-
Get involved.
We want your input!
Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.
After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.
After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/
Thanks in advance and have fun!
RadioDiscussions Administrators
Community Radio Act
- Thread starter Improv
- Start date
It's thumbs down! Don't get me wrong. I'm not against LPFM. I was one of
the original petitioners before the FCC.
Long ago, I was able to convince the FCC of the need for such a service based
on the fact that this could create small radio stations that could serve ethnic
minorities in America's major cities. Stations like Boston's Touch FM could be
licensed and legal.
But, this bill was a sell out to the NAB.
Now, frequencies that could have provided service to minorities will instead
become repeaters for existing broadcasters.
This was a real let down. The FCC knows how to make rules for broadcasters
better than politicians. They were considering rules that were much better for
LPFM.
The FCC should have been allowed to do their job. The politicians should have
repealed The Radio Preservation Act and let the FCC take it from there.
I am saddened by the fact that the hope for minority radio stations in our inner
cities may be doomed.
My last card was to fax Barack Obama about the consequence of this bill. I told
him that the station called the Voice of Black Boston (in the Boston Globe) will be
silenced and replaced by someone else's translator. President Obama is a cousin
of mine. I hope he will listen to the one voice of dissent.
My original purpose in proposing this service was to bring radio to small towns
who did not have a radio station and to serve ethnic minorities in our inner cities.
Bruce Quinn
the original petitioners before the FCC.
Long ago, I was able to convince the FCC of the need for such a service based
on the fact that this could create small radio stations that could serve ethnic
minorities in America's major cities. Stations like Boston's Touch FM could be
licensed and legal.
But, this bill was a sell out to the NAB.
Now, frequencies that could have provided service to minorities will instead
become repeaters for existing broadcasters.
This was a real let down. The FCC knows how to make rules for broadcasters
better than politicians. They were considering rules that were much better for
LPFM.
The FCC should have been allowed to do their job. The politicians should have
repealed The Radio Preservation Act and let the FCC take it from there.
I am saddened by the fact that the hope for minority radio stations in our inner
cities may be doomed.
My last card was to fax Barack Obama about the consequence of this bill. I told
him that the station called the Voice of Black Boston (in the Boston Globe) will be
silenced and replaced by someone else's translator. President Obama is a cousin
of mine. I hope he will listen to the one voice of dissent.
My original purpose in proposing this service was to bring radio to small towns
who did not have a radio station and to serve ethnic minorities in our inner cities.
Bruce Quinn
Zero chance of any LPFM's in Boston or anywhere out to 128 and, in most cases, out to 495. The dial is just far too packed.
Almost certainly zero chance in any Top 20 market. Very low chance of any new LPFM's in markets down to around #50 or #60...depends somewhat on the market. Oddly enough, even in pretty rural areas, sometimes you're squeezed between two other, medium markets and you can find yourself with no possibilities for LPFM's because of all the rimshotters. And of course, anywhere near a real population center, you're going to find numerous applicants all fighting over just ONE (maybe two) license. And odds are good a time-sharing situation will occur and that generally makes for terrible radio listening; if the owners could've gotten along and collaborated in the first place, there wouldn't have been a time-share.
LPFM was always a bad idea to a real problem. The real answer would have been re-instituting some actual ownership caps instead of the joke that TelComm'96 made them. Instead there was a collective hallucination that if you made a signal small and economically crippled enough, then it would be cheap enough for low-budget "community broadcasters" to somehow scrape together just enough money to get started despite having no real business plan. Quite a few LPFM's have folded an returned their licenses to the FCC since 2000 because they either had a weak business plan or, equally likely, the community they were in just wasn't going to support another radio station.
At this point, the justification for LPFM is very, very low. Most radio listening is done in the car, which an LPFM is poorly-suited for since the signal...by definition...is not meant to cover more than 5.6km radius. The only places where you still see a lot of non-car radio listening is in urban areas with high population density, congested roads, and passable-to-decent public transit. Places where it will, for the most part, be impossible to fit an LPFM. Put that together and add in that there's rarely going to be high demand for a new radio station when any underserved audience is probably getting what they want from satellite radio or internet radio? Very hard to justify a new, small radio station like an LPFM.
As for Boston, I should point out that for most of 1998 to 2005, a lot of the college radio stations in eastern Mass had very weak management structures and they welcomed community volunteers to help out...especially over the summers. A dozen or so organized and shrewd community volunteers could easily have come in, set up shop, and gradually (2 or 3 years) taken over all the aspects that mattered at the station, while still preserving enough student involvement to keep the parent college happy. Granted, that would not work at WHRB, WMBR or WZBC, but those are about 20 times bigger signals than any LPFM's anyways. Since 2005, it's gotten tougher as several colleges have invested more time and money into their stations, and would be sensitive to a takeover attempt (no matter how subtle) by an "outside entity".
That said, there's still likely a lot of potential for community volunteers to just come in and do a decent show at stations like WMFO, WBRS, and even WZBC. You might need to come in at a really ungodly hour but sometimes that "ungodly hour" is prime drivetime around 5 to 7am.
Almost certainly zero chance in any Top 20 market. Very low chance of any new LPFM's in markets down to around #50 or #60...depends somewhat on the market. Oddly enough, even in pretty rural areas, sometimes you're squeezed between two other, medium markets and you can find yourself with no possibilities for LPFM's because of all the rimshotters. And of course, anywhere near a real population center, you're going to find numerous applicants all fighting over just ONE (maybe two) license. And odds are good a time-sharing situation will occur and that generally makes for terrible radio listening; if the owners could've gotten along and collaborated in the first place, there wouldn't have been a time-share.
LPFM was always a bad idea to a real problem. The real answer would have been re-instituting some actual ownership caps instead of the joke that TelComm'96 made them. Instead there was a collective hallucination that if you made a signal small and economically crippled enough, then it would be cheap enough for low-budget "community broadcasters" to somehow scrape together just enough money to get started despite having no real business plan. Quite a few LPFM's have folded an returned their licenses to the FCC since 2000 because they either had a weak business plan or, equally likely, the community they were in just wasn't going to support another radio station.
At this point, the justification for LPFM is very, very low. Most radio listening is done in the car, which an LPFM is poorly-suited for since the signal...by definition...is not meant to cover more than 5.6km radius. The only places where you still see a lot of non-car radio listening is in urban areas with high population density, congested roads, and passable-to-decent public transit. Places where it will, for the most part, be impossible to fit an LPFM. Put that together and add in that there's rarely going to be high demand for a new radio station when any underserved audience is probably getting what they want from satellite radio or internet radio? Very hard to justify a new, small radio station like an LPFM.
As for Boston, I should point out that for most of 1998 to 2005, a lot of the college radio stations in eastern Mass had very weak management structures and they welcomed community volunteers to help out...especially over the summers. A dozen or so organized and shrewd community volunteers could easily have come in, set up shop, and gradually (2 or 3 years) taken over all the aspects that mattered at the station, while still preserving enough student involvement to keep the parent college happy. Granted, that would not work at WHRB, WMBR or WZBC, but those are about 20 times bigger signals than any LPFM's anyways. Since 2005, it's gotten tougher as several colleges have invested more time and money into their stations, and would be sensitive to a takeover attempt (no matter how subtle) by an "outside entity".
That said, there's still likely a lot of potential for community volunteers to just come in and do a decent show at stations like WMFO, WBRS, and even WZBC. You might need to come in at a really ungodly hour but sometimes that "ungodly hour" is prime drivetime around 5 to 7am.
Aaron: There are days when I share your.... can I call it... pessimism about LPFM. In some ways it has been designed to fail. And if it does, then the FCC, the Congress and the industry hopefully will sit down and discuss what went wrong. It would be easy to say: That won't happen. Whats to discuss. They will be glad to see that it failed.
But during this same extended period of time it will take to receive apps, process them, grant some Construction Permits, and then excited people build them, we also have time for the traditional commercial broadcasting world to display more frayed edges, some unraveling of the basic fabric of audio communication.
What we have to hope for is that congress, the NAB, the Community Radio enthusiasts all sit down around the table and maybe admit to one another: "Maybe we are doing things wrong."
I know, I accused you of being the pessimist. I demonstrate that I am the dreamer.
Out of the 800 or so licensed LPFMs, there has to be 50 to 80 of them that are coming close to living up to the dream that originally launched the movement. I'm watching all the stories Google can find on the subject and organization after organization is proclaiming: "There will be thousands (as in multiple thousands) of new stations. In this economy and the already crowded spectrum I will be surprised in the anticipated Application window ends up granting 500 new Construction Permits. If we could get another 50 "poster child examples" out of that crop, maybe it will become possible for researchers to look at the stations that meet some kind of litmus test for qualifying as a "success". And if scholarly research could be done on these 100 or so good examples, and let them all express to the researchers what works for them, and what rules and policy are killing them, maybe, just maybe, we could see the FCC and those who gather around it come up with improved rules for the whole blooming broadcast industry.
Any my wife just nidged me. You didn't tell me the ice cream truck was in the neighborhood. So, where did you get that Dreamsicle?
But during this same extended period of time it will take to receive apps, process them, grant some Construction Permits, and then excited people build them, we also have time for the traditional commercial broadcasting world to display more frayed edges, some unraveling of the basic fabric of audio communication.
What we have to hope for is that congress, the NAB, the Community Radio enthusiasts all sit down around the table and maybe admit to one another: "Maybe we are doing things wrong."
I know, I accused you of being the pessimist. I demonstrate that I am the dreamer.
Out of the 800 or so licensed LPFMs, there has to be 50 to 80 of them that are coming close to living up to the dream that originally launched the movement. I'm watching all the stories Google can find on the subject and organization after organization is proclaiming: "There will be thousands (as in multiple thousands) of new stations. In this economy and the already crowded spectrum I will be surprised in the anticipated Application window ends up granting 500 new Construction Permits. If we could get another 50 "poster child examples" out of that crop, maybe it will become possible for researchers to look at the stations that meet some kind of litmus test for qualifying as a "success". And if scholarly research could be done on these 100 or so good examples, and let them all express to the researchers what works for them, and what rules and policy are killing them, maybe, just maybe, we could see the FCC and those who gather around it come up with improved rules for the whole blooming broadcast industry.
Any my wife just nidged me. You didn't tell me the ice cream truck was in the neighborhood. So, where did you get that Dreamsicle?
All kinds of new stations? Sounds like those ads for HD radio...
There are some with creative people, interesting programming, community-based such as
WOOL-LP in or nr Bellows Falls, VT, etc. But I get the idea that your "community radio",
even if you can find a way to shoehorn it in, might be more like a rebroadcaster of some
church from Idaho. Yeah, really local.
Agreed on college radio, signals, etc. And when it comes to people coming in to college
radio, for some time now there have been Hispanic-related shows on WMWM..using a legit signal rather than setting up some pirate in Peabody or Salem or something.
There are some with creative people, interesting programming, community-based such as
WOOL-LP in or nr Bellows Falls, VT, etc. But I get the idea that your "community radio",
even if you can find a way to shoehorn it in, might be more like a rebroadcaster of some
church from Idaho. Yeah, really local.
Agreed on college radio, signals, etc. And when it comes to people coming in to college
radio, for some time now there have been Hispanic-related shows on WMWM..using a legit signal rather than setting up some pirate in Peabody or Salem or something.
True. There are no LPFM frequencies under the current LPFM rules. There are no LPFM
frequencies in Boston created by the Community Radio Act either.
Howerever, translators operate under different technical rules and there are just a few
frequencies that could become translaters in Boston. Dutchman is right. These should
be licensed ethnic low power stations instead of translator frequencies.
Dutchman is also correct. Minorities in our inner cities have been sold out by this bill.
The FCC also needs to act on Low Power AM.
frequencies in Boston created by the Community Radio Act either.
Howerever, translators operate under different technical rules and there are just a few
frequencies that could become translaters in Boston. Dutchman is right. These should
be licensed ethnic low power stations instead of translator frequencies.
Dutchman is also correct. Minorities in our inner cities have been sold out by this bill.
The FCC also needs to act on Low Power AM.
Creating more stations, of any type, merely compounds the
problems of staying in business. Somebody has to pay the
expenses. Unless you are a non-profit with deep pockets,
this usually means revenues raised through advertising. If
you really think that you can make the numbers work, buy
an existing station, change the format, and have at it.
To the usual suspects - if you can't swing it for several
hours a week, you definitely can't swing it on a full-time basis...
True low power stations cover a very small geographic area.
Broadcasting, in general, is not the best way to serve
these "communities"...
problems of staying in business. Somebody has to pay the
expenses. Unless you are a non-profit with deep pockets,
this usually means revenues raised through advertising. If
you really think that you can make the numbers work, buy
an existing station, change the format, and have at it.
To the usual suspects - if you can't swing it for several
hours a week, you definitely can't swing it on a full-time basis...
True low power stations cover a very small geographic area.
Broadcasting, in general, is not the best way to serve
these "communities"...
N1WVQ said:
outside of 8am to 4 pm, a Hindi (primarily) music station out of Toronto CIAO 530
1610 and 1700 are indeed underutilized. compared to 3 stations duking eachother out on 1650, 1690, korean on 1660, voix divine on 1670 spanish on 1680 soleil on 1710 misc TISs on 1620/30 and Signal on 1640 anywyas
http://radio-locator.com/cgi-bin/vacant?select=city&city=boston&state=ma&x=0&y=0 is pretty accurate wrt current usage, isnt it
WLYNgm said:
Your message ended a bit too soon. You failed to share with us what is the best way to serve these "communities"....
If a group of Koreans within a metro area are concentrated in an area 5 or 6 miles in diameter and their status within the general area is in flux as they mature in speaking the language, starting their small business, establishing their churches and becoming financially entrenched... what is the best way to serve such a community?
I would assume the best way would also work in a community made up of Latinos, a community of Brazilians, a community of artists and writers, a community of single moms, or a community of gay and lesbian people who for some reason happen to be concentrated in a definable, small geography.
E
Elizabeth_F
Guest
Flying-Dutchman said:
I think I believe this guy. But, why is this not how the story is being
reported?
Elizabeth_F said:
gotta love "Congressionally mandated $2.2 million study conducted by the MITRE Corporation " pork
to state the obvious facrt that a 50 watt signal on a crappy antenna 20 feet off the ground 0.6 MHZ away from a 98000 watt signal on the top of blue hill is not an issue, Technically speaking.
in my experience, single-channel spacing is fine. theres about a block in Mattapan where 90.1 interferes with WZBC, and thats fairly far from Newton anyways.
In my experience...as someone who professional measured signal quality for a living...it most definitely isn't. Especially when you consider HD Radio which, as much as many people hate it, is a reality that must be acknowledged. With HD, even second-adjacent gets a little tricky at times...and even at low powers. There's a 5w translator barely 1/2 mile away from our 50w translator on our second adjacent. Both stations' protected service contours encompass the other's xmitter sites and then some. But since we have HD on our translator, there's definitely some fuzz on their signal on our campus where our translator is. And this is on a really good radio (JVC KD-HDW10...amazingly good adjacent-signal rejection).
Third-adjacent usually isn't a problem, true. But in the digital world, for FM at least, second-adjacent is cutting it too close...and first adjacent shouldn't even be talked about.
And Mattapan is still well inside WZBC's protected service contour. Why should WZBC suffer so an illegal pirate can be on the air?
For that matter, on YOUR radio it might be a block. On a crappy clock radio, it might be ten blocks. Who knows? Various radios have pretty widely varying reception abilities depending on internal components (DSP, filters, etc) and their antennas.
Heh. Much as I gotta give props to my homies in MITRE and MITREtek :
I can't argue with this. That study was Congress trying to legislate its way out of something it shouldn't have inserted itself into in the first place.And I can't complain about needless signal studies. One of those on PAVE PAWS helped paid my rent for half a year thanks to overly-nervous residents on Cape Cod. ;D
Elizabeth_F said:
Just chalk it up to human frailties. I have been beating the search engines to death to see what is being said about, and reported about the new legislation.
I am reminded of the fable we were introduced to in grade school about the group of blind men assigned to explore the elephant and report what the elephant was like.
We hear mostly what groups with lobbyists or good internal lobbying skills want us to hear in hopes we will see it their way. Guys like Bruce mess up their party. May his tribe increase!
M
MickeyD
Guest
Flying-Dutchman said:
Boston has many pirates in Boston that are doing quite well. LPFM was never supposed to be for large cities wsa it?
That is rather the irony, isn't it?
Not exactly. The public pressure to make more opportunities for access to the airwaves, which led to LPFM, was coming mostly out of urban areas. But LPFM...even the never-implemented LP10 (10 watt) class of station...was never meant to be possible in urban areas. There's just no way: the dials were already packed solid...most recently thanks to Docket 80-90 that eliminated almost all (if not just "all") the rimshot opportunities.
That's really what exposed LPFM as a total political sham: to the Average Joe, it LOOKED like a solution to providing access to the airwaves for non-billionaires. But it never was and never will be. Especially since so much LPFM implementation happened AFTER the Great Translator Invasion of 2003, but LPFMs were not deemed "primary" over translators.
Now if the FCC decided that translators could be bumped by an LPFM using the same technical facility as the translator...THAT would be a little more "answering the public's demands". But even then, it wouldn't help the big urban markets much. Notice how few translators are in the major markets? Again - the dial's been packed pretty full for a long time. This is especially true in Boston where the non-comm band is jammed solid with two dozen little college stations.
Excellent observations, Aaron.
For people living out in the rural areas, it is easy to imagine that LPFM could work in the cities. After all, all the "working people" (labor?) all live in this little part of town, and all the Irish live over here, and all the immigrants live over here in this part of the city and all the artsy people with their liberal ways are clustered over here. Right?
Public Policy over the last 30 to 50 years has worked to homogenize our cities where possible. We are destroying those monster low-income housing projects and replacing them with subsidized living spaces all intermingled with other income levels. (Well, were trying.) Interstate highways broke up earlier urban housing patterns. School integration changed where people live. As we modernize public transportation in the cities, people are seeking out places to live in uncharted territory becase the bus or the train runs there. In most cities people who are excited about implementing the dream of LPFM Community Radio are facing that fact that any "community" of people they define that needs to be served are scattered 20 to 40 miles in every direction. A 3-1/2 mile radius just doesn't meet the need.... even if the frequencies can be found.
Here is what I project. Where frequencies can be found, stations will be established as a "legitimacy marker". It will give the organization credibility. It is much easier to get "press credentials" when you can write your request on a letterhead that indicates the FCC have recognized your organization and granted call letters. Keeping a volunteer not-for-profit organization focused and content to "remain on the ranch" is enhanced when leadership can use the FCC regs and the IRS 501(c)3 rules and leashes to rope in the more free-spirited members and volunteers.
The real technology that cements the success of these new operations will be how well they harness Podcasting, Web Streaming, sub-channels on more powerful transmitters and other methods of distribution we are too focused on the past to recognize. But having that LPFM license as a crutch and a leash will hopefully enable those organizations to outperform those who are Podcast only, Stream only, etc.
Also, if the day comes when congress and the FCC recognize that 100 watts at 100 feet just doesn't meet the need, we have to assume those pioneers who try and make the flea-power work will be able to be at the head of the line if better allocations are ever possible.
For people living out in the rural areas, it is easy to imagine that LPFM could work in the cities. After all, all the "working people" (labor?) all live in this little part of town, and all the Irish live over here, and all the immigrants live over here in this part of the city and all the artsy people with their liberal ways are clustered over here. Right?
Public Policy over the last 30 to 50 years has worked to homogenize our cities where possible. We are destroying those monster low-income housing projects and replacing them with subsidized living spaces all intermingled with other income levels. (Well, were trying.) Interstate highways broke up earlier urban housing patterns. School integration changed where people live. As we modernize public transportation in the cities, people are seeking out places to live in uncharted territory becase the bus or the train runs there. In most cities people who are excited about implementing the dream of LPFM Community Radio are facing that fact that any "community" of people they define that needs to be served are scattered 20 to 40 miles in every direction. A 3-1/2 mile radius just doesn't meet the need.... even if the frequencies can be found.
Here is what I project. Where frequencies can be found, stations will be established as a "legitimacy marker". It will give the organization credibility. It is much easier to get "press credentials" when you can write your request on a letterhead that indicates the FCC have recognized your organization and granted call letters. Keeping a volunteer not-for-profit organization focused and content to "remain on the ranch" is enhanced when leadership can use the FCC regs and the IRS 501(c)3 rules and leashes to rope in the more free-spirited members and volunteers.
The real technology that cements the success of these new operations will be how well they harness Podcasting, Web Streaming, sub-channels on more powerful transmitters and other methods of distribution we are too focused on the past to recognize. But having that LPFM license as a crutch and a leash will hopefully enable those organizations to outperform those who are Podcast only, Stream only, etc.
Also, if the day comes when congress and the FCC recognize that 100 watts at 100 feet just doesn't meet the need, we have to assume those pioneers who try and make the flea-power work will be able to be at the head of the line if better allocations are ever possible.
- Status