Future of LPFM

3/21/03 Two Articles from March LPFM TIMES 707 464-9263 bberkowitz@Yahoo.com
Autopsy? No! LPFM is Well: Myths Exposed
By JohnBroomall@Yahoo.com Christian Community Broadcasters
Phone: 678 880-0676 For regular LPFM updates visit: ccbroadcasters.com

A Lively Response to "LPFM Autopsy" by Thomas Hazlett in the March LPFM TIMES
"War with Iraq". "Armageddon". "Appolypse". "Final issue of LPFM TIMES Because 'LPFM Is Dead'" These headlines are attention getting, but certainly not all true at present. While the future of the world is of utmost importance, this publication is not devoted to these weighty issues but to LPFM now ... and in the future.

Last month when Thomas Hazlett attempted to dissect LPFM we were not told his qualifications, other than his role as a "Senior Fellow at the Manhattan Institute for Policy Research." While this title is impressive, this does not automatically qualify him as an authority on LPFM. By contrast, this author (John Broomall) has been active in low power FM on a daily basis since its beginning, as a consultant to dozens of LPFM applicants throughout the United States and as a source of current, accurate LPFM information to hundreds of LPFM groups through the Internet and LPFM TIMES.

In this article we will show that Mr. Hazlett is dead wrong in his lament on the demise of LPFM. What is worst, he offers no future hope, no "action plan" for a resuscitation or resurrection. We certainly do not deny the problems that LPFM groups face ranging from a slow and inconsistent FCC to resolving complex mutually exclusive situations. We write extensively about these issues in LPFM TIMES. We discuss and dealing with real issues but do not "toss out the baby with the bath water" - there is a major distinction!

There are many forms of electronic mass communications, regulated and unregulated; radio alone ranges from wireless microphones, carrier current broadcasting, amateur radio (on many bands) to digital FM and shortwave which covers the world. In addition, there is television plus Internet streaming which is virtually unregulated. Mr. Hazlett accused the visionary founders of fatally betraying their own dreams; it is true that LPFM is different from various ideas that were proposed several years ago.

Apparently LPFM without the "poison pills" would have more power, greater coverage, air commercials, and multi-station ownership and operation would be permitted. Uh, it seems that something like this already exists and it is called Clear Channel. If LPFM rules were the same as those Clear Channel operates under, no one has suggested a way that the "good guys" would get all the stations than want rather than the frequency going to CC or one of the other "Big Boys" of broadcasting.

Imagine the response if Mr. Hazlett went to any operating LPFM station and told them that they should not exist because the FCC did not approve his version of LPFM! Rather than accepting LPFM as a legitimate piece in the diverse quilt of mass communication options that exist today, Mr. Hazlett wishes to take bits and pieces and create a "dat" - half-dog, half cat creature that does not exist in the real world.

Myths and Our Rebuttal:

Few LPFM stations are on the air and LPFM will remain rare - First, the statistics quoted are out of date. As of today more than 600 construction permits has been issued and 150+ LPFM stations are on the air. By the end of this year, we predict nearly one thousand CPs - this is the amount predicted by former FCC Chairman Bill Kennard. Doomsayers said that nearly 80 percent of the projected total would be eliminated by Congress' "third-channel law."

Why were the gloomy predictions so wrong? Under the original LPFM regulations, for example, ten groups might apply in an urban area and one be granted while a rural area might have four applicants and ten available frequencies. The present rules eliminate the one urban frequency while all the rural applicants still get a frequency from the reduced number of six available. The net change: five grants "pre-Congress" and four under the current law - total reduction only 20 percent. LPFM is not rare now and its popularity will continue to grow. Finally, diamonds are rare yet very valuable. Hundreds - thousands of LPFM groups will be serving radio markets through the nation in years to come.

Enough frequencies are not available. It is true that LP100 frequencies are scarce to non-existent in large cities. According to the www.recnet.com site (LPFM section) LP100 frequencies are available in more than 1,000 towns and communities from 7,000 to 250,000 in population, plus many more smaller communities. Applicants with CPs who do not build their stations will leave frequencies available for future use. Many more frequencies will be available for LP10 use. Imagine a map of the United States covered by large and small marbles representing the coverage of 100 watt and ten watt stations. There are many small "cracks" where ten watters can fit where stations of greater power would not work. Thus, the greatest opportunities for LPFM is to reach niches which would not be available for more powerful stations.

LPFM groups are not allowed enough power / coverage. In many populated areas, additional frequencies are simply not available regardless of classification. Where frequencies are available and when windows are opened, low power advocates can apply for a more powerful class of station. (An LPFM licensee could chose to give up its low power station if granted a permit to build one with greater power.) Another important consideration is that more powerful transmitter and antennas cost considerably more money. Many LPFM groups with limited budgets can reach their community or target audience without incurring the equipment expense to reach an large area.

Apathy prevails among LPFM groups. When the FCC originally established LPFM by a Report & Order on January 20, 2000, supporters were lead to believe that the process of getting construction permits would be easy and stations would be rapidly licensed. The term "rocket docket" was coined to describe the promised speed. Many factors have contributed to the slow processing ranging from a change in administration leading to a Commission less committed to LPFM, the large number of applicants, and the major slowdown caused by Congress changing the rules after applications had been filed from twenty states. These factors - and not "poison pills" in the FCC Order - led to the slowdown.

In no area of human endeavor can a "fever pitch" of intensity be maintained for several years; what are applicants expected. to do while waiting on the FCC? There are many reasons for apparent apathy that have nothing to do with the "failure of LPFM." Most LPFM groups have one highly motivated visionaries. Some of these have died, others are no longer with the group for reasons that have nothing to do with the application.

Tom Hazlett claims that "only half (of 255 permittees) have bothered to respond." Without knowing what these groups were asked to respond to, it is hard to criticize them as apathetic. Other "proof" quoted is outdated; he states "low-power FM will need a boost to get even 100 tiny stations on the air." As stated above, more than 150 stations are now broadcasting and more are signing on almost daily. To say that half of operating stations "don't have regular programming" is obviously incorrect - the FCC does not grant licenses to stations that don't offer regular programming!

Expiration of unbuilt CPs proves that LPFM is doomed and Restrictive rules caused the demise of LPFM. Actually, the reverse is true. If anything, the FCC made applying too easy with "do-it-yourself" applications, layman-friendly "Channel Finder" engineering software, and no application fees. LPFM is the "amateur radio" or "Citizen's Band" of mass media. Many groups got permits without "counting the cost" in time, talent, and money required to establish even the simplest station. An unbuilt station does not prove that the low power concept is flawed. Rather, the vacant frequencies will be filled in the future by better prepared - and more patient - broadcasting groups.

LPFM is too expensive to operate. This myth is unbelievable. Anyone with experience in broadcasting knows that the cost of operating a full-power station knows that that the cost of low-power station is minimal -actually less than the cost of a daily fast-food hamburger! The FCC point system favors established organizations (two plus years of existence). Most groups plan to use their existing headquarters facility (only a small room is required) and volunteer operators, and automation for their station. Rent and labor expenses are eliminated; the only absolutely required expenses after a station is built are electricity, repair of equipment, and about $500 per year in music licensing fees: total under $1,000 per year. We sympathize with Bird Street Media's (KRBS-LP) $800 in monthly expense, but most groups can start with a far smaller budget.

Local programming rules are too restrictive; stations can't share programs. Tom Hazlett laments the burden on KRBS because "80 percent of their 36 hours of programming must be local" and "a regional LPFM network is not permitted." Again, these charges are misleading. As explained previously in this column, LPFM stations are not required to do any local programming. It is true that Bird Street promised to do eight hours a day of local programming but that was a voluntary decision to gain a point-system advantage. Also, "local program" does not have to be live - music locally programmed into an automation system meets the requirement of "programming produced within ten miles...." In our opinion, KRBS-LP should use automation to operate 24-hours-a-day: they promised the FCC they would operate at least 12 hours a day - not a scant 36 hours per week.

While it is completely true that "LPFM stations cannot rebroadcast other stations" programs can be shared in various ways. For example, a Northern Sacramento Valley Radio Co-Op could be established to produce programs to be aired on area LPFMs. While this programming cannot be delivered via one "mother" station over-the-air, it can be delivered via Internet audio streaming, dedicated phone lines, satellite, UPS, or even via volunteer couriers. While full-length national programs do not classify as "local programs" a local program can incorporate short national features on health, exercise, finances, gardening, ,etc.

The inability to sell commercials is a fatal flaw. We have saved the most controversial "weakness" of LPFM to the end. Many LPFM groups believe that they will be successful only if they are permitted to sell commercials. Most advocates of "commercial LPFM" do not realize that they will incur major new expenses that non-profit LPFM avoid. For starters, commercial stations - even low-power translators - must pay application fees and ongoing annual fees to the FCC. If a commercial application is Mutually Exclusive, the FCC auctions the frequency to the highest bidder with pre-established minimums. Expect to pay for a business license and other state / local governmental fees. Music licensing fees will be far more costly that the amount. Volunteer staff and donated equipment? Do not expect free labor or equipment if you are "for profit" - people will perceive that you are "in it for the money." If you are successfully overcome these financial hurtles, IRS will be waiting for its share of the profits!

Ultimately all broadcasters finance their operations from one of three sources: commercials from businesses, gifts or "underwriting" from non-profit groups (or businesses), and direct contributions from listeners. A successful commercial station thrives on the first source. Businesses who advertising on commercial stations expect numbers, ratings, results. A new, unknown station cannot provide what advertisers demand. Huge conglomerates like Clear Channel can squelch small new competitors.

By contrast, non-profit groups face few financial hurdles with lower expenses in all categories. Most applicants claimed the point for "two years community presence." This means that the applicant existed prior to LPFM with a purpose, mission, volunteers, and financial supporters. This base of support can often provide the necessary funding and staff. If a group has a mission that fill various local needs, then gaining support of the community. Commercial advertisers demand results; underwriters of non-profit radio are grateful for acknowledgement and the right to finance programming that they want. The author of this column speaks from professional experience, having raised millions of dollars in underwriting support for non-commercial broadcasting over the past seven years.

In summary, LPFM, like any baby, faces many challenges and stumbling blocks but the "bucket of poison pills" does not exist! Exceedingly rare - that is already disproved. Quaint and casual? At worst, that is better than "slick, inpersonal, and canned." Some local community broadcasters would be proud to be called "quaint and casual"!

><><><<>><><><><><>><><><><<>><<><><>><><<><><>><<><><><><>><<><><><><><>>
Reprinted from the March LPFM Times
Thomas W. Hazlett: Low-Power Radio - An Autopsy
The write is a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute for Policy Research

In December 2000, the Federal Communications Commission announced the first community groups to win low-power FM radio licenses. The regulatory path had not been smooth. The FCC's plans for the medium - framed to promote free speech and local diversity in the face of mega-consolidation in commercial radio - had been savaged in Congress by the National Association of Broadcasters and National Public Radio. An estimated 2,800 new licenses would have been available under the regulator's proposed rules; this total shrank to just 1,200 after the incumbent broadcasters - predictably crying "interference" - had their way.

Still, when the first non-profit organizations were awarded radio permits, hope ran high. What might creative folks make of the golden mike when free of corporate constraints? Enthusiasts envisioned innovative formats, including free-form music and serious talk from alternative perspectives.

Yet, two years on, silence dominates the low-power playlist. And the problem stems not from limitations imposed by foes of the medium - whose lobbying persuaded Congress to trim available assignments by 60 percent - but from FCC rules that were largely written by its champions. These rules are now strangling the upstarts.

Of the 255 recipients of the FCC's initial station awards in late 2000, only half have bothered to respond. The process begins with a construction permit, after which a station is built, followed by issuance of an operating license. Such micro-stations cost under $10,000 to create, but only 35 had reached the second stage by late 2002. Of these, just 18 stations - seven percent of those eligible - were found to offer any regular programming. Station construction permits are now expiring, unused. Low-power FM will need a boost to get even 100 tiny stations on the air.

The majority of America's 269 radio markets will fail to hear a single new broadcast. Even if you live in a city where a new station locates, you will be searching for a needle in a haystack, as low-power signals travel just 3.5 miles. But that limitation is also an opportunity. We could be filling the airwaves with thousands of fresh voices. Using traditional FCC spacing rules, at least 100,000 low-power transmitters could join the FM BAND.

The handful of new stations actually broadcasting hints at the promise of the medium. InOraville, California (population 12, 656( low-power KRBS was launched in April 2002 by 100 local citizens who donated $100 each. No one who hasapplied for their own show has been turned down.

According to the station's website, listeners may enjoy: punk rock, bluegrass, Celtic, ragae, "Free Speech News", ethnic programs, a reading of Steinback's Grapes of Wrath, "Resistance Radio", history lessons, and "Fishing with Splitshot." Middle-of-the-road it is not.

But nor is it likely to be economic. To comply with FCC rules, local programs must air for 80 percent of KRBS's 36 weekly broadcast hours. That takes a lot out of the unpaid staff. These volunteers keep monthly expenses to $800, but even this squirrel-sized nut is tough to crack. Listeners are exhorted to donate time and money.

Just a dozen $3 commercials spread out over the programming day could sustain the fledgling station and provide local retailers with a productive advertising channel. But ad spots are banned by Commission rules, as are multiple-station ownership and greater use of syndicated programming.

Each fledgling station is forced to got it alone, begging. Major commercial radio chains coast on scale efficiencies, combining hundreds of broadcasting station. If the Oraville community group could team up with low-power stations in Marysville, Chico, and Redding, shared operation - and programs - could shave costs. Stations offering neighborhood promotions - for stores, shops, churches, cr dealers, or restaurants - might achieve critical mass, producing quality programs for those desperate to escape mass media. Capitalist innovators might follow the example of Ben & Jerry's, co-opting a market alternative to create an alternative market. Off-beat broadcasting chains could flourish in a variety of flavors.

Alas. That could lead to the emergence of a Northern Sacramento Valley low-power FM radio monopoly, clearly a far more dangerous thing that Clear Channel's 1,200 full-power radio station network with 110 listeners, blessed by the FCC.

J. Rodger Skinner, who in 1998 filed one of the two petitions triggering the FCC's low-power radio action, says, "It was a huge blow when the FCC limited low power FM to non-commercial use only. This left station operators with no way to support a real radio station." He notes that many pirate operators wanted low-power FM simply to "play radio." he took issue. "This was not a plaything that I was attempting to create, but rather a full-fledged new broadcasting service."

Lobbyists from the big broadcasters have been blamed in dozens of news stories and commentaries for burying low-power radio. But the attack they launched was simply gratuitous violence. The FCC rules were advanced by "public interest" enthusiasts for low-power FM radio. to further their crusade against commercialist they loaded it with a bucket of poison pills. The result is that new community radio stations will be quaint, casual, and exceedingly rare - which is exactly the way their old foes, the NAB and NPR, like them.