The National Association of Broadcasters (NAB) fear that satellite radio may have "different needs and incentives for the use of terrestrial repeaters" as a result of the merger between Sirius Satellite Radio Inc. and XM Satellite Radio Holdings Inc.
One of the NAB's concerns is the "heightened desire to offer locally oriented programming, including local advertising" through the repeater network. So the NAB is asking the FCC to adopt final repeater rules that block Sirius-XM from offering local content on their repeater networks.
This isn't anything new.
Over a year ago, an NAB-backed bill (H.R. 983) was introduced to Congress, meant to "preserve local radio" and in effect would stop the airing of Amber Alerts and other emergency services on Sirius and XM. Somehow I don't see this as being in the public's interest.
In the its recent FCC filing, the NAB continues, "In adopting final rules for [satellite radio] repeaters, it is also necessary that the commission be mindful of the SDARS licensees' record of misbehavior in this area."
They go on to highlight violations regarding Sirius and XM repeater towers. Of course, this ignores terrestrial radio's own history of FCC violations.
Oh I get it: Do as I say, not as I do.
How about this instead. If regulators do feel that terrestrial radio is a substitute for satellite radio, and that they compete in the same relevant market, then satellite radio should be permitted to provide more - not less - localized programming. There is absolutely no need for an 80-year old government-granted monopoly over local programming to continue to exist in this day and age.
But that's exactly what the NAB wants. In their on-going attempt to save itself - rather than actually trying to innovate and provide a compelling product - they want to prohibit other local programming, and secure they're stranglehold on "localism." Now that's anticompetitive.
[via Radio Ink]
Will the NAB just go away? Thank you!
This neverending nightmare is like the movie groundhog day.....
Still say terrestrial should be charged for music rights on the same scale too...
Maybe if they offered radio worth listening to people would listen.
The fact that a free service can't compete with a paid service tells you just how bad the free service is.
The irony in this latest NAB bs is that I have not heard any significant LOCAL content on any terrestrial station, ever. Barring the talk format, when is the last time any of us recall arriving in a city, tuning into some "local" radio, and hearing music that truly stated "wow, this sounds like (insert city name here)! Gee, this station really gives me a flavor of what this city is all about!" There are no "local" radio stations. With corporate playlists, voicetracking, and shell imaging elements all originating from out-of-market sources, the only local things I ever hear on old-fashioned radio are the aforementioned local ads, replete with horrible copywriting, bad production, and even worse voiceacting. No thank you, I'll stay tuned to Sirius.
The irony in this latest NAB bs is that I have not heard any significant LOCAL content on any terrestrial station, ever. Barring the talk format, when is the last time any of us recall arriving in a city, tuning into some "local" radio, and hearing music that truly stated "wow, this sounds like (insert city name here)! Gee, this station really gives me a flavor of what this city is all about!" There are no "local" radio stations. With corporate playlists, voicetracking, and shell imaging elements all originating from out-of-market sources, the only local things I ever hear on old-fashioned radio are the aforementioned local ads, replete with horrible copywriting, bad production, and even worse voiceacting. No thank you, I'll stay tuned to Sirius.
The point is that traditional broadcasters are making radio for their advertising clients. The listener is only a means to an end, and is only relevant to the extent that if too many go away, they can't charge high spot rates. They really don't care at all about what is on the air as long as the money from the commercials is coming through the door. They really, really want to keep sat rad from dipping into their lucrative local advertising markets because that is their lifeblood, and they consider these markets their own little gold mines.
A merger would be anti-competitive, so block it because they want to compete.
Huh?
So, would the reverse also hold true? Should satellite radio move to block local radio stations from carrying national content? No more Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, etc. Anything that isn't produced within a 50 mile radius of the terrestrial station should not be carried on the station.
@Dragline: You make a great point. The NAB has argued that if Sirius-XM merge, they should be held to the same FCC indecency regulations as terrestrial is (since they're in the "same market").
So the same reverse thinking should be applied to "localism" - if Sirius-XM are barred from local content, then terrestrial radio should be barred from syndicating nationally.
The NAB doesn't have any right to whine about local content until their stations stop firing local hosts to save money, and they stop pre-recording and canning traffic and news to the point where I have to turn my XM on to get accurate local information, since the radio stations have outdated information "live."
"Localism" has always been a phony gambit, and I don't think the NAB puts much stock in it, except as a bogeyman. So much content on terrestrial is either syndicated or very predictable (i.e., the same crap you heard at home) and I can't fathom what the hell bothers them so much about this non-issue. The use of the word itself is Orwellian.
They should also require that you have your seatbelts cut out and airbag disconnected with a Sirius installation. Blocking Amber Alerts and weather warnings is just about the same thing.
The need for consulting a good New York cosmetic surgeon is necessary as it is not only your health which is at risk, but also your appearance too. Look for a New York cosmetic surgeon with whom you feel most comfortable with, and always make sure that you follow all the instructions that they give.
Well, how will you go about getting a New Yorker interested enough to tell you about all the places to see, and provide you with enough facts about the sights? By paying them of course!