HD Radio - Touchy subject for supporters. You guys are famous !!! :D :D :D

[Chuck]

"Listeners *do* use weak signals if a distant station has programming they want to hear that isn't A licensed station has a protected contour. that is a geographic area within which no other station can interfere. Outside of that area there is no promise that a station can be heard. If you have a small clock radio and I have a JRC with a beverage attached and I can receive a station from Europe and you can't what does that mean? The very weak station has no legal protection against interference. Those are the laws.

You are correct about the letter of the law.

The problem is, listeners have come to expect stations to be receivable way past their protected contours. It is simply something they have always been able to do, and taking it away will get an unfavorable reaction. Your average radio listener doesn’t know broadcast law from a dish of baked beans. All they know is they've always been able to hear a particular station in their home or car. Suddenly they may not be able to.

Contrary to views that have been expressed here, quite a few people do listen to “out of market” stations. It’s not just a bunch of crazy DX’ers. They are mainstream enough to show up in Arbitron ratings. I’ll grant you that it is more of a rural phenomenon than an urban one, but it exists. It is also fairly common in suburbs of very large cities like Dallas and Houston where rim shot stations from outside of town are receivable on your car radio all through your commute to work downtown.

It may be true that 80% of the population lives in 20% of the land mass; it hardly seems fair that those rural or suburban people must suffer so the urban dwellers gain. That’s a pretty draconian point of view. With a medium that is supposed to be fun, educational and entertaining, the only good formula for success is one where everyone wins.

 

[autopaint-1]

This is like telling an officer, Gee, everyone speeds here and this is the first time I've been pulled over. So what, as long as stations are protected from interference within their "protected contour" that is all that matters. If stations feel it should be otherwise you'll have to go to the commision and have the laws changed. I know this sounds harsh but it is also reaalistic.

 

[Chuck]

This is like telling an officer, Gee, everyone speeds here and this is the first time I've been pulled over. So what, as long as stations are protected from interference within their "protected contour" that is all that matters. If stations feel it should be otherwise you'll have to go to the commision and have the laws changed. I know this sounds harsh but it is also reaalistic.

I know you've made that statement several times.


Have you ever met a broadcaster who didn’t brag about how far their signal went? I can’t recall anyone advertising, “Our station can’t be heard worth a damn past our 64 dbu contour.” You aren't likely to either.

My suspicion is that many broadcasters, especially smaller ones, don't know or understand that they may suffer some interference past their protected contour, nor do they understand how that could affect their long term viability. At least, that is my reading from talking to other broadcasters at recent broadcasting conventions. I think when they figure out that their actual coverage areas are likely to be compromised, they will be very unhappy, as will their listeners.

Since we're repeating ourselves here, I will restate my opinion: Assuming that IBOC is accepted by the general public, the current version looks like a big win for large and urban broadcasters. Unfortunately, that win will come at the expense of smaller broadcasters. Very convenient.

Let’s call it what it is: a legal way to thin the herd.

 

[davideduardo]

Since we're repeating ourselves here, I will restate my opinion: Assuming that IBOC is accepted by the general public, the current version looks like a big win for large and urban broadcasters. Unfortunately, that win will come at the expense of smaller broadcasters. Very convenient.

Let’s call it what it is: a legal way to thin the herd.

The only place where there are many, many local stations that will potentially obstruct weak, out of market signals is in large metros. In the large metros, nobody listens to out of market stations to the point of this listening being significant.

In more rural areas, there is no large quantity of large local signals that will block the entire AM and FM bands. One or two stations may be affected in each area, but 90% or better of stations used in rural areas will not be affected since the individual isitener does not live close enough to the transmitters of more than a couple of potential HD signals.

 

[1q2w3e]

This is like telling an officer, Gee, everyone speeds here and this is the first time I've been pulled over. So what, as long as stations are protected from interference within their "protected contour" that is all that matters. If stations feel it should be otherwise you'll have to go to the commision and have the laws changed. I know this sounds harsh but it is also reaalistic.

I know you've made that statement several times.


Have you ever met a broadcaster who didn’t brag about how far their signal went? I can’t recall anyone advertising, “Our station can’t be heard worth a damn past our 64 dbu contour.” You aren't likely to either.

My suspicion is that many broadcasters, especially smaller ones, don't know or understand that they may suffer some interference past their protected contour, nor do they understand how that could affect their long term viability. At least, that is my reading from talking to other broadcasters at recent broadcasting conventions. I think when they figure out that their actual coverage areas are likely to be compromised, they will be very unhappy, as will their listeners.

Since we're repeating ourselves here, I will restate my opinion: Assuming that IBOC is accepted by the general public, the current version looks like a big win for large and urban broadcasters. Unfortunately, that win will come at the expense of smaller broadcasters. Very convenient.

Let’s call it what it is: a legal way to thin the herd.

I am sorry but I dont see how this will "thin out the heard". Please explain. Some stations haev tried to rimshot some major markets. Those stations will eb the ones that will suffer. They chose not to serve their COL as well and may get stepped on. That was a business decision they chose and has nothing to do with HD Radio.

 

[Chuck]

In more rural areas, there is no large quantity of large local signals that will block the entire AM and FM bands. One or two stations may be affected in each area, but 90% or better of stations used in rural areas will not be affected since the individual isitener does not live close enough to the transmitters of more than a couple of potential HD signals.

Maybe so David, but if one of those stations happened to be yours, you wouldn't be very happy about it. As far as I can tell, my station is not going to have any additional problems from our neighbors than it already has, but I feel sorry for those who will. There will be some.

I've gone to a lot of trouble, and some cash expense, to figure out what the cards hold for the future. Even then, I may still be wrong. I can tell you that most of the smaller broadcasters are not armed with that kind of information and may be in for a rude awakening.

The new string about "HD Interference Case 1" was not started by me, but it is exactly what I'm talking about. In fact one of the stations on that list is more or less local to me. It is for sale and was looking like it might be an attractive purchase possibility. The station puts out a pretty good signal into two mid sized cities. It has very nice, nearly new transmitting equipment. Programming wise though, it is a waste of time. It never shows on any ratings I’ve seen. It could be a really potential good "fixer-upper."

Assuming the data posted is valid, it certainly makes the idea of acquiring it a lot less attractive. If other potential purchasers figure that out, it is quite likely that the current owner will suffer financial loss because of it. It is uncertain if the station’s near by neighbors will ever go IBOC. If they don't, then all will be well with the station. If they do, we really won't know what will happen until they are on the air. But the potential for problems is very real. Theory is great, but what it does in real life is all that matters.

I’m sure someone will respond by reminding that there is potential risk in everything. That’s true. At the right price, a small gamble might be a really good one. But a fire sale bargain on the purchaser’s part may mean financial disaster for the seller. Profiting at someone else’s expense is not my idea of an ethical way to do business. Call me old fashioned.

 

[Chuck]

I am sorry but I dont see how this will "thin out the heard". Please explain. Some stations haev tried to rimshot some major markets. Those stations will eb the ones that will suffer. They chose not to serve their COL as well and may get stepped on. That was a business decision they chose and has nothing to do with HD Radio.

Well for a starter, Autopaint-1 said on another string:


"The commission has screwed up quite a bit. Allowing regional AM stations to run 50 Kw on otherwise regional frequencies. Odd power schemes (such as 800 watts on AM) to shoehorn in a station. Allowing a larger station to buy out another station so that they can go full time. In the North East they have two class B stations on the same frequency within 100 miles. Maybe it's time that some cleaning be done."

Sounds like "cleansing” to me. (I won't argue about the Commission screwing up, but for the most part, they have done it at the direction of Congress.) If you look around this Board, you'll find several other references to removing those pesky small stations. I don't have time to find them for them for you, but maybe you do. You can also reference the Radio World archives where a few months ago "Guy Wire" ran an article saying it was time to thin out the underperforming stations so IBOC could succeed. What would you call that?

What could very well happen is many rim shot stations could potentially have their usable coverage cut down to just their protected contour. Sure that is all they are legally guaranteed, but it isn't how they've been operating for quite some time. Their audience expects things to be the way they always were and their management would like things to not get any worse, since they pay their bills by programming to people, especially in car commuters, who listen well past that distance.

At best, those stations may have to rethink their business model. At worst, they may discover that the station really isn't viable serving their city of license, population 1253 people and a few hundred cows. Someone is going to lose.

On balance, I don't think this is very healthy for radio in general.

 

[autopaint-1]

I have an idea but I doubt many would find this acceptable. Where you have a grandfathered more powerful signal now causing the smaller to lose some of its coverage (for whatever reason), the larger station could offer its HD2 or HD 3 channel to the smaller station (which of course would lease the space from the larger broadcaster) That would resolve many of these issues as more and more HD radios become available. I believe the numbers of stations having to give up some bandwidth in this way would be minimal and that could be a way of cutting back on a number of these marginal signals which were placed, as one person said for political reasons rather than following good engineering practice.

 

[Chuck]

I have an idea but I doubt many would find this acceptable. Where you have a grandfathered more powerful signal now causing the smaller to lose some of its coverage (for whatever reason), the larger station could offer its HD2 or HD 3 channel to the smaller station (which of course would lease the space from the larger broadcaster) That would resolve many of these issues as more and more HD radios become available. I believe the numbers of stations having to give up some bandwidth in this way would be minimal and that could be a way of cutting back on a number of these marginal signals which were placed, as one person said for political reasons rather than following good engineering practice.

Long term, that might work, but I doubt it would do much for the immediate future. One major problem is the lack of radios that are capable of decoding the HD-2 signal. It may be 5-10 years before there are enough to make any significant difference. Meanwhile the smaller station has to endure the interference, pay for the additional channel and face a probable loss of revenue.

A lot of smaller stations are distinctly "Mom & Pop" operations who don't have deep enough pockets to survive the transition. They live on cash flow. To add insult to injury, they would be forced to pay for the use of the HD-2 channel which is part of what started the problem to begin with. I doubt that many could hang on long enough to survive.

If such stations do survive, it will probably be at the hands of larger group broadcasters who have deeper pockets. When compared to the effects of the Communications Act of 1996, this could be about the same as comparing a heroine addiction to a mild craving for something salty.

 

[SUPERCASTER]

Let’s call it what it is: a legal way to thin the herd.

That sounds like the big broadcasters plan for HD radio. When it does not succeed with the public, the additional interference will reduce competion and kill off many smaller broadcasters. It could mean a bigger share of broadcast revenue for the mega-casters.
Legal; perhaps not. There are anti-trust laws, and restraint of trade, as well as many state anti-competative laws which do not allow one business to interfere with the commerce of another. There are also the civil courts, where a lot of lawsuits for damages are likely to take place. A jury is not likely to see this HD fiasco the same way as a mega-caster.

The FCC is not immune from congressional oversight or legal action, and there are hundreds of millions of dollars of taxpayer funds wrapped up in the CPB and pubcaster conversions to HD. If HD fails this could be a major scandal.
Remember it is the New York state Attorney General, Spitzer that started the payola investigations.

 

[dbdigital]

Let’s call it what it is: a legal way to thin the herd.

That sounds like the big broadcasters plan for HD radio. When it does not succeed with the public, the additional interference will reduce competion and kill off many smaller broadcasters. It could mean a bigger share of broadcast revenue for the mega-casters.
Legal; perhaps not. There are anti-trust laws, and restraint of trade, as well as many state anti-competative laws which do not allow one business to interfere with the commerce of another. There are also the civil courts, where a lot of lawsuits for damages are likely to take place. A jury is not likely to see this HD fiasco the same way as a mega-caster.

The FCC is not immune from congressional oversight or legal action, and there are hundreds of millions of dollars of taxpayer funds wrapped up in the CPB and pubcaster conversions to HD. If HD fails this could be a major scandal.
Remember it is the New York state Attorney General, Spitzer that started the payola investigations.

Yes, and it all fits in neatly (a little too neatly) with Clear Channel's push to get the FCC/Congress to relax the already overly generous rules on station ownership citing some silly nonsense about "leveling the playing field."

For who they don't say. But obviously Clear Channel won't be content until they control nearly all of the AM/FM spectrum.

On a related note, there is a fascinating op piece by Corey Deitz entitled: "The Coming Devaluation of AM and FM Radio" which discusses the possible impact internet radio will have on terrestrial radio. The author is obviously intrigued by the idea of a 15 year old using his allowance to start an internet radio station and competing with Clear Channel on the web.

Now THAT is a level playing field.

http://radio.about.com/od/opinionpieces/a/aa082206a.htm

One question he asks is: "...although much weight has been put on HD Radio as part of the future saving grace of AM and FM, at least one question arises: will HD Radio infrastructure outpace WiMax infrastructure – and even if it does, will it matter?"

db