If You Can't Beat 'Em...
If you can't beat 'em -- buy 'em.
If you can't buy 'em -- bankrupt 'em.
It worked for Reagan during the Cold War, and the big media companies are trying the same strategy today. But the "budget buster" of choice isn't SDI. It's HD. As in digital radio.
The Clear Channels, Entercoms and Infinitys of the world are trying to shove digital radio down the throat of the industry and consumers. It's ostensibly to "save the industry" from the competition from satellite services, Ipods and other "new" media. But in reality, it's just a way to further eliminate competition from the myriad small broadcasters who continue to be an irritating nuisance for the corporate giants.
Does HD radio offer some advantages? As with most things, the answer is not black and white. Yes, the current IBOC (In-band, on-channel) system from Ibiquity does provide CD quality sound on FM. UNTIL you start multiplexing with different digital channels, commonly referred to as HD2, HD3, etc. As you stack more and more program layers onto the digital stream, bandwidth for each individual program begins to diminish, until you end up with the same basic quality currently available. And since the digital signal cannot be received at the same distance from the transmitter that an analog signal can, the ultimate result is the same basic quality over a much smaller area. The nasty little secret about digital signals is that they are either there or they are not. There is no area of marginal reception. No gentle fading of the signal as you travel away from the transmitter. The signal is there one second and simply gone the next. And if the station YOU want to listen to is more than forty or fifty miles away -- you can pretty much forget it.
And for this, the mega-medias want you to spend several hundred dollars for a new radio!
It is claimed that HD broadcasting on AM brings the sound to FM quality. Notwithstanding the same effect of multiplexing the digital stream for additional channels, the AM HD system also causes very noticeable interference with adjoining stations. So once again, the coporate giants are essentially trying to LIMIT your choices to those stations in your immediate area. Preferably THEIR stations, to be exact.
But the ultimate problem with HD radio is one of economics. Many small and medium market stations are barely making ends meet as it is. The investment required to begin HD broadcasting is substantial, to say the least. And since stations are required to pay licensing fees to Ibiquity (which, incidentally, is largely OWNED by the big media corporations! Imagine that!) the switch to digital is more than just a major capital investment. It's a large ongoing expense, as well. I firmly believe the mega-media owners hope that, facing such an investment, small and medium market owners will either A) sell their stations at fire-sale prices or B) give up entirely and just turn 'em off.
The NABB (National Association of Big Broadcasters) is actively assisting in this attempted extortion. And yet small broadcasters continue to support the NABB through membership dues. Why? I know that belonging to the NABB gives stations the opportunity to purchase professional liability and libel insurance at reduced rates. But at what cost in the long run? Is the cost of getting insurance on the open market more or less than the HD which is being crammed down their collective throats??!!
Don't get me wrong. I am not against progress. I am not against trying to make radio as good as it can be. But the problems of the industry are not technical. They are systemic. It's bad programming, cookie-cutter formats and centralized control of broadcasting that is causing the relentless drop in overall listenership. What good are hundreds of digital channels if they all play the same music, at the same time, with no originality or responsiveness to the listeners? Which is better for the future of the industry -- a couple hundred small broadcasters super-serving their communities or a couple of dozen mega-media outlets simply sucking as much money out of their local economies as possible for the benefit of shareholders half-a-continent away?
The answer is important to far more than those of us in the industry.
If you can't buy 'em -- bankrupt 'em.
It worked for Reagan during the Cold War, and the big media companies are trying the same strategy today. But the "budget buster" of choice isn't SDI. It's HD. As in digital radio.
The Clear Channels, Entercoms and Infinitys of the world are trying to shove digital radio down the throat of the industry and consumers. It's ostensibly to "save the industry" from the competition from satellite services, Ipods and other "new" media. But in reality, it's just a way to further eliminate competition from the myriad small broadcasters who continue to be an irritating nuisance for the corporate giants.
Does HD radio offer some advantages? As with most things, the answer is not black and white. Yes, the current IBOC (In-band, on-channel) system from Ibiquity does provide CD quality sound on FM. UNTIL you start multiplexing with different digital channels, commonly referred to as HD2, HD3, etc. As you stack more and more program layers onto the digital stream, bandwidth for each individual program begins to diminish, until you end up with the same basic quality currently available. And since the digital signal cannot be received at the same distance from the transmitter that an analog signal can, the ultimate result is the same basic quality over a much smaller area. The nasty little secret about digital signals is that they are either there or they are not. There is no area of marginal reception. No gentle fading of the signal as you travel away from the transmitter. The signal is there one second and simply gone the next. And if the station YOU want to listen to is more than forty or fifty miles away -- you can pretty much forget it.
And for this, the mega-medias want you to spend several hundred dollars for a new radio!
It is claimed that HD broadcasting on AM brings the sound to FM quality. Notwithstanding the same effect of multiplexing the digital stream for additional channels, the AM HD system also causes very noticeable interference with adjoining stations. So once again, the coporate giants are essentially trying to LIMIT your choices to those stations in your immediate area. Preferably THEIR stations, to be exact.
But the ultimate problem with HD radio is one of economics. Many small and medium market stations are barely making ends meet as it is. The investment required to begin HD broadcasting is substantial, to say the least. And since stations are required to pay licensing fees to Ibiquity (which, incidentally, is largely OWNED by the big media corporations! Imagine that!) the switch to digital is more than just a major capital investment. It's a large ongoing expense, as well. I firmly believe the mega-media owners hope that, facing such an investment, small and medium market owners will either A) sell their stations at fire-sale prices or B) give up entirely and just turn 'em off.
The NABB (National Association of Big Broadcasters) is actively assisting in this attempted extortion. And yet small broadcasters continue to support the NABB through membership dues. Why? I know that belonging to the NABB gives stations the opportunity to purchase professional liability and libel insurance at reduced rates. But at what cost in the long run? Is the cost of getting insurance on the open market more or less than the HD which is being crammed down their collective throats??!!
Don't get me wrong. I am not against progress. I am not against trying to make radio as good as it can be. But the problems of the industry are not technical. They are systemic. It's bad programming, cookie-cutter formats and centralized control of broadcasting that is causing the relentless drop in overall listenership. What good are hundreds of digital channels if they all play the same music, at the same time, with no originality or responsiveness to the listeners? Which is better for the future of the industry -- a couple hundred small broadcasters super-serving their communities or a couple of dozen mega-media outlets simply sucking as much money out of their local economies as possible for the benefit of shareholders half-a-continent away?
The answer is important to far more than those of us in the industry.
posted by Just Some Guy on the Radio at 5:56 PM
2 Comments:
Rage on Radioman. I'm a proponent of digital television, but I get your point about cost.
The truth is, people will be better served by QUALITY radio, the kind that comes in programming. Don't worry, I don't think anyone is rushing out to spend big bucks on HD radios. It will all come with time. But what do I know, I'm already listening to Sirius.
HD Radio won't be the future, Satellite radio won't be the future. The future is wireless internet broadband. Once cities get wired (SF and Boston already are, Chicago is next and even good old St. Louis is asking for bids on wiring the city) and the technology is available in your car, it's over as we know it. When you are able to fire up your ride and then flip a switch to activate your modem on the dashboard, then my internet station from my bedroom will be able to compete with the bohemoths of broadcasting. It will be everyman for themselves, and damn it, that's the way it should be.
BTW, I miss yakkin with ya, bud and I have ya linked on my blog.
Post a Comment
<< Home