Current Issue:



September 8:
The Radio Show Issue
Emmis CEO Jeff Smulyan




Click here to subscribe to Radio Ink.






Radio Ink Writers




















User Feedback

Saving The AM Band is a Very Hot Topic



Add a Comment

(10/5/2012 8:39:10 AM)   Flag as inappropriate content
I agree that the AM band is in need of an overhaul. When was the last time you spoke to anyone under the age of 40 that listens to an AM station? The newspaper business is a perfect example of what happens when you don't keep up with the changing habits and technology of your audience. For AM to survive, we need to shift to an All-Digital system - get rid of noisy analog - and do it quickly. Even now - it may be too late to regain the lost audience to other media.
- Dave
(10/4/2012 2:49:37 PM)   Flag as inappropriate content
Just Leave the AM band alone. It is doing fine. Some of those stations are using am digital in a Hybridized mode so existing anolog radio can received them in addition to new Cars standard am band digital technology. Today Stations can stream online in addition to broadcasting. Much of that streaming can be recieved via mobile devices crystal clear. There is no need to simultcast on an already crowded FM band.
- Henning Bjerre
(10/3/2012 8:39:23 PM)   Flag as inappropriate content
It's Back to the Future for Nazi radio!
- It's iNiquity's Volksemphanger!
(10/3/2012 6:03:13 PM)   Flag as inappropriate content
The FCC’s proposed limit of one pending FM translator application per Arbitron market will frustrate AM revitalization with a needless regulatory roadblock. Not only does it disregard the statutory language of the Local Community Radio Act of 2010, which speaks only of communities, but dismissing all but one commonly-owned application per market makes no practical sense either.

As an example, Conner Media has a pending petition for reconsideration of that restriction. It had filed applications to serve five separate population centers in the sprawling Greenville-New Bern-Jacksonville, NC market, with no overlap among them. That market has a multitude of AM stations needing nighttime service that would benefit from FM translators. Indeed, one of Conner’s applications is the only one pending in a town with an AM station authorized for only 78 watts at night. If forced to abandon all but one of our translator applications in this market, we clearly would select one in a more lucrative area.

One of the FCC’s primary policy rationales for the one-to-a-market cap was to deter speculation. But it is utterly unclear how imposing this draconian regulatory restriction upon applications filed nearly a decade ago in good-faith compliance with all existing requirements could possibly advance that goal. Rather, the FCC’s concern should focus upon the public interest in enabling AM stations to improve their service through FM translators.

After providing decades of local community service, AM clearly needs help now. The FCC claims to want to provide prompt relief. The pending FM translator applications are an immediately available way to provide that help. The Commission’s plan to dismiss the vast majority of pending FM translator applications and then open a future window for refiling, perhaps years hence, makes little sense, especially in light of the extreme delays in processing the current batch that has been pending since early 2003.

- Peter Gutmann
(10/3/2012 9:48:33 AM)   Flag as inappropriate content
Translators are FM, how does simulcasting AM radio station programming on the FM band save the AM band? I understand that FCC lawyers representing owners of AM stations would be better off. The author did state the problem correctly, electric-magnetic interference hear thur AM receivers is the problem,not the transmitters.Older tube type receivers with a green ground wire to attached to a water pipe or similar ground do a okay job of separation. Requiring better designed receivers would save AM
- V.J. Carr
(10/3/2012 2:27:46 AM)   Flag as inappropriate content
AM is dead, save for a few major market stations where they have not lost sports to FM. Otherwise, AM is flat lining and talk to "revive" the band, although quaint, is both pointless and unrealistic in the new age of digital and wireless high speed technologies. ...And by far, more people now have more immediate access to the internet (including wireless) than to AM radio.
- Bob
(10/2/2012 10:43:47 PM)   Flag as inappropriate content
To continue, one step won't solve the AM problem. AM's problems are technological (night power, noise level, fidelity), and many efforts have been made in the past to revitalize this band. I applaud all who are offering great community service with their AM's, but as Dave Richards states, it's time to move AM stations "back onto the main road" and BEGIN THE BEGINNING of finally fixing AM.

FM Translators are a great first step...

Migration seems to be the only comprehensive final step.

- Ben Smith


Add a Comment





 
Advertisements

Advertisements