Argumentum ad populum is a fallacy, David.
-
Get involved.
We want your input!
Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.
After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.
After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/
Thanks in advance and have fun!
RadioDiscussions Administrators
Some clear thinking on IBOC: Skotdal: AM Band Needs Drastic Change
- Thread starter KB1OKL
- Start date
I've never once done it. Ever.
We've had ratings for 85 years. Other than crackpots and the terminally ignorant, there have never been any broad indictments of ratings.
There have been complaints accompanied by documentation of faults in the various systems that needed to be modified in some way.
The Congressional hearings of the 60's were a combination of both: some serious and some grandstanding, crackpot congressmen were alarmed how ratings determined the programming on the public airwaves. The offshoot of this public spectacle was the creation of what is, today, the MRC.
For all the Latin you want to use, argumentum ad populum does not apply here as there have been congressional hearings, industry committees, and even occasional lawsuits within the broadcast industry. And since we are talking about polling and statistical sampling, we'd have to included the scrutiny of research in nearly every field of endeavor, both here and abroad. There has been plenty of scrutiny, study and inspection of all forms of research so to say that it is believed because it's always been that way is disingenuous.
Except for, you know, the fact that one household can throw off the entire sample to the point that entire ratings periods have to be recalculated, but let's just ignore that tiny flaw. And all the others. And while we're at it, let's just completely forget the fact that congressional hearings are held on all manner of problems that never get resolved.
The only crackpots and terminally ignorant people are those who believe that traditional radio is still relevant in this day and age, that any number of technologies will save it, and/or that digital isn't poised to replace it. Those of us living in reality have already moved into places where we'll continue to be successful in the long term.
As the problems are encountered, they are corrected. Remember that the influence of a single household is only a PPM issue... the 200 plus diary markets are unaffected. And Nielsen has instituted procedures to identify households where unusual listening occurs and to investigate them in the event there are things like one person carrying multiple meters, etc.
There have only been a couple of cases of re-issuance of PPM numbers since 2008. That's out of nearly 4000 total books issued in that period.
The issue with ratings was resolved by the mandate to create an oversight entity, overseen by the advertisers and not the media.
Sure, sure. And that is why Entercom just spent over $100 million for the Lincoln Financial stations as per today's announcements.
Yeah, because there have never been any similar issues with diaries. And the advertisers overseeing the ratings makes very little difference when there's no real competition among ratings firms. A monopoly is a monopoly no matter who's regulating it.
As for Entercom buying Lincoln Financial out, LF has been looking to sell for years and they just now found a buyer. That's not exactly a ringing endorsement of the medium.
As for Entercom buying Lincoln Financial out, LF has been looking to sell for years and they just now found a buyer. That's not exactly a ringing endorsement of the medium.
Large variances in a 12-week diary survey do not occur based on one household because the total 12-week sample is larger than the PPM panel and one person or household can only influence a single week. In the PPM, there is more vulnerability to outrider dwelling units because the same household can be in the sample for up to 104 weeks. Viewing the smaller 12-week PPM sample size, there is no comparison with diaries.
In general, the problems demanding reissuing of books in the diary have to do with things like improper ascription practices (often caused by a station putting odd data in its SIP), improper attribution for format swaps between two frequencies and media households having diaries for a week. In the case of media households, a book would only be reissued if it "materially" changes the rank of a station or its competitors... which is often not the case.
Advertisers do not oversee the ratings. The MRC is a separate entity with its own staff and offices and is supported financially by advertisers and, to some extent, by the media.
As I have said before, there have been plenty of different attempts to do ratings in the Arbitron era (1965 to present), but none has achieved success because the agencies are quite satisfied with Arbitron (Nielsen) and never saw a burning need to encourage or subscribe to a different service.
Lincoln Financial has been frequently reported to have been "asking too much" for the properties. There are few groups that could have fit this set of stations into their existing clusters and even fewer who could work out the kind of tax-friendly deal Entercom was amenable to.
CBS has had its smaller market stations open to offers for several years. The deals happen when properly matched buyers take interest.
None of that refutes anything I've said.
1st take IBOC off AM, Keep it on FM
R
rbrucecarter5
Guest
Take it off both. It severely affects coverage and building penetration. Nobody but me would notice it is gone from FM.
I don't know. It's already on the air. I'd say leave it on both bands, even though I can't stand the horrid buzz when it's on local 50KW AM stations -- it sounds even worse on AM than the mild buzz one hears on FM. But it's also a fact that not every AM station can afford the HD technology, so there's low chance the entire band will be covered with HD buzz.
In time HD may keep the AM band alive. Some stations will possibly go all HD, or have an analog channel and a high power HD channel (thinking way ahead to the time that the AM band thins out, as some believe will eventually happen). The technology's here, there are stations on the air using it, and I don't see the point in yanking it off the airwaves.
In time HD may keep the AM band alive. Some stations will possibly go all HD, or have an analog channel and a high power HD channel (thinking way ahead to the time that the AM band thins out, as some believe will eventually happen). The technology's here, there are stations on the air using it, and I don't see the point in yanking it off the airwaves.
R
rbrucecarter5
Guest
I just don't see it happening on AM. There is too much interference. I had one little capacitor blow in a 12V adapter for a micro-cell ATT gave me. So what you ask? It was a switching supply for 1.5A, and for a period of a couple of months, it produced horrible levels of RF interference that stretched down the block several houses each direction. Nobody noticed or complained. I was aware of it, but I am starting a company and had no time to track it down. Once I did, it diagnosed it in minutes. The thing is - every cell subscriber to ATT in my neighborhood was given a free microcell. And every one of those microcell power supplies has failed in the same way, so I am still getting incredible levels of RF interference that will probably never go away. Add to that the same cheap switching power supply design in EVERY SINGLE wall wart out there that has to supply 12V at greater than 500 ma, and you have a staggering number of cheap Chinese chargers around the country that are going to fail and jam the AM band. If not that - new washing machines with massive stepper motors. Or CFL bulbs you have to buy because the government interfered in our lighting decision. Or old light dimmers. Or bad nightlights. Or badly designed power tools with awful power factors. Or badly designed kitchen mixers with horrible power factors. Etc. Etc. Etc. NOTHING is going to solve the interference problem on AM. All digital HD cannot break through these incredible levels of interference. Moving to the country doesn't solve it - farm equipment is horrific interference generators. Awful, horrible, very bad, no hope because the FCC was filled with political appointees that do NOTHING about interference levels on the AM band. It is virtually useless, and the problem is getting worse by the day as China churns out more and more ultra cheap electronics and appliances. I can tell you - they have NO DESIGN SMARTS - for 9 years my job was to help them design things because they couldn't do it. HD AM is so prone to RF interference it drops at the slightest hint. I have to drive isolated stretches of road that have no powerlines nearby to decode ANY HD AM at all. Since most roads, streets, and hghways have power lines, and power lines go to houses, HD AM is out of luck. All digital - I doubt is much better. Given high levels of interference from just about everything - especially in houses and buildings - I don't see all digital listenable anywhere. Maybe cars - if they aren't too close to power lines and the signal is strong enough. I hate to say AM is doomed - but the two months my house was a jamming station - I didn't really miss AM. That's why I didn't fix it sooner. There is nothing on AM I care to listen to. All digital Rush, all digital sports, all digital foreign, all digital small church preaching - I'm not bothering.
So let's do the same thing to FM - it's coming as power supply switching frequencies creep up, more and more things like iExcess's that pump out FM interference, computers with higher and higher clock frequencies, TV that act like computers. Video games that act like Blu Ray players. Blu Ray players with higher and higher resolutions requiring higher and higher frequency circuitry. Smart cars, smart roads communicating on VHF or UHF or ISM. its only a matter of time before interference levels on FM equal those on AM. HD will not work on FM either, and analog FM will be unlistenable. Already - I lose weak LPFM stations when I drive in my garage - too much RF from the sprinkler system controller box and home network. Wait until those levels go up an order of magnitude - I will lose full power FM stations as well. There is only 10 dB difference as it is between LPFM and local full power at my location. Forget FM DX - it isn't possible in my wired "smart house". HD - solves nothing, it only makes the signal more vulnerable to interference. Stick a fork in both bands. They are DONE. Eventually.
40% of what American's cume AM?
Yeah, but 95% of those figures are listeners 65+.
So, maybe he should have said: "a band that nobody (who matters) cares about anymore."
Thats the reality.
Yeah, but 95% of those figures are listeners 65+.
So, maybe he should have said: "a band that nobody (who matters) cares about anymore."
Thats the reality.
It depends where you get your money. If it's from those listeners who think sending you their money will get them into heaven, then you might have something.
Because I don't know anybody over the age of 55 who won't send a check for any amount of money if they think it'll get them into the promised land.
Actually, about half is under 55.
RBruceCarter: I wasn't aware that HD on AM (or FM, for that matter) was so interference prone.
I had thought that the digital signal made HD AM more or less impervious to RFI. Obviously I was wrong.
I myself have less RFI on the AM band than I did when I was a kid and my folks' analog TV / light dimmers / electric blankets / power tools / etc. etc. made portions of the band a bear to listen to. I deal with more RFI on Shortwave than the AM band. My router puts out some hash, but it doesn't make the AM band unlistenable. My CFL bulbs only put out buzz up to 5-6 feet away, if that. The switching power supplies for my cell and tablet radiate RFI up to 4-5 feet away, if that. I guess I'm pretty lucky.
On HF, my neighbor's plasma TV makes the 41 meter band useless. Another neighbor's washing machine makes alien sounds that coat the HF spectrum from over a block away.
I had thought that the digital signal made HD AM more or less impervious to RFI. Obviously I was wrong.
I myself have less RFI on the AM band than I did when I was a kid and my folks' analog TV / light dimmers / electric blankets / power tools / etc. etc. made portions of the band a bear to listen to. I deal with more RFI on Shortwave than the AM band. My router puts out some hash, but it doesn't make the AM band unlistenable. My CFL bulbs only put out buzz up to 5-6 feet away, if that. The switching power supplies for my cell and tablet radiate RFI up to 4-5 feet away, if that. I guess I'm pretty lucky.
On HF, my neighbor's plasma TV makes the 41 meter band useless. Another neighbor's washing machine makes alien sounds that coat the HF spectrum from over a block away.
I discussed this topic with Andy a few weeks ago. I understand his point: just because AM goes all digital, it doesn't mean that it isn't susceptible to environmental electro-magnetic pollution. It still is and he saw it happen during testing. It's like saying DTV is impervious to multi-path interference. It isn't. It just doesn't manifest itself as "ghosting."
But as I said to Andy, there are some 300 TV stations, translators and CPs on channels 5&6 alone, not to mention stations that are on the other low VHF channels. There's nowhere else for them to go. Plus, the FCC has already said that low VHF will play a major role in finding displacement channels for TV stations in the repacking plan (Andy's idea was giving VHF channels 1-6 to radio).
One idea that I think should be explored and one that was suggested in RW several years ago was putting AM stations on DTV subchannels. There are several TV stations that are doing this already. No new band needs to be cleared, no new technology needs to be developed. The infrastructure is all in place. The NAB estimates that nearly 12 million households across the U.S. rely on terrestrial TV, and that number is growing as more people ditch pay-TV for free.
Granted, the downside is that there are no ATSC receivers in cars. Maybe that would be the next frontier for DTV: in the dash--at least as a secondary audio band.
Anyway, it's just an idea and it would be easy to implement.
But as I said to Andy, there are some 300 TV stations, translators and CPs on channels 5&6 alone, not to mention stations that are on the other low VHF channels. There's nowhere else for them to go. Plus, the FCC has already said that low VHF will play a major role in finding displacement channels for TV stations in the repacking plan (Andy's idea was giving VHF channels 1-6 to radio).
One idea that I think should be explored and one that was suggested in RW several years ago was putting AM stations on DTV subchannels. There are several TV stations that are doing this already. No new band needs to be cleared, no new technology needs to be developed. The infrastructure is all in place. The NAB estimates that nearly 12 million households across the U.S. rely on terrestrial TV, and that number is growing as more people ditch pay-TV for free.
Granted, the downside is that there are no ATSC receivers in cars. Maybe that would be the next frontier for DTV: in the dash--at least as a secondary audio band.
Anyway, it's just an idea and it would be easy to implement.
ATSC is a data steam...if it decides audio, the video is there as well......its not like the analog visual/aural carriers USED to be...
Also in a lot of states, it is ILLEGAL for a TV screen to be visible to the driver....you can forget about in dash TV receivers anytime soon (I think they should ban ALL video devices in the front seats PERIOD...yes, including the passenger....because you KNOW they will try to say "Hey LOOK AT THIS!" to the driver....sorta like the joke "Here hold my beer!")
Andy's plan was given 1-6 to radio???? Since when did TV RF 1 come back into existence??
TV RF 2-6 is not away...though I WOULD personally like to see something other than DTV there (IF the 600MHz band could be saved for that!) but the wireless folks dont want it....and DTV doesnt work there well with the current ERP levels.....FM OR a digital radio format would have been nice...but wont happen...Canada and Mexico still have those channels in use as well...unless its something that can be universal in N and Central America, it wont happen....
Also in a lot of states, it is ILLEGAL for a TV screen to be visible to the driver....you can forget about in dash TV receivers anytime soon (I think they should ban ALL video devices in the front seats PERIOD...yes, including the passenger....because you KNOW they will try to say "Hey LOOK AT THIS!" to the driver....sorta like the joke "Here hold my beer!")
Andy's plan was given 1-6 to radio???? Since when did TV RF 1 come back into existence??
TV RF 2-6 is not away...though I WOULD personally like to see something other than DTV there (IF the 600MHz band could be saved for that!) but the wireless folks dont want it....and DTV doesnt work there well with the current ERP levels.....FM OR a digital radio format would have been nice...but wont happen...Canada and Mexico still have those channels in use as well...unless its something that can be universal in N and Central America, it wont happen....
Just because an in-dash radio would receive the entire ATSC M/H package that does not mean it has to display the video, provided the radio does not have video capability.
I included VHF ch. 1 because Andy mentioned it in his comments even though it is not officially part of the TV band.
Actually, it is 8-VSB that doesn't work well on VHF. Experiments were recently carried out using COFDM as part of a proposed ATSC 3.0 standard on ch. 8. The results were surprisingly good--even in a moving vehicle.
I included VHF ch. 1 because Andy mentioned it in his comments even though it is not officially part of the TV band.
Actually, it is 8-VSB that doesn't work well on VHF. Experiments were recently carried out using COFDM as part of a proposed ATSC 3.0 standard on ch. 8. The results were surprisingly good--even in a moving vehicle.
Last edited:
That be a workable option. But I don't think we will see another band added to the dashboard.
- Status