• 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

LPFM: A Broad Discussion of Stations and Purpose

Red Plume said:
I saw that! Thanks for helping to return that spectrum to the public!
Click to expand...
And that's exactly the point. LPFM was allowed under the guise of giving communities more access to the airwaves but instead to the greater extent, did nothing more than created more band congestion, many examples of financial failure, and grifters.
Not everyone is qualified, nor has any business operating a broadcast facility. Want to have fun with radio? Buy a CB.
 
What about unlicensed so called Part 15 AM? I understand many of these are ignoring the 10 foot antenna and feedline rule. So if LPFM is only a pea shooter as Kelly claims. Wouldn't a compliant Part 15 AM be like peeing into the wind? And, not worth a grown man's time.
 
Last edited:
Time Warp said:
What about unlicensed so called Part 15 AM? I understand many of these are ignoring the 10 foot antenna and feedline rule. So if LPFM is only a pea shooter as Kelly claims. Wouldn't a compliant Part 15 AM be like peeing into the wind? And, not worth a grown man's time.
Click to expand...
There can’t be that many unlicensed Part 15 AMs around
 
For those LPFM stations that are being run by suspended or dissolved corporations, you have your chance to do something the next time renewals come up. If you feel deeply about this, please put your name on the public record and file an objection against a renewal of a station (LPFM, full-service, translator, etc.). Just make sure you come to the table with evidence in hand and not just theories or heresy.

There are hundreds of good LPFMs out there that are run by local community organizations and providing good services to their communities. We do not need to paint LPFM with a broad brush because of a few bad apples.

All broadcast services have bad apples. Not just LPFM. There's just fewer LPFM stations, which make the bad apples look more obvious.
 
If you feel deeply about this, please put your name on the public record and file an objection against a renewal of a station (LPFM, full-service, translator, etc.).
Click to expand...
Great idea. Unfortunately we'll have to stick a pin in it, because the next broadcast radio licenses aren't up for renewal until October 2027.

All broadcast services have bad apples.
Click to expand...
Sure. But monetary pressures tend to weed out the bad apples in commercial operation pretty quick.
 
Red Plume said:
In my research, the translator of an AM station, in order to protect one of the fraudulent LPFM stations I discovered, has a deep null in place, facing the downtown/center of their market. Their translator is basically useless. They are co-channel.

I call this LPFM fraudulent because it's licensed to an organization that no longer exists and has passed any windows of opportunity for remediation.

The AM station has gone to considerable trouble to protect the LPFM.
Click to expand...
I’m confused-why would an AM station protect a ‘fraudulent’ LPFM? Just curious.
 
What constitutes "educational" covers a lot of ground. Ultimately, it's the FCC who makes that final determination. What someone other than the FCC defines as educational (or not) is meaningless. I certainly wouldn't take the word of a commercial broadcaster or NPR, someone with a grudge against LPFM, to define what is or isn't educational and if a nonprofit should or shouldn't be allowed to have an LPFM station.
 
Back
Top Bottom