lpam – DIYmedia

LPAM Handbook Bequeathed to Creative Commons

Kyle Drake, LPAM engineer and evangelist extraordinaire, last year put together a comprehensive guide to building and operating LPAM stations. Originally, only hard copies were available, and then for a small fee. Now, Kyle’s released his LPAM handbook in PDF format (2.3 MB) under a Creative Commons license.
This manual is amazing: 100+ pages detailed information on how to get the most out of medium wave. There is no other resource like it. It is essential reading and reference for anyone serious about LPAM broadcasting.

LPAM Petition for Rulemaking Amended

Last October, a coalition of aspiring low-power AM broadcasters and citizens filed a petition for rulemaking at the FCC to create a licensed LPAM service. The comment and reply-comment period came and went, attracting a smattering of public input, including some predictable opposition from most established (commercial) broadcasters. The FCC’s done nothing with it since.
Rumor has it that FCC staff may be more inclined to explore the idea of legal LPAM were the petition streamlined to outline a technically and politically simple service to administer. Otherwise, went the rumor, “come back in a few years” to try again. Continue reading “LPAM Petition for Rulemaking Amended”

LPAM Comments In, Favor Further Exploration

The initial comment period on the petition for rulemaking closed on November 21. Just over two dozen comments were filed, the overwhelming majority of which favor further FCC study of a low-power AM community broadcast service. Not too bad considering the petition got almost zero publicity. Comments from LPFM’s major players are nonexistent, save for an excellent graphic from REC Networks illustrating just how LPAM might bring community radio to places (legal) LPFM will never reach. Continue reading “LPAM Comments In, Favor Further Exploration”

Low Power AM Petition for Rulemaking Accepted at FCC

RM-11287 is a multi-party petition that calls for the opening of the AM band to small broadcasters. Two of the five parties involved also filed the original petition for rulemaking that led to LPFM’s conception.
This has been a long time coming: citizen interest in LPAM has percolated since the 1990s, and there’s been open discussion of the idea since at least 2002. In 2003 a respected broadcast engineer submitted a proposal to the FCC which called for the creation of 30 and 100-watt “neighborhood radio” AM stations with 1-5 mile broadcast ranges. The FCC never formally acknowledged receipt of this document. In 2004 efforts were made to revive the proposal, to no avail. Building on these previous efforts with copious field experimentation led to the petition the FCC finally accepted.
RM-11287 attempts to differentiate LPAM from LPFM in several respects. The most significant is its commercial nature: LPAM seeks to “fill the current gap between small stations and megacorporations…where mid-sized businesses used to be” in the broadcast industry. Petitioners contend that while LPFM addresses a “community coverage gap” opened by the consolidation of radio since 1996, “[t]here remains, in radio and in other mass media industries, a separate, but similarly dangerous, ‘small business gap'” which “harms the nation by hindering economic growth and also by limiting the free flow of information and ideas.” It is proposed that one entity may own up to 12 LPAM stations nationally, although no more than one in any given market.
Multiple options are presented for the technical requirements of an LPAM service, with power levels ranging from 1 to 250 watts. All are geared toward keeping administration of the service simple. It is believed that under such conditions LPAM stations may provide opportunities for access to the airwaves that LPFM simply cannot: for example, according to cited analysis from REC Networks, metropolitan Detroit is currently off-limits to LPFM, but as many as four possible LPAM frequencies exist in the city.
Some components of the petition, like asking the FCC to make licensing decisions between competing applicants based on their proposed broadcast content, will simply not fly. And given that the Telecommunications Act of 1996 requires the FCC to auction off all commercial broadcast licenses, implementation of the proposal as written would require the blessing of Congress. But the fact that the FCC is at least open to a rudimentary level of discussion about LPAM is encouraging. Comments on RM-11287 are due in mid-November (on or around November 20).

Low Power AM Petition for Rulemaking Accepted at FCC

LPAM's Appleseed Bears Fruit

Kyle Drake, the revolutionary LPAM guru whom I had the pleasure to meet at the RAD Conference, has unleashed something with great potential to give LPAM a significant kickstart in the proliferation department.
Key to this is a tunable loading coil – vitally important because it conquers what is probably the biggest drawback to liberation of the AM dial, the unwieldy nature of the antenna system. He’s designed one that works well. Continue reading “LPAM's Appleseed Bears Fruit”

LPAM Petition Revival Effort; FCC Tomfoolery Planned for Monterey

What with the FCC in the midst of a spasm of public backlash (recently magnified by the judicial bodyslam given its media ownership work), a new effort is afoot to resurrect a petition for rulemaking to consider the establishment of a low-power AM radio service. Such a petition was actually tendered to the FCC more than a year ago but, like other selected documents, it entered the agency’s maw and disappeared.
The “revival petition” asks the FCC to finally respond to the LPAM request made in mid-2003; it will be submitted as a part of the agency’s ongoing inquiry into localism. Don Schellhardt is collecting signatures; if you’d like to be included e-mail him and include your contact information for the petition’s purposes. The initial plan called for submission to the FCC by tomorrow but that may be a bit flexible, and follow-up filings can be made to include more signatories. Continue reading “LPAM Petition Revival Effort; FCC Tomfoolery Planned for Monterey”

Making Contact With Your Congresscritter

The Amherst Alliance is circulating this friendly reminder that with Representatives and Senators ostensibly home for a week-long break it might not be a bad idea to refresh their memories about pending efforts to expand community radio (both FM and AM).
Four years ago it was election-year shenanigans which allowed the National Association of Broadcasters and National Public Radio to curtail LPFM by legislative fiat. With media issues generally enjoying a higher profile on Capitol Hill there may be an opportunity here – but LPFM/LPAM is now competing with other media interests and issues (like indecency) which have more political flair at the moment.

December Amendment One: A Push for LPAM

As part of the FCC’s current study of localism, an effort’s afoot to lobby the agency to leaglize a form of low power AM radio service. Not only would LPAM be a good supplement to LPFM in general, but it might allow for placement of new community radio stations where congestion on the dial precluds new LPFMs.
Included in this month’s A1 is a supplement that summarizes the process for filing comments with the FCC’s Localism Task Force, and contains a list of recommended issues to emphasize.

Asking for More

It seemed like a huge victory for those fighting for access to the airwaves when the FCC decided on January 20 to re-legalize low power radio in the United States.
The celebration was short-lived, however, when the details of the plan were laid bare. In addition, those who fought the idea all along have redoubled their efforts to kill the new LPFM service with legal and legislative pressures and a burgeoning propaganda campaign.
In the midst of the largest firestorm low power radio’s ever experienced, the Amherst Alliance has petitioned the FCC to take a second look at LPFM – officially filing a Motion For Reconsideration over the newly-created regulations. Continue reading “Asking for More”