[BC] Expanded AM Band and License Return

[Dana Puopolo]

Yep.

The channels were given to them based upon a selection process involving
INTERFERENCE....NOT  one involving diversity!

Now...five years later...they want BOTH CHANNELS!

I say take BOTH channels away from the greedy bastards!


-D




On 6/19/06, Harold Hallikainen <harold at hallikainen.com> wrote:
> I found the article at
>
http://www.radioworld.com/reference-room/special-report/2006.06.21-03_rw_AM_ex_6.shtml
> interesting. I recall the expanded band was introduced to result in a long
> term reduction in interference on the AM band. Stations whose removal from
> the existing band would result in the greatest interference reduction were
> given a preference for licenses in the expanded band. During the
> transition, they were allowed to broadcast on both the old and new
> frequencies. I thought they were required to simulcast, but from what I
> read in this article, that does not seem to be the case. Anyway, these
> stations now do not want to give up the old channels. Not giving up the
> channels appears to result in an increase in local program diversity, but
> does not result in the original goal of interference reduction.
>
> Harold
>
>
> --
> FCC Rules Updated Daily at http://www.hallikainen.com - Advertising
> opportunities available!
>
> _______________________________________________
> This is the BROADCAST mailing list
> To send to the list, email: broadcast at radiolists.net
> For sub changes, archives and info on this other lists:
http://www.radiolists.net/
>


-- 
Paul B. Walker, Jr.
www.walkerbroadcasting.com
walkerbroadcasting at gmail.com

_______________________________________________
This is the BROADCAST mailing list
To send to the list, email: broadcast at radiolists.net
For sub changes, archives and info on this other lists:
http://www.radiolists.net/