Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

mew5175_TheSecond t1_jdclm83 wrote

I am the biggest radio advocate there is. I worked in radio for the majority of my professional life and believe when operated correctly (having all local programming, personalities, and content), it is truly the best medium.

With that being said, this article and commenters here painting this as some sort of government overreach or overreaction is ridiculous. You cannot just broadcast on a random frequency all willy nilly. Those licenses are insanely expensive and these brothers should just have an internet radio station where they won't run into trouble.

Also the FCC has essentially no other powers other than legislating public airwaves so this is in no way a waste of their time or resources. This is exactly what they are set up to do. This is not the equivalent of 30 cops showing up to a drug store for a stolen candy bar and it should not be treated as such.

These brothers are providing a valuable resource for a specific community. No denying that. But you gotta do it legally. And it seems like they were given plenty of warnings ahead of time that they completely ignored. I have no sympathy here.

181

Based_nobody t1_jdcot9g wrote

Yes But they're not issuing any more licenses for am/fm.

So how do you get a new radio station if you can't? Fucking "I Heart Whatever the fuck" owns all the goddamn stations in the US almost. The rock stations are all BS drivel.

Don't you want new music and new opinions? These guys provided a service for a group of people. That's more than anyone can say of the FCC.

37

BeMoreChill t1_jdcq089 wrote

Have you heard of this new thing called the internet?

33

attackplango t1_jddgrbf wrote

So internet access and devices to access it are free now? Or at least as affordable as the one-time purchase of a radio?

−10

BeMoreChill t1_jddh82s wrote

I see more homeless people with cell phones than AM/FM radios lol

19

attackplango t1_jddhhjt wrote

Ah yes, I remember the article you had published in The Journal of Unsubstantiated Anecdotes. Your dedication to lack of peer review was inspired.

−9

BeMoreChill t1_jddi8gh wrote

There’s public services that literally give cell phones out to people in need for free

17

attackplango t1_jddiddb wrote

That’s great! What kind of data plan do those cell phones have?

−10

BeMoreChill t1_jddimc9 wrote

Pretty decent. There’s also free WiFi around the city. You new here?

19

mew5175_TheSecond t1_jdcvvff wrote

Trust me I can go back and forth with you all day on the decline of radio and the reasons for it. I agree with everything you're saying about the state of the industry. Our only hope at this point is for the behemoths like iHeart and whatnot to no longer deal with the billions in debt they have and sell off their assets to various local owners who make radio what it should be. But that's a tall ask and an extremely unlikely future.

But at this point if you can't get an AM or FM license, you gotta go online. And fact of the matter is, most people are only listening to radio in their cars, and you can still listen to internet radio via your phone + bluetooth or aux cable in a car.

An AM/FM signal perhaps makes you seem more legitimate which is the only reason I can think of as to why these brothers continued to pirate the airwaves, but I assume all the advertising they are doing for themselves is online anyway. They promoted their programs on Instagram and whatnot so they could still do that for an internet-only station. When they got their first ever letter/warning from the FCC, they should have used their final moments on FM to say we are shutting down and used the opportunity to promote their new internet-only radio station. They opted not to do that and now they have to pay the price for it.

26

attackplango t1_jddgljd wrote

I don’t think a lot of people in NYC are listening to internet radio in their cars. I would wonder how many people in the audience know that internet radio is a thing. Also, there’s the hurdle of being able to afford monthly internet, and having something that can access it.

Yes, there’s licensing, and yes we don’t want unexpected interference. But also, the spectrum is a publicly owned thing, and if no more licenses are available because corporations have bought all of a very limited stock, what is the solution there? Internet is not accessible in the same way radio is.

12

familygamereview t1_jddcf47 wrote

But for the audience, the internet costs money they might not have. Maybe theyre serving a community stuck with heart radio because they lack income and cant afford to go over their data plan if they even have a data plan let alone a subscription. Radio is free. Its kind of weird to assume theyre pirating radio for the prestige.

4

Steelemedia t1_jddob12 wrote

They actually do issue new licenses. It takes money and attorneys and engineers to navigate the process. Better to ask permission than forgiveness.

4

hamhead t1_jdd7bgt wrote

There's a reason they aren't issuing more...

3

wrongwaycorrigan t1_jdhs2kt wrote

If I set up a high power radio transmitter in your neighborhood on 2.5GHz and 5GHz would you mind that it interfered with your WiFi at home? That's what this is about. There is a band plan and licensing. You are restricted to transmit within frequencies and power based on your license.

2

mymindisgoo t1_jdjpnsr wrote

89.1, 89.9, 90.7, 91.1, 107.1 say no they aren't all drivel.

2

Pays_in_snakes t1_jdd8rkl wrote

There's a huge issue of equity here too; the unfair allocation and costs of radio licenses means that an immigrant community that actually still would like to use radio for something other than classic rock and bad advertising has no way to access it, and internet radio is simply not as accessible to everyone in that community

−2

Steelemedia t1_jddo0wo wrote

Wife is on the board of a community radio station that started as a pirate radio station. It took work, visits to DC and attorneys to transform a hobby into an entity that serves a community. Now they have a call sign and their frequency is protected.

No mention in the article about the wattage or bleeding into KISS FM 105.5. They should have formed an LPFM station.

22

k1lk1 t1_jddcy0a wrote

Both things are true:

  • Regulating the airwaves is important

  • Licenses need to be easier and less expensive to acquire

17

The_CerealDefense t1_jdegxw4 wrote

> Licenses need to be easier and less expensive to acquire

They are... just not in the frequencies and geographies that many people want to broadcast in. There are tons of cheap, especially low power stations across the country... a lot of them religious based. A lot. Like way more than you'd ever imagine

13

pixel_of_moral_decay t1_jdctpzk wrote

Yup. And there’s a reason so much frequency is empty on your dial. Preventing interference is one of their primary jobs.

Which is why they need to enforce illegal broadcasting. This can be effectively jamming radio in other parts of a market.

And that does have safety implications as radio is one of the most basic signals to broadcast in an emergency.

8

[deleted] t1_jdg3if6 wrote

>You cannot just broadcast on a random frequency all willy nilly. Those licenses are insanely expensive and these brothers should just have an internet radio station where they won't run into trouble.

Why shouldn't you be able to do it without a license to begin with?

0

mew5175_TheSecond t1_jdhk149 wrote

Because there is a very limited amount of airwave space and you wouldn't want the "wrong people" seizing those spots.

2

[deleted] t1_jdiboyj wrote

What's wrong with a free for all except on emergency frequency?

0

woman_thorned t1_jddamgd wrote

The fcc should be the ones cracking down on bots and open ai, and they could be working on that, or spam, or hackers, if they wanted to, and no one made them choose this use of resources. And yes, I know they don't have regulatory power over most of those things but they could be working to get it if they let fucking Ecuadorians buy the license they have been asking to buy for 15 years and been told no.

−5

Jimmy_kong253 t1_jdcl9jr wrote

I understand both sides of the argument radio station operators and FCC. But it can't operate an unlicensed radio station flip side what if it was somebody promoting anti-Semitism or hate instead of community events and news that's positive and helpful. You can't shut one illegal radio station down and then let another one run they all have to be shut down

24

sushi69 t1_jdcnzfb wrote

Bruh licensed radio stations promote plenty of hate, this has nothing to do with the content

7

Based_nobody t1_jdcpabc wrote

Lol, you must have never heard of AM radio or Fox's stations.

Drive through the middle of the country and you'll hear some terrible crap from the cross-draggers.

5

The_Lone_Apple t1_jdc793w wrote

They're not entitled to broadcast just because they feel like it. Go do a streaming station no one will listen to.

19

andylikescandy t1_jdc9i33 wrote

Because they didn't buy a slice of spectrum, I'm guessing from a company who got there first and are doing nothing with it?

5

hamhead t1_jdd7o3f wrote

>I'm guessing from a company who got there first and are doing nothing with it?

Why would you guess that? AM/FM stations can't be silent for more than 1 year (and often less than that... they have to inform the FCC within 10 *days* of going silent) or they lose their license.

9

andylikescandy t1_jdgjqf9 wrote

Was not aware of this, was aware of spectrum squatting happening in the past.

Point is noone else was using the spectrum, it wasn't like they were stepping on another station's broadcasts. Whole point of the system is to ensure that this is fundamentally what happens -- not to gatekeep and make it cost-prohibitive for anyone but large companies who bought up a ton of small stations in the past. I mean it is once politicians with donors get involved, but it's not supposed to be that way.

1

The_Lone_Apple t1_jdcauhr wrote

Still not entitled to make their own laws as they're finding out right now.

5

DadBodofanAmerican t1_jdcky5s wrote

Good stuff, these guys should follow the rules just like everyone else. Now do all the rest of the QoL stuff.

6

nycnola t1_jdd54oc wrote

Would I find interesting about all of this is their bravado and brazen behavior. They didn’t try to hide that they were broadcasting illegally. What kind of morons are these?

6

SolitaryMarmot t1_jddvygr wrote

105.5mhz FM band in Queens shares FMLP licensure through the Roman Catholic Diocese and a Chinese Anti-Communist organization. Its only 100 Watt though so easy to break into.

How much you wanna bet the money behind the Ecuadorians eventually traces back to the Chinese Government? It can't be cheap to get pirate transmitters siezed over and over.

https://transition.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/fmq?list=0&status=0&facid=197021%22%20%20%20%20%20%20style=

https://transition.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/fmq?list=0&status=0&facid=197220%22%20%20%20%20%20%20style=

See also this story from the NYT:

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/15/business/media/fm-stations-that-dont-reach-far-but-reach-deep.html

4

overitncallinuout t1_jdfl38o wrote

And this reinforces why I warn people not to download things illegally when over. FCC is not to be messed with as they will threaten you by mail. It took only one letter for me...

2

wrongwaycorrigan t1_jdhrlav wrote

What does the FCC have to do with illegal downloading?

1

overitncallinuout t1_jdhwhmu wrote

Well a while back when there were certsin popular web sites for streaming things (pirate), the FCC had begun cracking down...even for downloads that were not for profit. Some would see a letter in the mail threatening court, and I can tell you that there were a number of people (at lwast one that I can remember) who were made an example of. I hope this makes sense. It is something you can research on your own if you would like more information.

2

BottomScreen t1_jdchxb9 wrote

Will be tuning into sentimientos this sunday with the lady

−1

chug84 t1_jdcinvd wrote

Awesome. I feel such better now!

−9

fapplesauc3 t1_jdcoyyj wrote

Fined but not shut down.

> The seizure of their equipment by federal agents did not deter the Ayoras from continuing to operate their pirate radio station

These guys are based. Keep it going, you harm nobody and help many. Fuck the FCC, burn down that captured regulatory body. We don’t want corpos making the rules anymore.

−14

YaksInSlax t1_jdcx2yk wrote

Broadcasting radio can interfere with emergency services communication which, literally, would harm people. The FCC is absolutely necessary to keep airwaves clear and organized.

Whether the spectrum is being used for something useful is debatable, but this guerrilla-style radio anarchy is not the way to make a statement -- especially in such a big metro area. It is most certainly not "based".

10

fapplesauc3 t1_jddthik wrote

They were doing this for 15 years, they did nothing wrong other than piss off the regulatory capture agencies. I’m all for ensuring emergency services communication, but thats not what this is.

−4

therealowlman t1_jdcjoex wrote

Good to see them finally tackle the important crimes.

−17