Aggregator

MB requires licensee to pay delinquent regulatory fees or show cause why payment should be waived or deferred

.

MB cancels Order to Pay or to Show Cause previously issued to Livington W. Fulton

MB requires licensee to pay delinquent regulatory fees or show cause why payment should be waived or deferred

.

.

.

Sens. Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii) and John Thune (R-S.D.) have reintroduced the Reliable Emergency Alert Distribution Improvement (READI) Act, which is meant to improve the emergency alert system and prevent its accidental triggering.

Among other things, the bill would allow broadcasters to repeat presidential and FEMA alerts, something they can’t do now.

The bill was introduced last year — and passed the Senate — in the wake of an inadvertent missile alert triggered in Hawaii during which some people did not receive the alert. “Even though it was a false alarm, the missile alert exposed real flaws in the way people receive emergency alerts,” said Schatz, Oct. 24, ranking member of the Communications Subcommittee.

FCC Investigating Missile False Alarm

Local officials in Hawaii inadvertently issued an incoming nuclear missile alert, leading to some panic and an FCC investigation into the incident.

“South Dakotans understand how drastically the weather can change on a dime,” said Thune, chairman of the subcommittee. “For that reason, among many others, this legislation would make necessary improvements to help keep South Dakotans and communities around the country safe in times of emergency.”

The bill would:

1. “Ensure more people receive emergency alerts by eliminating the option to opt out of receiving certain federal alerts, including missile alerts, on mobile phones;”
2. “Require active alerts issued by the president or FEMA to be repeated. Currently, alerts on TV or radio may only be played once;”
3. “Explore establishing a system to offer emergency alerts to audio and video online streaming services, such as Netflix and Spotify;”
4. “Encourage State Emergency Communications Committees to periodically review and update their state Emergency Alert System plans, which are often out of date;”
5. “Compel FEMA to create best practices for state, tribal and local governments to use for issuing alerts, avoiding false alerts, and retracting false alerts if they occur, as well as for alert origination training and plans for officials to contact each other and federal officials during emergencies;” and
6. “Establish a reporting system for false alerts so the FCC can track when they occur and examine their causes.”

A House version has also been introduced by Reps. Jerry McNerney (D-Calif.), Tulsi Gabbard (D-Hawaii), Pete Olson (R-Texas) and Gus Bilirakis (R-Fla.).

“We applaud the leadership of Sens. Schatz and Thune and Reps. McNerney, Bilirakis, Gabbard and Olson for introduction of the READI Act of 2019 which develops guidance and best practices for how state and local governments can improve emergency alerts, particularly to address the issuance of false alerts,” said NCTA — The Internet & Television Association. “As participants in the nation’s emergency alert system, cable operators appreciate Congress’ efforts to improve coordination between federal and local authorities to ensure consumers receive accurate and relevant emergency and public safety information in their local communities.”

 

The post Errant Missile Alert Prevention Bill Reintroduced appeared first on Radio World.

Value engineering. What does that mean? As broadcast engineers, we typically don’t build devices, but we do build systems, often made up of equipment from multiple, disparate manufacturers. We start off by determining the goal of the project — just what is the system supposed to accomplish? We then begin drilling down to key elements of the system, their roles and how they interact with other parts of said system.

But always in the background, we’re forced to work within a framework of cost. It’s great to say, “If money were no object, this is what I would do …” but I have yet to work on a project for a radio station in which money was not an object. I’m quite sure the same goes for you. We all have budgets that need to be satisfied.

When we purchase a piece of gear, there are several aspects of it that we must consider:

• Role in the system
• Functionality
• How well it integrates with other parts of the system
• Upfront cost
• Operating cost

And let’s face it, a big part of the purchasing decision is whether we like a brand or not, and that comes mainly from prior experience. Trying a new brand, or a new technology, is often something people don’t want to do because they have no experience with it and can’t form any idea of how it will affect them negatively. “Tried and true” is something most of us want to stick with.

Value engineering comes into play when what you want to accomplish doesn’t fit within budgetary requirements. It’s as simple as that.

Say, for example, you’re moving an entire radio station cluster to a brand-new facility, and when you look at the overall cost for the entire project, you find that it’s short on budget by, say, 10%. (That’s also of concern because you’ve no contingency money at the end.)

Another cause for value engineering would be when you want to get a certain item, but it doesn’t fit within your budget parameters, so you are left figuring out what else can be removed, or otherwise made less expensive, so that your desired “thing” then does fit.

HOW TO FIND THAT 10 (OR MORE) PERCENT

It should be obvious that the easiest way to find savings is by studying the largest budget line items first, since they’ll have the most impact mathematically. In a studio move, for example, that will likely be consoles, followed by furniture. In a transmitter site build, that will likely be the transmitter itself.

If you’ve found out that you are over budget after completing your initial design, likely there will be some anger and frustration to get over. You could be saying to yourself, “We just can’t do it for that much!” and it’s probably true. (Although it’s putting the cart before the horse, many times budgets get set before the system design is complete. It happens that way all the time.)

The order in which I would look for savings, from the least worst to the worst, is this:

• Can I reduce some of the studios to a less complex (and less expensive) console model?
• Can I reduce the size of the routing system? Do I really need that many inputs and outputs?
• Can I defer the building of several of the studios until a different budget period comes along?
• Can I re-use one or more of the “old” studios at the new place until a different budget period comes along?

No one wants to take this approach, but it’s one of the many aspects of managing a large capital project that you must be able to do in order to succeed. Hopefully, you’ll have your project fully budgeted before the station owners say, “Just how much is this going to cost?” so that you don’t find yourself in this position. Be forewarned, though: Just because you have all the numbers added up doesn’t mean that the station owners will agree to that amount.

There’s much more on the topic of value engineering, which we’ll discuss in future editions of Best Practices. And as always, we welcome your contribution on the topic.

Doug Irwin, CPBE AMD DRB, is vice president of engineering at iHeartMedia in Los Angeles and a technical advisor to Radio World.

Comment on this or any story. Email rweetech@gmail.com with “Letter to the Editor” in the subject field.

The post What Does “Value Engineering” Mean to You? appeared first on Radio World.

NXP Semiconductors in collaboration with the Digital Radio Mondiale consortium hosted the first annual NXP Cockpit & Infotainment Forum in New Delhi on Oct. 22.

Pictured from left to right are Ron Schiffelers, NXP; Ashok Chandak, NXP; Ruxandra Obreja, DRM; Alexander Zink, Fraunhofer IIS; SK Singhal, advisor TRAI; and Yogendra Pal, DRM India Platform.

The newly created one-day event featured presentations and demonstrations of the latest trends and solutions surrounding infotainment — from radio and audio to processing and connectivity. It also provided attendees with insight into the development of DRM and the inclusion of DRM receivers in many of the new models on the roads in India.

[Read: Air Highlights DRM Ahead of Cricket Matches]

DRM says participants also received updates on the All India Radio rollout as well as information on how NXP’s latest generation of software defined radio can facilitate DRM digital radio for infotainment system architectures.

The broadcasting and manufacturing industry as well as representatives from government bodies like the Indian regulator TRAI participated in the forum, sharing their information and experience. They, in turn, received information on the latest developments in the infotainment sector.

“The NXP-DRM car event in New Delhi was a great moment where our message was that DRM, whether in AM or FM, is just one standard with the same features and benefits,” said DRM Chairman Ruxandra Obreja. The demonstrqtions of DRM for FM showed how DRM can also enhance the performance of the many cars that an increasing number of Indians will own.”

 

The post NXP and DRM Hold First India Infotainment Forum appeared first on Radio World.

Times have changed since 1945, and the FCC wants to make sure that it is keeping up with those changes, seeking to update many of its media rules that may no longer be relevant. The latest such attempt comes with rules dealing with who has access to antenna sites.

The commission announced a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on Oct. 25, seeking comment on whether current rules originally crafted in 1945 should be eliminated or revised. Specifically, the rules prohibit the grant, or renewal, of a license for a TV or FM station if the applicant or licensee controls an antenna site that is suitable for broadcasting in the area and does not make the site available for use by other similar licensees.

The FCC says that since the rules were introduced, there has been an increase in antenna sites suitable for broadcasting, a majority of which it says are owned by non-broadcast entities. Calling them “rarely invoked,” the FCC seeks comment on whether the rules are necessary in today’s environment to promote competition and a variety of broadcast sources.

All five commissioners approved of the NPRM.

“These rules date back to 1945,” said FCC Chairman Ajit Pai. “At the time, there was a freeze on broadcast station construction in order to conserve equipment and material needed for World War II. The commission was also concerned about developing the still-nascent FM radio and TV services at a time when broadcasters were still the predominant antenna site owners. But that was a long, long time ago; today there are abundant FM and TV stations, the tower site market is flourishing and commission staff has been unable to find a single instance where these rules were successfully invoked. What they have found are parties citing these rules without a factual basis for doing so, resulting in unnecessary delay of commission proceedings.”

“We must keep up the effort to free traditional, regulated industries from regulatory burdens where appropriate; otherwise, they will continue to fight with one, or both, of their proverbial hands tied behind their backs,” wrote commissioner Michael O’Rielly in his statement.

No deadline for comments has been given at this time.

 

The post 70-Year-Old Antenna Site Rules Up For Debate By FCC appeared first on Radio World.

Media Bureau to host a Symposium on Thursday, November 21, 2019, entitled "Current and Future Trends in the Broadcast Radio and Television Industries"

.

FCC seeks comment on whether the common antenna siting rules for FM and TV broadcaster applicants and licensees are necessary given the current broadcasting marketplace

.

.

FCC grants the petition of Charter Communications finding that Charter faces effective competition in providing cables services in franchise areas in Massachusetts and Hawaii

.

Action Continues Commission's Efforts to Modernize its Media Rules

.