50 new of 99 responses total.
BTW Rane fm stations are spaced at .2 mhz not .1 that still leaves space for 100 broadcasters in an given area. Also here is an interesting article in the Washington Post on micro power broadcasting that was written before the liscenses for micro power broadcast were all but killed in December of last year: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A2125-2000May14.h tml
Here is an interesting article from the Libertarian perspective in Reason magazine on how "spectrum scarcity" is a red herring created by the FCC. http://www.reason.com/9510/WALKERfeat.html
It's probably pointless to bring history up. The FCC was moving forward vigorously on a proposal to license hundreds of low-power stations. The broadcast lobby and NPR went to Congress and legislation forbidding the FCC from working on this issue, at all, ever, was embedded in one of the giant end-of-session omnibus bills. Clinton had promised to defend the low power broadcasting proposal but he was unwilling to take it as far as vetoing the omnibus bill and shutting down the government again. (This was in late 2000.) I do not have a technical background, but from what I've read I believe that the broadcast lobby lied about the technical threats posed by the low power stations in order to get Congress to roll over. Congress will do anything for the broadcast lobby, since they need access to the airwaves to run ads for re-election. Anyway, the FCC worked really hard on trying to liberalize the low power broadcast rules, one really cannot have asked them to do more.
Re #51: In a world like the one the article suggests, where interference problems were resolved via lawsuits, I think you'd see even fewer small stations than there are now. The companies with the big pockets would still dominate, because they'd have the money to bring and win legal disputes.
Re #36: Broadcasters can have their licenses revoked if their use of the airwaves is "not in the public interest". If you have a problem with a station being a clone of another station on the dial, write letters to the FCC about their waste of spectrum not being in the public interest. Send a copy to the station with a note that it should go in their public file. Enough of this from enough people, and they may change format or fail to get their license renewed. (I *really* suggest this if you live in an area with a lot of religious broadcasters and no jazz, classical or NPR station. The right wing does it to everyone else, do it back to them.) As for the crank in #0, if he has 13,000 supporters willing to lend guns to his defense why the hell don't they all just put $5 in an envelope and mail it to him, giving him enough money to buy a broadcasting license and a certified transmitter? Re #38: Clue: Just because we own the Interstate system in common doesn't mean that we don't need rules for what you can do on it and how.
re #53 Good point that actually occured to me as well. I'm not a big fan of the livertarians but I welcome any creative constructive thought at this point on how to break the log jam the the big radio monopolies have on the airwaves. FYO in one of the articles I read it said Clear Channel communication owns 1200 radio satations, clearly that shows that the way the spectrum is being divied up is out of hand. p.s. I'm going to leave the livertarian typo I like it :-)
re #54 Did I say we didn't need rules Russ, I did not. What I suggested was that the current rules such as no fm transmiters can be liscensed under 100 watts (the elimination of the class d liscense) and the 4,000 dollar cost of a liscense to broadcast bias the process towards corporate and NPR style radio stations at the expense of smaller more diverse radio stations. I think this is a bad outcome and I would like to see it changed. Nowhere did I say anything such as "smash the state dude," if you thought that's what I was implying then that's all on you. :-)
Correction: stations are spaced at 0.2 Mhz in the FM band (at odd decimals.. x.1, x.3, etc). This does not change any of the above discussion to any significant degree.
re #57 true enough but it can fun to nitpick sometimes.
(Especially to pick one's own nits.....)
If someone can't come up with $4,000 for a broadcast license, how are they going to come up with the money to buy equipment and run a station? As I said earlier, I'm all for micropower stations, but the realities of setting up and running one is going to limit the diversity you seek. Whether you're in it for the music or for advancing a particular politicial cuase, you'll get much more bang for your buck by using a print media or setting up an Internet radio station.
$4000 will buy a lot of radio shack stuff ... ham fests and other technically oriented 'gatherings' and a few books (gasp! read!) on antenna theory ....viola! $3500 left over for budweiser!
re#61 Thanks tsty that's that's the gist of what I was about to say.
You guys are really underestimating the time and money it will take to run such an operation. Sure, you can buy cheap stuff at hamfests, but what are you going to do when it breaks? Where are you going to put the antenna? Chances are you're going to have to pay some rent for that space. Take a look at how much it costs us to run Grex. You better plan on at least that much to run a radio station.
Here's what Nick Farr, General Manager of WCBN, had to say: "Our budget is about $75,000; but that doesn't include rent or utilities for our facility, transmitter or antenna, *or* staff salaries. (Our staff is entirely student based, the exec staff positions get a small stipend that covers books for the term.) "Usually, a MINIMUM station budget is about $250-500,000, assuming that the DJ staff is volunteer and there are three full-time positions (General Manager, Program/Music Director and Chief Engineer). The smallest budget for a completely independent station, that we've seen, is $50,000 for a homebrew community radio station in Ohio run out of some guy's barn. Their studios, transmitter, and antenna are on the same small piece of farmland. His startup costs were in the $100,000 range. "Commercial stations usually run budgets at minimum of $1,000,000. "
re 41: Are you *crazy*? What's wrong with you?!!?! I mean, Budweiser?! Good God, man, you're sick. Sick!
Hey...remember it's tsty who posted that. :)
re #64 I suspect Stephen Dunifers budget for Radio Free Berkeley in a year is closer to 500 than 500,000. He runs it out of a backpack and manages to run a very tight on frequncy station at the same time being a former radio engineer. You have just swallowed corporate line hook line and sinker Dan.
If you only want to run a few watts then you can stick an antenna out your window. You only need a tower on some farmland if you are planning on pumping thousands of watts into the air. One full watt is pretty powerful, actually. At work we've used radio data terminals which put out 1 watt around 400MHz or so, and that signal can go a mile or two. At lower frequencies you can send a couple of watts quite a ways (hand-held CB radios).
Just put a good, tight, filter on the output. Mark From Michigan runs a watt or more out of his junk yard out there on Dexter Pinckney and the thing splatters all over the FM band! He needs a simple cavity to clean that mess up. (He could use the barrel of a cannon or something.)
One of the (commercial) AM stations in Houghton is (in)famous for pushing their transmitter a bit too hard. Every time there's a voice peak, it splatters, and you can hear buckshot all up and down the band.
WCBN is a corporation? When did that happen? I'm speaking both from my experience as an engineer, businessperson, and Grex board member--not as a corporate lackey. The rule of thumb in all those ventures is that it always costs more than you think it will. And I've yet to run into a situation where that rule of thumb was broken. All I can say, raven, is go for it. If you think you can do it on the cheap, and have it make an impact, be my guest.
Dan thanks to attitudes like yoursI can't for it without being criminal. That is really my main point, IF a micro power boradcaster takes the responsability to broadcast with a clean transmiter why should they be criminalized?
They won't be, if they get a license (but I presume you mean, without a license). Well, what right do you have to occupy that frequency by yourself when others might want to use it? Someone must judge your right compared to that of others, which is what licensing is. Also, if you use it unlicensed, what basis do you have for 'complaining' if others used the same frequency?
RE#69 -- does he actually transmit? I've listened a bit for that station, but never heard anything. If I remember he's awfully close to WUOM, bot in frequency and in location.
Re 73: But what if there seems to be plenty of frequencies available, but no way (or even an application process) to get a license to use them? In the last couple of years the FCC was about to allow micropower licenses, but a heavy lobbying effort by the National Association of Broadcasters (including NPR, which is disappointing) killed it.
RE#74-- Indeed he does. Perhaps not all the time but I've listened in several times. He must have some sort of robot playing music and adds on it. I've heard spots for Mill Creek Sporting Goods, a gun show at the Saline Fair Grounds, and a spot for that card store behind the Fox Village theater. The last time I picked it up I was just scanning the FM band in the basement of my house, located about two miles, as the crow flies, from his surplus museum. To top it off, it was going even though he's in jail. (As do the Friday meetings.)
re #72: I am FOR micropower radio stations. I want people to be able to get licenses to run them. BUT, as Rane points out, licensing is essential. All I can say is to keep lobbying your representatives and senators and get them to pass a law forcing the FCC to allow them.
Are the objections of NPR, NAB or anyone else easily available on the web? I've heard that they objected, but have not heard their reasons.
They objected on the grounds that it would create too much interference for people trying to listen to their stations, basically.
I'd like to see the details of the analysis that demonstrates that. If there are open channels at 0.2 Mhz intervals, how does the interference occur if those channels are used for minipower stations?
If you where broadcasting mini-power on 107.3fm, would your neighbor be able to get 107.1fm?
Sure. I can now hear separate stations on 91.1 and 91.3 (and similarly elsewhere on the 'dial'). It does depend somewhat on the quality of the transmitting and receiving equipment, however, so they are sufficiently selective. Transmitters for mini-stations would have to be type approved (and people take their chances when they buy receivers).
So what's the problem with somebody manufacturing micropower transmitters with sufficiently accurate transmission characteristics? It's commonplace in the world of cell phones and CD radios, and has been for years. If I recall, the biggest argument the anti-micropower lobby used was that "these amateurs would be all over the spectrum with their crappy homebrewed stations".
I don't mind the idea of getting a liscense as I have stated before. What I mind is that the liscense is 4000 dollars (which I don't have) and that it's the law that stations have to be over 100 watts (which adds even more to the expense of a station). If I am responsible about making sure the station doesn't overlap other stations and stays on frequency why should I be prohibited from broadcasting because I am a low income person? Perhaps for those in the upper middle class they can see no difference between a 4000 dollar liscense and say a 200 dollar liscense, but I can assure you when your means are limited that that is a large difference indeed. Also Stephen Dunifer states on his Radio Free Berkeley web site that there are now ic chips that will keep a micropower station on frequncy and from interfering with adjacent frequncies so the argument that low cost home brew stations can't be run responsibly.
is a lot of bs. For some reason the end of my last response got cut off when I posted it...
RE#80 -- I'm sure its in the public comments of the notice of rulemaking on the FCCs website, btu it's a bitch to find things on there. I remember reading about the NAB complaining that eliminating third channel separation was going to cause all sorts of chaos, 2nd channel separation was not enough for them.
Rane in resp:80 :: Analysis? What analysis? The FCC's studies said there would be no problem. The broadcast lobby made up a CD of bad-sounding radio, sent it to everyone in Congress, and claimed that this is what radio stations would sound like if the micropower proposal passed. Bluntly, the broadcast lobby *lied* to maintain its stranglehold.
Here's a URL for the FCC's discussion of that bogus CD the broadcasters sent to Congress: http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Engineering_Technology/News_Releases/2000/nret00 05.html
Re #82: The argument is more that, say I'm on the fringe of a commercial station's coverage area. Now let's say someone starts up a micropower FM station nearby on the same frequency. Their signal is either going to capture my receiver, or cause really annoying flutter between theirs and the commercial station's. Personally, I agree that this probably wouldn't have been a widespread problem, though it probably would have happened some places. The current broadcasters were simply acting in their own narrow self interest. Not only do they not want more competition, they really don't want the headaches of having to deal with more reception complaints.
Something wrong with that URL, Ken. Would you check it please, and post again? This may be the analysis that I asked about earlier. Because the transmitter would have to be type-approved, and each would be set up to operate only on the licensed frequency, I would judge that a 100 watt xmtr would cost ca. $1,000. I also think that the FCC would only license corporations to run such ministations, for the public protection that offers. That's not a big burden, however, as incorporation costs very little.
((Rane, I just retested the link by reading the conference through
Netscape and clicking on it, and it worked fine. My link seems to be wrapped
around two lines. If you can't get it to work, try a google search:
fcc low power disinformation hatfield
and that should get you right to the page.))
I thought I had corrected for the wrap, but I left a little bit because it did not show in the window into which I pasted the URL. Works OK now. The report answers my question: the FCC believes there are no valid reasons not to license the low power FM stations. Well, try, try, again. To succeed, of course, you have to get a lot of congresspersons to support the service.
IIRC, the law passed by Congress forbids the FCC from doing anying regarding low power licenses. Period. The agency is not allowed to make more studies or more proposals. Ever. Of course the law *could* be repealed. All you would have to do is outbid the broadcast lobby for the affections of Congress. Again IIRC, it was commented at the time that Congress had never before overruled the FCC on spectrum management. Big Lies and Big Money have closed this issue for the forseeable future.
It's just part of the country's continued shift to the right. The radio spectrum is now seen as a resource that can be auctioned off to the highest bidder.
The em spectrum is very valuable, and brings the government lots of money. I seem to recall that recently, a band of frequencies were auctioned off for some ludicrously large amount of money. It was supposed to be the most expensive auction purchase ever. iirc, Nokia got it, but I could be wrong.
the auction price is very cheap for the revenue produceing resource gained. What the goverment should get also is a piece of the action. Of gross revenue, not just net profit.
Re #96: In the case of radio and TV licenses, they do, I think. Aren't there annual renewal fees?
The amateur radio license must be renewed at 10 years intervals. I don't know what the interval is for commerical licenses.
It is much shorter for commerical (broadcast) licenses. Like every three or 4 years. re 97: re 96: I was thinking not only a percent of gross advertising revenue in the case of broadcasters (radio&TV), but also percent of revenue for wireless phone use.
You have several choices: