The future of AM radio
Fri Feb 1 21:33:08 EST 2008
<<On Fri, 1 Feb 2008 18:58:52 -0500, firstname.lastname@example.org said:
> What exactly does the CRTC plan to do with the unused spectrum?
The evidence is that they are perfectly prepared to license new,
technically feasible AM stations (as witness 740 Toronto, 1040
Montreal, 1580 in two different cities, 1610 Montreal, and others)
provided the owners meet their usual requirements of not taking
advertising revenue away from existing stations and playing at least
35% Canadian content.
> On a related matter would the CRTC be open to allowing non-Canadian
> signals to readust protection patterns for stations that no longer
Only if they get something in return.
> Prime example would be WEEI who no longer should worry about the
> former CKVL.
WEEI doesn't protect ex-CKVL except by the historical accident that
WEEI's deep null towards KOA made it possible to drop in half a dozen
850s between Boston and Denver.
> 2. Could we ever see the FCC do the same thing in the US outside
> major markets?
U.S. radio is not regulated on the basis of protecting stations from
in-market competition as it is in Canada, so no. If an AM station
goes off the air, and the facility is still technically feasible,
someone else can apply for it at the next window.
> I have never understood why the CBC and CRTC wanted the national
> service off AM.
The CRTC doesn't care, near as I can tell. The CBC (not to mention
commercial broadcasters) wants to be on the band that people actually
listen to, and that's FM. How would you like to have the only AM
signal in your market, when the other dozen stations are on FM?
More information about the Boston-Radio-Interest