🚀 go-pugleaf

Low-watt sedition
by: Alexander Cockburn
The Nation - Vol. 261 ; No. 8, Sept. 18, 1995

When last we looked, the Federal Communications Commission
took a smack in  the face from Federal District Court Judge
Claudia Wilken. The F.C.C. was trying  to stop Stephen
Dunifer from operating a low-watt radio station on the 88.1
FM  frequency from a house in Berkeley. The F.C.C. was also
trying to fine him $20,000 for having the temerity to
broadcast without an F.C.C. license.

Judge Wilken denied the F.C.C. an injunction to shut down
Radio Free Berkeley on free-speech grounds, at which point
the F.C.C.'s lawyer memorably expostulated that her decision
would unleash "anarchy and chaos."

The F.C.C. has now moved to impose a statutory fine of
$10,000 and has  produced a fourteen-page opinion on the
case, one of the most ludicrous documents to emerge from a
federal regulatory body. Explaining why it must silence
Dunifer, the F.C.C. placidly contends that it has an
obligation to insure "fair, efficient, and equitable
distribution of radio service" in the  United States--which
is like the Federal Election Commission claiming that it
seeks to keep the democratic process free of the taint of
big money.

Like the F.E.C., the F.C.C. exists to protect the rich
against the poor. It is, after all, currently presiding over
one of the wildest merger orgies in the history of
broadcasting. Business Week reckons that "within a few
years, 75  percent of the national radio audience may be
served by just four major groups."

The F.C.C. bases its entire concept of what exactly
constitutes "equitable"  distribution of radio service on
topological calculations of efficient use of  frequencies.
Try this, from the F.C.C.'s opinion: A 10 watt station with
a 100 meter antenna has a service radius of 5.9  kilometers
and a service area of 109 square kilometers. To protect this
hypothetical low power station from interference by a
co-channel Class A FM station operating at 6 kilowatts, we
would need to preclude the establishment of  that Class A
station within a distance of 92.6 kilometers from the
transmitter  for the low power station. In contrast, one
Class A station would preclude  another co-channel Class A
station within a distance of 115 kilometers. A Class  A
station, however, operating at 6 kilowatts with a 100 meter
antenna has a  service radius of 28.3 kilometers and a
service area of 2,516 square kilometers.  Therefore, while
the preclusive effect of a Class A station is 24 percent
greater than the 10 watt station (115 kilometers divided by
92.6 kilometers),  the service radius of a Class A station
is almost 500% greater than the smaller  station (28.3
kilometers divided by 5.9 kilometers). Although the
preclusive effect of a station increases with power, as we
would expect, the service radius  (and area) increases at a
much faster rate. If we treat preclusion as a cost and
service as a benefit, the cost/benefit ratio improves with
power; but the ratio is very poor for low powered stations.

F.C.C. claims of "interference" are grossly inflated.
Attorneys for Dunifer, who have been contacted by
micro-broadcasters across the country, say that complaints
of interference are virtually nonexistent. Outside urban
areas, much of the radio spectrum is empty. And even in
cities, micro-broadcasters have found no problem locating
space. New technology will make this even easier. In its
role as the rich folks' cop the F.C.C. has been soliciting
complaints from licensed broadcasters to buttress its
specious claims about interference. The broadcasters haven't
bitten yet, though no doubt they will.

But note the F.C.C.'s premises in the passage quoted. If the
country is entirely covered by immensely expensive Class A
FM stations all owned by the same person, all broadcasting
Rush Limbaugh plus Easy Listening, this is more "equitable"
and--in the F.C.C.'s surreal phrase-insures greater
"diversity of voices" than several thousand low-watt
stations, broadcasting to neighborhoods, cheap to set up,
and operated by several thousand groups or individuals.

Thus the F.C.C. grandly concludes that "the public interest
would not be  served by licensing a low power FM broadcast
service"-- meaning that the F.C.C. thinks it is not in the
public interest for low-power FM to be a voice and an
outlet for the poor and the disfranchised.

The case goes back to Federal District Court on September
22. Dunifer (now broadcasting on 104.1 FM out of North
Oakland) and his lead attorney, Luke  Hiken, deserve all the
support they can get. Contributions to Dunifer Legal
Defense, c/o Luke Hiken, 1 Sansom Street, Suite 900, San
Francisco, CA 94104.
______________________________________________________________
   Association mondiale des radiodiffuseurs communautaires
      World Association of Community Radio Broadcasters
          Asociacion mundial de radios comunitarias
3575 Blvd. St. Laurent, Suite 704, Montreal, Quebec, CANADA  H2X 2T7
Fax: (1-514) 849-7129 >> Tel: 982-0351 >> Email: amarc@web.apc.org
WWW: http://netaccess.on.ca/~friends/amarc.html

________________________________________________________
Bruce Girard
Email: bgirard@pi.pro.ec or amarcbg@web.apc.org
Tel: +(593-2) 525-521    Fax: +(593-2) 542-818
Avenida America 3584, Casilla 17-01-1171, Quito, Ecuador