Could this mean the end to small market radio?

[richmcdonald]

Do any of you radio geeks know what this is all about? Could it truly be the end of small market radio? We all seen how wonderful deregulation worked out. : I dont trust iy, I would like to know what you insiders think about this? The FCC is taking comments on these proposals. We can add our comments to the record.

Check it out here http://www.helpradionow.com

 

[DeVasher]

I am not sure this is the end of small market radio. It is the end of a bunch of move-in stations making up a cluster, or creative city of license changes like what the boys on North Shadeland have done. In Indy it only effects most of the clusters with the exception of Clear Channel. Everyone else has a station or more licensed to somewhere other than their current studio. Cumulus is really screwed on this one (Noblesville, Fishers, and Lawrence) Radio One (Indy, Greenwood and Speedway) Emmis (Indy, Indy, Indy, Shelbyville) Entercom (Indy, Indy, Greenfield) Raven (Indy, Franklin) Disney is licensed to Plainfield with studio in Carmel, Continental (Danville, Indy)

Having a live body at the station 24/7 is a fairly good idea I think. The only station around here that really is equipped and staffed to cover any sort of natural disaster is WIBC...everyone else is voice tracked.

The problem remains....broadcasters got greedy and drove the price up for the stations they acquired in the "heydey" of consolidation. Now that business has slipped a little...they are having trouble making their note payments....and have had to cut everything else. Sort of like being house poor.

 

[Radio55]

I am actually for this proposal. I never thought it made sense to have one person be responsible for six stations. I remember coming to work one weekend morning to get ready for a remote, and the building was EMPTY. No one there! And we had three stations going on computers. The times we live in requires the FCC to step in and make owners responsible for their stations. There needs to be, I would suggest one person for each 2 stations in a cluster. One person can reasonably keep track of two stations.
As far as Cutting back so only their most profitable services and day-parts remain ... stations are already doing that to the downfall of the product. Listeners know there is no one there at the station, so why listen? If an owner is going to buy 6,7 stations, they need to operate those stations. If this proposal passes (or something similar) it will only be better for the public... and create jobs.

 

[butlerguy03]

What would this mean to high school broadcasters? Would we have to have a person in-studio 24/7? I would hope there would be an exemption for colleges & school systems...

 

[justalurker]

Unfortunately this is more than just turning the clock back 13 years and requiring stations to be "staffed" again. This proposal restores a lot of rules better left in the past.

Just repealing the "unattended operation" portion of the rules would roll us back 13 years ... and if you can remember that far back look to see how "attended" stations were actually run. State of the art (of the time) automation running with some "operator" who managed to get the FCC operation license sitting around watching dials. Some stations were run by wire ... permanent remote control connections to central monitoring locations (similar to alarm companies). All of this while "attended" operation was required. "Unattended operation" was more of a recognition of how stations were being run (without serious issues) than an off the map solution without a problem.

I wish those pushing to reverse the rules would PROVE that there are problems that would be solved by reversing the rules. How many stations have operated illegally because there was no one watching their dials 24x7 (only taking occasional readings)? How many stations operated silent (no audio, just carrier) or out of spec beyond the 3 minutes or 3 hours that the law requires the station needs to be corrected? Is there a problem?

The problem I see is the "community of license" shuffling. Claiming (in my opinion lying to the FCC) to provide local service to some community lucky to have their own post office and town council while really serving the bigger metro market (and often ignoring that named community). Extra layers of "community oversight" are not going to fix that problem. Those that were playing games 15-20 years ago will return to the same games ... they have the experience.

This proposal is a solution in search of a problem.

 

[virgilstreetnc]

There has been a lot of noise raised on the topic of 24/7 staffing. While there has been very little evidence that stations are not offering proper emergency/weather service when needed, I believe there should be a requirement for some origination of programming from the city of license and there should be requirements for ascertainment of community needs.

The localism topic has snowballed as a result of what happens when stations are purchased and then do not serve the community of license originally intended. Most of the Indianapolis stations would fall into this category. Something does have to be done to get these stations back to serving the intended cities of license, not just the surrounding metropolitan area.

It is not a right to own a radio station. It is a privilege given by the public to serve the public. Profit is great, but public service is suppose to come first.

Regarding the 24/7 staffing requirement, that likely will not appear in any final legislation, as even Senators have voice support for the radio industry on this matter.

 

[Goat Rodeo Cowboy]

The bad news about these proposals is that too many issues are trying to be covered by one stroke of the brush.

Whether or not one licensee should own 4 or 6 stations, put them in one building, and have one person on duty is a question of multiple ownership as much as it is about opertors on duty. One of the circumstances that apparently triggered this knee-jerk was the claim that emergency officials out in Fargo ND could get the radio station on the phone to ask that an evacuation order be broadcast. At three A.M. does it matter whether one person puts the announcement on six stations or is it better that six different people do one station each. Hello? Is any bureaucrat running with brain on automation?

Now, lets go to West Seedtick, OK where some enterprising person has figured out they can run this fleapower station in this people-sparse geography. If the station is built into what was the garage of the licensee's residence, and the licensee is asleep at 3 AM with the phone turned on, and can be in the studio in about 37 seconds, is being awake "while on duty" going to be part of this rule?

Now lets go to Bucksnort, TN. (Unlike West Seedtick there actually is a Bucksnort) Transmitter up on a ridge out in the country with no sleeping quarters so we have an operator on duty, reportedly awake. Some listener calls to report strange visions and sounds that indicate catastrophe. This operator on duty is probably required to remain at the station (the control point?) rather than go see for himself/herself what caused the reported commotion. If the operator is stuck to the control point, and can't raise anyone on the phone, what service can the station render that it can't or won't under today's rules?

I think it is good that we (and the FCC)(and the industry) are having this conversation. The proposed rules do not give me a warm, fuzzy feeling.

 

[Flying-Dutchman]

I'm not worried about these new proposed rules. I believe radio stations should help put their
community of license on the map. This does not mean you ignore the population in your coverage
area.

An operator on duty is also good. Someone needs to make sure that tornado warning gets
on the air.

 

[Goat Rodeo Cowboy]

I'm not worried about these new proposed rules. I believe radio stations should help put their
community of license on the map. This does not mean you ignore the population in your coverage
area.

An operator on duty is also good. Someone needs to make sure that tornado warning gets
on the air.

My guess is that you are not the guy responsible for gathering up the cash each payday to meet the payroll for a small radio station.

 

[Flying-Dutchman]

Wish you were right about that one, sometimes. If I couldn't pay someone to do a job, I just did it
myself. It can be done.

 

[Ur-A-Dawg]

Bruce Quinn, Dutchman, I see you have applications pending to build new stations in some more
small towns. Seymour, Yeoman, Noblesville, and Wolcott.

 

[virgilstreetnc]

Wish you were right about that one, sometimes. If I couldn't pay someone to do a job, I just did it
myself. It can be done.

Regarding 24/7 staffing, being a single owner/operator who does all air shifts and sleeps in the back of the building may work for some small operators, but that's not the norm and shouldn't be required.

Small operators with a professional attitude and concern toward the community shouldn't be saddled with overnight expense of having someone sitting there in case a storm cloud blows over the town.

However, if there is severe weather, or emergency situation, it is the responsibility of the owner or operator to have someone on call to immediately get to the station and open up the airwaves if necessary. That would seem to be the wise alternative. And I would be correct in assuming most sincere radio owners already have this sort of system in place.

Public officials, those in position to issue evacuation order, tornado warnings, et al, should have an emergency number to reach local radio stations, even if it's the owner's home or cell phone.

That would solve that problem.

 

[Ur-A-Dawg]

I think the point was that you can comply without spending a great deal of money. I don't think he meant that owners should be required to sleep in the station at all hours.

I remember once reading about an old man who owned a station near Boston, MA who ran a station just as you described. He'd cook his dinner in the station while doing a radio show. He also slept at the station.

 

[Kent]

Do any of you radio geeks know what this is all about? Could it truly be the end of small market radio? We all seen how wonderful deregulation worked out. : I dont trust iy, I would like to know what you insiders think about this? The FCC is taking comments on these proposals. We can add our comments to the record.
Check it out here http://www.helpradionow.com

Will it kill small market radio? Probably not. However, these proposals are almost certain to cause exactly the opposite of their intent. They'll increase consolidation, increase automated programming, and further inconvenience the general public.

Consolidation will increase because of the people expense of 24/7 staffing. The majority of radio stations in this country make less than local fast food franchises. As their bottom line gets cut further, you'll find these small operators consolidating. They'll increase automation by having a single staff 24/7 instead of a separate staff for each station for half the day. Of course, this means fewer jobs, not more like many jocks seem to be hoping.

The public will be further inconvenienced because stations would have to have main studios in their communities of license. This means no more centrally located facilities. The majority of people who could visit the radio station during their lunch hour would have to take time off of work in order to pick up prizes or view the public inspection file. It will also mean further expenses on already low paid jocks. They once had a 2 mile commute to work, but it's now 15 or 20 one way. Not good at $3.00+ per gallon pricing! Another headache for jocks is that owners aren't likely to invest in state of the art facilities if they have to have separate ones for each station. Say goodbye to Adobe Audition and hello again to razorblades and tape!

Also, those who claim it will be easier to reach people at the station if someone is there 24/7 don't seem to realize that they still won't be able to reach anyone in the overnights. Stations that were previously operating 24/7 will simply sign off after dark. So, if the service you're getting isn't enough for you in the overnights, it will be even less if these rules pass.

Better solutions to these problems include fixing EAS if it's not adequately serving the listening public. We have the technology to make it do anything we want. Also, requiring stations to have a contingency plan for how to handle emergencies when unattended would be a much better approach. We can solve the problem of getting public file information to the communities by posting that information on websites and providing it free of charge to those who request it without having to go to the studio.

 

[Ur-A-Dawg]

I think some idealists have proposed some rules that just don't make good business sense.
But, it's not the end of the world. We will survive.

I doubt the FCC will pass even half of Bruce Quinn's or Marty Hensley's proposals.

 

[media1170]

I have tried to locate the FCC writing concerning the proposed requirement of station staffing. Can't locate it, maybe Flying Dutchman can find it. Don't forget localism issues.
BUT, I don't think the proposal specifies 24/7 but "hours of operation".

I can see why city of license service proposals are causing ownership "heartburn" concerns since most stations don't provide any real service for their city of license. Indy is a real case in point-"rim-shot" hell. Only a hand full of the FM's are licensed to Indy yet the words, Brownsburg, Plainfield, Franklin, Greenfield, Greenwood, Shelbyville, Fishers are seldom heard beyond a whisper under a set of call letters proclaiming some sort of Indianapolis radio greatness.

Last time I was in the area I tried to listen to WARM 93.9 to see how they identified themselves. No call letters or city ID was heard , so I guess the FCC rules don't apply to that station. Nice trick. I expected to hear something along the lines of :

WRWM-Broadcasting from a closet at WFMS on the northeast side of Indianapolis for Fishers Indiana!!!!!! Coming Soon: serving all of Indianapolis from Lawrence, Indiana!!!!

Lucky for Lawrence that they will be getting a new radio station. I can just see the WRWM Good Guys float parading down Franklin Road led by the Lawrence Central High School Band. The Mayor, Paul Ricketts, welcoming the station to the city, presenting the manager of the station with the "key to the city" and the civil pride that would flow to the city now with its own radio voice.

Yes, I can't wait.

 

[Ur-A-Dawg]

The NAB and the IBA will work hard to shut this down!

 

[virgilstreetnc]

I have tried to locate the FCC writing concerning the proposed requirement of station staffing. Can't locate it, maybe Flying Dutchman can find it.

Always good practice to read the first post of a thread, which lists this site: http://www.helpradionow.com/

where you will find the FCC docket info listed.

hope that helps.

 

[justalurker]

One of the circumstances that apparently triggered this knee-jerk was the claim that emergency officials out in Fargo ND could get the radio station on the phone to ask that an evacuation order be broadcast.

The Indiana State Police can trigger an EAS that will play on stations that decide to rebroadcast such things. This is a better solution than requiring a station to be the link between law enforcement and the community when the message CAN get out faster via EAS. (Remember that word CAN.)

An operator on duty is also good. Someone needs to make sure that tornado warning gets
on the air.

No, they don't.

The EAS rules require three things. Two of them are tests ... relaying a monthly test from another station once each month and creating their own weekly test once a week except during the week that the monthly test is forwarded or a week when an actual alert is sent. The ONLY other message required by the FCC is the national alert. The national alert has NEVER been used (except in error). Even the tragedy of 9/11 did not trigger a national alert.

EAS rules DO NOT require a station to transmit tornado warnings ... even if there is a person on the air standing there in front of a mic running a live broadcast they are NOT required to give tornado warnings.

So you are asking stations to be staffed in order to perform a duty the station is required to perform?

 

[Oldbones]

I can see why city of license service proposals are causing ownership "heartburn" concerns since most stations don't provide any real service for their city of license. Indy is a real case in point-"rim-shot" hell. Only a hand full of the FM's are licensed to Indy yet the words, Brownsburg, Plainfield, Franklin, Greenfield, Greenwood, Shelbyville, Fishers are seldom heard beyond a whisper under a set of call letters proclaiming some sort of Indianapolis radio greatness.

The whole "city of license" thing is out-dated and should be scrapped. It serves no purpose today. How exactly would a full-market signal provide "real service" to their city of license? Is this to the exclusion of everyone else? Should WZPL only allow businesses in Greenfield to advertise there? Run lost dog reports (but only if the owner lives in Greenfield)? Of course not.

The Indiana State Police can trigger an EAS that will play on stations that decide to rebroadcast such things. This is a better solution than requiring a station to be the link between law enforcement and the community when the message CAN get out faster via EAS. (Remember that word CAN.)

Unfortunately, the authorities are often the weakest link in the chain. I don't live in Indiana, but if the state police there are as inept at getting the word out as they are in the state I live in, no matter what system you use will be little more than a doorstop. Indeed, back in the "good old days" when jocks used to have to make police calls every shift, more often than not you got little or no information.

At the last station I worked at, several months went by with no Required Monthly TEst. Finally, when the state broadcaster's association investigated it, they discovered that there'd been some personnel changes at state police headquarters, and no one there knew how to send the test, or even that they were supposed to!