Public radio wary of interference from new low-power FM stations
Originally published in Current, April 19, 1999
By Jacqueline Conciatore
NPR is warning stations and the public that the FCC's proposed low-power FM service could be a technological disaster.
What's at stake is "the ability to receive a radio station clearly," says Jim Paluzzi, an NPR Board member and head of West Coast Public Radio. "This is the most important issue facing public broadcasting in the last two decades."
The FCC in January proposed new rules that would allow hundreds and perhaps thousands of low-power FM stations. It proposed licensing 1,000-watt and 100-watt stations and sought comment on a third new microradio class, 1-10 watts. The deadline for filing comments, recently postponed by the commission, is now June 1.
The effect of NPR's position is to ally NPR with big media--the powerful National Association of Broadcasters (NAB) is unequivocally opposed to low-power FM--instead of the free-speech and community groups calling for greater access to the airwaves in the face of ever more concentrated media ownership. Paluzzi during an April 8 NPR Board meeting said there were plans to approach the NAB as a potential ally, but board Chair Kim Hodgson says that was probably only a suggestion, because he's unaware of any such plan.
NPR insists that it doesn't oppose low-power per se. "We've never said we're opposed," said spokesperson Siriol Evans. Rather, NPR is making its concerns known and may take a more definitive position once it has more info, she said.
Paluzzi at the board meeting said there were plans to rely on the public radio regional organizations--i.e., the stations--to meet with FCC commissioners and members of Congress about the issue. In March, West Coast Public Radio held a conference on spectrum management that focused largely on low-power.
Paluzzi articulated three areas of concern about the impact low-power would have on public radio:
Radio receivers won't be able to handle the increased traffic. NPR is co-sponsoring, with CPB and the Consumer Electronics Manufacturers Association, lab tests to measure electronic interference for typical radio receivers in the presence of full power and low-power signals. NPR is concerned about interference to reception of members' full service stations. If the FCC extends interference protection to the proposed 1,000-watt stations, as a primary service (it proposes 100-watt and below as a secondary service), NPR fears the influx of new stations would result in dislocation of public radio's translator and repeater stations, leaving listeners in some areas without a public radio signal.
Radio reading services could be hurt because their subcarrier signals are more sensitive to interference.
The addition of thousands of low-power stations could jeopardize the transition to the radio industry's anticipated digital transmission technology, In-Band, On-Channel (IBOC) broadcasting. In an April 1998 response to low-power FM proposals, NPR told the FCC that low-power stations would use the same channel spectrum that's required by all proposed IBOC systems. It would "render the promise of digital radio illusory," NPR said.
Because the FCC hasn't adopted a digital transmission standard yet, it can't know how low-power would impact the transition. Why not hold off on low-power until there are answers? Paluzzi asks.
FCC Chairman William Kennard has endorsed the addition of low-power service as a counterforce to media consolidation and homogeneity of service. In a Jan. 28 joint statement with Commissioner Gloria Tristani, Kennard said, "we cannot deny opportunities to those who want to use the airwaves to speak to their communities simply because it might be inconvenient for those who already have these opportunities." Recently when Rep. Billy Tauzin (R-La.), who chairs the House Commerce Committee communications subcommittee, came down on the FCC for the proposal, Kennard said: "There is enough room for the voices of churches, schools, and neighborhood groups as well as established radio companies."
Paluzzi rebuts: "What good is it to have more voices if you can't hear any one of them? More voices with bad engineering is cacophony. I don't think the public is going to be at all concerned about public broadcasters taking a strong stand for sound engineering practice."
It's a disparate population supporting low-power: community organizations including minority groups, churches and schools among them. Free-speech advocates were the earliest and most active, starting up hundreds of "pirate" microradio stations. Their campaign for a system of grassroots radio stations may be thwarted by the FCC proposal, which calls for mutually exclusive applications to be resolved by auctions--a process that would favor the applicants with the deepest pockets. The FCC may allow commercial activity and could allow five to 10 stations owned by the same entity.
The FCC in the past year has waged war against pirate stations, raiding and shutting down hundreds.
It says it's gotten over 13,000 inquiries from people who want to start a low-power station.
Earlier news: Pirate radio movement under attack from the FCC, 1998.
Outside link: Low-power FM section of FCC web site.
Web page created April 22, 1999
Current
The newspaper about public television and radio
in the United States
A service of Current Publishing Committee, Takoma Park, Md.
E-mail: webcurrent.org
301-270-7240
Copyright 1999
To Current's home page