"David Eduardo" wrote in message
. com...

"Frank Dresser" wrote in message
...

"David Eduardo" wrote in message
. net...

"Frank Dresser" wrote in message
...

"David Eduardo" wrote in message
news

Since it only affects Am significantly, and does not affect AMs with
good
signals, we are talking about very few stations that are otherwise
viable
being affected.

I take it that electromagnatic interference from home electronics
isn't
significantly reducing the radio audience even though they are
listening
to
analog radios.

This one has been proven. A look at ratings from the 70's and even 80's
show
listening ZIP codes to include significant listening in those in the 5
mv/m
to 10 mv/m range. Today, in most large cities, the listening is almost
entirely in the 10/mvm or better... in LA, it is mostly in the 15 mv/m,
for
example. The difference is not new stations, as most larger markets
have
had
no new stations in that period, but the difficulty in listening... and
listener expectations of better signals and less noise.



And that's "very few stations that are otherwise viable being
affected."?

I don't understand the question.



You made a couple of points concerning interference which seemed
contridictary. If interference is driving signifivant numbers of people
away from radio, it's an important consideration for the public. If
interference is only effecting a very few viable stations, it's important
only to those very few stations.

Frank Dresser