be one example. In fact, WMAL in DC is closer to being viable (it isn't, though) than 1500. And there are ones like 570 in Seattle, 560 in Denver, 980 in Kansas City, 580 in Orlando that do get at least a 5 mV/m over the bulk of the population of their metro. And some very directional "clears" like KGO actually do better in covering their metros than the non-D former 1-A stations.

You say there are 170 which can cover 80 per cent and that's still not very good. AM is inferior technology, and obsolete technology. The solution is not to shut down all but 170 stations and let them go to super power. The solution - before it was too late - would have been to expand the FM band, migrate to FM, require all new receivers to receive the expanded band and eventually to shut down analog FM, too. If the FCC had done this 20 or 30 years ago, terrestrial radio might have a chance of survival. If the FCC had done that as well as keep broadcast regs from that era in place.

That horse got out of the barn decades ago as you say. The biggest issue affecting OTA radio is not coverage or fidelity. It is new media. Broadcasters don't care if they are on AM, FM or new media. We are not in the transmitter business.

The problem today is that the FCC's obsession with local service did not contemplate a mostly urban nation and definitely did not consider that in a new Millenium a person's "community" would be their list of friends on Facebook.

In any case, nobody is buying radios today. The "radio" of today is a smartphone, and our competitors are Pandora and Slacker.

 

[MikefromDelaware]

http://rtdna.org/article/am_radio_news_migrating_to_fm#.VVppl_lViko

From Powell E. Way ([email protected]) on the ABDX Yahoo group:



And some FM simulcasts like WHIO-FM and the aforementioned WDEL-FM don't even cover the whole market.

Also, some news/talk stations like WIBC Indianapolis and KIRO Seattle are now heard only on FM.

In my case I can get both WDEL AM and FM at home. So I do choose to listen on FM, I'm 64. I've listened to WDEL since I was a kid, so I'm not a new younger listener, but the Phillies broadcasts sound so much better on FM. I'm looking forward to hearing the Eagles this fall on WDEL-FM. WDEL's AM signal is directional so there are parts of the Wilmington market that doesn't get 1150 AM very well. 101.7 FM fills some of that void. Since Wilmington is so close to both Philly and Baltimore there aren't many opportunities to get an FM signal. My guess is WDEL would have preferred a stronger signal for FM, but you use what's available. Delmarva Broadcasting wouldn't take one of their highly rated FM music stations 93.7 WSTW or 103.7 WXCY and similcast 1150, so 101.7 while not being a flame thrower like 93.7 or 103.7 does make a major difference for WDEL's product.

 

[TheBigA]

In any case, nobody is buying radios today. The "radio" of today is a smartphone, and our competitors are Pandora and Slacker.

Interesting that none of the popular online-only audio services offer news, local or national.

I know there are a lot of former broadcasters working for Apple/Beats, and there are rumors of a service that would be similar to broadcast radio. But it's all focused around music and promoting the Apple infrastructure.

 

[davideduardo]

Interesting that none of the popular online-only audio services offer news, local or national.

I know there are a lot of former broadcasters working for Apple/Beats, and there are rumors of a service that would be similar to broadcast radio. But it's all focused around music and promoting the Apple infrastructure.

I think the whole concept of "community" has changed from "close at hand" to "close to heart". You can have your affinity group via FaceBook or other social media sites where the people may be strewn across your town or across the world. I think this concept is even more accentuated among Millennials than Gen Xers and Boomers, but all of us are far less geoconstrained than just a few years ago.

On the social level, it gives me concern about the rather unique decentralized American form of government and I wonder where future participants in community organizations will come from.

At the radio level, as we use Waze for traffic and dozens of apps for weather, localism is going to be redefined. At the moment, it seems that the non-OTA broadcasters are redefining it for us.

Of course, there are the luddites who think that Pandora is not radio. Right.

 

[TheBigA]

Of course, there are the luddites who think that Pandora is not radio. Right.

But my point is that none of these popular online services are providing audio news. Facebook, Twitter, Spotify, Pandora. None of them.

You have podcasting, but it's not done in an on-going, live format, but rather on-demand. That's OK, but news doesn't happen when you expect it.

 

[davideduardo]

But my point is that none of these popular online services are providing audio news. Facebook, Twitter, Spotify, Pandora. None of them.

You have podcasting, but it's not done in an on-going, live format, but rather on-demand. That's OK, but news doesn't happen when you expect it.

I totally agree with your point, and did not mean to seem in disagreement. I am just wondering if news and "radio" have been divorced by the Internet for, at least, Millennials.

When, during the 80's we were relieved of the requirements for percentages of news, we also unaccustomed listeners to depending on radio for news. Now, younger listeners have likely never heard a station they like doing "real news" and so the circle is broken.

Of course, I am being a pessimist and "awfulizing" the situation to some extent. Maybe.

 

[TheBigA]

Now, younger listeners have likely never heard a station they like doing "real news" and so the circle is broken.

For now...what we've learned is that if someone does it in a way that is cool & different, it may find another life. But for now, it's another one of those things.

 

[Oscar Madison]

Radio news has also been redefined by new media.
News needs to be gathered, prepared and edited - regardless of medium. Those news organizations who adapt are best positioned to thrive in new media.
Radio news - whether the TOH newscast or all news, all the time - has been a one-size fits all commodity. General interest. Keep it short (under 40 seconds) not to strain anybody's short attention span. They pick what's important and you can take (listen) or leave it (tune out).
Newspapers always allowed the reader to select what interested him. Pick the stories you want to read; read as much of the story as you want. New media radio news offers the listener that same flexibility via on-demand or podcasting. Many journalists resist giving up their gatekeeper - we know best - role but the inmates will take over the asylum - sooner or later.
NPR keeps trying to move in this direction and the "member stations" - addicted to their rusty towers - keep trying to thwart it.

Radio needs to recognize its essential service is not an electromagnetic signal. Adapt or perish. Example: Wells-Fargo ran stage coaches to haul money. Now they move money electronically. A dairy used to promote it's "worry-free home delivery." They are gone. Another saw how the customers' needs were changing and opened a chain of convenience stores (featuring dairy products). They are thriving. Major studios once thought their job was selling tickets to movie theaters. The government helped them face reality by forcing them to divest their theaters. Audio creators are at the same kind of cross-roads.