Democracy Now! October 28: LPFM Debate
The main opposition to this is higher powered signals; NPR being named a few times. They claim that by allowing more low power signals to be broadcast, you'll add static and signal congestion to the airwaves.
I thought this was interesting, because it definitely falls within the realm of journalism. I can't see anymore technical way to more intimately connect people to the media. If you have local newspapers and national newspapers - why not local radio stations as well as the already existing national ones? How much easier would it be to move journalists closer to the public forum if that forum was condensed even more to be added in with local conglomerates of news sources?
Is this really a technical issue, or a decision to not centralize journalistic views to a more local level?
1 comment:
I think "Democracy Now!" are trying to create more diversity in terms of news stories available via the radio. The trouble is the limited spectrum.
In Professor Ryan's Spring term semester a Supreme Court case that we covered was: Red Lion Broadcasting Co. v. Federal Communications Commission. This established scarce radio spectrum sations could be regulated. It might be further hassle for LPFM's to be regulated if greater freedom was granted.
Post a Comment