Contract City Radio

I've spent a substantial chunk of my career writing about radio stations that operate without a license and cover community politics. If you tune your receiver to 1620 AM in Sandy Springs, Georgia, you'll find such a station. Unlike other unlicensed outlets I've written about, this one may well be legal.

Radio Business Report has the story:

"Radio Sandy Springs"…is running without a license, yet it is not a pirate station. It's a network of low-power AM transmitters fed simultaneously that covers the entire town and beyond. The station's programming is professionally done and centered around community affairs. It even airs the Sandy Springs City Council meeting, brought to you by a local Mercedes-Benz dealership. It airs plenty of local spots from local businesses….

RBR spoke with owner/GM [general manager] David Moxley, first assuming he was a pirate operator: "I'm not a pirate station. We're an LP [low-power] AM station and don't have to be licensed, according to Part 15 of the FCC regs. which allows for AMs to broadcast at one-tenth of a watt. They don't offer a license for this. Each transmitter is its own station of sorts. One transmitter covers between seven tenths and one mile radius. We can, within reason, hold our signal into one spot. Our transmitters are FCC-certified, but at the same token, it says nothing in the rules about where each transmitter gets a signal from, just as long as I stay below a tenth of a watt. Nowhere in the code does it state where each transmitter should get their audio. My transmitter, my antenna and my ground lead, if used, is not any more than 3 meters. My attorney and I have read the regs up one side and down the other and I'm not breaking any law. We pay BMI, we pay ASCAP…."

In addition to covering the community, Moxley's station runs locally produced shows devoted to everything from classic cars to radio drama. If you're curious to hear it but don't live in the area, you can catch it on the Internet.

Comments

[R C Dean]

My attorney and I have read the regs up one side and down the other and I'm not breaking any law.

Well, if he's not Sticking It to The Man, what good is it?

[Dave W.]

Maybe Clear Channel can convince the FCC to liberalize the restrictions. They seem to have a lobbying budget and some real pull.

[Kevin Breen]

I think it's great. I'd like to get something like that started up in my area.

[Jason Ligon]

What would happen if Glassman's optimisim and Erlich's pessimism ever came into contact with each other? I shudder to think.

[James]

Dave: say WHAT? Why would Clear Channel want the restrictions liberalized? The restrictions are in place to protect Clear Channel from competition. Quite literally, as a matter of fact. The enabling law quite clearly states that the FCC is supposed to regulate the market in order to ensure an adequate-sized audience for each station.

Clear Channel almost certainly has its lobbyists racing back to Washington to write new rules banning networks of this sort. It is, in fact, a network. I'm presuming they're feeding the microstations through phone lines, which probably wouldn't have been feasible fifteen or twenty years ago.

Which means they are most decisively sticking it to the Man by using technology to bypass regulations in a way the Man never thought of. A couple of years ago, when there was a slim chance the FCC was going allow unlimited numbers of 500 watt stations, all the broadcasters, from Clear Channel to NPR, of all damned people, trooped into Congress to assure their puppets that the low-power stations would "interfere" with the licensed stations. All technical data disputed this: modern radio communications are much more efficient and the signal more discrete than when the regulations were written eighty years ago, but Congress and the FCC were relieved to have a "scientific" excuse to avoid fragmenting the market.

It will interesting to see what technical excuse they use to shut these guys down. And don't kid yourself: they will shut these guys down eventually. Since they are within the technical guidelines the FCC assures us are scientifically determined, they will probably reach for some bullshit terrorism, security, or crime pretext.

A network such as this could have unlimited coverage and no licensing fees to pay. In other words, they aren't just thumbing their nose at regulators, they've found a new business model. Clear Channel will be rightly terrified, since they are heavily invested in the old business model. Bottom line: in an industry as heavily regulated as broadcasting, new business models are not welcomed with open arms.

[Jason Ligon]

Er, wrong thread. Sorry.

[Dave W.]

Dave: say WHAT?

Sometimes ppl here like to blame the gov't for things that are only partially the gov't's fault. Personally, I like your views on competition. I think competition, real competition, is an important touchstone of capitalism, which I think is a good system.

[Heffalump]

We did the same thing when I was in college 40 years ago. Covered most of the city with LP transmitters.

[Eric the .5b]

That's really a very neat solution.

[business babe]

That is a pretty cool idea!

[Douglas Arellanes]

Operators of LP stations may be interested in using our free and open source software for playout and automation; it makes it very easy to control broadcasts across numerous transmitters, each with a simple, cheap PC.

http://www.campware.org