• Get involved.
    We want your input!
    Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.

    After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
    If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.

    After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
    https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/

    Thanks in advance and have fun!
    RadioDiscussions Administrators

Long-time engineer says Ditch the FM Table of Assignments

On the surface, you'd think the FCC would love this proposal. But then again, this is the do-nothing FCC.

When the FCC says they want comments about a new class of station, the thing they don't want to hear is "eliminate sub-classes." Truthfully, they don't want comments at all. They're just going through the motions because they have to.
 
Getting rid of the Table of Allotments, station classes AND filing windows? Great idea. Which means the FCC won't do it--unless it agrees with a proposal they've already put forward or fits into existing rules.

In a way, LPFM and LPTV was doing what the author suggests: finding available channels (using software) that don't interfere with licensed stations (of course, in the case of low power stations they have to accept interference).

But look how long it took the Commission to finally get the Fairness Doctrine off their books. They may pay lip service to paper reduction, simplification and "getting with the times" but they're too sclerotic to make any meaningful changes.
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.
Back
Top Bottom