Top Menu

What about Low-Power AM (LPAM)? | Blog posts | Radio Survivor Discussion Forums

Avatar

Please consider registering
guest

sp_LogInOut Log In sp_Registration Register sp_MemberList Members

Register | Lost password?
Advanced Search

— Forum Scope —




— Match —





— Forum Options —





Minimum search word length is 3 characters - maximum search word length is 84 characters

sp_Feed Topic RSS sp_TopicIcon
What about Low-Power AM (LPAM)?
sp_BlogLink Read the original blog post
August 7, 2017
1:39 pm
Avatar
Admin
Forum Posts: 120
Member Since:
January 19, 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

With the last group of low-power FM stations approved in the 2013 licensing window now going on the air—and no new LPFM windows scheduled—many folks are wondering what other licensed low-powered broadcasting opportunities might exist. So far this year we at Radio Survivor have fielded quite a few inquiries from people who would like to start a station, or who are simply curious about the subject.

A handful of them asked about the possibility for a low-power AM radio service. It’s a reasonable question, especially since in the last decade the FCC has made so-called “AM revitalization” one of its broadcast priorities, and the Netherlands approved its own low-power AM service last year (machine translation from Dutch).

As it turns out, several proposals to create a LPAM service have been submitted to the FCC, with the first coming in 1997. However, it’s obvious that none have become reality.

The proposal that received the most serious consideration came from a coalition of groups led by Don Schellhardt and Nick Leggett—the latter responsible for the first 1997 proposal—two members of the Amherst Alliance which also contributed to the proposal that kicked off the eventual creation of LPFM. Filed in August, 2005, this petition suggested a commercial low-power service. Commercial, because petitioners contended that stations would need advertising revenue to be economically viable, in addition to providing advertising opportunities for small businesses unable to afford time on full-power stations.

I interviewed Schellhardt about it back in 2004 for my old radio show and podcast, “Mediageek.” The archive audio is still available.

That proposal was itself a follow-up to one filed two years earlier by broadcast engineer Fred Baumbartner, which was never taken up by the FCC. This time around the Commission did open up a proceeding, RM–11287, in which about 75 comments were filed. The filing didn’t escape the attention of commercial broadcast industry groups, which generally opposed the idea. The National Association of Broadcasters wrote, “the LPAM Petition threatens to undermine the Commission’s efforts to clean up and improve the AM band,” presaging the current AM Revitalization effort.

A year later the original petitioners, joined by REC Networks, submitted a “streamlined proposal” to use technical specifications inspired by 10-watt Travelers’ Information Stations. Those are the stations which you’ll see advertised on the highway offering road condition updates and tourist information.

Ultimately the LPAM proposal received no additional action from the FCC, and the proceeding was closed formally on January 30, 2015.

Gone, perhaps, but not forgotten. Only seven months later Radio World published a commentary by independent broadcaster Jim Potter advocating for LPAM in order to revive “live and local” radio.

Making no reference to the earlier Schellhardt/Leggett or Baumgartner petitions, Potter called for stations to be licensed at 250 to 500 watts of power (Schellhardt/Leggett originally proposed just 100 watts, the same as LPFM), but did not specify commercial or non-commercial service. “ He argued that high-powered AM stations, "are doomed to wither because large mass-appeal stations cannot serve the ever-increasing diversity of large urban populations." The solution would be low-powered AM stations for communities to,

"satisfy their own local needs, including radio swap shop; city council and school board meetings; ask the mayor call-in shows; high school ballgame remotes; community calendar, school lunch menus, local news and views and inexpensive spots read live by the local announcer. In other words, live and local content, reasons for folks to dust off their kitchen AM radios and find the new station in town. Fancy that!"

(The tenor of this argument ought to sound pretty worn in to anyone familiar to community radio and LPFM.)

Though the FCC decided not to carry low-power AM forward, that doesn’t mean the idea doesn’t have merit and isn’t technically feasibly. Rather, as it is with communications policy, the barrier is political. Not political as in Republican or Democratic, but political with respect to the power of numbers.

Looking over the comments to the Schellhardt/Leggett proposal it’s clear there just wasn’t a groundswell of support. By comparison, the push for LPFM in the late 90s joined together a broad coalition that even included the United Church of Christ, alongside a multitude of broadcast professionals, public interest groups, musicians, artists and individuals, with tens of thousands of filings submitted to the FCC.

I don’t fault the original LPAM petitioners for the outcome. Building the needed coalition and overwhelming grassroots support is hard, hard work, and only a tiny fraction of proposals to the FCC are ever granted any kind of consideration, never mind actually becoming policy. My sense is that AM radio simply isn’t that attractive to enough groups and people. Moreover, many of the advocacy groups one might expect to back a new low-powered radio service are likely preoccupied (if not overwhelmed) with supporting existing and new LPFM stations, or focused on other enormous public interest battles, like net neutrality and media ownership.

So, I have to conclude that a new low-power AM broadcast service in the U.S. is very unlikely. That said, anyone can submit a fresh proposal and dig in. However, it would be wise to learn from the previous proposals and the success of LPFM and think about how to build a movement—especially one that can meet or beat the expected resistance from the established broadcast industry, which has consistently opposed all low-powered radio efforts of the last twenty years.

That said, if you’re interested in getting on the air I’d strongly recommend researching to see if there’s an existing community radio station or new LPFM in your area. To aid in your search, Wikipedia has a reasonably accurate list of community stations (though unhelpfully listed alphabetically, rather than geographically), and REC Networks maintains a list of low-power FM construction permits that have been granted since 2013. Odds are there’s a station somewhere that could use some help and some new programmers. It may not be as exciting as starting your own station, but it’s also not nearly as expensive or labor-intensive. In any event, any opportunity to broadcast is valuable, and shouldn’t be dismissed.

August 21, 2017
5:44 pm
Avatar
New Member
Members
Forum Posts: 0
Member Since:
August 21, 2017
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

I am a "Licensed Broadcaster" of a 1,000 Watt Daytimer. I am 101% for LPAM. There are so many small towns that have no radio station. FM is a waste of time, although, I did file for a FM Translator for my AM Station this past August. I did this because I don't have a clue what Commissioner Pai is going to do for AM and the fear of the Federal Government shutting AM down.

I don't think the Federal Government will do what Canada has done, but we need to hold on tight to the channels in the MW Band! I am for what has been proposed. Right now, unlicensed AM at .01 watt is is nothing and full of crap! A nice power would be 1 watt with 50 feet of antenna, and if no interference is found another watt or two wouldn't hurt.

More Class "C", (Old Class 1V) Channels should be created in the extended band. If the LPAM Rule Making is granted, it will shut up these big time corporations about the pirates on FM. The Pirates will continue unless the FCC and Congress will give them something, and LPAM is the answer!

Scott Bailey, WMRO-AM, Gallatin, TN

August 23, 2017
12:36 am
Avatar
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 125
Member Since:
August 18, 2017
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

of life within the earth, not to mention worms and perforated insects. Biologists have been looking for signs of life cheap Coach Handbags sale on Mars before exploring the surface of the earth. Barbara Sherwood Lollar, a geologist at the University of Toronto, Canada, says the general view is that the depths of the earth are very poor. Until the nuclear war race Coach Bags Shoulder Bags to overthrow this orthodox theory. In the 1980s, the United States would seal the radioactive waste jar in the ground. The US Department of Energy authorities worry that if there are microbes in the depths of the ground, they may digest these sealed cans. In 1987, in order to lift this fear, the US Department of Energy sponsored a research team to find the life of small caliber wells beneath the Savannah River facility in South Carolina. Surprisingly, the scientists found bacteria in the depths of 500 meters and called single cell organic matter called paleus. Then scientists found that underground life not only exists, but also very common. In 1992, John Parkes of the University of Cardiff in the UK found that sediments were filled with life in the waters of Japan. Even at the depth of 500 meters of the sea, they found 11 million microbes per cubic meter Nike Lunar Womens of soil. Which contains the meaning of extraordinary. Even if you take into account the heat inside the earth will kill the underground 4000 meters deep in any life, it still exists enough space for a large number of life to survive. It is estimated that the subsurface contains about 1% to 10% of the world's biomass, and a more detailed exploration of the crust will further determine this value. At the same time, the focus of the study has shifted to answering some of the most pressing problems, that is, the challenge of deep underground organic matter. The first question is how do they eat in such a barren environment? For example, microbes living underground in the seabed must have been buried in the seabed before being buried in the subsurface sediments thousands of years ago. Around the Nike Air Max Shoes Outlet soil only a small amount of nutrients, there is no fresh food source, the microbial has long been extremely hungry. Indeed, taking into account the microscopic observation of these microbes show a weird quiescent state, some skeptics argue that these are well preserved long-term death of the cell corpses, rather than living organisms. However, this is not the result of Yuki Morono, Japan's Ocean Science and Technology Agency, Japan's Southern Valley. His team used Nike Free TR Fit the depths of 220 meters above the Pacific Ocean in Japan and found a sample of 46,000-year-old sediments and marked them with a sufficient source of food for stable carbon and nitrogen isotopes. Two months later, the wild trees found traces of isotopes in three-quarters of cell samples. This means that these cells are still living cells, although from their behavior Shoes Outlet you may not be able to distinguish. The wild trees say that the pace of their lives is so slow compared to us. It is very difficult to distinguish between living cells and dead cells. The key feature of their survival is the extremely slow metabolism that makes the food source less abundant for thousands of years. 'When life comes, there are a lot of violent geological processes,' says Snowwood Loreal. But we must consider another very convincing possibility that life is at the warmth of the fault. It can protect life from severe asteroid impact, or the deadly ultraviolet rays exposed by the early earth. There is no doubt that this is a mainstream theory: most people believe that the ocean's hydrothermal vents are the cradle of Earth's life. But even if the crust did not witness the appearance of the first form of life, they were almost certainly the last refuge of organic matter at the end of life on earth. Jack O'Malley-James and his colleagues modeled the possible fate of life on Earth last year because the increasingly aging sun could lead to an increasingly global environment The worse. This model shows that about one billion years later, the earth's oceans will evaporate, the only surviving life will be located deep underground, they may be able to continue to live 1 billion years. Whether it is tropical rain forest, tropical grassland or coral reefs, the planet's most lasting and stable life characteristics, may be deep sea life. This may be the same for other planets. 'The results of the Deep Sea Biosphere have completely changed the strategy of exploring life forms on other planets,' says Snowwood Loreal. In the 1970s, Cheap Coach Bags the Pirates of Mars went to Mars to find signs of life on the surface of Mars, and now we know that signs of life are likely to appear in the basement. The discovery of the armor of the animal door has ignited the new hope of finding a complex form of life. At the moment many people have focused on the ground. Pushe said: This is the last part of the earth that has not been developed. We expect more exciting discoveries in the future, including animals and single cell organisms. Science and Technology NewsCan we sleep less? I do not know how many people fantasy if not sleep can energetic, like eating a du

Forum Timezone: America/Los_Angeles

Most Users Ever Online: 61

Currently Online: carter@123
12 Guest(s)

Currently Browsing this Page:
1 Guest(s)

Member Stats:

Guest Posters: 3749

Members: 3333

Moderators: 0

Admins: 4

Forum Stats:

Groups: 5

Forums: 18

Topics: 11790

Posts: 12326

Powered by WordPress. Designed by WooThemes