• 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

Why are politicians trying to harm satellite radio?

E

eGillCVI

Guest
Look at this crap. Does this bill serve any purpose other than trying to do harm to satellite radio? I wonder who's paying these piece-of-crap politicians to act like this is a matter of importance.<blockquote>Bill Blocking Local Material On Satellite Radio Introduced In Senate
Sens. OLYMPIA SNOWE (R-ME), MAX BAUCUS (D-MT), and TRENT LOTT (R-MS) have introduced a bill requiring the FCC to launch a rulemaking to "preserve local radio broadcast emergency and other services." The bill slaps further restrictions on satellite radio's ability to provide local programming, and makes the FCC hold a rulemaking proceeding to examine whether to continue to allow the satellite systems to broadcast local material on national channels, as they do now with traffic and weather. The bill is similar to H.R. 998, which is making its way through Congress.

A statement from NAB Pres./CEO DAVID REHR lauded the new bill, saying "It is crystal clear that both XM and SIRIUS– with nearly $1 billion in combined losses last year and having failed as a national programming service– are skirting the intent of their original FCC licenses. This bill holds satellite radio accountable to those licenses.

"With introduction of today’s legislation – coupled with a companion bill in the House - NAB looks forward to educating lawmakers on the invaluable role played by free, local radio every day in communities all across AMERICA."</blockquote>
 
> Look at this crap. Does this bill serve any purpose other
> than trying to do harm to satellite radio? I wonder who's
> paying these piece-of-crap politicians to act like this is a
> matter of importance.Bill Blocking Local Material On
> Satellite Radio Introduced In Senate
> Sens. OLYMPIA SNOWE (R-ME), MAX BAUCUS (D-MT), and TRENT
> LOTT (R-MS) have introduced a bill requiring the FCC to
> launch a rulemaking to "preserve local radio broadcast
> emergency and other services."

Sirius and XM better hurry up and get some lobbyists down to Washington ... and probably wouldn't be a bad thing, either, for them to start making some heavy political contributions to both parties.
Sad, but that's what this is all about. NAB practically wrote this bill.

Hurricanes this year took out a good number of AM and FM radio stations. Would these politicians - who are also probably complaining about emergency response to those hurricanes - rather have affected residents have NO local radio information, or have the ability for that information to be distributed via satellite?
 
> Hurricanes this year took out a good number of AM and FM
> radio stations. Would these politicians - who are also
> probably complaining about emergency response to those
> hurricanes - rather have affected residents have NO local
> radio information, or have the ability for that information
> to be distributed via satellite?


that is common sense and you know a few of politicians dont have enough of that but that is a good idea
 
> > Hurricanes this year took out a good number of AM and FM
> > radio stations. Would these politicians - who are also
> > probably complaining about emergency response to those
> > hurricanes - rather have affected residents have NO local
> > radio information, or have the ability for that
> information
> > to be distributed via satellite?
>
>
> that is common sense and you know a few of politicians dont
> have enough of that but that is a good idea
>

Terrestrial radio, no matter how many corners are cut and shifts are voicetracked, employs many, many more people than terrestrial radio. XM and Sirius are self-contained operations and benefit the economies only of Washington and New York. If satellite radio takes over most of the functions of local radio, draws local ad dollars (or even national ad dollars) away from local radio, and reduces listenership to local radio significantly, local radio will hemorrhage jobs, LOCAL jobs. Even if there are no local jocks at the station, you still have the engineering staff, the sales staff, the receptionists, the maintenance staff. With two companies controlling satellite radio -- and at least in XM's case getting leaner and meaner vis-a-vis hiring of air staff -- where are all these jobless LOCAL people going to go?

Yes, terrestrial radio has powerful lobbyists. How can it afford them? By making a lot of money, more money than satellite radio will ever make. Do I like what it's trying to do to satellite radio? No. But just accusing the politicians of being in the pocket of big business is only part of the story. The big business in question is keeping food on the tables of working people in Hartford and Des Moines and Billings, places that XM and Sirius will never employ a soul. What's wrong with politicians taking a stand on behalf of their constituents?
 
> Yes, terrestrial radio has powerful lobbyists. How can it
> afford them? By making a lot of money, more money than
> satellite radio will ever make. Do I like what it's trying
> to do to satellite radio? No. But just accusing the
> politicians of being in the pocket of big business is only
> part of the story. The big business in question is keeping
> food on the tables of working people in Hartford and Des
> Moines and Billings, places that XM and Sirius will never
> employ a soul. What's wrong with politicians taking a stand
> on behalf of their constituents?
>
I guess I'm just more jaded than you. If these same politicians were really concerned about local radio and jobs, then they should not have approved one company owning as many radio stations as possible nationwide and up to eight in each market. When one company could only own an AM and FM in one market, that was one GM for every one or two stations. Now, one GM can manage eight stations. That's a loss of between three and seven jobs in one market. For that matter, if we're talking about radio jobs, then they should have retained public service requirements to create more radio news jobs.

If AM and FM radio want to sustain their business levels, then they should concentrate on the benefit they have: being local. That will save AM and FM radio, not legislation in Congress.
 
> > Yes, terrestrial radio has powerful lobbyists. How can it
> > afford them? By making a lot of money, more money than
> > satellite radio will ever make. Do I like what it's trying
>
> > to do to satellite radio? No. But just accusing the
> > politicians of being in the pocket of big business is only
>
> > part of the story. The big business in question is keeping
>
> > food on the tables of working people in Hartford and Des
> > Moines and Billings, places that XM and Sirius will never
> > employ a soul. What's wrong with politicians taking a
> stand
> > on behalf of their constituents?
> >
> I guess I'm just more jaded than you. If these same
> politicians were really concerned about local radio and
> jobs, then they should not have approved one company owning
> as many radio stations as possible nationwide and up to
> eight in each market. When one company could only own an AM
> and FM in one market, that was one GM for every one or two
> stations. Now, one GM can manage eight stations. That's a
> loss of between three and seven jobs in one market.

And the number of jobs will remain -- even if that number is only one -- will still be greater than the number of jobs that satellite radio will ever create in that market.
 
Cable TV came along and did the same thing to television. Those stations--and the local jobs contained therein--are still around...and many of them see increased penetrating because of cable! I don't buy it.

> Terrestrial radio, no matter how many corners are cut and
> shifts are voicetracked, employs many, many more people than
> terrestrial radio. XM and Sirius are self-contained
> operations and benefit the economies only of Washington and
> New York. If satellite radio takes over most of the
> functions of local radio, draws local ad dollars (or even
> national ad dollars) away from local radio, and reduces
> listenership to local radio significantly, local radio will
> hemorrhage jobs, LOCAL jobs. Even if there are no local
> jocks at the station, you still have the engineering staff,
> the sales staff, the receptionists, the maintenance staff.
> With two companies controlling satellite radio -- and at
> least in XM's case getting leaner and meaner vis-a-vis
> hiring of air staff -- where are all these jobless LOCAL
> people going to go?
>
> Yes, terrestrial radio has powerful lobbyists. How can it
> afford them? By making a lot of money, more money than
> satellite radio will ever make. Do I like what it's trying
> to do to satellite radio? No. But just accusing the
> politicians of being in the pocket of big business is only
> part of the story. The big business in question is keeping
> food on the tables of working people in Hartford and Des
> Moines and Billings, places that XM and Sirius will never
> employ a soul. What's wrong with politicians taking a stand
> on behalf of their constituents?
>
 
Couldn't have said it better myself!

> I guess I'm just more jaded than you. If these same
> politicians were really concerned about local radio and
> jobs, then they should not have approved one company owning
> as many radio stations as possible nationwide and up to
> eight in each market. When one company could only own an AM
> and FM in one market, that was one GM for every one or two
> stations. Now, one GM can manage eight stations. That's a
> loss of between three and seven jobs in one market. For that
> matter, if we're talking about radio jobs, then they should
> have retained public service requirements to create more
> radio news jobs.
>
> If AM and FM radio want to sustain their business levels,
> then they should concentrate on the benefit they have: being
> local. That will save AM and FM radio, not legislation in
> Congress.
>
 
Our Government should not help, or hinder any business over another. Let the free market decide... but this works both ways.

Am/Fm stations should not have obscenity restrictions. Content should not be regulated in any way.

Satillite Stations should be alowed to provide whatever content they want,, be it local or national.

Let the public decide if they would rather pay a monthly fee and have no commercials, or pay no fee and deal with spots. But don't put any content regulations on either.
 
Our Government should not help, or hinder any business over another. Let the free market decide... but this works both ways.

Am/Fm stations should not have obscenity restrictions. Content should not be regulated in any way.

Satillite Stations should be alowed to provide whatever content they want,, be it local or national.

Let the public decide if they would rather pay a monthly fee and have no commercials, or pay no fee and deal with spots. But don't put any content regulations on either.
 
Let me start by saying that I am playing both sides of the fence. I work in terrestrial radio and have multiple subs to both Sirius and XM. I very much enjoy my satellite radio subs. The channels offering formats that are not available on AM or FM radio in most markets are really cool! I spend time every day with Highway 16 and Audio Visions on XM and The Big 80s, Standard Time and Prime Country on Sirius. I understand how fans feel about the service. Working in terrestrial radio for over 25 years, I also understand the other side.

Hate the NAB all you want, but they are just doing their job. Their existence is SOLELY funded by the radio and television stations they represent. Their sole purpose is to protect the interests of their members. If XM and Sirius were abiding by the original terms and intent of their licenses, legislation like we are discussing wouldn't be in play.

When the original satellite radio licenses (construction permits) were granted back in the 90s it was understood that they were to be a national service. Whether you think that is fair or not is a moot point, it was a term of their licenses and they accepted it when they accepted the licenses. What both licensees proposed to the FCC when they were granted their licenses was to offer 60 or so CD quality digital channels. The spectrum they were granted by the FCC was ample for that number of channels. The use of terrestrial repeaters was to be limited to just a few areas where satellite reception was simply not possible. It would appear that neither XM nor Sirius have operated in the spirit of the terms of the licenses they were granted.

The local traffic and weather channels are clearly a violation of the original conditions and intent of their licenses to be a national service. The fact that they are broadcasting those channels nationwide is a bad defense. Under their current licenses they have no choice but broadcast them nationwide. The truth is, they would love to be able to transmit them on the terrestrial repeaters for the markets for which they were intended only.

Instead of 60 or so CD quality digital channels we have over 150 Internet stream quality channels. In the name of competitive advantage they have strayed miles away from their original purpose. We could debate whether quantity over quality is a good or bad thing, but it was not what they were originally licensed to do.

They have built extensive terrestrial repeater networks giving them coverage up to 15 miles away from the center of most major market downtown areas, giving them huge expanses of terrestrial coverage over densely populated areas where there are no legitimate satellite reception issues. This reeks of plans to insert local program content in specific markets. While you may have no problem with that, it is not what they were originally licensed to do.

All FCC licensed services are expected to abide by the original terms and conditions of their licenses until such a time as they have requested and been granted permission to stray from those original conditions. Because the FCC has been slow to act (or have completely failed to act) on condition violations pointed out to them, the NAB has recruited help with some political clout. If XM and Sirius want to change the conditions of their licenses they need to go before the FCC and try to make their case instead of doing it in the shadows. In the meantime, expect the NAB to fight for terrestrial radio to the death.



> > Yes, terrestrial radio has powerful lobbyists. How can it
> > afford them? By making a lot of money, more money than
> > satellite radio will ever make. Do I like what it's trying
>
> > to do to satellite radio? No. But just accusing the
> > politicians of being in the pocket of big business is only
>
> > part of the story. The big business in question is keeping
>
> > food on the tables of working people in Hartford and Des
> > Moines and Billings, places that XM and Sirius will never
> > employ a soul. What's wrong with politicians taking a
> stand
> > on behalf of their constituents?
> >
> I guess I'm just more jaded than you. If these same
> politicians were really concerned about local radio and
> jobs, then they should not have approved one company owning
> as many radio stations as possible nationwide and up to
> eight in each market. When one company could only own an AM
> and FM in one market, that was one GM for every one or two
> stations. Now, one GM can manage eight stations. That's a
> loss of between three and seven jobs in one market. For that
> matter, if we're talking about radio jobs, then they should
> have retained public service requirements to create more
> radio news jobs.
>
> If AM and FM radio want to sustain their business levels,
> then they should concentrate on the benefit they have: being
> local. That will save AM and FM radio, not legislation in
> Congress.
>
<P ID="signature">______________
Deano</P>
 
> Terrestrial radio, no matter how many corners are cut and
> shifts are voicetracked, employs many, many more people than
> terrestrial radio.

I agree that Terrestrial radio with an upper case "T" employs more people than terrestrial radio with a lower case "t"! The size of the letter requires more work.
Now, will you agree that proof reading ones posts before sending them is a good thing?<P ID="signature">______________
Proud 2 B a pioneering satellite radio subs¢riber
Ai4i is always on the trailing edge of technology
______________</P>
 
> > Terrestrial radio, no matter how many corners are cut and
> > shifts are voicetracked, employs many, many more people
> than
> > terrestrial radio.
>
> I agree that Terrestrial radio with an upper case "T"
> employs more people than terrestrial radio with a lower case
> "t"! The size of the letter requires more work.
> Now, will you agree that proof reading ones posts before
> sending them is a good thing?
>

I proof them for typos. Unfortunately, I spelled "terrestrial" correctly both times. Ugh.

Embarrassing, especially for me, a copy editor by trade! Wish I could edit it now, but the statute of limitations (or whatever) has run out.
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom