David Faulkner wrote: > Are the 50 kw clears now > committing suicide, finishing the job the FCC started several years ago?
The FCC, believe it or not, has no dog in this hunt. It is now, just as it was when the clear-channel breakdown started half a century ago, a political agency that responds to what it thinks the industry it regulates wants it to do, and to what it hears from its bosses in Congress, who control the FCC's budget. The breakdown of the clear channels began (as Mark Durenberger has documented in exquisite detail) when "have-not" broadcasters, most of them outside the big cities (disproportionately in the East and upper Midwest) that had the clear-channel allocations, went to Congress looking for more signal than they already had. All the FCC did was to rubber-stamp those requests (against strong protests, to the Commission and to Congress, from the established clears), just as it compliantly rubber-stamped IBOC, which was presented to it as a fait accompli by NAB...which in turn was acting in the interests of the big broadcasters who make up most of its membership. In the absence of a *coordinated*, well-funded campaign by the smaller AM broadcasters whose ox will be gored by IBOC, it was almost unimaginable that the FCC would do anything other than approved what it perceived as the "industry's" preferred digital solution. Unfortunately, it will now be tasked with cleaning up the messes that will result. s _______________________________________________ IRCA mailing list [email protected] http://montreal.kotalampi.com/mailman/listinfo/irca Opinions expressed in messages on this mailing list are those of the original contributors and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of the IRCA, its editors, publishing staff, or officers For more information: http://www.ircaonline.org To Post a message: [email protected]
