LPFM's to be regulated by states, not the FCC?

[TheBigA]

However if you are in Chalk Hill, TX; Elloree, SC; Georgetown, CA; or Tunnel Hill, GA; an LPFM could be considered a part of their local disaster preparedness planning

Maybe...my limited experience there is that most of the town fathers, as it were, are part-timers. As you know, the LPFM stations I've worked with have been located IN schools, churches, and municipal buildings. Not free standing facilities. But we're talking about towns of 30,000 or more.

I really wish the central thrust for LPFM was in small towns. The reality is that a lot of people are going after the same large audiences that the big commercial stations have. While the law was written in a way that really prevents licensees from accumulating stations and competing for advertisers, it would have been better if it had limited the locations to areas no longer served by local radio. I don't know how you write that into a law. But I know a lot of people in populated areas are trying to jam LPFM stations onto the dial.

Getting back to the original topic, the regulating of broadcasting is a specialized thing, and not the same as regulating gas or electric companies. Even the FCC has a lot of trouble understanding how it all works. A few years ago, one of the commissioners came from a local utility board, and she recognized how different it was. In any event, the legislation sought by the representative in Oklahoma is not going to get anywhere.

 

[KevinFodor]

However if you are in Chalk Hill, TX; Elloree, SC; Georgetown, CA; or Tunnel Hill, GA; an LPFM could be considered a part of their local disaster preparedness planning

Maybe...my limited experience there is that most of the town fathers, as it were, are part-timers. As you know, the LPFM stations I've worked with have been located IN schools, churches, and municipal buildings. Not free standing facilities. But we're talking about towns of 30,000 or more.

I really wish the central thrust for LPFM was in small towns. The reality is that a lot of people are going after the same large audiences that the big commercial stations have. While the law was written in a way that really prevents licensees from accumulating stations and competing for advertisers, it would have been better if it had limited the locations to areas no longer served by local radio. I don't know how you write that into a law. But I know a lot of people in populated areas are trying to jam LPFM stations onto the dial.

Getting back to the original topic, the regulating of broadcasting is a specialized thing, and not the same as regulating gas or electric companies. Even the FCC has a lot of trouble understanding how it all works. A few years ago, one of the commissioners came from a local utility board, and she recognized how different it was. In any event, the legislation sought by the representative in Oklahoma is not going to get anywhere.

Big A: I couldn't agree with you more. Too many LP-FM's are in the control of individuals in larger cities whose main goal is to try and "prove something" to the local commercial radio operators. That was not the intent of LP-FM's. However, if an LP-FM in a larger city is proving itself to be viable financially with diverse programming some of which does provide some competition, I'm fine with it. And if it provides programming the local commercial stations won't provide, better still.

But, really LP-FM was designed for smaller towns that can't financially support a commercial station, but might be able to support a more volunteer operation that provides truly "local" programming.

I am involved with an LP-FM owned by a municipality in a very small town (Population: 7,000). We provide a music format which, a survey of local households showed, about 6 in 10 wanted on the station. We provide daily school lunch menus, daily community news on weekdays, specialty programming on the weekends that offers a bit more diversity. (Locally produced talk shows, religion including local church services, a bluegrass hour, etc.) Programming is professionally produced, the playlist is a reasonable length, with a little "oh wow" thrown in for spice. (We are not trying to reinvent the wheel with our playlist...we are playing the hits, but offer a little respite from constant repetition.)

Community support is growing...and we seem to be on the verge of a large increase in underwriting support from local businesses. It's simply my belief that if such a station is programmed professionally and run correctly, they can work. But, not if they're programmed like someone's personal i-Pod, by someone who has a desire to "get back" at some owner, station, stations or..."greedy corporations", wants to make some political point, or is a religious organization 1,000 miles away that wants to try and milk some donations from every small berg and town they can buy LP-FM's or translators for.

Like all of radio...if you find out what your audience wants...and give it to them, you'll succeed.

 

[TheBigA]

I am involved with an LP-FM owned by a municipality in a very small town (Population: 7,000).

Hey Goat! How's that for a small town? I have more people in my immediate neighborhood!

 

[Goat Rodeo Cowboy]

Kevin: The only thing I would challenge about what you posted was that LPFMs were really created for small towns. I think if you will trace through the legislative history and look to see who the "power players" in the movement were (those who lobbied, if you please) the original dream was to have stations in metro areas to serve minorities and special interest groups. When NAB got through with their efforts along with some of the influence from NPR, congress shut the cities out with the 3rd adjacent frequency rules. If you pull a list of the 820 or so stations and study the list you will find there are very, very few LPFMs in the larger communities.

Whether anyone really worried about rural areas and tiny, tiny towns having a radio station, that is where they ended up. Not because that was the original intent, but because that where the available channels were.

There is a bit of humor here.... for those who are able to stand back and laugh. (Some will find this description a bit too close to home to be funny.) When you sort out the major players in the movement to get LPFM radio created you will find the liberal church groups very prominent in the effort. They wanted little radio stations in the cities in neighborhoods where they were sponsoring community action projects, offering aid and comfort to pockets of poverty, and other groups including ethnic groups you find clustered in neighborhoods within metropolitan areas.

In the end with LPFM basically available in rural areas where you are hard pressed to find a liberal church group, and even harder to find one with the finances to underwrite the construction of even a cheap radio station, the conservative/evangelical Churches have latched onto the idea. Close to 80% of the LPFMs indicate they are doing religious programming. They appear to be doing one of two kinds of religious programming. Many hook up to the satellite and pump out the national religious programs of a "teach and preach" nature. The other half are i-pods doing CCM music.

BigA: You and I have had this discussion more than once. You understand cities and metro areas. There are towns of 3,600 residents which can be very pleasant places to live. A town of 7,000 can also be a pleasant place to live. Both of these places may have a weekly newspaper that is published by a chain that owns 15 to 30 such papers. All the economic and staffing pressures we see in radio stations owned by a chain also impact these papers. Maybe a total staff of two people to make a newspaper work. So if you are active in Rotary, the Boy Scouts, the Optimist Club and other such groups, what methodology do you have available to publicize your bake sales, and other community events. You may snicker at someone trying to do radio, commercial or non-comm in a town of 4, 5 or 6 thousand people, but it can be a very satisfying and pleasant task. It can also be "hell on earth" if you find that you and that community are not fond of each other. The classic community based organization with a 12member board of directors may not work. You may need to let one person with an entrepreneurial bent run it as though it was a personal enterprise and when the person ages or simply grows tired of the burden, let them recruit a new "owner of the toy store".

 

[TheBigA]

You may snicker at someone trying to do radio, commercial or non-comm in a town of 4, 5 or 6 thousand people,

No snickering at all. Just no experience. The smallest town I ever worked in, and this was when I was a teenager, was over 50,000.

 

[Timewarp]

I see some of you want to place new and unique restrictions on LPFM. Let's see. Give local
authorities power over the license. Now LPFMs would be afraid to cover controversial topics on air.

Make automation illegal. Then you must sign off when you can't find volunteers.

Most of all. Blame the NAB for what you have done to cripple yourself.

 

[Goat Rodeo Cowboy]

I see some of you want to place new and unique restrictions on LPFM. Let's see. Give local
authorities power over the license. Now LPFMs would be afraid to cover controversial topics on air.

Make automation illegal. Then you must sign off when you can't find volunteers.

Most of all. Blame the NAB for what you have done to cripple yourself.

Wow! Some people know how to "kick it up a notch" when it comes to conversation. ;D

starting at the bottom of your message, what has LPFM done to cripple itself? It kind of stripped bare an turned loose on the world with some "do-gooder" instructions and has yet to really "find itself". A lot of people who maybe were a bit long in being naive and innocent jumped in and found it is not easy to make one of these things into "the talk of the town". I don't mean talk radio. I mean a station that would have the whole town talking ABOUT the station.) What started out, according to some observers, to be 1,000 watt commerical channels ended up being created with a 100 watt max at no more than 100 feet above average terrain and told to never sell real commercials. That's a little bit like being placed in the Mojave Desert in binkini briefs, with no hat, no shoes and no water bottle and given the opportunity to see if you can create civilization. So. What has LPFM done to cripple itself?

Who is proposing to make automation illegal for LPFM? I preach the same thing to LPFM that I do to commercial radio: Turning your radio station into an ipod does little or nothing for listeners, for community or for civilization. The rules that were handed down from Moses on the mountain top said that at least half the programming should be produced locally. I bark and growl about the people who hook their automation machine up to a satellite feed, let its "rest" on the hard drive for an hour and then time-shift it onto the transmitter. They then declare it local because they played it off a local hard drive. Many, many years ago I became a proponent of wise and productive use of automation. Automation and local content are not mutually exclusive.

If you will read the legislation and the legislative history, Congress assumed that in some cases, some communities would elect to have city government or other local civil entity actually apply for the license and be the operator. We have had some discussion here on the wisdom of that move. I don't know that controversial topics would never be broadcast if a local government body operated the station, I don't know that it is essential that controversial topics should be broadcast on a community based station.

Intelligent exchange of concepts does not require the kind of abrasive discourse we here on the radio. If fact as we are seeing in the political life of our nation abrasive discourse can bring civilization to something of a non-productive standstill.

Assume for a moment that I was able to call Washington yesterday and today I am handing you a construction permit to build an LPFM in the community of your choice. Tell us what you would do that is superior to what is currently being done by many or most of today's existing LPFMs.

 

[cold_coffee]

Put down that bong dudes! This is the real world calling. The FCC is not giving up
it's authority to regulate any form of radio. We know LPFM was a stupid idea in the
first place.
But, there is light shining. Congress has again asked the FCC to do a study. The last
study caused a 10 year delay. Guess what? I'll check back here in 2020.

 

[Goat Rodeo Cowboy]

The FCC is not giving up it's authority to regulate any form of radio.

Go back and read from the top. This discussion has never centered on whether the FCC would or could give up anything. There are four or five states that have fired a shot across the bow of the Federal Government. State Legislatures are passing resolutions putting the U.S. on notice that any Federal laws that violate the 10th Amendment (as interpreted by the people supporting this movement) are henceforth null and void. So these people would assume the Food and Drug Administration is in violation. The Commerce Department regulating trucks and busses is in violation, etc. etc. etc. I live in a state where the capaign season for the office of Governor is kicking off, and this concept apparently will be part of the campaign. And my personal reply to people who want to bend my ear about it is: "Have you completely forgotted the unpleasantness that took place in the 1860s?"

We know LPFM was a stupid idea in the first place.

We who? You have a mouse in your pocket when you say we? YOU believe it was a stupid idea. You have a lot of company in that belief. There are those of us who want to see the "experiment" play itself out. When you live in a country that believes in and attempts to practice self government, it is not necessarily a stupid idea to try something new. If it fails, then we can declare it stupid and put it behind us and move on to the next experiment.

 

[upstate29651]

And my personal reply to people who want to bend my ear about it is: "Have you completely forgotted the unpleasantness that took place in the 1860s?"

Relevance?

If anything, the "recent unpleasantness" reinforces the need for adherence to the 10th amendment.

G

 

[Goat Rodeo Cowboy]

And my personal reply to people who want to bend my ear about it is: "Have you completely forgotted the unpleasantness that took place in the 1860s?"

Relevance?

If anything, the "recent unpleasantness" reinforces the need for adherence to the 10th amendment.

G

I included in my post the comment you have quoted which reaches beyond broadcasting into politics of the day. And you have now responded with an opposing point of view.

The Managing Board Editor will not look with favor on us taking this conversation into the realm of politics rather than the realm of broadcasting.

I listened to a podcast this week which was a round-table discussion by some guys who are "big sticks" in the world of commercial broadcasting. They were not very gracious in their attitude toward LPFM being added to the mix.... but their language was not quite as blunt as the poster who said here: "It was a stupid idea." (Google for TWiRT to find some interesting podcasts.)

The whole LPFM experiment may go down in flames no matter WHO (which level of government) regulates this new genre of stations (Less than 10 years old now.) Many of the people who have been behind the movement to put LPFM into action are using concepts and language that indicates they still see broadcasting much like we tended to see it 10, 20 and 30 years ago. That was understandable in the 1990s when they were pushing for LPFM to be established. Even today it does not take much reading of the messages on Radio-Info to realize that many of us are still in denial of the idea that broadcasting is fundamentally changing. And you do not need much reading to realize even those who have the attitude that the business is changing are miles apart on agreeing what that means.

I'm at a place in life where I have the time and energy to participate in "the experiment". I'm not sure it makes much difference to LPFM whether the FCC continues to control it, or if it is ripped away from them and placed in the hands of state government or even local metropolitan government. We are still left with the much, much larger question: Are any of us smart enough to define a formula where programming and necessary dollars and people's media habits can be fit together in such a way that LPFM will work..... and survive.

 

[Carmine5]

There are some excellent observations by John Anderson on his DIY Media blog concerning the OK proposal for state-regulated LPFM.

He discusses the difference between the OK bill and the laws enacted in FL and NJ prohibiting unlicensed broadcasting.

http://www.diymedia.net/

Apparently, the interstate commerce rule would be violated if a state-regulated LPFM's signal interfered with the signal of an FCC licensed station that had crossed the state line.

c5

 

[w9wi]

Apparently, the interstate commerce rule would be violated if a state-regulated LPFM's signal interfered with the signal of an FCC licensed station that had crossed the state line.

I wonder if it would even be brought into play if a state-regulated LPFM failed to meet federal protection requirements with regard to a FCC-licensed station owned by an out-of-state company? (even if the FCC-licensed station was located wholly in Oklahoma and any potential interference areas were wholly in Oklahoma)

 

[Goat Rodeo Cowboy]

There are some excellent observations by John Anderson on his DIY Media blog concerning the OK proposal for state-regulated LPFM.

He discusses the difference between the OK bill and the laws enacted in FL and NJ prohibiting unlicensed broadcasting.

http://www.diymedia.net/

Thank you for the link. I do not regularly follow DIY Media Blog so I had not read this one. For anyone who has the stomach (a.k.a. "Intestinal Fortitude") to read it, go through the 44 page white paper written in 2002 by Douglas Galbi, part of the FCC staff. I just read through it. I could not tell that Galbi would or would not take sides in some of the current Amendment 10 discussions. He did seem to be in favor of having the whole issue of the Interstate Commerce aspects of radio emissions revisited. The dominant court decisions and documents date back to the era of 1930. We didn't have police radar speed detectors or garage door openers or cell phones or FM transmitters on higher frequencies than the AM transmitters. So he seems to raise the question: Does today's understanding of legal issues possibly call for change? He simply says it calls for examination.

I was a corporate purchasers and administrator of insurance coverage 30 years ago. If you have tried to read your insurance policy on your car or you house, it probably left you cross-eyed for a day or two. There was a move in that era to move from standard policy forms which are a "one size fits all" to custom written manuscript policies. It never got anywhere for one main reason: We have 200 years of court history in deciding what the meaning of certain words when used in an insurance policy. Moving to modern day language which LAY PEOPLE understand meant we would have 30, 40 maybe 60 years of court battles of aruging what the new words meant when there was a dispute in an automobile accident or storm damage to your house.

My other brush with legal issues (I am NOT a lawyer) was spending about four years of my life getting a small change in tax law changed in a state legislature. I got the ball rolling. I left the industry affected by this tax law and about two years later the new law was finally passed. Justice and legislation move slowly.

BOTTOM LINE: LPFM as we speak of it is about ten years old now. Probably half the stations are no more than five years old. With the changes in broadcasting, technology and social customs, there may be no need or interest in LPFM 10 or 15 years from now. Even if I am "hell bent" on being the lead person in getting an LPFM on the air as soon as possible, I don't think this question of state regulation or federal regulation will change or be settled in my lifetime! It may indeed eventually change to state regulation but by the time the court system deals with such a change it is probably 15 to 30 years out in the future.

I would suggest our current energies are better spent on discussing how we make such a station viable this year, and next year and the year after that. You can come and put flowers on my grave the day state regulation of LPFMs becomes effective.

 

[Flying-Dutchman]

Regulating radio is not cheap. Lawyers, engineers, and administrators come at a hefty price.
Do you think any state really wants to pick up the tab from Uncle Sam? In these times?

Call this a show stopper.

 

[TheBigA]

With the changes in broadcasting, technology and social customs, there may be no need or interest in LPFM 10 or 15 years from now.

I don't know...if they follow your lead and focus mainly on rural areas, I think broadcast is more effective and more useful in the boonies than in populated areas. As you've said, it's very unlikely that they'll get a lot of broadband in the sticks, and I don't know what cell coverage is like. I just got an iPhone, and it works fine here. But I haven't been to Idaho or Arkansas yet. With any luck, I never will. The salesman was very quick to point out that the iPhone comes with earbuds, so I can listen to the radio on my phone. Haven't actually tried that yet. 3G seems to be fine for what I do.

 

[Goat Rodeo Cowboy]

With the changes in broadcasting, technology and social customs, there may be no need or interest in LPFM 10 or 15 years from now.

I don't know...if they follow your lead and focus mainly on rural areas, I think broadcast is more effective and more useful in the boonies than in populated areas. As you've said, it's very unlikely that they'll get a lot of broadband in the sticks, and I don't know what cell coverage is like.

I get too wordy at times and in my effort to shorten my messages down to one truckload or less, I leave things out. I would like to have said: " ...there may be no need or interest in LPFM or even commercial broadcasting as we know it 10 or 15 years from now."

Yes, rural people do hold onto older traditions, practices and technology more than do people in population centers. 10 of the last 12 broadcast stations in America to turn out the lights will be in little county seat towns of less than 10,000 population.

I have lived in my house for 11 years now. (For the 10 people on earth who have not heard me say this before: I live so far in the country I have to go back toward town to hunt!) For the first five cell phone coverage at my house was somewhere between dismal and total failure. When Cingular acquired ATT Wireless, marvelous things began to happen. With the acquisition of BellSouth and their half of Cingular by the "new" AT&T, I may die an early death at my own hands before we find out if LPFM works or flops. That refers to the whole range of services, not just cellular.

 

[Carmine5]

There are some excellent observations by John Anderson on his DIY Media blog concerning the OK proposal for state-regulated LPFM.

He discusses the difference between the OK bill and the laws enacted in FL and NJ prohibiting unlicensed broadcasting.

http://www.diymedia.net/

Thank you for the link. I do not regularly follow DIY Media Blog so I had not read this one. For anyone who has the stomach (a.k.a. "Intestinal Fortitude") to read it, go through the 44 page white paper written in 2002 by Douglas Galbi, part of the FCC staff. I just read through it. I could not tell that Galbi would or would not take sides in some of the current Amendment 10 discussions. He did seem to be in favor of having the whole issue of the Interstate Commerce aspects of radio emissions revisited. The dominant court decisions and documents date back to the era of 1930. We didn't have police radar speed detectors or garage door openers or cell phones or FM transmitters on higher frequencies than the AM transmitters. So he seems to raise the question: Does today's understanding of legal issues possibly call for change? He simply says it calls for examination.

I found myself nodding off a few times trying to read his white paper and then losing my place. He really got deep into the definition of the word "commerce" as it was understood in the early part of the 20th century when rules regarding federal regulation of the airwaves were being formulated. Commerce in those days simply meant social interaction and not merchandising as it is understood now.

Given that radio signals are essentially broadcast for the purpose of social interaction and can cross state lines then, yes, the feds not the state would regulate them--at least that is how I understood his argument as to why the courts would usually rule against unlicensed broadcasters who challenged such federal authority. However, he made it a point several times in his paper to emphasize that this was in regards to AM broadcasting. Would LPFM with its more localized signal be treated differently?

c5

 

[Goat Rodeo Cowboy]

This conversation helps us see what makes community, civilization and governance such a challenge and struggle for mankind. I walked away from my attempt to read the 44 page document with a totally different interpretation of how the early nation described and dealt with the word commerce. And for all I know we may both be wrong.

Let me try to steer this conversation back to a legitimate line of conversation that our Managing Board Editor will find worthy for the space:

What would be different for LPFM operators and would-be operators under state regulations than what they currently face under federal regulation?

What would be different for LPFM operators if federal government and state government got together and said: LPFM up to 100 watts is now just like Part 15. Here are a few basic rules you must follow and for everything else you are on your own. Would that cause more people to listen? Would that cause more people to make contributions and endorsements? If LPFM were allowed to sell real "commercial" commercials, would that seriously change things for people who want to participate in dinky little stations that reach a dinky little bit of real estate?

 

[TheBigA]

Would that cause more people to listen? Would that cause more people to make contributions and endorsements?

I have never seen anything in the FCC regulations, or even in the system of regulation in general, aimed around either of those things. I think they're both outside the purview of regulation. I also don't think anyone involved in regulation has any idea how to get people to listen or contribute. That's not their interest or motivation.

As for selling commercials, I think that harms the integrity of what LPFM is supposed to do. Having worked in both non-commercial and commercial radio, I can tell you there's a different mind-set in each of the systems.