323
AM radio law opposed by tech and auto industries is close to passing | Ars Technica
(arstechnica.com)
this post was submitted on 02 May 2024
323 points (98.2% liked)
News
23361 readers
3817 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I was referring to a quote from the article where someone stated that 82 million Americans listen to AM radio.
Coincidentally, I am above average, think that AM radio has utility, and am not opposed to requirements that it be made available in car stereos - though I do not actively tune in.
I’m opposed to it, if the argument is basically “for emergencies”… then putting an emergency radio in would be better. At that point, just lump into the spare kit or something.
Nobody in an emergency is going to think to use something that they don’t use in every day life. Having AM radio in cars is… not going ti be useful. (EAS goes out on FM amd say radio, too, and there’s the WEA sent to cell phones for people younger than dirt.)
and if SHTF, powering a car is going to be difficult. You basically can only rely on the gas in your tank and what you keep around for the lawn mower (if that.).
Most emergency radios are designed with minimal power from the get go (ie battery operated, recharged via hand crank or portable solar, etc.) and can usually be set to automatically come on if the EAS sends an alert.
The justification of "emergencies" is problematic. Most people aren't going to hunt for an AM radio in an emergency. They are going to their phone/computer. If they want to prop up traditional communication then they should just require both AM and FM AND require the EAS included. With software defined radio this all can be implemented with a single chip and SiriusXM included probably. Just requires the appropriate antennas.
I’m just going to assume there’s somebody that makes a single part, it’s all they make, but it has to go into every am radio; and that person paid off a bunch of lobbyists so they can keep selling that part.
It’s stupid. For emergency alerts, cell phones are vastly more useful, the Wireless Emergency System is far more featured, cell phones are likely in everyone’s pocket, and the system is as reliable as the EAS is.
Any other justification is stupid, and propping up AM is probably the result of said lobbyists…
All of the comments like these don't understand the word emergency.
There are numerous plausible reasons cell phone towers, computers, and TV will be out in a true emergency.
I mean, hell, cell phone were unusable on 9/11 due to congestion, and even though it was a horrible event, it want an emergency the like of which are possible.
AM is dead fucking simple. Seriously. If you know what you're doing, you can make a receiver with a wire, a resistor, and a speaker. You don't even need power to run it.
The WES system that sends broadcasts to cell phones is more like a pager than cell phone. On 9/11, a WES signal was never sent given the extensive media coverage.
The fact that you mention two way communication getting blocked during 9/11 as an argument for a technology that doesn’t allow 2-way communicatio… is kind of amusing.
There is a further, critical advantage to cells. The vast majority of people wouldn’t have to build a cell phone to get that alert. Pretty sure the only am radio in my house is an unplugged and stored hand crank emergency radio.
We all already have phones in our pockets, or at least in arms reach practically 24/7. The hardware to maintain the network already exists and is going to be maintained regardless if it’s used for alerts.
AM is largely going away. There’s only a handful of niche uses (like very rural or remote locations,) where it’s more useful.
To further expound on that…. Are you running your car or truck or what ever 24/7 in case of an emergency broadcast? In an emergency it’s best to have your vehicle be a dedicated vehicle and your receiver a dedicated receiver. You don’t want to find your battery ran down or that you’re out of fuel.
Which brings us back to… this bill is stupid. Unless you’re a trucker, you’re probably not going to be around your car enough to reliably get the emergency broadcast.
And truckers have better systems than AM radios for communication.
Your phone ain't gonna be much use when there's no tower nearby.
Neither is that radio.
What’s your point?
AM travels significantly further than cell signals, chum. Hundreds of miles instead of just a few.
Yes yes.
And how large is that tower? What happens if say a forest fire rips through the ground station. Tornado. Hurricane. Ooops your entire coverage is gone.
Cell towers are more distributed, meaning loosing any single tower is far less critical. (Typically, phones are in range of 2-3 towers at any given time. Unless you’re way out in the sticks.)
The land under the am tower probably costs more than the entire cost of setting up a cell. (Especially in urban areas where they can go onto rooftops of existing structures.)
But of course this entire conversation is ignoring that it’s am radios in cars. I don’t know about you but most of my day is not spent in a car. Which is turned off when I’m not using it so as to not waste gas or run down the battery.
I have a cell phone inside arms reach practically 24/7. Most people do.
Try reading up more on AM radio signals, buddy.
You know, I read this whole back and forth, and the only takeaway I have is that you have absolutely no idea how any of these technologies work. Like at all. I’m not saying this to be a dick or anything -it’s ok to not know things- but it’s painfully obvious in this case because your lack of fundamental understanding is the core of your argument.
And if you did understand how the tech works, you’d probably get why those options are used instead of your layman’s idea of a good idea. Which is not, in fact, a good idea at all for a variety of reasons. Which is exactly why these other things are being discussed and supported by people who do understand them (and I’m not talking about the rest of the Lemmy comments either, I mean in the real world).
There are tons of scenarios where cell towers/fm transmitters for an area would go down, but cars would still be fully operable. But even if that wasn’t the case, why do you want to remove a public safety option that currently exists, even if you don’t and won’t use it? The only people who benefit are big companies (the exact ones whining they don’t want to comply) that don’t care about you, so why do you give a shit if this inconveniences them?
My cell phone and FM radios won't work after an EMP. AM will be the first "broadcast signal" to return in such a worst case scenario.
So. This bill is meant to force manufacturers to put am radios inside new cars.
Right?
New cars that, in a hypothetical emp… will be just as fried as your cell phone is.
And that’s why the emergency prep angle doesn’t hold water. You would literally be better off with a hand crank emergency radio (that can almost certainly survive.)
And if AM is removed from cars (AM's biggest listening base) it will die. If AM radio dies, then the hand crank emergency radio will have no use. Much like the portable UHF/VHF television.
Because there’s no possible way that the government could buy up the 77 stations thst broadcast the NPWS stations.
We’re already subsidizing them heavily because the backup systems to keep them on are expensive.
Edit to add: the demand for AM is going away. Content is cheaper to produce and distribute online.
In stead of passing legislation to bail out a dying industry (what this bill is really about,) they should be looking at ways of resolving the problem.
An easy first step is to buy or otherwise nationalize the 77 critical stations. We can then either maintain them as vital infrastructure or replace them with newer and more capable/effective technologies.
All this bill is going to do is prolong the problem.
Gotcha... And just for funsies, how much money (taxpayer money) have we spent on say... failing banks? I'd say investing zero tax payer dollars to "save" AM radio is a better investment.
But we’re not going to be able to save AM radio.
Outside of rural areas, AM radio has no advantage over cell based internet services. It’s less expensive for the content producers, and it’s inevitable that they switch to streaming instead of broadcast.
And those rural areas don’t provide the audience necessary to sustain the cost of the broadcast service.
Further this bill isn’t without cost- that cost is being paid by everyone who buys a car.