College stations sold or leased to NPR, religious etc

They're better off spending that money on something more students will use. ......Yup Like the PENSIONS of the professors and staff............thats where the $$$$ goes.....

This is my point the government approved radio stations, and yes NPR is government radio, you almost never hear a alternative view on it.....or any spirited discussions, its about as non offensive as Disney.....now that is a total waste of the educational band.

For example they will never talk about gun control for black people

http://charlestonthuglife.net/2013/01/19/a-question-for-our-president/

Or Trayvons criminal past......
http://www.wnd.com/2013/04/police-buried-trayvons-criminal-history/

or put muslims and isalm in a bad light....

http://www.barenakedislam.com/

What we need are more community oriented open minded stations......There are any dark stations that can be used for this purpose.....
-------------------
What we don't need is a non-commercial band made up of mostly the same NPR network programs that are already well represented nationwide.

johnbasalla said:

For schools that have a Broadcast and related Majors programs, the FM station is not a toy or simply an extra-curricular activity. It is an integral part of the experiential learning process. When done well, the public benefits by having an alternative station that stands on its own. What we don't need is a non-commercial band made up of mostly the same NPR network programs that are already well represented nationwide.

Click to expand...

Maybe at your school. Not all. In many schools, student media are kept independent on purpose.

Where there are multiple NPR member stations, they usually are not carrying the same programs - from NPR or any other source. If you teach broadcasting, you should know that. You should also know that "broadcast" and "majors" should not be capitalized. See the AP Style Book.

And again, you're incorrect Richard.

Even those on the political right that support defunding NPR completely admit that they are given fair coverage on NPR news programming, and one could also argue they present viewpoints and issue coverage that is absent from commercial talk radio. I hear alternative viewpoints on NPR daily. That is not "government radio."

You made the statement "no one can provide any content unless it is government approved." I would like you to tell me what government official approves the playlists of community programmers on KAXE, and hosts at WXPN and KCRW.

If you can't, I expect you to retract your false statement.

see my edit above......its censorship on a mass level....hogging up limited FM bandwidth that others can use....

Yes XPN bridgeport........love it.....had friends work there......so why do we have NPR hogging up frequencies and keeping hundreds of little XPN's off the airwaves...

Then I expect you to agree that groups like EMF and Calvary Chapel network feeds abuse their tax exemption and claim financial hardship. They create far more dial clutter than regional NPR.

For instance, examine Seattle and Portland. The public radio services provide news, classical, jazz, etc. The EMF feeds provide multiple, low power repeaters of the same programming. Who's the guiltier party here?

Your examples are pointless. You're expecting NPR to cover your particular opinion, or the opinion of a particular angle news site. The fact that NPR isn't voicing your opinion doesn't mean they're censored by the government. And the issue of Islamic fundamentalist terrorism HAS been covered on NPR, as has gun violence in the inner city. I know, because I listen. Obviously you don't.

Richard Stefan said:

see my edit above......its censorship on a mass level....hogging up limited FM bandwidth that others can use....

Click to expand...

You're confusing a national program service and the radio stations that choose to carry it. Two very different things. The stations don't have to carry NPR programming. And since there are only a handful of NPR shows, the stations usually carry shows from lots of other independent suppliers, or produce them internally. NPR doesn't own any frequencies, so they're not the ones doing the hogging. You really should learn more about them before you shoot your mouth off in a forum where almost everybody knows more about the subject than you.

Ah steve 2 different animals EMF bought a station in my area 96.7 fm in Stamford CT paid $15 million they had a CP to move the transmitter to new rochelle and get signal into NYC.......so why didnt someone offer $16 million?

But Cox radio literally gave away for $500K 2 full time AM station in Stamford and Norwalk ct when they had other people interested U conn wanted it and they had a journalism school in Stamford.......Sacred heart U bought them and promptly got rid of all the show hosts and even high school football which has been on the station since 1948 and replaced it with NPR and NO local programming what so ever......

But the educational band is different....it was supposed to be for the public to get involved, and states and the Fed government funded it with strings attached....so it was bland boring and non controversial....student carrier current stations were never even allowed to get a 10 watt FM because of 50kw "educational" stations and channel spacing probalems when lowing the power to 25k or 10K would have opened up more space for colleges universities even broadcast schools.......I always wondered why Conn School of broadcasting couldn't even get ONE 10 watt FM station allocated let alone 1kw......

Right Big A BBC radio all night and no local programs...still a waste when it's on all the stations....

Richard Stefan said:

student carrier current stations were never even allowed to get a 10 watt FM because of 50kw "educational" stations and channel spacing probalems when lowing the power to 25k or 10K would have opened up more space for colleges universities even broadcast schools

Click to expand...

I personally was involved in the conversion of several campus carrier current stations to FM, and also involved in the licensing of several 10 watt high school stations. We were able to do it with no problems. So I don't know what you're talking about. As for CSB, did they ever actually apply? My sense was they were always in financial trouble.

Just wondering were those 10 watt stations in the educational band? CSB was always just making it but then i look at WSHU....20kw at 638 feet, nothing can get close to it, and this is repeated all over the country http://radio-locator.com/info/WSHU-FM

Richard Stefan said:

Just wondering were those 10 watt stations in the educational band?

Click to expand...

The ones I started were all at 90.3. But the FCC later changed the rules, and 10 watters were replaced by 100 watters.

Richard, it's not the "educational band." It's the non-commercial band. NPR does not "hog bandwidth." NPR, as already pointed out - so pay attention - does not own any stations. Repeat NPR does not own stations. Got it! And a lot of stations do carry NPR provided programs but they are scattered across the country. In any given market, only one or two at most stations carry any amount of programming from NPR. Other public radio stations in the market generally have music formats and carry little, if any, programming from NPR.

Stations which are NPR members take programming from a variety of sources, not just NPR. APM, PRI, PRX, state or regional networks, and of course, shows stations produce themselves. NPR has no special ability to put the shows it produces on any station's air. NPR competes with other distributors for station clearances. NPR does not produce most of the programs it distributes; most are produced by local stations. And NPR competes with other distributors for programs. Everyone is entitled to their own opinions but their own facts (Daniel Patrick Moynihan).

I don't have actual statistics at my fingertips (and it's not worth looking up just for you) but non-commercial (and some commercial) bandwidth is used by religious stations, and yes, by educational stations and even by some public radio (as defined by CPB) stations that do not choose to become NPR members.

Public radio stations which carry the major NPR distributed programs get good audience numbers in many markets. Educational, or student radio stations do not. They are not intended to. You claim to care about "the public" but in your consuming hatred of public radio, you want to wipe out something many people do listen to and replace it with something hardly anyone will listen to.

Major public radio stations could function without any government funds. Educational radio never could. Yet you seem to have a burr in your saddle about government funding. Little inconsistent there, eh?

It is true that many college radio stations run by students are inconsistent messes. There are also many that do well and have developed a loyal following.

johnbasalla said:

It is true that many college radio stations run by students are inconsistent messes. There are also many that do well and have developed a loyal following.

Click to expand...

A loyal following on or off campus? And how large a following? Anything that justifies the station have a Class B or A license instead of LPFM? In any case, as non-commercial stations, they are not going to generate revenue. My school imposed a fee on students to pay for the radio station and the newspaper - want it or not, like it or not. This not real world experience: We play what we want and we don't have to sell time.

One of the issues with these stations is that they represent the college. That can be a good thing, if the station is doing good things, like promoting the sports program, the research being done on campus, or some of the academic interests. Or it can be a bad thing if the station is ignoring the college completely, and just acting like a sand box for people who, in many cases, aren't students or even alumni. I attended two colleges, each with a student radio station. One of the stations made an effort to associate with the sports program, and broadcast all the football and basketball games. The other station was just another music station. That station was later taken over by the school's communications department, staffed by professionals, and carried some NPR programs. Why? Because the students didn't involve the actual licensee, which was the college, in any of the programming. Students have to remember who is paying for the station, who owns that station, and how it's perceived by the community. If the station isn't good PR for the college, at some point the college will want to know why it's paying for this expensive toy. And that is a real world experience.

First, it’s good seeing some life in this forum.…

I’ll get this out of the way immediately:
Richard, although I admire your passion, your thoughts about college radio are nostalgic … but largely outdated, in my view. (Frankly, the same could be said about the entire Wall Street Journal article — which, in its lead, focuses on 30 years ago.)

In particular, teaching “new talent” how to be on the air (job training, essentially) is less important today with so few jobs available compared with a few decades ago — and, hence, so few students wisely choosing not to pursue them. (I’ll add, however, that many skills are highly transferable — and, thus, still valuable. But I’m definitely not referring to such things as taking transmitter readings — TheBigA is right on in his reply on this subject.)

Three decades ago (when I was an undergrad and working in college radio), if a station did little more than train future broadcasters, that was generally OK … because those graduates actually got jobs in broadcasting (so “mission accomplished” … but that decidedly is not the situation today).

I only partially agree with FredLeonard (who seems at the polar opposite), however.… First, I would add the word “when” to his remark: “[When] student radio stations are a toy for students to play with [they are] a waste of institutional resources.”

Indeed, stations should never be considered merely as “toys” … and I do not believe the vast majority are treated as such (in his remarks, johnbasalla is right on). To the contrary, most, I’m confident, are well-managed — and taken quite seriously — by faculty or staff advisers and dedicated student managers. (An aside: In my opinion, non-student-affairs affiliation, such as academic-department oversight, is preferable.)

So, I heartily disagree that well-run (again, the vast majority) college stations “waste” licenses. That said, paramount, I believe, among missions today should be fulfilling public-interest obligations (required of all licensees), serving listeners (without them, why bother in the first place?), and, yes, serving institutional missions (likewise, but from quite a different perspective, why bother otherwise?).

As correctly pointed out by others, not all stations achieve such standards. For those that do attain high quality (and the listeners that follow), DJs playing music may or may not be part of the formula (in this sense, I don’t necessarily share the ‘college radio’ nostalgia of some others).…

To students, I emphasize: “We must protect us from ourselves.” By this warning, I mean we must remain relevant, so as not to give our school any reason to even think about selling the license. This might be accomplished, in part, by taking seriously the original spirit of the NCE (noncommercial educational) license classification — which does not emphasize training DJs … being merely a student-club activity … nor, most definitely, breaking new music (not that there’s anything wrong with that).

Rather, I believe, stations must offer at least some programming — potentially in alliance, on occasion, with parent colleges or universities — that also serves the public interest … and listeners (what a concept), via informative or educational nature. Such programming might also have educational value to students — because careers still exist in areas such as multimedia news and sports journalism (hence, relevance to institutional missions).

In my view, this could be a successful recipe for long-term relevance. In contrast, highlighting, as the WSJ article does, college radio’s breaking R.E.M. three decades ago … and suggesting that’s the universal formula for college radio to thrive in 2014 … is pollyannaish, at best. The more important question: Is the signal being used appropriately and productively today?

The Wall Street Journal — of all places — seems to depict news programming as some kind of calamity: “Instead of cutting-edge music, it now airs local- and national-news programs 14 hours a day, including during the peak daytime hours.” Sorry, WSJ, but relying mostly on nostalgia, with little regard for modern-day relevance, will only result in more situations like in Georgia and elsewhere (which, needless to say, as many comments in this thread demonstrate, isn’t considered horrific by all).

Lastly, on NPR … I’m not a huge NPR fan (though I appreciate the high-quality of some of its — and other public-radio networks — programming) … but, echoing some others, I think criticism might be better directed at (and deserved by) some of the religious-formatted stations cluttering the spectrum with duplicative (and, frankly, often not very good) programming.

(Sorry for writing so long … but, believe it or not, I did use an “erasure.” Just before posting, however, I saw TheBigA’s post, just above mine; I think it serves as an appropriate “abstract” to my longer post. He’s right on the mark … and I hope he doesn’t mind such a depiction.)

Interesting points, guys.

The idea keeps being presented that student radio stations are justified as training grounds for future broadcasters. It has happened to me a lot, I meet people socially. We go through the usual "what to you do" exchange. When I mention my background in radio, the other person says (often with some nostalgia and excitement) that he (almost always he) had a radio show in college. But that's not what they have done since.

Thinking back to the people I knew from the student radio station, maybe a quarter were broadcasting majors. And I can think of only a handful of others who actually went into the biz after graduation (let alone made a career of it).

To me, this says "hobby station," not training ground. Yes, you can mention broadcasters of note who once worked for a student radio station. Don't forget all the student DJs who went and did something else. And don't forget the broadcasters who never went near a student radio station.

Periodically, I see bios on station websites that mentions so and so has been on the air since they were 13 or so. Geez, I don't know if broadcasters should be telling the world this is something 13 years can do.

And how many college students are interested in student radio today (as either hobby or training ground) when radio is something to which people their age don't listen?

Any university that has a major for broadcasting should be preparing students for work directly in the field AND other broadcast/media related careers. It's not all just about getting a job at a radio or TV station. For example, large public school districts need media savvy people, including people who can produce programming. Large companies often have media departments. The best thing for station's that employ student talent to do is to position themselves as another station in the market carving out a niche and competing for listeners. THINK BIG, as in serving the market your signal is in, not small, as in a little student station on campus. This is eminently doable, particularly if you have a broadcast and related careers program. Then, not only are you providing a good training ground, you are also serving the public. Quite frankly, those college-owned FM stations that are toys, or sound like they are, do a disservice to "College Radio".