FCC to consider ongoing operation of existing FM6/Franken FMs, Expanded FM Band and Elimination of Reserved Band Protection Requirements

[davideduardo]

Didn't the FCC do this back in 2009 & People wasn't interested in Expaning the FM Band down to 76 MHz

That part of the spectrum was in use by other services in the US. Specifically, TV channels 5 and 6.

See our collaborator Miche's fine article at https://recnet.com/alternate-spectrum-76-88

What's so different now?

It would require reallocation of use, again. But the main objection is that people don't go buy radios any more, and to get that added spectrum into cars for just half the population might take over a decade.

On the other hand, Brazil is moving its AMs to that new part of the FM band and the government is backing the change with considerable resources and tax concessions. But that is Brazil.

 

[MarioMania]

That part of the spectrum was in use by other services in the US. Specifically, TV channels 5 and 6.

See our collaborator Miche's fine article at https://recnet.com/alternate-spectrum-76-88

It would require reallocation of use, again. But the main objection is that people don't go buy radios any more, and to get that added spectrum into cars for just half the population might take over a decade.

On the other hand, Brazil is moving its AMs to that new part of the FM band and the government is backing the change with considerable resources and tax concessions. But that is Brazil.

Dude, I know about TV Ch. 5 & 6

I really hope the U.S follow what Brazil is doing

 

[davideduardo]

Dude, I know about TV Ch. 5 & 6

I really hope the U.S follow what Brazil is doing

They won't. There is little or no industry interest in a whole new portion of the band that will take over a decade to get up to even reaching half of all vehicles and none of the existing home radios.

Er, and I am not a "dude".

 

[Greg Goodfellow]

They won't. There is little or no industry interest in a whole new portion of the band that will take over a decade to get up to even reaching half of all vehicles and none of the existing home radios.

Er, and I am not a "dude".

 

[Greg Goodfellow]

As much as some, including me, wish for expanding the FM band for LPFM’s and migrating AM’s, streaming is indeed the future. If 87.5 were given over to such stations, that would be welcomed.

 

[Michi]

They won't. There is little or no industry interest in a whole new portion of the band that will take over a decade to get up to even reaching half of all vehicles and none of the existing home radios.

Er, and I am not a "dude".

This is exactly why the focus is on noncommercial stations as the primary beneficiary. In the past, we have spoken of the Wide FM spectrum (76~88) being used as a final resting place for AM Revitalization and other commercially focused proposals, such as making it an all digital band, etc.

I think NPR's mindset is in the right place here. There are many underrepresented immigrant and minority religion communities in our country. By expanding the FM band and giving those groups an opportunity to have their own stations for their own community, we can promote our nation's evolving diversity. Existing broadcasters should not even complain about this because it does not impact them. No one is forcing anyone to move to this band. I am supporting specific rules for this service that would focus first on new entrants, even in the major metro markets for either full-service or LPFM type facilities.

I also support the use of Channel 5 spectrum in areas outside the noise limited contours of Channel 5 stations but inside the noise limited of Channel 6.

There may be more opportunities for other types of applications who have been trying to get on board such as special event and in-stadium broadcasting.

REC is currently working on proposed technical rules regarding the protection of DTV Channels 5 and 6 and the protection of LPTV stations by secondary users.

TV has been jumping off of this spectrum and it can be used for other purposes in many parts of the country, why not allow radio to maximize this spectrum's utility?

 

[Mediafrog+]

Take care of your WRTH. It's the last one they will issue unless someone who wants to lose money buys it and keeps publishing.

Recent word out of the WRTH publishers is that they have had discussions with potential new owners, but "nothing to report at this time." So not completely dead, but I am not optimistic. Any revival would have to be a stripped down version, or web access only.

 

[kevtronics]

Nowadays it's easy to buy FM radios which tune all the way from 64 to 108 MHz. But that requires you to actually want to buy a radio.

Japan is also expanding their FM band from 76-90 MHz up to 95 MHz, calling it "FM Wide", creating room for AM stations to move to FM. But they've been selling 76-108 MHz FM tuners for decades, to allow audio reception of the analog VHF TV channnels they formerly had in that range, and to allow the radios to receive the 88-108 MHz FM band used elsewhere in the world, so it's an easy transition for them.

 

[Kelly A]

Wasn’t suggesting any Americans would reconfigure to the lower FM bands unless they were traveling to Japan or one of the countries still using OIRT (and those still using OIRT aren’t places Americans would want to travel to right now…) Just that there is that option.

When I was visiting Japan a couple years ago, never paid attention to what station was on which frequency in my rental car. Hit scan, listen for a few seconds, hit scan again, listen, then maybe saved the preset. Consumers aren't radio nerds, and don't pay attention to frequencies or channel assignments.

 

[davideduardo]

I think NPR's mindset is in the right place here. There are many underrepresented immigrant and minority religion communities in our country. By expanding the FM band and giving those groups an opportunity to have their own stations for their own community, we can promote our nation's evolving diversity. Existing broadcasters should not even complain about this because it does not impact them. No one is forcing anyone to move to this band. I am supporting specific rules for this service that would focus first on new entrants, even in the major metro markets for either full-service or LPFM type facilities.

There are two factors I see as critical here.

First, existing community stations are in a finance crisis at present. Funding for all but the most prominent stations is hard to come by and the once-important sector of college and university radio is literally disintegrating as interest in traditional RF-based radio is disappearing. When we look at the fact that a third of all American homes have no radio at all, we can see where the future lies.

Second, the way users seek information and entertainment is rapidly and violently changing. Radio is not the top-of-mind source for the younger generations today as the web is seen to have replaced radio for much of what we once depended on radio to provide.

In general, the one-for-many nature of radio is far less desirable than customized user specific web sources of entertainment and information. Why would a web aware person wait through 10 minutes to 15 minutes of talk or music and commercials for a very quick and non-specific traffic report when they can get instant, localized and user specific data from an online source?

Traffic information is used here as an example of why most people today have moved their information sourcing to the Internet. They are not going to regress to what they see as ancient technology.

There may be more opportunities for other types of applications who have been trying to get on board such as special event and in-stadium broadcasting.

Again, that requires that persons buy a separate device that just receives that kind of audio. I have a device that lets me talk to other people, text in real time, send messages, listen to music, play games, pay bills, order groceries, fill a prescription, schedule services like car maintenance or as dental appointment, see the weather, check investments and dozens of other things: it's my smart phone.

Next to nobody is going to by a single-purpose device today. This is a past technology that is going the same way that portable CD players and portable DVD players have gone in the last two decades.

REC is currently working on proposed technical rules regarding the protection of DTV Channels 5 and 6 and the protection of LPTV stations by secondary users.

Unless all LPTV stations are guaranteed local cable coverage and have OTT delivery as well, they are in an ever-declining interest in RF delivered video.

TV has been jumping off of this spectrum and it can be used for other purposes in many parts of the country, why not allow radio to maximize this spectrum's utility?

I don't think anyone who understands that they have thousands of audio sources online and on their smartphone will have any interest in buying a single purpose device that may, locally, only offer one or two additional content providers.

Unless organizations that would utilize one of the new frequencies uses it as one aspect of a broader and more varied array of online content features, the window of opportunity for new stations on a new band is closed.

 

[TheBigA]

Didn't the FCC do this back in 2009 & People wasn't interested in Expaning the FM Band down to 76 MHz

What's so different now?

I don't think they're really interested now either. A lot of this seems to be speculation.

 

[davideduardo]

Japan is also expanding their FM band from 76-90 MHz up to 95 MHz, calling it "FM Wide", creating room for AM stations to move to FM. But they've been selling 76-108 MHz FM tuners for decades, to allow audio reception of the analog VHF TV channnels they formerly had in that range, and to allow the radios to receive the 88-108 MHz FM band used elsewhere in the world, so it's an easy transition for them.

Japan has less than 2% of the world's population and, as an island nation does not have any influence over neighboring territory. It has a severely aging population and is no longer the center for new technology.

As an island, they can make unusual use of the spectrum. I don't think it is an example that any one will emulate.

And the AM stations that are migrating to FM are government or official stations. Comparing AM migration in nations where all or nearly all AMs are government-run to the US where nearly none are licensed to any form of government is not a valid comparison.

 

[TheBigA]

First, existing community stations are in a finance crisis at present. Funding for all but the most prominent stations is hard to come by and the once-important sector of college and university radio is literally disintegrating as interest in traditional RF-based radio is disappearing.

This part can't be minimized. If you want to start a community station, it helps to have some connection with the community. At one time, colleges and universities provided that connection. Or state governments. As you said, colleges and universities are leaving that role in large numbers. State governments may be next. With all of the Republican governors, it wouldn't surprise me if more of them sell their state-owned NPR & PBS stations the way Chris Chistie did in New Jersey. He said states should not be in the broadcasting business. That was a false statement. States are NOT in the broadcasting business. They're in the community service business. That's what these radio & TV stations do. The fact that a prominent governor doesn't understand this is a huge problem for the future of community broadcasting. If established non-profits are no longer interested in hosting community broadcasting, then all you're left with are religious organizations, which is the case now.

It's very easy to talk about growing community radio. I love to talk about it. But I also know that it takes a lot of work and commitment from somebody. So it always comes down to who will be the people who make that commitment, and what community resources are left for the to use? You talk about it for funding, but even if we omit that from the list of responsibilities, there aren't many non-profits willing to commit their existing resources, such as space in their buildings or even space on their towers. There's a lot of groundwork that needs to be done to rebuild relationships with non-profits before we can begin talking about community broadcasting. Otherwise, we're simply talking about individuals building hobby stations in their garages. Which is what a lot of LPFMs are right now.

 

[TheBigA]

Unless organizations that would utilize one of the new frequencies uses it as one aspect of a broader and more varied array of online content features, the window of opportunity for new stations on a new band is closed.

That reminds me that people may not understand the role technology companies in the 1920s had on the development of radio as we know it. Starting with Westinghouse, RCA, GE, and AT&T. Those were "big tech" of their day. They all invested heavily in radio and in developing its early regulation. 100 years later, all of them have left broadcasting. Who would take that role today? Apple? Google? Amazon? Unfortunately all of them are devoted to their own internal online radio systems. None of them have any interest in over the air broadcasting. So if you eliminate colleges and universities, state governments, and technology companies, who's left? Then you look to locally based industries for funding, and the main ones are all playing on the national platform. Funding a local non-profit radio station isn't on their radar.

 

[Kelly A]

That reminds me that people may not understand the role technology companies in the 1920s had on the development of radio as we know it. Starting with Westinghouse, RCA, GE, and AT&T. Those were "big tech" of their day. They all invested heavily in radio and in developing its early regulation. 100 years later, all of them have left broadcasting. Who would take that role today? Apple? Google? Amazon? Unfortunately all of them are devoted to their own internal online radio systems. None of them have any interest in over the air broadcasting. So if you eliminate colleges and universities, state governments, and technology companies, who's left? Then you look to locally based industries for funding, and the main ones are all playing on the national platform. Funding a local non-profit radio station isn't on their radar.

This, and lender's aren't interested in lending to commercial or non-commercial entities who have interest in doing radio. It takes years for a public stations to build a donor base. Of course that donor base is built over time on the quality and interest in the programming.
That makes start-up public stations even more difficult to get funding-for.

 

[TheBigA]

This, and lender's aren't interested in lending to commercial or non-commercial entities who have interest in doing radio.

Even on the subject of banks, the first non-com I started had two banks on the board of trustees. But that's when banks were local. Do you really think Wells Fargo or Bank of America would accept a seat on an LPFM board? Of course not. The platform is too small. On the other hand, EMF or VCY works off a national funding base. Is there any secular non-profit with an interest in radio that has that kind of reach? And if there was, why would they put their money in a single local radio station? The only way for it to happen now is some rich guy plows part of his IRA into a hobby station.

 

[davideduardo]

That reminds me that people may not understand the role technology companies in the 1920s had on the development of radio as we know it. Starting with Westinghouse, RCA, GE, and AT&T. Those were "big tech" of their day. They all invested heavily in radio and in developing its early regulation.

Don't forget that those were not always the biggest. Names like Zenith, Stromberg-Carlson and Crosley were huge, but were either bought out or faded.

The first decade of radio was mostly made up of companies putting their name on a radio station to enhance the image of the company. Insurance companies, watch makers, car dealers, department stores, labor unions and, particularly, newspapers ran radio stations long before they discovered that they could sell advertising to "outsiders".

World's Largest Store. Chicago Federation of Labor. Earle Anthony, World's Greatest Newspaper. The Prairie Farmer. All among the many names made famous by the stations they owned.

 

[kevtronics]

And the AM stations that are migrating to FM are government or official stations. Comparing AM migration in nations where all or nearly all AMs are government-run to the US where nearly none are licensed to any form of government is not a valid comparison.

I don't know what you mean by "official stations" (as opposed to pirate stations?), but the Japanese AM stations that are now simulcasting on "Wide FM" (90-95 MHz) are commercial, not government-run. The public NHK network didn't need the FM band expansion because they already had plenty of FM allocations within Japan's existing 76-90 MHz band.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_radio_stations_in_Japan

 

[Michi]

I don't know what you mean by "official stations" (as opposed to pirate stations?), but the Japanese AM stations that are now simulcasting on "Wide FM" (90-95 MHz) are commercial, not government-run. The public NHK network didn't need the FM band expansion because they already had plenty of FM allocations within Japan's existing 76-90 MHz band.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_radio_stations_in_Japan

The NHK AM radio networks (Radio 1 and Radio 2) are a different program than NHK-FM. NHK does have some FM relays of R.1 and R.2 on FM in more remote places like the Izu Islands.

Also, NHK does have a small number of stations in the expanded spectrum:
92.5 JORK R. 1 Sukumo, NHK Kochi
93.6 JOZK R. 1 Uwajima, NHK Matsuyama
92.6 JOZK R. 1 Niihama, NHK Matusyama
93.0 JOMG R. 1 Nobeoka, NHK Miyazaki
90.1 JOOG R. 1 Hiroo, NHK Obihiro
90.7 JOIP R.1 Saiki, NHK Oita
92.7 JOQP R.1 Shingu, NHK Otsu
91.3 JOQP R.1 Susami, NHK Otsu
94.6 JOXK R.1 Minami, NHK Tokushima

There may be more now. But there should be plenty of room for NHK R.1 and R.2 to migrate into this spectrum and if not, they can further expand the band. The "multimedia broadcasting" allocation from 95~108 never took off and the WIDE-FM radios being sold in Japan already cover 76~108.. so it would not too difficult for MIC to expand the FM band even further, let's say to 100.

Also remember in the case of Japan, it was the commercial broadcasters who asked to be allowed to shut down their AM facilities and covert to FM. But in all fairness, other than NHK and AFN, there are only about 50 licensees of AM stations in Japan (some stations operate multiple transmitters to cover their designated market area, normally one or more prefectures). In the USA, we would never be able to fit all of the AM stations into the legacy and extended FM bands.

 

[AnyHuman]

A bit off topic, but 4 out of the 7 LPFMs in the major city where I'm located have been off for over a month.
*95.3
*98.5
*100.1
*104.7/100.5 (they have a modification to change channel)

The only 3 that are on, that I know of, are 90.5, 97.7 and 100.7. 90.5 broadcasts the syndicated Life Talk network and 97.7 broadcasts Spanish Radio Vida from Weslaco TX. The station on 0100.7 has some local programming but no local info, just a mix of Christian preaching and Christian music all in Spanish. So much for local haha.


Are LPFMs exempt from reporting they're off?