Really? People still want to have little FM stations? And they expect others to listen? If you want to reach a niche-group, ever heard about blogging?

Believe me, I want the power of CC and CBS Radio broken, and I am all for more variety on air, but it's not going to come from 3 mile stations. That is really not going to work. It's simply not worth the money you put in it.

by Jasper on Apr 21, 2009 10:33 am  

Hi Jasper -- well, blogging might work for some folks, but others really love -- and really need -- the organizing power and community feeling that comes from broadcasting out of a single place, to a community of interest. I worked with Prometheus Radio Project (http://www.prometheusradio.org) for 6+ years, and we met with civil rights organizations, churches, schools, immigrants rights groups -- hundreds of organizations and thousands of people who say that radio is right for them.

There are hundreds of these stations on the air now, breaking community news, launching the organizing careers of local activists, and providing a platform for youth and elders to come together.

Don't knock 'till you try, and remember that the airwaves are public. If we can finally change the law to allow thousands more groups, from cities to rural areas, to use their own airwaves, we'll have won a victory that will resonate for community broadband, for the spaces in between digital TV channels, and for other public resources from water to land to air.

Get on board by going to http://prometheusradio.org/take_action/ now!

by Hannah Sassaman on Apr 21, 2009 10:40 am  

If we can finally change the law to allow thousands more groups, from cities to rural areas, to use their own airwaves

The law is already that way. You're more than welcome to buy up a radio station.

That small groups can't afford to, or that small radio stations can't compete with bigger firms is a whole other issue. Ever hear of economies of scale? Oh wait, I forgot, community activism isn't supposed to apply logical analysis.

Who listens to radios anyway? They're too expensive. Podcasts are far cheaper, more durable, and easier to disseminate. Sounds like another waste of taxpayer dollars to me.

by MPC on Apr 21, 2009 11:09 am  

Right -- you can buy a radio station, but they cost millions -- out of the range of the local Methodist church or community college.

Big broadcasters have traditionally fought community radio because they don't want local music or voices on the air -- even broadcasting at 100 watts or less (which is the coverage range of LPFM, a few miles at most). But you should know that these noncommercial LPFM licenses are free, and it costs very little to operate a station. We've known groups with incredible volunteer energy who invest a few thousands dollars and then have a fully functional, 50+ volunteer operation.

For those of us without reliable internet access, radio is a vital form of communication, and one I'll always be fighting for! But thanks for your (sour) opinions, MPC. Back to work!

by Hannah Sassaman on Apr 21, 2009 11:25 am  

We need less radio not more. As Hannah Sassaman points out, the airwaves are public. We should be allocating spectrum to its highest and best uses, which means moving away from terrestrial radio broadcasts and towards wireless internet. That way anybody who wants can set up their own internet audio stream and anyone who wants can listen to it where ever they want.

by db on Apr 21, 2009 11:26 am  

I would also note that if people don't have reliable internet access, then that is the problem that should be addressed.

by db on Apr 21, 2009 11:30 am  

@MPC: Doesn't happen a lot, but we agree here. If you want audio, use podcasts.

@ dh: People who don't have reliable internet access, don't live in an area where local radio will ever be. Two examples in this article are Columbia Heights and South Arundel. People can't get reliable internet there? Come on. No reliable internet exists in central Montana. But guess what, there's nobody there to broadcast anything either.

@ Hannah: I have nothing against radio enthusiasts. In fact, I am one. However, I do know about local radio to know that 90+% is horribly amateurish, and an utter waste of time and money.

Yes, the airwaves are public. Yes, CC and CBS Radio forgot that years ago. But those two facts do not add up to having an infinity weak three mile stations.

I very strongly believe that if you want to reach niche-groups, you need to use blogging, or its audio version: podcasting. Podcasting is cheaper, and easier to distribute than radio, which makes is perfect for niche-casting. Get a mic for $80 and it even sounds good!

Breaking news doesn't exist on a square mile. Do you really think people will check their microstation if WTOP will report the same event within minutes? And what if you live in Georgetown and you want to know about things happening on Capitol Hill? Sorry, you're too far away, you can't get WHIL, you have to live with WGTN.

And yes, WTOP is a good example, because they are not part of CC and CBS Radio, but of Bonneville International, which only owns 23 stations. Yet WTOP is the fifth most grossing station in the US, and the only non-CC, CBS Radio, NY or LA station in the top 10.

by Jasper on Apr 21, 2009 12:18 pm  

I admit to being a little fuzzy on the FCC regs since I'm out of practice, but is there anything preventing individual hams from doing this sort of thing over the ham frequencies?

by Froggie - KI4FXU on Apr 21, 2009 12:33 pm  

Yes, blogs in communities like Washington, DC serve as an important avenue for information sharing. However, blogs are not enough because they cannot fill in all the gaps where the local media misses.

Also, you can't respond to an immediate emergency using a blog. For example, Brice Phillips' low power FM radio station, WQRZ LP, was one of only 4 stations in the region that remained on the air after Hurricane Katrina devastated the gulf coast. Phillips and his staff of volunteers provided vital information to those in search of food, water, and shelter.

There is plenty of space on the airwaves for multiple forms of media, the FCC just needs to open them up.

by Lynda on Apr 21, 2009 12:37 pm  

@MPC, @Jasper: Podcasts don't reach me, and I'm on the Internet several hours every day. I have almost never listened to a podcast, but I listen to the radio every day driving to and from work.

by Brad on Apr 21, 2009 1:33 pm  

I live in Philadelphia, where we have an extremely rare 1 watt radio station -- WPEB-FM. It covers more than 100,000 people, I'd guess, as it covers over 10 square blocks from its West Philadelphia broadcast tower.

On that station I get incredible local and world music, news from local union workers and high school students, and local musicians and pastors.

I listen to that station on the radio all the time in my kitchen. I almost never listen to podcasts, despite the fact that I use a computer regularly.

by Hannah Sassaman on Apr 21, 2009 1:35 pm  

@ Brad: With a 3 mile broadcasting radius, you're not gonna listen to these stations in your car either.

Furthermore: try podcasting. It's not that hard. You probably have an mp3-player. Whatever software you use to manage your mp3-player, it does have a podcast feature. It's not only for iPods. WMP, Winamp, Realplayer, they all ahve podcast options. Then, find which of your favorite programs have a podcast already, and listen to them when *you want to*, in stead of when they happen to air. If you have a fancy (i)phone (I don't) it even works on your phone.

Even better, make a playlist that automatically mixes snippets of your favorite programs with your favorite songs. Tadaa! Personal radio!

Anyway, not listening to podcasts because you're unfamiliar to them, is about the same argument as not listening to microstations because I don't know about them. Here's my pledge: find me a microstation in the Lorton area, and I'll try it at home. In return, you try some podcasting.

BTW: Why aren't the people at Prometheus already podcasting their programming? That way former inhabitants of the area can stay in touch!

by Jasper on Apr 21, 2009 1:57 pm  

@Jasper, you've assumed wrongly. I am perfectly able to listen to podcasts, but I choose not to. I've heard enough podcasts to conclude that they are an inefficient means of information transmission. I don't want to download stuff to my iPod (which I almost never use), and I don't want to listen at my desk, where I can read much faster than a podcast can talk. What I want is radio: turn it on in my car, listen while I drive, and enjoy the serendipity of content chosen by others.

You're certainly right that a 3-mile radius will limit listening time, but I daresay going three miles takes much longer in the District than in Lorton.

by Brad on Apr 21, 2009 2:29 pm  

Jasper, there is also the rarity of computer and reliable internet access, something often taken for granted. Some of those with computers may not have ones that run iTunes and thus have podcasting availability. Radio, on the other hand, is one of the most universal form of communication - cheap and readily accessible. The three miles is also an average - these signals can carry as far as 20 miles in some areas. A blog is no good if nobody has a computer or electricity.

by John on Apr 21, 2009 2:53 pm  

@ Bard: The fact that you choose not to listen to podcasts, is fine, but not an argument for or against it. Neither is my choice to barely listen to radio anymore, and rely on podcasts. It's a choice on how you consume your media. But it has nothing to do with the availability.

@ John: As I said before: You do not need iTunes to access podcasts. WMP, winamp, realpayer, they all allow podcasts. As podcast is nothing more than an audio-RSS feed. In fact, you don't even need a mp3-player for it. Most browsers and all computers will play them too.

Furthermore, I'd like to challenge your statement that radio is the most available form of communication. Internet is everywhere, thanks to wireless technology. And if you don't have a wireless computer, then you still have your phone. There are virtually no phones left that can not access the internet.

The fact that you choose not to use a technology does not mean it's not there.

Radio is there. But so is wireless internet. Especially here in DC. In fact, both are the same medium: electromagnetic waves. It's only the wavelength/frequency that are different. Even the access is equally easy or hard. Finding a radiostation on 105.2FM is equally hard as getting a podcast from www.podcast.com/show

The great advantage of podcasting is that it plays, pauses and stops when I want it to. Not when the broadcaster wants it to.

by Jasper on Apr 21, 2009 3:34 pm  

@Jasper, my point is that some people choose radio over podcasting. John's point is that some people cannot choose podcasting over radio. The fact that you are neither of these people does not mean they're not there.

by Brad on Apr 21, 2009 10:56 pm