I read with interest the MMTC’s (Minority Media Telecommunication Council) ideas for rescuing radio. In the summary, they make the statement:
By granting this Radio Rescue Plan quickly, the FCC can provide lenders and investors with assurance that the federal government stands behind the survival and sustainability of this industry that is so vital to public service, public safety, minority entrepreneurship and democracy
Red flag. Anytime some groups want to rush something through because of some perceived crisis, it should be closely examined for potential conflicts of interest.
It is fine to look into the rules and make changes as technology evolves, rushing some change through because the economy has gone south is not the best plan. If radio is in such bad shape that it needs a rules relaxation to survive, that indicates there is something seriously wrong with the underlying structure. No amount of rules changing is going to help that.
Anyway, they lay out some ideas, most of which have been batted about before and have had little of the intended affects.
- Re-purpose TV channel 5 and 6 to the FM broadcast band. Allow AM station to migrate there with a priority given to relieve interference issues on the AM band.
- Night time AM signal contour rules, relax requirement to cover 80 percent of city of license at night.
- Modify or eliminate principle community coverage rules
- Replace minimum efficiency standards for AM antenna systems with “minimum radiation standards”
- Allow FM applicants to specify Class C, C0, C1, (etc) in zone I and IA.
- Delete non-viable FM allotments from the table of allotments.
1. The first idea is to re-purpose TV channel 5 and 6 to the FM band. This would allow more FM stations to exist and presumably many AM station to migrate to the FM band. Sort of like the expanded AM band project in the 1990s where AM stations moved to the 1600-1700 khz range and then turned in their old licenses in the 540-1600 khz range to reduce interference. Worked out well except for the last part, almost no AM station that moved into the expanded band has ever turned in it’s original license. I doubt that they would in an AM to FM band migration.
Perhaps using this expanded FM band to move all of the NCE stations from the commercial channels and allow for LPFM’s to proliferate would be a good idea.
Then there is the problem of what to do with the various LPTV-6 stations that are still around.
I doubt the FCC will go for this because they can make too much money auctioning off the spectrum in one whole chunk to the highest bidder.
2. Night time AM coverage rules. The proposal is to allow a relaxing of the night time AM coverage rules over the city of license. Currently required to cover 80 percent of the area or population except in the expanded band, where the requirement is 50 percent. Making it all one uniform standard (50%) would make the most sense. Not that it would make a lot of difference listener wise, still, it might ease the burden on some AM station that would otherwise be solvent.
3. Modify or eliminate principle community coverage contours. This idea just seems like a way to satisfy more big radio consolidators and have more stations move out of their communities of license, which they are supposed to be serving. This is the money statement:
MTCC believes that modification fo these rules benefit small, women, minority, and all broadcasting licesnses by providing them with additional flexibility for site location
How? I still cannot fathom how this will benefit those groups mentioned above, seems like a generic statement with no merit.
The rim shot signals which are at least providing some type of radio programming to rural areas would cease to exist as they would all pick up and move toward population centers. This is a bad idea. The owners who bought rim shots should have known they were buying rim shots in the first place and not be expecting too much in the way of moving things around to accommodate their idea of what the FM broadcast band should be.
4. Replace minimum efficiency standards with a minimum radiation standard for AM antenna systems. The proposal states that when those standards were adopted, land was plentiful and electricity was not. I would comment that neither land nor electricity is plentiful today. Reducing this standard would open up potential AM station buyers to risk of investing in a bigger money pit than what AM radio currently is today.
In other words, it is a bad idea which would only cause potential owners to be saddled with huge electric bills and hasten the end of AM radio. As an engineer, I know that with the right amount of capacitance and inductance, I can load up an AM transmitter to a chain link fence. That doesn’t mean it is a good idea.
5. Allow FM applicants to specify class C, C0, C1, C2, C3, (etc) in zone I and IA. I presume they mean to allow a class B to specify class C2 and a class B1 to specify a class C3. This might make the application process a little more uniform, but I doubt it would make much difference in the FM band.
Also, they seem to use the term “spectrum warehousing” often. What does that mean? They make an elusion to the difference between a 54 dBu and a 60 dBu contour. Is that 6 dBu a “spectrum warehouse?” It is really nonsensical, sort of like “precious bodily fluids” in Dr. Strangelove.
6. Non-viable FM allotments. Sure, delete them or re-align them so that they might be usable to someone. Makes sense.
Heard in the clear