Brattleboro Selectboard passes diluted resolution for rfb

Thu Nov 20 09:03:39 EST 2003 wrote:

>Is it fair that the FCC allows frequencies to go unused in a situation where
>there is clearly a public mandate to allow LPFM, the licenses for which are
>being held up by those corporations who "are paying a lot of money" even 
>it has been shown that, in this situation, no interference has been 
>created by
>their presence?

I'm not sure there is "clearly a public mandate" for LPFM.  I really doubt 
that a significant portion of the population is even aware of it, much as I 
have a hard time believing that there is significant public support for 
rfb, even in the Peoples Republic of Vermont.  Internet message boards 
don't count.  It's easy to blame the big corporations for everything that's 
wrong with America, but that's a bogus argument too.  Everyone claims to 
hate Walmart too, but their parking lots always seem to be full.  Given the 
difficulty of finding a clerk in one of their stores, I doubt it's all 
employees.  :-/

"Localism" makes for a nice sound bite, but in reality it's 
meaningless.  Even as a kid, I preferred to listen to WBZ or WRKO, even 
though they were 100 miles away rather than our crappy local station.

>This is clearly a money issue here, the rest is a smokescreen. Inaction by
>the FCC on LPFM applications has caused a frustration in the general public
>which mimics the creation of the lawlessness on 27 MHz and subsequent 
>of its' enforcement, plus the general disregard for good operating 
>practice in
>the 802.11, 2.4 GHz band.

Huh?!?!  Not sure what you're referring to with the 2.4 gHz band, but CB 
has been a zoo since the 70s...long before LPFM ever became an issue (or 
80-90 for that matter).  Breaker breaker good buddy.  I think the real 
problem here is that too many people think that if they don't agree with a 
law it somehow doesn't apply to them.  30 years ago when Brattleboro had 
essentially 2 AMs which I'm sure were typical "try to be everything to 
everybody" small market radio we didn't see this blatant in-your-face piracy.

>If all these frequencies are available under Part 15, then the FCC admits
>local "governing" of the airwaves is legal. As they specify only an accepted
>power level and not a "range," they leave open the concept of "local" 
>to that of being subject to interference from other users. The power level
>then becomes arbitrary.

Again, huh?!?!?  I don't see where the FCC implies that governing of the 
airwaves is a local, not a federal issue.  Part 15 states 100mW 
power.  It's pretty clear.  The FCC has jurisdiction here, not the 
Brattleboro city council.

>Do I feel the FCC operates efficiently and in a vacuum?  No

Does any government agency?  Do we really want them to?

More information about the Boston-Radio-Interest mailing list