After the power increase, interference remediation is an uphill climb

[dumber than a box of hair]

According to the R&O on the HD power increase, getting interference complaints remediated is going to resemble a salmon attempting to spawn and instead being grabbed by a bear looking for food. Paragraphs 27-30 of the R&O (available at http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-208A1.pdf) basically tell a broadcaster to work it out with the allegedly interfering station first, then complain to the FCC...but don't bother unless/until you have six interference complaints from listeners within your protected analog contour, and oh yes, make sure you fully verify and document them or the Enforcement Bureau won't give you the time of day. The one part of this procedure that makes at least some sense: The FCC has 90 days to act on each complaint, and if they fail to act, the interfering station must reduce its digital carriers.

If these people had the first clue about how the real world works, they would have known that this is effectively saying to broadcasters "screw you" (possibly, of course, their intent all along). More likely than not, "that annoying noise on my radio" will cause tune-out, not an interference complaint.

 

[Savage]

I want to say right here and now:

Upon the first actual verifiable case of interference remediation actively adjudicated by the FCC involving HD Radio at an increased digital injection level, including a formal opinion and order to the interfering station: I will buy dinner for the first person reporting same.

You can notify me of this historic occurrence by PM.

Don't everybody go hungry, now.

 

[Savage]

Of COURSE there will be appropriate safeguards and "interference remediation!"

But first:

"You must cut downnnnn......the GREATEST TREE in the forest.......wiiiiith.....a HERRING!!!!" :-\

 

[BRNout]

What I really want to know is: who at Ibiquity and/or the HD Alliance keeps greasing palms over at the FCC?

They totally have their way with every FCC ruling, even when it clearly represents allowing violations in the FCC"s own regulatory infrastructure. Why is this? Because it honestly comes off as some form of corruption - based on what I see and read.

Secondly, Obambi's administration is supposedly a booster of community-based LPFM. How can that possibly work when you've just decreased the capacity of the FM band by 50%?

 

[TheBigA]

As I said in another thread, I believe this is the first time the FCC has actually addressed the interference issue. The fact they're laying out procedures is way beyond where they've been for the past 5 years.

That being said, they're also laying off staff at the Media Bureau, so don't be surprised if your documentation goes without response.

More likely than not, "that annoying noise on my radio" will cause tune-out, not an interference complaint.

First of all, there's no documentation that says HD causes tune out. But the second part is that tune-out is not the FCC's problem. Interference is. But at the same time, the FCC policy for the past 25 years has been to cram as many stations as possible into the existing spectrum. Those two things conflict. So they've ignored the interference issue.

What I really want to know is: who at Ibiquity and/or the HD Alliance keeps greasing palms over at the FCC?

Why is it that people always suspect bribery? This is just plain dumb. The fact is that iBiquity doesn’t have enough money to bribe the FCC, and the Alliance is broke. So no one is greasing palms. As I said, this is simply long-standing FCC policy that has been further reinforced by Congress. No one has to bribe someone to make a stupid decision. That kind of thing happens all the time. It brings new meaning to the term “no brainer.”

Repeat after me: The FCC doesn’t care about OTA broadcasting. If it all goes away tomorrow, they’re fine with that. If broadcasters are interfering with each other, too bad. All they care about is cramming more stations onto the existing bands, either with HD Radio or LPFM. As I’ve said many times, I see no difference between the two. They’re both bad for existing stations. But they’re both priorities for the FCC and Congress. And it has nothing to do with bribery.

Secondly, Obambi's administration is supposedly a booster of community-based LPFM. How can that possibly work when you've just decreased the capacity of the FM band by 50%?

I refer you to the previous paragraph. They don’t care about how it will work. They care about the policy of cramming more stations onto existing bands. They are policy wonks, not engineers. They fine with giving away second and third adjacents for LPFM. If it causes interference, they’ll deal with it exactly the way they’ve dealt with HD. Ignore ignore ignore. If it causes tune-out, so what? Not their problem.

 

[Savage]

BigA, you're probably right about bribery not being a factor. You are also right about how the FCC and Congress would like to see OTA broadcasting - ALL radio and TV too - go away tomorrow. There is a political dimension to this. OTA broadcasting and the Internet are the two main avenues for government watchdogs and critics to report to the public what the government class are up to, and that's not good for them. So there is a two-prong long-term approach going on here to silence dissent: get rid of broadcasting and regulate the hell out of the Web. Then they can tell us what to think, and tell us to like it, too.

But you're wrong in your declaration that this is the first instance of the FCC addressing IBOC interference. Almost identical language was used in the initial 2002 IBOC R&O. The same procedures were set forth (minus the requirement that six active, informed and technically savvy complainants must suddenly surface within your interference-free contour) and those procedures haven't been observed - not even once.

BTW: regarding the "six complainants" threshold requirement. Within my WYSL NIF of 13.687 mV/m reside something like 7000 persons. Yet I have to present the same number of consumer interference complaints as a Class B FM in Philly with a contour encompassing, say, 2.5 million people. VERY fair. :

 

[TheBigA]

But you're wrong in your declaration that this is the first instance of the FCC addressing IBOC interference. Almost identical language was used in the initial 2002 IBOC R&O.

I figured if anyone would know, it's you. Thanks for the info, but that tells me that they won't be doing anything about interference. And also doesn't bode well for those who complain about LPFM interference.

 

[BRNout]

First of all, there's no documentation that says HD causes tune out. But the second part is that tune-out is not the FCC's problem. Interference is. But at the same time, the FCC policy for the past 25 years has been to cram as many stations as possible into the existing spectrum. Those two things conflict. So they've ignored the interference issue.

Just because it's not documented does not mean that it doesn't exist. I am not aware of anyone truly studying the issue in a scientific way.

Why is it that people always suspect bribery? This is just plain dumb. The fact is that iBiquity doesn’t have enough money to bribe the FCC, and the Alliance is broke. So no one is greasing palms. As I said, this is simply long-standing FCC policy that has been further reinforced by Congress. No one has to bribe someone to make a stupid decision. That kind of thing happens all the time. It brings new meaning to the term “no brainer.”

Yeah, I was just venting a bit. I actually agree with this statement, the FCC is so dumb that I believe it.

Repeat after me: The FCC doesn’t care about OTA broadcasting. If it all goes away tomorrow, they’re fine with that. If broadcasters are interfering with each other, too bad. All they care about is cramming more stations onto the existing bands, either with HD Radio or LPFM.

It sure seems that way. Interference on both main broadcast bands is getting worse and worse and the FCC has greased the skids to make it happen.

Clearly they have ZERO engineering savvy - if they did, they never would have allowed the IBOC system's use on the MW band. Talk about no-brainers.

 

[TheBigA]

Just because it's not documented does not mean that it doesn't exist.

That is not a justification for making crap up.

As I said, like WMD in Iraq.

Clearly they have ZERO engineering savvy

No. They have zero engineers. And this bureau is just one small example of all the other mis-management taking place.

 

[Play Freebird]

Why is it that people always suspect bribery? This is just plain dumb. The fact is that iBiquity doesn’t have enough money to bribe the FCC, and the Alliance is broke. So no one is greasing palms. As I said, this is simply long-standing FCC policy that has been further reinforced by Congress.

Alright, so maybe iBiquity and the Alliance are "broke" -- but how about the NAB, which works for both of them? Needless to say, outside of an early period when Eureka-147 still was under consideration, NAB has been pushing IBOC for years -- and filed comments in strong support of both nighttime AM digital operation and the FM digital power increase. And of course, NAB (which claims to speak for all broadcasters) is very pleased with this week's FCC decision:

http://www.nab.org/documents/newsRoom/pressRelease.asp?id=2181

Perhaps "bribery" is the wrong term, but NAB (like most lobbying groups) certainly peddles money-backed influence and is known to impose not-so-veiled threats against lawmakers and FCC regulators who don't cooperate. Here's a good article explaining how the system works:

http://www.ajr.org/Article.asp?id=3748

 

[TheBigA]

Alright, so maybe iBiquity and the Alliance are "broke" -- but how about the NAB, which works for both of them?

I think you're looking for a crime that doesn't exist. Just because someone's happy about a decision doesn't mean they bribed the FCC. And quoting a 6 year old blog doesn't mean a thing. If the NAB was so powerful, they would have been able to kill LPFM. They didn't.

The government's agenda means more than any influence, threats, or money. At the end of the day, the government wants to increase the number of radio stations. That means they will promote HD radio and LPFM. The NAB doesn't have to do a thing to help that process along. They can claim victory, but I doubt they did a thing to make it happen beyond a couple of 3 martini lunches...which they would have done anyway.

 

[Len14043]

I don't see the need for interference mediation in most of the country except parts of the Northeast Corridor. HD radio, like many other things, will be better in the Red states. ;D

 

[bigtom101]

HD radio, like many other things, will be better in the Red states. ;D

Remember: it's not the size of your stick, but how you use it. At least that's what the ladies have told me....

 

[BRNout]

That is not a justification for making crap up.

As I said, like WMD in Iraq.

Yeah, tell the Kurds that.

 

[audioguy]

I have developed an absolutely fool proof solution for IBOC interference. It works 100% of the time for both AM and FM.

Just turn off the radio! You won't hear any interference. Guaranteed.

Wonder if the general public will figure this out?

 

[landtuna]

I have developed an absolutely fool proof solution for IBOC interference. It works 100% of the time for both AM and FM.

Just turn off the radio! You won't hear any interference. Guaranteed.

Wonder if the general public will figure this out?

I think many of them already have.