Mutually assured destruction

[nd2023]

I went to Washington DC last weekend. On my way back I noticed that WJFK 106.7's IBUZ was wiping out WWMX 106.5 in DC itself. I remember I used to be able to hear Mix 106.5 pretty well in DC before 106.7 got IBUZ. I think 106.7 is at -14 and 106.5 is at -20. In Baltimore, 106.5's IBUZ wiped out 106.7. Between Baltimore and DC, both station's IBUZ were wiping each other out (and both were also coming in HD on my HD radio).

Both 106.5 and 106.7 are owned by CBS. What is the point of ruining analog reception of 2 co-owned stations in a highly populated corridor between Baltimore and DC, just to get 10 listeners with HD radios?

But I have to admit that 106.5-HD2 is my favorite HD2 station in the country.

 

[TheBigA]

What is the point of ruining analog reception of 2 co-owned stations in a highly populated corridor between Baltimore and DC, just to get 10 listeners with HD radios?

Local local local. You read it here every day. Radio is local. So why should listeners in Baltimore listen to a station licensed to Northern Virginia, or vice versa? If they want to do it, it's available at radio.com.

 

[tomservo]

Local is right, but… I'm sure commuters between the two metro areas would like to have either/or carry from one market to the next, or at least have the coverage they had until the HD fired up.

I guess if it was a serious enough problem, CBS would temper one or both HD signals, but it doesn't matter to enough people to make a dent in the ratings. (If WJFK had ratings worth denting, that is.)

 

[Tom Wells]

People who live anywhere near the I-95/ Ann Arundel Parkway area quite naturally feel that their "market" and "daily world"
includes Washington DC AND Baltimore. The area between is packed with industry and military security businesses.
( Like the NSA ).

And for that mater, most of these same people consider Annapolis the third city which makes up the true larger market as perceived by overall marketing (outside radio).

 

[TheBigA]

People who live anywhere near the I-95/ Ann Arundel Parkway area quite naturally feel that their "market" and "daily world" includes Washington DC AND Baltimore.

That's fine, but the people who license and regulate broadcasting don't operate that way.

 

[Savage]

Here we go again with the "you're not entitled to any coverage outside your protected contour" nonsense: you know, the ad hoc new engineering standard which has never been enacted/adopted by anyone other than HD-promoting investor-broadcasters, and iBiquity.

But it's not just that. It's not only "you're not entitled to any coverage outside your protected contour," it's "we now have the right to render all service outside your protected contour utterly worthless - because of HD."

It's a ridiculous, and self-defeating, stance for any radio broadcaster to take. First of all the pro-HD interference-permissive talking point contradicts an 80-year old allocations system, which exists for sound engineering reasons. We have first-adjacent protections in the AM and FM bands here in the USA because: they are absolutely necessary to prevent RF chaos, and to prevent the public's eventual rejection of radio audio services as simply a morass of worthless noise. Secondly: be careful what you wish for. If we turn the AM and FM bands into a wild, wild west where "anything goes" based on some simplistic, frankly idiotic bumper-sticker argument like "we don't need first adjacent protections because all radio is local" bear in mind that every station, HD or not, is as much a potential victim as a potential predator.

Not that I'm that worried about message-board engineers trashing radio that much, as HD continues to circle the drain with endless fixes, patches, excuses and rationalizations while the real world pedals heedlessly by. But let's maintain law and order here for everyone's mutual benefit.

 

[TheBigA]

It's a ridiculous, and self-defeating, stance for any radio broadcaster to take.

It's not a stance taken by broadcasters. It's apparently an agenda taken by the FCC in 25 years of regulation. And yes it sucks. No other industry operates with such restrictions. If it was up to broadcasters, every license would be for 100K.

 

[Savage]

On the contrary: HD broadcasters are VERY quick to trot out the "no-adjacent channel protections outside a station's protected contour" argument. It's the only way they can justify - or more precisely, attempt to justify - otherwise outrageously unacceptable levels of interference. No rational person associated with our industry buys this argument.

The FCC, contrary to your suggestion, is just stepping back to let the industry sort it out, and has adopted a TOTALLY (ridiculously) hands-off attitude towards HD interference. They have NOT adopted the foregoing talking point as an actual rule, because there are a few people at the Commission left who are smart enough to know they won't get away with trashing the allocations system for the benefit of HD. The FCC's attitude: there, we gave you (NAB, Big Radio lobby, iBiquity lobby) your hybrid digital system. Go make it work for yourselves.

The illogical extension of the "you're only entitled to coverage within your protected contour" stance is: only local coverage has any merit. If this is the case, let's trash the allocations table entirely, revoke all A, B and C authorizations and license co-channel 100-watt ERP/100 meters ATT stations every 70 miles. So we'd have a 100.5 in Buffalo, Rochester, Syracuse, Albany, Binghamton, Corning, Jamestown, etc. Wow - THINK of all the spectrum license fees if we opened up the bands like that!!!


After all - LOCAL is all that counts..... :

 

[TheBigA]

The FCC, contrary to your suggestion, is just stepping back to let the industry sort it out, and has adopted a TOTALLY (ridiculously) hands-off attitude towards HD interference.

But my view is that inaction IS taking action. You can't ignore your primary responsibility as a regulatory agency and leave it up to the industry because selfish self interest takes over.

 

[Savage]

I certainly can't disagree with that statement. That's exactly what's happening as regards the FCC and HD. It's beyond irresponsible.

But then again, the more government we get, the worse things seem to get. We layer inequity on inequity as Special Interest A tries to get its way by pushing regulators to put their butcher's thumb on the scales of justice. Special Interest B indignantly employs muscular lobbying to nullify A's actions, and the beam swings the other way. And so it goes, endlessly, always at our expense.

This way lies madness. Government wastes more and interferes more and infringes our liberties every day. The only way to fix it is: less government, because as we cut down the population of busybody corrupt policymakers, we get less bad policy.

You know. Like HD and its Dumpsterfull Of Engineering Debacles.

 

[tomservo]

People who live anywhere near the I-95/ Ann Arundel Parkway area quite naturally feel that their "market" and "daily world"
includes Washington DC AND Baltimore. The area between is packed with industry and military security businesses.
( Like the NSA ).

And for that mater, most of these same people consider Annapolis the third city which makes up the true larger market as perceived by overall marketing (outside radio).

By that reasoning, the only station I can think of that would meet that requirement for coverage is WLZL. I recall all the DC stations crapping out before getting into Ballermer and all the Baltimore stations crapping out near the DC line.

 

[8638]

I went to Washington DC last weekend. On my way back I noticed that WJFK 106.7's IBUZ was wiping out WWMX 106.5 in DC itself. I remember I used to be able to hear Mix 106.5 pretty well in DC before 106.7 got IBUZ. I think 106.7 is at -14 and 106.5 is at -20. In Baltimore, 106.5's IBUZ wiped out 106.7. Between Baltimore and DC, both station's IBUZ were wiping each other out (and both were also coming in HD on my HD radio).

Both 106.5 and 106.7 are owned by CBS. What is the point of ruining analog reception of 2 co-owned stations in a highly populated corridor between Baltimore and DC, just to get 10 listeners with HD radios?

Points well taken. However, even pre-IBOC, WJFK was pretty much unreceivable in the car northeast of Laurel/Greenbelt. WJFK has a directional null toward Balto. to protect WWMX. When Howard Stern began simulcasting on WJFK, 1300 AM (formerly WFBR?) was acquired or LMA'd and calls changed to WJFK.

And, for the 'local' naysayers, people in the DC/Balto. corridor are quite used to having media outlets from both cities available to them.

 

[tomservo]

Here we go again with the "you're not entitled to any coverage outside your protected contour" nonsense: you know, the ad hoc new engineering standard which has never been enacted/adopted by anyone other than HD-promoting investor-broadcasters, and iBiquity.

But it's not just that. It's not only "you're not entitled to any coverage outside your protected contour," it's "we now have the right to render all service outside your protected contour utterly worthless - because of HD."

It's a ridiculous, and self-defeating, stance for any radio broadcaster to take. First of all the pro-HD interference-permissive talking point contradicts an 80-year old allocations system, which exists for sound engineering reasons. We have first-adjacent protections in the AM and FM bands here in the USA because: they are absolutely necessary to prevent RF chaos, and to prevent the public's eventual rejection of radio audio services as simply a morass of worthless noise. Secondly: be careful what you wish for. If we turn the AM and FM bands into a wild, wild west where "anything goes" based on some simplistic, frankly idiotic bumper-sticker argument like "we don't need first adjacent protections because all radio is local" bear in mind that every station, HD or not, is as much a potential victim as a potential predator.

Not that I'm that worried about message-board engineers trashing radio that much, as HD continues to circle the drain with endless fixes, patches, excuses and rationalizations while the real world pedals heedlessly by. But let's maintain law and order here for everyone's mutual benefit.

A while back, in another thread, several examples of first adjacent stations with overlapping contours was given. Some were pretty egregious. If the allocation system is so great, how did all those overlaps happen?

I want to know when the FCC has ever moved to protect a station's signal outside the magic blue circle. Where I live now the atmosphere often brought in a Panama City station, WPAP, on 92.5 MHz. For whatever reason, it was a regular on the coast with a decent enough signal to stop the scan on a car radio down on the beach highway.

But now it's completely wiped out by a local translator. I don't understand how a situation like that is any different than WPAP disappearing because of another station's HD sidebands.

 

[8638]

Here we go again with the "you're not entitled to any coverage outside your protected contour" nonsense: you know, the ad hoc new engineering standard which has never been enacted/adopted by anyone other than HD-promoting investor-broadcasters, and iBiquity.

But it's not just that. It's not only "you're not entitled to any coverage outside your protected contour," it's "we now have the right to render all service outside your protected contour utterly worthless - because of HD."

It's a ridiculous, and self-defeating, stance for any radio broadcaster to take. First of all the pro-HD interference-permissive talking point contradicts an 80-year old allocations system, which exists for sound engineering reasons. We have first-adjacent protections in the AM and FM bands here in the USA because: they are absolutely necessary to prevent RF chaos, and to prevent the public's eventual rejection of radio audio services as simply a morass of worthless noise. Secondly: be careful what you wish for. If we turn the AM and FM bands into a wild, wild west where "anything goes" based on some simplistic, frankly idiotic bumper-sticker argument like "we don't need first adjacent protections because all radio is local" bear in mind that every station, HD or not, is as much a potential victim as a potential predator.

Not that I'm that worried about message-board engineers trashing radio that much, as HD continues to circle the drain with endless fixes, patches, excuses and rationalizations while the real world pedals heedlessly by. But let's maintain law and order here for everyone's mutual benefit.

A while back, in another thread, several examples of first adjacent stations with overlapping contours was given. Some were pretty egregious. If the allocation system is so great, how did all those overlaps happen?

Grandfathered, pre-1964 allocations, in a nutshell. Most egregious I know of: WBEB Philadelphia and WCBS-FM New York, a mere 88 miles or so apart. Both are non-directional, full Class B equivalents, on 101.1 MHz. Neither is very listenable on the move in central NJ.

 

[nd2023]

On the contrary: HD broadcasters are VERY quick to trot out the "no-adjacent channel protections outside a station's protected contour" argument. It's the only way they can justify - or more precisely, attempt to justify - otherwise outrageously unacceptable levels of interference. No rational person associated with our industry buys this argument.

The FCC, contrary to your suggestion, is just stepping back to let the industry sort it out, and has adopted a TOTALLY (ridiculously) hands-off attitude towards HD interference. They have NOT adopted the foregoing talking point as an actual rule, because there are a few people at the Commission left who are smart enough to know they won't get away with trashing the allocations system for the benefit of HD. The FCC's attitude: there, we gave you (NAB, Big Radio lobby, iBiquity lobby) your hybrid digital system. Go make it work for yourselves.

The illogical extension of the "you're only entitled to coverage within your protected contour" stance is: only local coverage has any merit. If this is the case, let's trash the allocations table entirely, revoke all A, B and C authorizations and license co-channel 100-watt ERP/100 meters ATT stations every 70 miles. So we'd have a 100.5 in Buffalo, Rochester, Syracuse, Albany, Binghamton, Corning, Jamestown, etc. Wow - THINK of all the spectrum license fees if we opened up the bands like that!!!


After all - LOCAL is all that counts..... :

Having that system would be great for getting smaller broadcasters on the air in their towns and would allow for more local radio stations if that is the system in conjunction with ownership caps. But in unpopulated areas, it would leave places without any local stations. And it would be annoying to people driving long distances since they'd have to change the radio station more often.

 

[Savage]

Well, my tongue was planted firmly in-cheek when I suggested this scheme. Of course it wouldn't work. Not that equally-dumb ideas haven't actually been tried by bureaucrats before, however.

As far as "unpopulated areas having no local stations," I will observe that today there are communities in rural New York State where you can't get a sandwich or a tank of gas....but they have a local radio station. If my satirical scenario of a plague of 100-watt stations were to see the light of day, I can imagine we'd have dairy milking barns with radio stations licensed to them.

 

[TheBigA]

I can imagine we'd have dairy milking barns with radio stations licensed to them.

Wasn't WPTZ housed in an old red barn? With the tower in a cow pasture?

 

[local oscillator]

Amen to less government. I was about the add "especially at the FCC," but no, I'm for less government period. But, getting back to our fine friends at the Commission, there is no doubt that these once marginally useful guardians of spectrum have pulled a 180. Their once moderately technical brains are now drawn to every little bit of junk science that claims to modify the laws of physics. I think they actually no longer care at all about broadcast spectrum, save for the extent to which it's useful for their precious broadband.

 

[Play Freebird]

Wasn't WPTZ housed in an old red barn? With the tower in a cow pasture?

Not sure about WPTZ, but there's an AM station in Illinois housed in a barn-like studio building. I remember driving by there years ago :

http://www.peorianetwork.com/whow/

As you can see in this series of pictures, WHOW went through some rough times about seven years ago followed by a tower collapse in 2006, but is reportedly in better shape today, although (to keep this on topic) HD Radio had nothing to do with its revival:

http://www.peorianetwork.com/whow/Last/index.html

http://www.peorianetwork.com/whow/ice/index.html

 

[DaveBayArea]

But, getting back to our fine friends at the Commission, there is no doubt that these once marginally useful guardians of spectrum have pulled a 180.

Strangely enough, that only applies to broadcasters. Witness the narrowbanding requirement for the 150-174 MHz and 421-512 MHz bands. Here they get it right.

Dave B.