XPost: alt.radio.broadcasting

Radio World

///////////////////////////////////////////
NAB Scoffs at GBS Geo-Targeting Tests

Posted: 07 Jun 2022 02:36 PM PDT https://www.radioworld.com/news-and-business/headlines/nab-scoffs-at-gbs-geo-targeting-tests


The National Association of Broadcasters is dismissive of the ZoneCasting experimental testing data provided to the FCC by GeoBroadcast Solutions.

In fact, NAB told the FCC that GBS rigged the tests, that it effectively attempted to catfish the commission by submitting only glowing test results
for extremely circumscribed, specifically engineered situations and that it failed to address numerous critical issues raised by the FCC and the radio industry.

NAB insists that allowing FM boosters to originate programming on a limited basis for geo-targeting would cause harmful interference and be
catastrophic to the radio business model. It said that permitting ZoneCasting’s operation will almost certainly drive listeners away from terrestrial radio and put listeners’ safety at risk and asked that the FCC reject the proposed rule change.

Several other broadcasters also have filed fresh opposition with the commission.
Strong words

Some background: The FCC in an April public notice sought input on studies submitted to the commission by GeoBroadcast Solutions in respect to experimental FM booster operations at KSJO(FM) in San Jose, Calif., and WRBJ(FM) in Brandon, Miss. (If you recall, the FCC rejected a request by
the NAB and NPR to delay this week’s deadline for comments.)

ZoneCasting was created by GBS in 2011 and has been in development since, according to the tech company. ZoneCasting uses a series of FM boosters
spread across a radio market that allows FM broadcasters to provide
localized programming and advertising for specific geographic areas for
short periods of time.

The NAB was already on record against the idea. Now it says the two recent field tests used an “artificially favorable design,” and described the results as “invalid and/or useless” and not supportive of GBS’s claim that
ZoneCasting can be deployed without negatively impacting the listener experience.

“To the contrary, these tests — and the fact that more robust, objective tests were not pursued — make clear that ZoneCasting will cause
unacceptable interference that harms consumers and undermines the public interest,” NAB told the FCC.

NAB spelled out two kinds of approaches to testing any proposed technology.
One puts the technology through a system of real-world challenging
scenarios to discover potential flaws, the other is designed to put a system’s best foot forward and cover up blemishes, it said.

“While the FCC and the radio industry critically needed to see and review
the first kind of test, GBS’s efforts are squarely developed to serve the latter, more cosmetic, purpose,” NAB wrote. “GBS has studied ZoneCasting’s
impact in a few handpicked scenarios, ignored the vast majority of more
likely situations, insufficiently addressed ZoneCasting’s impact on digital radio, and failed to comprehensively measure ZoneCasting’s effects on
actual listeners.”

NAB continued: “Regardless, even with GBS’s cherry-picked scenarios, its results still demonstrate that the public will be harmed if GBS’s
proprietary systems are permitted to be employed.” The tests confirm, according to NAB, that listeners in cars traveling at 60 mile per hour
“even in GBS’ most ideal route for traversing the artificially minimized interference area caused by ZoneCasting may experience interference for up
to seven seconds.”

To support its arguments, NAB submitted its own engineering analysis of the
GBS data, prepared by John Kean, senior engineer at Cavell, Mertz &
Associates, and commissioned by the NAB and NPR. In the analysis he
identifies what NAB calls a series of omissions and skewed reporting in the
GBS tests. 

Kean said he designed and built a scientific listener-based test system to measure the effects of GBS’s technology on the quality of radio audio
between the primary and booster stations and develop and recommend
acceptable listening parameters.

NAB believes Kean’s findings show that “the commission should save itself more time, effort and energy by swiping left on GBS’s rigged tests.”
An image from the report prepared by John Kean for NAB and NPR, showing
signal coverage of WRBJ(FM).
Others weigh in

The ZoneCasting rulemaking proposal is also opposed by iHeartMedia, Audacy, Cumulus Media, Beasley Media Group, Salem Media Group and Connoisseur
Media, among others. In their own joint comments, those broadcasters call
the testing of the GBS technology “woefully incomplete” and completed within “cherry-picked” testing environments.

“GBS’s self-serving rationale that the commission should focus on the time to traverse such (FM booster) interference zones at 60 miles per hour completely ignores the everyday reality for radio listeners of clogged rush hours, traffic congestion due to accidents, and slow passage on city
streets with traffic lights,” the broadcasters commented.

The radio broadcasters are also on record with their concern that emergency alert information could potentially be interrupted by geo-targeted
boosters. In addition, they worry that radio stations that do not launch ZoneCasting in a market could be economically damaged by those who do
deploy the technology. 

“The lack of transparency in GBS’s testing methodology makes it extremely difficult to duplicate or confirm its field tests, given that many
parameters were not stated, and it was even unclear whether the tests
employed the current ZoneCasting technology,” according to the most recent joint comments.

National Public Radio is another ZoneCasting critic that believes data from
the most recent experimental field tests are incomplete. It cites the Kean report and its findings that ZoneCasting co-channel interference regions
are much larger than GBS admits and that the technology threatens the
integrity and viability of the FM service.

“NPR has concluded that revision of the commission’s rules as proposed to permit authorization of the ZoneCasting technology is not warranted, and GBS’s petition should be denied with no additional experimental authorizations granted,” NPR wrote in its comments to the FCC.
GBS response
Radio World invited a response from GBS.
“We are confident that geo-targeting technology for radio is a viable and outstanding opportunity for radio stations, listeners and advertisers,”
said spokesman Robert Udowitz.
“Interestingly, our critics were once our champions, including NAB, which first supported geo-targeting radio technology because it was clear that
hyper local is in the interest of an industry dedicated to localism,” he continued.
“Then for some reason, the NAB switched sides, and the reasons for the about-face continue to shift. First, it was because the technology was
racist. When that was shown to be false, the NAB insisted geotargeting
would be bad for business. This was provably false given every other communications platform can and does geo-target its audience. So now, in
the final stages of the FCC’s review, the NAB claims geotargeting is
somehow unsafe. Whatever the NAB’s motivations may be, the FCC’s record shows that the vast majority of radio station owners support geotargeting.”

Radio World will report on additional comments filed by others in a
follow-up story.

Replies in the FCC rulemaking proceeding (RM-11854) are due June 21.

The post NAB Scoffs at GBS Geo-Targeting Tests appeared first on Radio
World.


///////////////////////////////////////////
FCC Opens FM6 NPRM, Seeking "Final Resolution"

Posted: 07 Jun 2022 01:13 PM PDT https://www.radioworld.com/news-and-business/headlines/fcc-opens-fm6-nprm-seeking-final-resolution


Saying it wants to bring “final resolution” to the Franken FM issue, the Federal Communications Commission has opened a notice of proposed
rulemaking.

The debate over whether to allow FM6 stations could have a much broader
impact than expected, depending on how the FCC ultimately acts. Because
among the questions it is asking are these two: whether to allow future FM6 operations beyond those that currently have STAs; and more dramatically, whether to license additional NCE FM radio stations on 82–88 MHz in areas where Channel 6 LPTV and full-power stations are not operating. The latter
idea has been proposed by NPR.

FM6 stations are the low-power digital television stations whose audio can
be heard on many radios at 87.75 MHz — just below the official FM broadcast band — and which are essentially operating as FM stations. Thirteen
stations currently have special temporary authority to do so.

Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel had indicated that the commission would take some action on the matter this month. But the FCC did not wait for that meeting, it has opened the NPRM asking for comments on whether it should
allow FM6 as an ancillary or supplementary service under specified
conditions.

It is also asking whether it should eliminate or revise the television
Channel 6 distance separation rules for low-power FMs, noncommercial educational FMs, Class D (10 watt) FMs and FM translators that operate on reserved band FM Channels 201–220, which is 88.1 to 91.9 MHz.
Background

The commission thinks that nearly 30 FM6 stations existed prior to the
digital TV transition. But many in the industry expected the question of Franken FMs to go away once LPTVs were required to go digital in the summer
of 2021, because the digital portion of their signals could no longer be received by FM radios.

However, as Radio World has been documenting in a current series of
articles, FM6 stations have sought to maintain their service in the new
digital TV age, arguing that they provide an important service.

As long ago as 2014, the FCC noted, Venture Technologies Group proposed to
use an ATSC 1.0 digital television transmitter on Channel 6 and a separate analog radio transmitter tuned to 87.75 MHz to simultaneously operate a
digital LPTV station on Channel 6 and an analog FM radio-type service. It
asked the FCC to treat the analog FM audio transmission as an “ancillary or supplementary” service under the commission’s rules.

That year the commission took industry comments on the concept. A coalition
of broadcasters supported it, while FM broadcasters, including National
Public Radio and other noncommercial educational FM broadcasters, as well
as full-power television stations licensed on Channel 6 opposed it, citing interference concerns. In 2019 the commission took another round of
comments, again without taking final action.

But the LPTV digital transition was completed in July 2021. Shortly
beforehand, Venture filed a request for STA to convert its Channel 6 TV
station in San Jose, Calif., to ATSC 3.0 digital and to operate an ATSC 3.0 transmitter and a separate analog FM radio transmitter on 87.7 MHz in an
analog format as an ancillary service. The Educational Media Foundation,
which provides programming to the station, supported that request.

The Media Bureau granted its STA subject to a number of conditions. The
station must operate in ATSC 3.0, not 1.0; it cannot create interference;
it must file regular written reports; the audio and video coverage must
reach similar populations; and the station must provide at least one
full-time stream of synchronized video and audio programming on the ATSC
3.0 portion of the spectrum. There are several other requirements as well.

Twelve more STAs have since been granted under the same stipulations.
NPRM

The FCC now is asking:

Whether FM6 operations serve the public interest and should be authorized
to continue in any capacity.
If existing FM6 operations should be authorized as “ancillary or supplementary” services and, if so, be subject to a rule that contains provisions similar to those in the 13 current STAs.
Whether the FCC can or should limit FM6 operations to only those LPTV
stations with active FM6 STAs right now.
Whether to adopt NPR’s proposal to license additional NCE FM radio stations on 82–88 MHz in areas where Channel 6 LPTV and full-power stations are not operating.
Whether to eliminate or revise the TV6 distance separation rules for LPFM,
NCE, Class D (10 watt), and FM translator stations operating on reserved
band FM Channels 201–220.


Those are the broad-brush questions. Among the many specific issues being raised in the FCC NPRM are these:

Is it an efficient use of spectrum to use a 6 MHz television channel to
provide a 200 kHz aural service?
Could FM6 programming be delivered in a more spectrum-efficient way, e.g.
as a digital audio-only stream on one of the LPTV’s multicast channels, through the internet or via traditional FM or LPFM licenses?
How is analog use of a digital channel “consistent with” the digital technology mandated by the FCC for the provision of advanced TV services? Should the FCC limit LPTV stations providing FM6 operations from modifying their facilities?
Should it limit such stations from being transferred while FM6 operations
are being conducted, to avoid license speculation?
Does the fact that stations are using ATSC 3.0 change the potential for
analog FM6 to interfere with or disrupt the station’s digital TV service? Should FM6 stations be held to the rules that require public inspection
files, border frequency coordination and other aspects of Part 73?
If FM6s are allowed, should they be subject to a 5% fee, as required of
certain digital TV ancillary or supplementary services?
If the FCC decides to limit FM6 only to stations that currently have STAs, should it “grandfather in” any LPTVs that have pending applications for CPs that conducted FM6 operations in the past?


The commission also spent quite a few paragraphs on the idea of eliminating
or tweaking the TV6 distance separation rules for LPFMs, NCE FMs, Class D
FMs and FM translators on the lower FM frequencies.

Since 1985 the FCC required FM stations on the reserved band to protect
Channel 6 stations. In the NPRM it noted that four years ago, in weighing tweaks to the LPFM rules, it had considered whether to change that
requirement, the idea being that the current provisions “significantly overprotect” TV6 stations and could be reduced with little impact. But it didn’t act.

So now that “analog television is … truly a legacy service” and the industry has experience with respect to digital TV6, the FCC asks again
about the continued need for TV6 interference protection rules, including
the possible impact if FM6 operations are retained — “that is, if FM6 and LPFM and NCE FM stations are allowed to come into closer proximity if the
TV6 protection rules are eliminated, would that increase concerns about interference from FM6 to LPFM/NCE FM stations — an important factor in our FM6 considerations?”

The deadlines to comment in MB Docket No. 03-185 have not yet been
published.

You can read the full NPRM here.

The post FCC Opens FM6 NPRM, Seeking Final Resolution appeared first on
Radio World.


///////////////////////////////////////////
Apple Previews "Next Generation" of CarPlay

Posted: 07 Jun 2022 01:11 PM PDT https://www.radioworld.com/news-and-business/programming-and-sales/apple-previews-next-generation-of-carplay


Following the start of the Apple Worldwide Developers Conference on Monday, details surrounding the newest edition of Apple CarPlay were of particular interest to radio enthusiasts and broadcasters alike.

Fred Jacobs of Jacobs Media wrote an article diving into conference
highlights and addressing how radio might be affected by Apples
self-described next generation of CarPlay. This is a friendly takeover of a vehicles entire dashboard and operating system, said Jacobs.

The latest CarPlay updates can now overhaul every screen in your car — from climate control to fuel levels to the speedometer, said Apple.

While only preliminary details have been released about the updated
version, at present, CarPlay enables users to get directions, make calls,
send and receive messages, and access their Apple Music subscriptions all
from the car’s built-in display.
Concept art depicting the updated dashboard for the next-gen of CarPlay.
(Photo courtesy of Apple)

Radio stations also have a home on the dash. Apple said users can stream
more than 100,000 live radio stations through the feature.

The graphic below offers a sampling of auto manufacturers already signed up
for Apples next-gen of CarPlay.
(Photo courtesy of Apple)

Outside of Apple CarPlays growing popularity with auto manufactures, the platform has also been gaining popularity among consumers.

From Jacobs Medias annual Techsurvey, which measures the amount of change
in the tech space and its impact on radio broadcasters, this year, CarPlays importance among core radio listeners rose significantly.

Of the 12% of survey respondents who bought or planned to purchase a new vehicle this year, more than one in four said Apples dashboard system is a “must have,” according to Jacobs Media.
(Photo courtesy of Jacobs Media)

Read Fred Jacobs full post on Where’s Radio In The “Next-Gen” Apple CarPlay? to learn more about how the “Radio” app fits on the new dashboard.

The post Apple Previews Next Generation of CarPlay appeared first on Radio World.


///////////////////////////////////////////
FEMA Notes 10 Years of Wireless Emergency Alerts

Posted: 07 Jun 2022 11:55 AM PDT https://www.radioworld.com/news-and-business/fema-notes-10-years-of-wireless-emergency-alerts


Wireless Emergency Alerts are now 10 years old. Government agencies use the system to send messages to cellphones in emergencies. Authorities have sent more than 70,000 WEAs to date. 

Officials at FEMA’s Integrated Alert and Warning System, IPAWS, noted the anniversary.

“In 2007, FEMA began modernizing the nation’s public alert and warning system by integrating new technologies into existing alert systems,” they wrote in a release. 

“The new system, IPAWS, began operation in 2011. The first WEA was sent
June 28, 2012 by the National Weather Service for a Flash Flood Warning in Santa Fe, New Mexico.”

As Radio World has reported, the Federal Communications Commission is
currently considering several changes to improve the WEA system, including
more standardized reporting, and is looking for partners for its testing.

You can watch a short video from FEMA Administrator Deanne Criswell
speaking about the anniversary at the bottom of this story.

[Visit Radio World’s News and Business Page]

Also this week, FEMA officials advised the alerting community that there’s
a new procedure for consumers who have Apple devices to follow to opt in to
WEA tests.

Since 2019, authorities have been able to send WEA tests that only wireless subscribers who opt in to tests will receive. Testing allows emergency authorities to assess WEA performance without disturbing the public with non-emergency messages.

Mobile phones ship from the manufacturer with the test option turned off.
Last month, FEMA says, Apple changed its procedure for opting in to tests, affecting devices that use the latest versions of its operating systems.

“This new procedure involves downloading and installing a software
component, then turning on an alert option in the device settings. Devices running older versions of the OS use a prior procedure.”

FEMA said both processes are explained in an Apple support document about emergency and government alerts on iPhone and Apple Watch. The section concerning test options is “Choose to Receive Test Emergency Alerts in the United States.”

Settings for Android devices remain unchanged. Google’s Android support
site includes WEA information. To opt into tests, search Notifications for Wireless Emergency Alerts and enable State/local test alerts.



The post FEMA Notes 10 Years of Wireless Emergency Alerts appeared first on Radio World.


///////////////////////////////////////////
Stations Tussle Over Channel Change Reimbursements

Posted: 07 Jun 2022 08:10 AM PDT https://www.radioworld.com/news-and-business/business-and-law/stations-tussle-over-channel-change-reimbursements


When it comes to situations like the involuntary channel change of a
station, the Federal Communications Commission has clear guidelines for how
the impacted station may be reimbursed for its troubles. Engineering work-related reimbursements might be a ‘yes’ for reimbursement. Even marketing items embossed on lip balms, keychains and pint glasses might get
a green light. But stations should be aware that these kinds of
reimbursement requests must be clearly justified and closely documented — a situation made more fractious when there are disagreements between two
station owners. 

That’s the current situation in Prescott Valley, Ariz. The Federal Communications Commission agreed to a request by Entravision Holdings to upgrade one of its stations, a decision that required station KPPV(FM) to
be modified with a new channel and new frequency. The commission explained
to both Entravision and KPPV’s licensee Prescott Valley Broadcasting Co.
that Entravision would reimburse Prescott for legitimate and prudent costs related to this involuntary channel change.

Monitoring this reimbursement negotiation fell to the Media Bureau, which required the two parties to submit a report in writing to the bureau
regarding the progress of their negotiations. If a reimbursement agreement
had not reached by Feb. 24, 2022, Prescott would need to submit a list of
all reimbursable expenses as well as documentation to support the estimated cost of each expense on that same date.

On that day in February, both Entravision and Prescott filed a statement to
say they were unable to reach a final agreement on which expenses are legitimate. The two went back in forth in a series of reports, responses, updates and objections, asking the bureau to strike or reconsider
reimbursement requests.

The bureau clarified a few things in its response. It reiterated that
Prescott must submit “a list of all expenses it claims are reimbursable” by February 24, but left the door open for Prescott to submit additional
approved expenses, a move that Entravision wanted to disregard. The bureau
said it would accept new documentation and new factual information as the process moved forward, including potential reimbursement for items such as marketing materials, legal fee invoices, certain engineering expenses,
office supplies, billboard advertising and the like.

[See Our Business and Law Page]

Although the bureau said it would review this additional documentation, it
did not accept an argument that Prescott made in which it claimed that “circumstances beyond its control” prevented it from providing copies of all estimates and invoices. Prescott has long been aware that it needed to thoroughly document all expenses, the bureau said. “The fact that
[Prescott] delayed obtaining documentation to support its estimates of the costs of various expense items was not a circumstance beyond its control,” the bureau said.

The bureau also reiterated that for expenses — like those listed above — to be reimbursable, there must be a “clear nexus between the frequency switch and the expense” and that all expenses must be “reasonable.” Prescott must
show that the expense falls into one of a few categories: engineering,
legal and equipment charges; printing of logs and stationery; out-of-pocket expenses while the station is off the air; advertising; or promotional materials. Prescott must also be able to prove that the expense is incurred solely because of the involuntary channel change. 

Among the reimbursements that the bureau approved was a $2,006 bill for engineering fees associated with a construction permit and a $4,130 legal
bill for permit processing and reimbursement negotiations.

Items not entitled to reimbursement include a $10,700 legal bill for work performed prior to the involuntary channel change as well as a
reimbursement request for legal fees related to the litigation surrounding escrow account payments. 

There is also a sizable list of charges that are still up for approval, including equipment, printing expenses, promotional expenses and
miscellaneous expenses such as the repainting of a wall with new logos,
payroll and overtime expenses and website redesign. The bureau is also requesting additional information on 16 other categories that resulted in
legal work in 2020 and 2021.

Since the bureau is requesting additional information from Prescott, it
also has given Entravision the opportunity to reply within 14 days after receiving Prescott’s response. The bureau also told Prescott that it will
not accept any further submissions other than an outright request from the bureau, an update on an estimated cost or information on an expense that
was not anticipated. Any other submissions will be dismissed. Likewise,
unless the bureau requests a reply, the bureau will not accept any further submissions from Entravision either. 

Entravision has 20 days from the date of the letter to reimburse Prescott
for the amounts that have been agreed upon so far, which total $17,931. In turn, Prescott has 14 days to respond to the bureau’s request for
additional information and 30 days to send a receipt of its reimbursements
to the commission. 

The post Stations Tussle Over Channel Change Reimbursements appeared first
on Radio World.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)