Posted on 07/03/2004 6:11:22 PM PDT by ovrtaxt
| Broadcast Lobby Fighting Satellite Radio | ||||
|
|
||||
|
Friday, July 02, 2004
By Radley Balko
I haven't listened to FM radio in years. With a few exceptions, the artists I enjoy don't get airplay. If your taste in music runs deeper than Fred Durst, Kid Rock, or Jessica Simpson, you've probably experienced the same thing.
Last Christmas, someone bought me a receiver and a subscription to XM satellite radio. I now listen to radio again.
XM offers about a hundred stations, covering every genre of music you can imagine. There's a station called "Hank's Place," which plays only authentic 1950s-era country music. There's also "Frank's Place," which plays only Sinatra-ish standards. There are several jazz channels, a live channel, an acoustic channel, and a channel for unsigned bands. There are two channels of soul, three channels of Christian rock, two channels of thrash-speed metal, and nearly everything in between.
There's a comedy channel that plays stand-up snippets from Lenny Bruce, George Carlin and Richard Pryor; and another that plays more family-friendly bits. There are news, family and talk channels, and audio feeds from about a dozen cable television networks, including Fox News.
In short, XM is everything FM radio could be, but isn't. And so, predictably, FM radio interests are doing everything they can to keep XM at bay.
Traditional (sometimes called "terrestrial") FM radio stations are represented in Washington, D.C. by the National Association of Broadcasters (NAB), one of the oldest, most powerful, most entrenched lobbying organizations around. NAB has wielded that power at the expense of technology, innovation, and — ultimately — consumers.
NAB fought cable television through every stage of its development, meaning that if the NAB had its way, you'd have no FOX News, no Comedy Central, and no HBO. Just the big three networks. NAB failed there. But as Jesse Walker has documented in Reason magazine and in his book Rebels on the Air, the organization has for decades fought and succeeded in snuffing out similar efforts in radio. It's most notable victory came over the licensing of low-fi radio stations, which would have given thousands of amateurs, low-budget operators and undiscovered talent access to the airwaves.
More recently, traditional broadcasters were given huge swaths of spectrum (the invisible grid over which radio, TV, and cellular signals travel) for the development of High Definition TV — for free. Most everyone else who wants a slice of spectrum is required to pay for it. Yet broadcasters got theirs for free, leaving those interests pursuing similar technology (wi-fi and cellular providers, to name two) to fight for the scraps. It's hard to say exactly what innovations and technology that grant may have quashed. We'll never know because they were never given the chance to develop.
Which brings us to the NAB's latest fight — against satellite radio. About a decade ago, XM and Sirius approached the FCC to bid on satellite spectrum. Wary of the NAB and its Washington chest-thumping prowess, XM agreed that in exchange for a slice of spectrum, it would not offer the kind of localized programming that would put it in direct competition with terrestrial broadcasters.
Put another way, XM subscribers in Los Angeles would hear the same stuff as XM subscribers in Portland, Dallas, or Poughkeepsie. With a titan like NAB standing in the door, this gentleman's agreement was really the only way an upstart like XM could have gotten into the game.
Fast forward 10 years. Today, XM and Sirius have finally caught fire. Both have subscribers that number well into the millions, most of them disaffected refugees from FM radio. And both companies now want to offer localized content. XM wants to give customers in major metropolitan areas instant traffic and weather reports. Sirius is offering audio feeds of NFL games, and may delve into traffic and weather as well.
As you might guess, the National Association of Broadcasters will have none of it.
NAB's position is a precarious one. Satellite radio has taken off because traditional broadcast radio is so darned dreadful. That means the NAB is forced to argue that the government must prevent satellite providers from offering localized programming because allowing them to do so might drive local broadcasters out of business. But at the same time, NAB must argue that the service local broadcasters currently provide is of high enough quality to merit that kind of protection in the first place. It's an absurd case on its face. If FM and AM radio broadcasters were really giving consumers worthwhile local content, they wouldn't need government protection from XM and Sirius.
Even odder, just as NAB is fighting XM and Sirius over local content, many of the stations NAB represents are turning away from localized programming, running cheaper, syndicated content from parent companies like ClearChannel and Infinity.
I've asked representatives of NAB how using the power of the FCC to keep out competitors could possibly benefit radio consumers. They always respond the same way. "That's not the issue," they say, "the issue is that XM is backing down from its agreement." Perhaps. But it's awfully telling that they won't even address the real question.
The fight is a classic case of what economists call "regulatory capture" — when an industry that's regulated by a government agency attempts to use that very agency and those regulations to keep upstarts and competitors at bay. And it's almost always to the detriment of consumers.
The good news is that it looks likes NAB is going to lose this time. XM has already begun offering traffic and weather, pending action by Congress and/or the FCC. And more local programming may be on the way. That may drive a few traditional radio stations out of business. But it will also ensure that those that survive will do a better job of giving you the kind of programming you want.
Which is sort of the whole point of a free market.
Radley Balko publishes a weblog at: www.TheAgitator.com. |
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
My sentiments exactly, pick. Oh for the days before syndication, when every single station on the dial had its own individual and distinctive personality. The problems started with the Top 40 concept, which limited playlists, and grew increasingly worse to the point that no DJ above the college station level has any say on what they can play. I have hoped for years that at some point the public would rebel against this restrictive policy, and satellite radio offers our chance.
You're right on that one, Bosco, I don't recall much in the way of traditional European music on either XM or Sirius. As one who also likes certain kinds of music that are well off the charts, I sympathize, and understand there is a point where CDs are the only solution.
The broadcasters, like the recording industry better wise up. People do not want to listen to the homogenized no talent pap played on top 40 radio and will willingly seek other alternatives. Does anyone seriously want to listen to Madonna's latest trash or Britanny's no talent bubblegum pop or howling DJ's with mindless contests and trash talk?
I have had Sirius for about 4 months and love it. I'm in my car from 3-8 hours a day and have Fox News, cnn, bbc, etc.,local weather/traffic and any kind of music you want to hear. Now I can leave the house in the morning when something big is happening in the news and pick it up in the car without missing anything. I can't get Rush, but I can catch Laura Ingraham on delay on the TalkRight channel, as well as other talk radio shows. I can tune to Rush on my local A.M. station, so all is right with the world. (excuse the pun) I highly recommend it.
These Clearchannel stations clog the air waves with zero-depth. ex-DJ nitwit, talk show hosts like Sean Hannity and Glenn Beck. What ever happened to local talk shows?
KFI640 (Los Angeles) -- they bcst Rish and Dr. Laura, other than that pretty much 100% local -- and funny and very, very good.
I've had XM radio for almost 2 years now and I can't live without it. The morning FM radio in my area is all fluff-talk with maybe 2 or 3 songs an hour! And half the talk is syndicated! XM is continuous music - no DJ or commercials. THey also carry the audio feed from Fox News. It was great to hear O'Reilly and H&C when I was in Canada where no-one knew who they were (except now I have the reputation of being a right wing nut for listening to Fox). THe local broadcasters are now running commercials about how many people dropped satellite radio becasue the FM and AM was better. To me, this is a sound of desperation for the traditional broadcasters.
We have a local morning talk show. Real guests too. And, of course, the loser Congressmen that we have.
The local CC talkstation (AM/FM pair) has Imus.
I like shortwave. Lots of variety, but mostly limited in broadcast times, and you do have to sort through all the faux
religious broadcasts, bad "world music", etc.
I've had XM for 3 years and have it in the house and 3 cars for $15 a month AND it has FOX News Channel live, so if you're on the road, you don't have to miss your regular programs. You can listen to one station from coast to coast if you like.
Trust me. It's worth it. Go talk to anyone who's got it. They'll tell you the same.
I had a chance to drive a couple days with XM equipped vehicles. Awesome in LA traffic!!! It was amazing!
Regular FM radio is pretty much totally unlistenable for me. I love XM.
Another bonus - the right wing talk radio station they have now, has Laura Ingram, who wasn't available on any of the local broadcast stations.
I'd rather listen to silence, than pay for radio....
I'm big on talk radio and sports. Does the XM provide these channels?
I remember being a kid, hearing the DJ say something like 'the new such-and-such album hit the stores today-- here's side 2.' After it was over, they would play a block of commercials.
Remember the king biscuit flour hour? GREAT live music! sigh...
I almost exclusively listen to AM these days, but even then, the commercials get overwhelming. Plus, in Tampa, we only really have 2 news/talk channels. the 3 to 6 pm slots are a total wasteland on both, so I actually end up listening to sports talk.
If it's anything like the digital music on my cable service, I will probably get it soon.
Thanks for the input. Thats one of my concerns, the availability of talk radio. I see listings like BBC radio or CNN and oh, please. That's the last thing I want to subject myself to. But if they have real, live call-in talk radio, with good hosts, that's a different story. Seems to me XM and Sirius could both benefit from at least one dedicated channel for talk radio only.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.