Let's make it clear---that's a quote from Saul Levine, owner of KMZT (1260) in Los Angeles, from the article.
Fifty years too late?
To sustain the money stream it gets from AM station owners in license fees? Self-interest often trumps public interest when you're talking about government.
I'm finding that the majority of the public nowadays seemingly has little to no interest in anything that doesn't have a screen or constant connectivity to some sort of social media or streaming platform.
Or, perhaps, if said cars still have some means of connecting to something via 3.5mm headphone jack, either directly or via an adapter, one can connect their choice of portable AM radio and listen that way.
Where will one buy a portable am radio?
Not sure if you're being facetious,
, but Amazon sells AM / FM portable radios for emergency use. I live in the hills outside San Francisco, and in my housing community, all the residents are advised to have a "Go" kit packed with a radio, food rations, extra water, etc., in case of immediate evacuation due to wildfire. The fire season in California has been bad this past decade.On the other side of the coin, if 16% of the listening public listens to AM at least part of the time, shouldn't that be enough justification?
Where everyone else shops for every other item possible: online retailers.
Every year, on average, six percent of the U.S. population buys a new car.
Administrative fees cover the cost of paperwork at the Commission. Was never intended as a revenue source.
That's not what I've read here, I believe, from David. He can correct me, of course, if I misunderstood, but I thought I read that the FCC wants AM stations to remain on the air because the agency counts on them as a revenue stream.
It's a revenue stream that covers the costs of administering AM licenses, including paperwork, reviews of sales and enforcement of violations, inspections, etc. It is a revenue stream, not a profit center.
