POST-IBOC THOUGHTS

[Savage]

Despite some comments posted here - and nothwithstanding the existence of the board topic - it's becoming increasingly clear that HD Radio's days are numbered. HD-FM is struggling and HD-AM is being propped up and manipulated like "Dead Tom" in "Muppet Treasure Island." Station conversions have slowed considerably, and in the case of HD-AM, have stopped. Receivers are disappearing - and not because consumers are buying them. Consumer acceptance of HD (to be distinguished from "awareness," and my comment about the Alliance's much-ballyhooed "77%" figure is it's likely consumers are widely confusing HD Radio with HDTV, the conversion message for which TV stations are absolutely pounding promos) remains abysmal. Outside of a handful of Allinace-invested big radio group executives, there is approximately NO industry interest in HD.

I would argue that the post-IBOC industry focus should be reorienting our priorities towards the qualities that made radio "the companion medium" after morphing to music-and-service formats after the demise of long-form network radio in the 1950s. To wit: many of my colleagues remember the days when station personalities were like personal friends to listeners. Radio was a town-square style center of information, personal, one-on-one communication and entertainment. It was NEVER "all about the music."

Today's industry "leaders" have gotten way, way off track, with largely-automated, sterile, boring formats which are little more than gobs of music strung together with repetitive liners and long stretches of commercials. Small wonder nobody cares about radio stations any more. There's nobody home.

Humans are social beings. They identify with other humans and like those who exhibit qualities they admire or are interested in. In its heyday Radio was always about what happened BETWEEN the songs. Listeners to classic airchecks of the great stations of the past never exclaim, "WOW! Listen to how W-MEX followed The Four Seasons with Roy Orbison!!! And that surly-voiced liner was SO COOL!!"

No. Radio aficionados listen to how the jocks related to the audience, weaving energy, content and interest amid the music. The tunes were only part of a whole.

Radio will never win in an arena where listener "choice" reigns - we're a mass medium. The iPod will always beat us in the choice department. If it sticks around satradio will too. This is where HD Radio missed the mark most egregiously - because HD sidechannels are so beside the point, it's hard to envision how anybody actually imagined they'd make any difference.

Things will change for Radio when we wake up and get back to doing what we have historically done with great success: COMMUNICATING. You know: meeting listeners' needs. The industry has been squandering generations of goodwill from its listeners with stupid, boring, no-content programming...because it's easy and cheap. Much in the same way Big Group Radio has become so insular they actually think they can dictate listening tastes from the boardroom, after listening to the Consultant Du Jour's latest focus-group study.

Drawing analogies to FM's takeover from AM, to AM's audience losses in the 1970s, and the other comparisons we've endlessly heard about on this board, is just sophistry. There is no parallel for the situation which has given birth to absurd expectations from HD Radio. The format-radio industry has totally forgotten what made it relevant 50 years ago.

It's still there for the taking....I truly believe this. What say you?

 

[johneb2johneb2]

I was an initial supporter of the HD-FM aspect, as it provided me with a music genre that was not available through the standard stations. The only drawback was it was a jukebox type format. I accepted that realizing it was something new starting up. Almost two years later, it still remains unchanged. Your statment in regards to programming is something that key people need to look at. I find that I am no longer enthusiastic about this bland type of programming. While I still believe HD on the FM band can succeed, it will only have a chance if they upgrade the programming, address reception issues, and make radios comparable in cost, quality & size as standard radios. Most of all, they need to educate the consumer clearly on what HD radio is and how it benefits them! Right now, I would say they are batting 0 for 4, as most people I talk to don't even know what it is. They think you are talking about TV. HD on FM can succeed, but only if it is done correctly. I honestly think that has not happened yet. It is critical if they want it to succeed, they really need to get their act together. Today, radio faces challenges from many other media, more so than ever before. They won't win me over with the half hearted effort exhibited so far. Just an average listener, JohnEB

 

[LinoNYC]

Despite some comments posted here - and nothwithstanding the existence of the board topic - it's becoming increasingly clear that HD Radio's days are numbered. HD-FM is struggling and HD-AM is being propped up and manipulated like "Dead Tom" in "Muppet Treasure Island." Station conversions have slowed considerably, and in the case of HD-AM, have stopped. Receivers are disappearing - and not because consumers are buying them. Consumer acceptance of HD (to be distinguished from "awareness," and my comment about the Alliance's much-ballyhooed "77%" figure is it's likely consumers are widely confusing HD Radio with HDTV, the conversion message for which TV stations are absolutely pounding promos) remains abysmal. Outside of a handful of Allinace-invested big radio group executives, there is approximately NO industry interest in HD.

I would argue that the post-IBOC industry focus should be reorienting our priorities towards the qualities that made radio "the companion medium" after morphing to music-and-service formats after the demise of long-form network radio in the 1950s. To wit: many of my colleagues remember the days when station personalities were like personal friends to listeners. Radio was a town-square style center of information, personal, one-on-one communication and entertainment. It was NEVER "all about the music."

Today's industry "leaders" have gotten way, way off track, with largely-automated, sterile, boring formats which are little more than gobs of music strung together with repetitive liners and long stretches of commercials. Small wonder nobody cares about radio stations any more. There's nobody home.

Humans are social beings. They identify with other humans and like those who exhibit qualities they admire or are interested in. In its heyday Radio was always about what happened BETWEEN the songs. Listeners to classic airchecks of the great stations of the past never exclaim, "WOW! Listen to how W-MEX followed The Four Seasons with Roy Orbison!!! And that surly-voiced liner was SO COOL!!"

No. Radio aficionados listen to how the jocks related to the audience, weaving energy, content and interest amid the music. The tunes were only part of a whole.

Radio will never win in an arena where listener "choice" reigns - we're a mass medium. The iPod will always beat us in the choice department. If it sticks around satradio will too. This is where HD Radio missed the mark most egregiously - because HD sidechannels are so beside the point, it's hard to envision how anybody actually imagined they'd make any difference.

Things will change for Radio when we wake up and get back to doing what we have historically done with great success: COMMUNICATING. You know: meeting listeners' needs. The industry has been squandering generations of goodwill from its listeners with stupid, boring, no-content programming...because it's easy and cheap. Much in the same way Big Group Radio has become so insular they actually think they can dictate listening tastes from the boardroom, after listening to the Consultant Du Jour's latest focus-group study.

Drawing analogies to FM's takeover from AM, to AM's audience losses in the 1970s, and the other comparisons we've endlessly heard about on this board, is just sophistry. There is no parallel for the situation which has given birth to absurd expectations from HD Radio. The format-radio industry has totally forgotten what made it relevant 50 years ago.

It's still there for the taking....I truly believe this. What say you?

Now awakening from that lovely dream, we join reality already in progress.....

I won't bother going into; how it's too early in this product's life cycle to call "failure". Nor will I remind you that one of Asia's largest chipmakers will soon debut newer, cheaper chips which will find their way into typical consumer sets.

Won't even mention this article I posted last week http://www.fmqb.com/Article.asp?id=636323

I will sit here with mouth agape at this gem: "Things will change for Radio when we wake up and get back to doing what we have historically done with great success: COMMUNICATING. You know: meeting listeners' needs. The industry has been squandering generations of goodwill from its listeners with stupid, boring, no-content programming...because it's easy and cheap."

Gotta hand you credit for having one hell of a nerve.

Optional question: When you set up your operation 20+ years ago, did you think you would have to resort to the sort of programming you now must to survive?

I'am not writing this to hurt feelings, I just don't know how you can write this sort of self-righteous sanctimony.


But I do have what will no doubt be considered good (temporary) news! In a few days I will depart for a twenty hour journey to "the country formerly known as Siam" Going there for the Songkran Festival (Thai new years) also to see what my Thai budds have done to my place. Since they tell me the Mac I left there has croaked, I may not be able to visit with you all for awhile. One of them is directing a film and has scheduled a walk-on for me (glorified extra) we'll see about that, the last time was not such a great experience.

Anyway, enjoy spewing your venom and disinformation. For awhile.

Lino

 

[Savage]

Bang A Gong, Lino. Get It On. Bang A Gong.

 

[dumber than a box of hair]

Despite some comments posted here - and nothwithstanding the existence of the board topic - it's becoming increasingly clear that HD Radio's days are numbered. HD-FM is struggling and HD-AM is being propped up and manipulated like "Dead Tom" in "Muppet Treasure Island." Station conversions have slowed considerably, and in the case of HD-AM, have stopped. Receivers are disappearing - and not because consumers are buying them. Consumer acceptance of HD (to be distinguished from "awareness," and my comment about the Alliance's much-ballyhooed "77%" figure is it's likely consumers are widely confusing HD Radio with HDTV, the conversion message for which TV stations are absolutely pounding promos) remains abysmal. Outside of a handful of Allinace-invested big radio group executives, there is approximately NO industry interest in HD.

I would argue that the post-IBOC industry focus should be reorienting our priorities towards the qualities that made radio "the companion medium" after morphing to music-and-service formats after the demise of long-form network radio in the 1950s. To wit: many of my colleagues remember the days when station personalities were like personal friends to listeners. Radio was a town-square style center of information, personal, one-on-one communication and entertainment. It was NEVER "all about the music."

Today's industry "leaders" have gotten way, way off track, with largely-automated, sterile, boring formats which are little more than gobs of music strung together with repetitive liners and long stretches of commercials. Small wonder nobody cares about radio stations any more. There's nobody home.

Humans are social beings. They identify with other humans and like those who exhibit qualities they admire or are interested in. In its heyday Radio was always about what happened BETWEEN the songs. Listeners to classic airchecks of the great stations of the past never exclaim, "WOW! Listen to how W-MEX followed The Four Seasons with Roy Orbison!!! And that surly-voiced liner was SO COOL!!"

No. Radio aficionados listen to how the jocks related to the audience, weaving energy, content and interest amid the music. The tunes were only part of a whole.

Radio will never win in an arena where listener "choice" reigns - we're a mass medium. The iPod will always beat us in the choice department. If it sticks around satradio will too. This is where HD Radio missed the mark most egregiously - because HD sidechannels are so beside the point, it's hard to envision how anybody actually imagined they'd make any difference.

Things will change for Radio when we wake up and get back to doing what we have historically done with great success: COMMUNICATING. You know: meeting listeners' needs. The industry has been squandering generations of goodwill from its listeners with stupid, boring, no-content programming...because it's easy and cheap. Much in the same way Big Group Radio has become so insular they actually think they can dictate listening tastes from the boardroom, after listening to the Consultant Du Jour's latest focus-group study.

Drawing analogies to FM's takeover from AM, to AM's audience losses in the 1970s, and the other comparisons we've endlessly heard about on this board, is just sophistry. There is no parallel for the situation which has given birth to absurd expectations from HD Radio. The format-radio industry has totally forgotten what made it relevant 50 years ago.

It's still there for the taking....I truly believe this. What say you?

Cliff's Notes: It's the content, stupid.

Well done, Bob. As usual, the HD true-believers can't refrain from personal attacks. But that's what happens when you come that close to skewering their sacred cows.

One exception, however: There IS a precedent for those "absurd expectations" from HD. I still have a lot of industry literature from the AM stereo period. Same predictions of salvation for AM radio...and the same result. I read it when I need a laugh...sort of like what happens when I read the writings of the HD true-believers here.

 

[Carmine5]

Yup, the personalities (and we had some great ones in the past), and being live and local was radio's strong suit. It still is.

If it was only about the music (and I'm reaching back to the 60's and 70's for this) we could have simply loaded up the old record changer with a stack of singles or LP's or compiled a reel-to-reel tape of our fav music and (if you had an old Ampex home deck like I did) have it auto-reverse endlessly. The same goes today with an iPod. No amount of "4 in a row" is going to compete with that.

But as Mr. Savage said, it's "what happened between the songs" that made radio a must-hear medium.

It can be that way again if radio will invest in the talent instead of throwing money down a technological black hole like HD Radio.

C5

 

[Savage]

Right you are, Mr. Box-O-Hair, right you are - save for SOME major differences (I mean with C-QUAM versus IBOC.)

C-QUAM didn't threaten the very existence of other radio stations by clobbering them with interference. C-QUAM stations weren't given a pass by the FCC for an elitist land-grab by big-market operators. Nor was there an extortionate licensing system imposed regally by Motorola. You bought your C-QUAM stuff - just like you bought your FM exciter - and you "owned" a piece of the system.

Neither was it necessary with C-QUAM to turn your existing signal into a squishy bag-o-crap in order to make the Stereo version sound like something.

Maybe the predictions for AM Stereo were out of line with reality, but at least "first, C-QUAM did no harm," Hippocratically speaking. (Where IS HippoRadio these days, now that I mention it??)

 

[KB1OKL]

Things will change for Radio when we wake up and get back to doing what we have historically done with great success: COMMUNICATING. You know: meeting listeners' needs. The industry has been squandering generations of goodwill from its listeners with stupid, boring, no-content programming...because it's easy and cheap.

It's still there for the taking....I truly believe this. What say you?

I say this quote is the BEST quote I've read here in a while and your whole post is right on the money.

I agree 100% with the personality aspect of radio, I too remember the days when the jocks were personalities, kind of like your buddies on the air. I listened to AM radio in the 60's during the whole Beatles thing and loved everything about it, radio was a huge part of my life when I was a kid and the jocks kept the whole thing together. My real relationship with radio personalities began with WBCN 104.1 Boston during the 70's, Charles Laquidera's The Big Mattress, and Marc Parenteau, are two stand outs I remember. Both were very funny and informative and really knew how to entertain an audience, I would especially listen to Marc all afternoon every afternoon, in fact I had that station on constantly. Charles's alter ego, Duane Ingalls Glasscock was on Saturday mornings, he actually instigated a lot of people to throw bags of excrement on the governor's (Dukakis) lawn one day among many other things he did. These guys really knew how to entertain. I used to set my alarm clock after a hard night ( I was about 24-25 years old) and listen to it every Saturday. Marc also was really funny and not always intentionally. One afternoon he put a record on the wrong speed (a 33 1/3 on 45) and stopped the record and explained how those damn little records looked like 45's on and on, he then put it on the right speed and played it. Guess what he did on the next record? haha! He changed the record to the correct speed without a word and never mentioned it.
HD has absolutely nothing to do with whether people will listen to radio or not, it helps nothing and degrades much, it's a failure already and the title of this thread is perfect in these post-IBOC days. Adios IBOC sorry to see you go.

 

[clone]

Now awakening from that lovely dream, we join reality already in progress.....

I won't bother going into; how it's too early in this product's life cycle to call "failure". Nor will I remind you that one of Asia's largest chipmakers will soon debut newer, cheaper chips which will find their way into typical consumer sets.

Lino,

I am not a frequent poster on this board. Since I'm not from NYC, of course, nothing I say can or should ever matter to anyone in the world. We all know that NYC is the only market in the world that matters to anyone, and everyone else should just go pound sand, because we are not #1, and we don't know what it's like to work in a cutthroat market. Also, since we don't work in market 1, we don't understand why IBOC is necessary, and we should all just keep quiet because the technology isn't "mature" just yet. The next revision is coming soon, and is going to take us all beyond AM, beyond FM. I mean, really, the product has only been out a few years. Look how long it took FM stereo and color TV to take off, right? Because consumers behave and purchase in exactly the same ways that they did in 1960 and 1970, respectively.

And yes, I'm sure you will start to gloat when the cheap chipsets are jammed down all of our throats in every product we buy, just so you can IPO and get out before the walls crumble. I'm sure you are going to relish the day when the only thing an analog radio can pick up is pure, unadulterated, 100% digital buzzsaw. I'm sure you will enjoy when all those "hicks" out in the sticks past the 80dBu contour can't reliably listen to FM radio anymore, let alone AM past twenty miles. I, for one, understand where you are coming from. I know why you feel the way you do, but you have to understand, no one else outside of corporate radio upper management does.

Everyone else wants locally owned and operated stations. If not that, at least locally programmed and staffed stations with quality airstaff that can connect with listeners. Ones that can blast out past the city and into the rural areas to provide everyone with a reliable product that they can enjoy and connect with. I understand that this doesn't make money for the fat cats in New York and San Antonio and wherever else you all are sitting right now. I understand that this doesn't provide iBiquity with any royalties. And I don't give one flying hoot that it doesn't. The FCC hasn't (yet) mandated that corporate radio operators turn big profits.

You see, what it really boils down to, is that the corporate radio squeeze is eventually going to pop your comfortable little bubble you live in. In most businesses, the end-consumer doesn't see the effect of the quality being squeezed out of the products they buy. They don't see all the friendly faces disappearing from the production lines and factories across the nation. And if they see a decline in quality, it is no matter, because the price of the goods are so cheap at this point, that they are easily replaced.

Radio, however, never cost the consumer anything other than the inital cost of the radio and the time they spend listening to spots. In radio's case, the "customer" has seen the quality dramatically decrease, the diversity disappear, the friendly faces washed away, the connection between listener and airstaff dissolve, all this while the "cost" (time spent listening to spots) has gone up. What consumer in their right mind is going to use a product with an ever-increasing "cost", while the quality and everything else that made it worthwhile in the first place disappears?

Station owners that understand this are thriving, believe it or not. (Hint, Lino: They're not in market #1!)

So, in closing, go ahead and keep telling us all how great IBOC is, and how the next chipset is actually going to work, and hope and pray that the asian fab plants can crank out enough chips to flood the market so you can all convince the FCC to kick the chair out from under the American public and get analog shut down.

The rest of us are going to kindly hope that corporate radio loses its shirt, and a fire-sale ensues so that local operators can get back into things. At this point, it could go either way. Keep your fingers crossed.

But see my first four sentences again, and feel free to ignore the entire post of a "small fry" "hick" out here on the far edge of "podunk" market #3.

 

[SUPERCASTER]

It seems Lino's continuous rants about the NYC market always being #1 therefore the rest of the markets don't matter, has failed a most important test.

The top five markets by 2007 revenue were Los Angeles ($1.1 billion), New York ($755 million), Chicago ($555 million), Dallas-Ft. Worth ($416 million), and Atlanta ($398.5 million).

http://www.bia.com/pressitem1.asp?id=1116

So again, the question remains "NYC is number one by what set of criteria, measurements and who's individual perception". Like people, virtually all stations and markets are #1 at something, even if it's natural gas. I rest my case.

 

[calstymes]

Thank you, clone, for a very sane post. And welcome to the message board!

I get ignored all the time by thestaunch IBOC supporters, so don't take it personally.

 

[rbrucecarter5]

Thank you, clone, for a very sane post. And welcome to the message board!

I get ignored all the time by thestaunch IBOC supporters, so don't take it personally.

I agree. Absolutely a great post. What goes on in New York has little bearing on my day to day life, I hardly give the place a second thought from week to week. I haven't been there in 15 years, nor do I have any plans to go.

I'm glad HD radio solves some problems for broadcasters up there, but that doesn't make it a solution for the rest of the country.

 

[Savage]

I completely understand the caution expressed by Supercaster and Cal here to the effect: be vigilant lest even more outrage be perpetrated in the name of HD Radio, e.g., an all-digital mandate at some future point, with forehead-smacking stupidity in the interim in the form of multi-tiered screwups further ruining analog listening.

(Typical caveat: Who the hell knows for sure, least of all me?? There. Done.) But I don't think all-digital is very likely in the forseeable future. Most stations haven't converted to IBOC, and very few have plans to do so. As has been amply noted there HD Radio is massively stiffing out there in the real world. You can't even buy the dumb radios any more without undergoing undue contortions. The prospect of totally outmoding every existing analog car and home radio would make even Alliance-loyal station managers blanch with panic - especially given the abysmal financial performance they're showing.

After the five-way AM Stereo Civil War of 1979-1989 with its attendant lawsuits, the FCC observes strict market-driven dynamics when it comes to proposed new radio standards: to the lobbyists for this idea or that, the Commission says, fine. We'll OKAY radio's latest "pet rock," but it's up to you to make it work in the marketplace. And iBiquity, the Alliance and the NAB have done SUCH a great job in that department!

Right now radio has far bigger fish to fry and even the tone-deaf management of Big Radio would hopefully know better than to further screw themselves by making radio even LESS listener-friendly. Plus there's no money to chase further upgrades or conversions. Regarding half-baked half-measures such as the recently-touted tenfold increase on FM, even THAT is going to require stations to tear down and replace entire transmitting plants. Let's watch and see how much of that actually happens. My bet is a couple of "show horse" facilities, maybe NPRs because they aren't ad-revenue driven, will be dutifully trotted out to illustrate the wonderful improvement in digital coverage to be enjoyed by eleven HD-FM listeners at the negligible capital cost of a half-mil or so. If there are many more "upgraded" facilities than that, I would expect to start hearing a fresh crop of adjacent-channel interference complaints.

 

[KB1OKL]

Yes again, thank you clone and Bob Savage. I often write tongue in cheek but I think many of us here are in agreement with a lot of both of your sentiments, IBOC needs to go. Despite my saying things like adios, nice to see you, etc. I don't think IBOC will go down without a long protracted bitter fight. They jumped pumped 15 billion more into it yesterday I believe. I still really do believe in a practical sense it is all over for IBOC in fact it is a never was but there is a lot of money behind it because for some obtuse reason which totally escapes me there are some in radio who despite all the bad press, radios either not sold or sold and then returned and consumer apathy bordering on hostility that still think it will be "the Savior" of radio. These people totally ignore the fact that it was the whole integrated experience of radio which made it some a welcome guest in your house and think that the alleged increase in fidelity which is actually synthesized will swoop everyone off their feet and have them storming the department stores trying to find these things. I think they all live in a little bubble which does not allow reality in.

 

[RememberWHEN]

Ooops...looks like they forgot to include the HD capability...maybe the licensing requirements scared them off...

http://www.silabs.com/public/docume...adcast/Radio_Tuners/en/Si473x_SW-LW_FINAL.pdf

 

[Tom Wells]

Ooops...looks like they forgot to include the HD capability...maybe the licensing requirements scared them off...

http://www.silabs.com/public/docume...adcast/Radio_Tuners/en/Si473x_SW-LW_FINAL.pdf

While y'all know how I feel about radios with no physical L and C, at least these folks have designed in for 1 khz steps, and seem to have
focused on straight radio (AM), without trying to cover any modes like SSB, synchronous AM, or data modes like RTTY, AMTOR, IBOC, etc.
Where the hell are the 455khz IF-channel AM converter designs already?
I have my own RF sections I'd prefer to use.

 

[JohnnyElectron]

I have found where AM IBOC works half-way decent - with musical format, single-tower/omnidirectional antennae without any phasor monkeybusiness. That seems to be where the codec works best and you don't have to play with receiving end antennae. Any directional activity = bye-bye. Digital delays added for sports talk call-in + cellphones + additional digital codec on remote sporting events all make the audio sound too shrill. Add thunderstorm within 2 states = bye-bye digital HD-AM lock, even on a 1A 50KW clear channel station.
Single tower omni AM with music - not many to go around, but the only ones I see benefitting from HD-AM or C-Quam stereo.

 

[rbrucecarter5]

Single tower omni AM with music - not many to go around, but the only ones I see benefitting from HD-AM or C-Quam stereo.

Don't extrapolate HD radio lock problems on C-Quam. C-Quam was always robust. I got reliable lock on DFW stations 300 miles away in the daytime - they sounded really good in stereo at that distance, as long as I wasn't near a power line. At night, C-Quam worked great on stations over 1000 miles away. I have a tremendous problem with them locally even getting an HD lock, much less keeping it.

If they were smart, the HD folks would just announce a "new scheme" for HD radio, quietly switch to C-Quam, and all the radios would decode it anyway. AMs would sound great, interference issues gone, the HD radios don't suffer from platform distortion that plagued early C-Quam receivers. The HD radios don't do a full, proper decode of C-Quam but it sounds better than mono, and they could potentially be reprogrammed to do the job right.

 

[Len14043]

With respect to AM radio, I believe IBOC is a moot point. In a post IBOC world, there will be many challenges to both AM and FM radio. IMHO, the greatest threat comes not from IBOC, but politicians. If the democrats expand their majorities in the congress and senate, and a democrat president is elected, the "fairness" doctrine will be re-instituted. That would push hosts like Limbaugh, Hannity, Savage, Bortz and many others to satellite and/or the internet. Savage, looking at your website, I would probably be a listener of "Whistle 1040" if I lived in the Rochester area. If the FD forces conservative talk to sat radio, many millions of listeners such as myself would likely go there too. After experiencing sat radio some of us would develop a liking for other sat channels and would be less likely to go to the local FM stations for music. Just my 2 cents from a listeners perspective.

 

[Savage]

I agree with you, Len. The Dems think they want the Fairness Doctrine back because they want to control the political discourse. But the realities of doing this invoke a version of the old "law of unintended consequences."

If they achieve hegemony in the federal government (House, Senate and 1600 Pa. Ave.) and actually ram the FD back into effect, two things will happen: (a) as you observe, the conservative talkers will simply move to the internet and satellite (they're already there anyway.) These hosts will not go away. This will spark enormous growth in both modes of radio content delivery. (b) Forcing Rush, Hannity, Ingraham et al to flee broadcast radio will cause one of the biggest backlashes in political history. It could have the effect of completely reversing the Democrats' moves to stuff the ballot box by creating "new constituencies" who would "hopefully" repeatedly vote in representatives to push new social agendas and entitlements. Woe betide tone-deaf political leaders who take Rush and his kin away from the Flyover States. These guys will hit back - mark my words.

Any attempt to reimpose the FD will spark years of First Amendment litigation. Think of the political fodder both sides could churn over this debate. The stakes on both sides are huge - which spells trouble for upsetting the status quo, if history is any guide.

And I further agree: against this backdrop, HD Radio has about as much relevance as how Nova Scotians feel about Kyoto.