A big hot button with the FCC is "diversity in media" - where African-Americans, Hispanics, Women and others have a strong presence in todays media - not just in the sense of programming, but in ownership as well.

And when many diverse groups, including the NAACP and LULAC, came out in favor of the merger many wondered how a merger improve diversity. The two words seem to, by definition, work against each other.

An article today in Black Enterprise explains it all. In short, XM has "The Power" (ch 169) and carries shows featuring Oprah Winfrey, Maya Angelou, Wynton Marsalis and Tyra Banks. Sirius also offers shows featuring Black celebrities and sports figures such as Keyshawn Johnson, Tiki Barber, Jamie Foxx and 50 Cent.

XM's President and interim-CEO Nate Davis, is an African American and a member of XM’s board since 1999. Davis plans to play a pivotal role in the new company if the merger is approved.

By contrast, only 1/8th of full-power radio stations are run by women and people of color in the U.S., and that's despite being two-thirds of the population. Even radio companies like Greenstone Media, with the financial backing of Gloria Steinem, Jane Fonda, and Susan Ness, couldn't survive in today's radio environment. And that's a pretty sad state of affairs.

Now I don't think it's being suggested that a merging of Sirius and XM will miraculously fix the media diversity problem, but both satellite radio providers already have dedicated themselves to providing diverse programming. So I think the thought is that by empowering a combined company to better compete, it opens up more opportunity for diverse programming to reach the population.

[Black Enterprise]

Garmin, the market share leader when it comes to personal navigation devices, has just taken the wraps off of their latest generation GPS devices: the nuvi 750, nuvi 760 and the nuvi 770.

The nuvi 700 series is packed full of cool features, like a "car locator" so you don't need to remember where you parked. It also includes a built-in MP3 players with Audible support, and a handy-dandy built-in FM transmitter (hey... remember those?) so you can either listen to your tunes or the turn-by-turn directions through your car stereo. The 760 and 770 also can receive real-time traffic reports, and let you steer clear of them.

But wait... where's the satellite radio support? There is none.

The real-time traffic data, is provided by an integrated FM TMC (Traffic Message Channel) traffic receiver. In the U.S., that data is provided by Clear Channel's Total Traffic Network. Not XM or Sirius.

And the MP3/Audible support is all you're going to find in the audio category. Never mind that they have that built-in FM transmitter issue already taken care of.

I've already ranted about how Sirius and XM have missed the boat when it comes to the personal GPS market, and this is just another example.

This morning, Garmin CFO Kevin Rauckman was on CNBC talking about the company's outlook, and he mentioned that they're focusing more on the Retail channel more than the OEM channel. The reasoning was that Retail just moved much faster than OEM, and they're just seeing much more sales on the Retail side.

This is exactly the opposite of satellite radio's strategy. Being included in personal GPS devices could be an opportunity for satellite radio on the retail side. It provides access to an affluent market who's willing to spend $500+ on a device, and if XM/Sirius applied the OEM model to Retail (i.e., complimentary 3-month or 6-month subscription), they gain access to more ears as well.

It's time to get on the ball with this one.

[Garmin Press Release]

Broadcasters Beasley, Citadel, Entercom, Greater Media, Lincoln Financial Media and Saga Communications have filed a joint filing asking that the FCC consider relaxing ownership restrictions when deciding on the Sirius-XM merger.

"...one essential protection would be the elimination of local radio ownership rules, which would allow AM and FM broadcasters to offer more diverse services to compete with SDARS on the local level."

An interesting concept, and one that's obviously using the satellite radio merger for self-serving interests. The joint filing goes on to suggest a fully interoperable receiver - one that supports terrestrial radio as well as satellite radio - be designed as part of the conditions:

"In addition, the Commission could require, in a manner similar to the television All Receivers Act, or to cable's Must Carry, that all satellite radio receivers be capable of providing SDARS, AM and FM analog, and AM and FM HD broadcast radio signals in order to facilitate more direct competition among service providers."

Now that's actually not a bad idea. Not only would it foster more direct competition, but would also move a lot more product off the shelves. Plus we all know that satellite radio subscribers tend to listen to terrestrial radio more than "regular" listeners, so that's just empowering the consumer. Never a bad thing.

But let's take it a step further...

It's obviously hypocritical for terrestrial radio to oppose the merger while at the same time seeking a relaxation of media ownership regulations. And at the same time, it's hypocritical for satellite radio merger proponents to oppose media ownership regulations (though - it can be argued - that there's already been a relaxation in media ownership rules, which is why we're in this mess to begin with).

But what about localism? There also shouldn't be a restriction on satellite radio from providing local programming. Why does the "government sanctioned monopoly" shoe only fit for satellite radio - when terrestrial radio has been enjoying a monopoly on local broadcasts since the 1930s?

And at the same time, let's apply the same performance fees to artists that satellite radio and internet radio pay. Why does terrestrial radio get a free ride? Do they provide more "promotional value" than satellite or internet? I don't think so.

If they want a level playing field - then let's give it to them.

[Read Joint Filing (PDF) via Yahoo! Message Boards]
Thanks Tony!

FCC Commissioner Michael J. Copps appeared on PBS' Bill Moyers Journal recently to discuss the state of media consolidation and the current outlook of the media today.

As always with Commissioner Copps, media consolidation is a sore point. He's never been a big fan of media consolidation (neither has Adelstein), but the interview still remains enlightening throughout the 19 minutes.

They start off the interview showing a clip from one of the recent public hearings on media consolidation:

MICHAEL J COPPS: Now we're back at square one. It's all up for grabs. And if we are going to do better this time around, it's going to be because of input from folks like you.

MIKE MILLS: We must ask the question, is American radio better today than it was 10 years ago? [Audience yells "No!"] ...that was the answer.

A key takeaway from the interview isn't that Copps is against media consolidation just to be against it, he takes the stance that it generally doesn't work towards the public interest. Copps defines "public interest" (which can be up to much debate) as three things: localism, diversity, and competition.

He also reiterated his stance on the shortening of broadcaster's license renewal process (something he brought up strongly during an editorial he wrote which was published in the New York Times).

While Copps doesn't directly address the Sirius-XM merger, it's a good interview to watch to get a sense of where he might stand. I think most would agree with his viewpoint. Question is - in trying to serve the public interest - what effect would a merged satellite radio service have on terrestrial radio in terms of localism, diversity, and competition?

[Watch Video or Read Transcript]
Thanks Bruce!

The Baltimore Sun has a great writeup on "good old-fashioned terrestrial radio" and its struggle to stay relevant amid the increasing competition for our ears.

There's some interesting facts and figures in the piece, but one quote that struck me was from a GM at an AM station:

"Because of satellite radio, more affluent people are going to use that service, so we have a smaller piece of the pie to slice up with the people remaining, who are not so affluent," said Bob Pettit, general manager of WCBM, the Baltimore talk-radio station at 680 AM. "The younger people are going to the new technologies. Radio used to be a very effective way to reach people aged 18 to 34. Now, not so much."

As a result, Pettit said, national advertisers are not turning to the old medium the way they once did, leaving the field to cheaper, and often local, ad buyers. In turn, the stations are obliged to charge less money because their demographic is poorer, he said, leaving the stations with less revenue.

That whole statement says, in no uncertain terms, "we are competing head-to-head with satellite radio." And it's valid. A decrease in cume numbers means less ears that are hearing an advertisers spot. And when the demos are less and less influential, even the smaller numbers become less valuable.

The savior for terrestrial radio is supposed to be "localism" - because unlike satellite radio, iPods or any other listening medium - only terrestrial radio can be local.

But I think the value of terrestrial goes beyond just reporting the local high school football game scores. If every station you switch to is playing the same song, then what's the point? It's a point that is referred to in the Baltimore Sun article:

"It's cool to hear a reggae channel, but no FM owner seems to dare to commit to one,"

It's not just being "local" that matters - it's being relevant. The only thing preventing terrestrial radio from playing Bluegrass, or Jazz, or Folk music is the corporate old guard who care about nothing other than squeezing the last penny out. But there's a whole new generation of Marketers who don't use the word "brand advertising" in their vocabulary. They use terms like "segmentation," "targeting," and "relevancy" to craft their campaigns.

And Radio is just not appealing to them.

[Baltimore Sun]

The League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC) has given Clear Channel's WLW an ultimatum: fix the problem with or they will urge members to boycott Clear Channel's top Hispanic markets.

The issue culminates around a promotional spot aired on WLW called "Speaking to An Illegal Alien." The spot featured translations of Spanish phrases like, "Be careful with those hedge clippers around the garden."

In May, WLW infuriated the Hispanic community when it put up billboards featuring a Hispanic man and a donkey, called "The Big Juan" (pictured). The billboards were eventually removed a month later. The league said last week's promotional spots showed them that Clear Channel market manager Chuck Fredrick "reneged on his commitment" made to "prevent future offensive materials" on the station.

"WLW has a track record of offending all minorities. Who's the next target? This is a real problem that needs to be fixed," Riveiro said.

"The spot in question was an old spot that aired in error," Fredrick said later. "It aired twice. We pulled it immediately upon realizing the error and we regret any discomfort that this mistake caused."

Riveiro said Fredrick told him that, too, but "I don't buy it."

Riveiro said if its demands are not met, the group will target Clear Channel's top 10 Hispanic markets by urging listeners to tune out and businesses to pull their ads.

In May, LULAC voiced its support for the Sirius-XM merger, and XM Satellite Radio carries WLW (ch 173) as part of their contract with Clear Channel.

[Cincinnati Enquirer]

If the FCC lets the merger of Sirius and XM move forward, Spanish-language broadcaster Entravision says the FCC should force the satellite radio companies to “relinquish their spectrum so that competition can be renewed.”

Entravision then offered to lead a consortium of terrestrial radio broadcasters to take over the remaining spectrum and to offer programming based on their individual "programming qualifications." In the name of competition of course.

But they don't stop there.

Entravision continues to "request" that in order to expedite the "resumption of competition" that Sirius-XM should be required to sell the terrestrial consortium the satellites, equipment and facilities of the of the SDARS license holders. At a depreciated value, of course.

"All of this is intended to promote competition," Entravision writes in their comment to the FCC. How noble.

[via Inside Radio]
Thanks Matt!

Read the full FCC comment after the jump...

Emmis Communications CFO Patrick Walsh, while at the Noble Financial Conference in Charleston, SC yesterday, was asked about the threat to terrestrial radio from satellite radio.

Walsh said that while he saw satellite radio as "competition" he did not consider it to have a "measurable effect." He cited other outlets such as the iPod and Internet radio as each being an additional "threat" to this company.

"We at Emmis have viewed the threat as being much more fragmentation from the iPod and Internet streaming and the fragmentation from media, whether it be YouTube or other media being delivered on the Internet just fragmenting peoples' time.

"Satellite radio doesn't show up in our diaries very often. The people that utilize satellite radio often toggle between AM and FM and satellite radio, and it really hasn't caused a measurable effect in our business yet. We reach hundreds of millions of people every day. Ninety-three percent of Americans listen to AM/FM radio every week.

"Satellite radio is a niche business focused on people willing to spend 13 dollars per month for the radio. Which for long-haul truckers or people who are advocates of a music format which may not reach a mass market - if you're a passionate Blue Grass listener in New York City - it probably makes sense for you.

"But I think they're still challenged. It's a challenging business model to launch a billion-dollar asset in space and try to build up a mass-market audience quickly. And with 15 million subs it's tough, which is why they're trying to get the merger done. In large measure they're trying to work with the government to solve a business model problem.

"So, it's not one that keeps us up at night. What we're working on is trying to offer compelling programming in a multi-platform environment to grow our business.

Patrick Walsh concluded by saying that satellite radio "is competition but I don't think it's the principal competition for radio going forward."

In essence, he's just define radio - and satellite radio - as being part of a greater audio entertainment market. Thanks Patrick, that was quite the compelling argument there.

[Radio Ink via FMQB]
Thanks Wes!

Reportedly Don Imus has agreed to settle with CBS for $20 million, and a non disparaging clause, according to the Drudge Report's legal sources.

The move opens the possibility Imus will soon return to the airwaves, reportedly as soon as January. Some wonder whether Imus could be headed to Sirius, since Mel Karmazin, a former boss of Imus, recently told the Fox News Channel he'd hire him.

"The fact that he had been fired wouldn't stop me from having Don work for me again," Karmazin said. "He makes you a lot of money."

[Drudge Report]

Cox Radio CEO Robert Neil is under fire for some possible racist remarks he made following the Congressional hearing on performance royalties in radio last week.

Sam Moore, who testified at the hearing, is calling for Neil to be fired after the remarks.

Neil said: "I saw the (congressional) testimony yesterday, and the reality is a lot of those people would be sitting in a shack somewhere in a small town if it wasn't for the fact that radio supported their music when it was coming up.”

Following the remark, Moore became furious. He felt the term “those people” is a racist remark, and that Cox Radio - which owns 80 stations in 18 markets - has made their money from black artists for 40 years.

Some of Cox Radio’s best known stations are WBLI and WBAB in Long Island, NY and six stations in the Tampa, Florida area. All of them play music by “those people.”

[Fox News]