Rrrado Rn wrote:
I think what he was showing was that the claim that signals should be
protected to infinity is ridiculous.

It has no practical place in the real world.
No one was claiming protection to infinity.

Then to what point then?

Just enough so you can DX the stations you want?


Another absurdity.



The FCC has already decided to what point stations deserve protection....

And no one was making that suggestion.

Strawman argument.

Again, taking your "iboc interference" argument to it's ilogical confusion.



Making my point...You're taking the argument to absurdity and then
claiming no real value. No ****. That's part of the definition of absurdity.

The truth is, that protection from interference has been happening
for nearly 3/4's of a century. Both within the borders and internationally.

FCC policy had always been such that new stations may be inserted
into the bandplan by specifying and guaranteeing protection from
interference of co-and adjacent channel operators in other markets. And
modifications may be made to a pattern by guaranteeing additional
protection to co and adjacent operators in other markets. Protection,
however, may not be taken away, ie, there may not be a relaxation of
interference protection.

Internationally, frequency assignments are also made to minimize
interference, ie., offer protection from interference of stations in
other locations.

In the US, some frequencies have been protected by international treaty.

So, protection IS afforded to international lengths. And has been for
decades.

IBOC, however, introduces interference. Not just for co and adjacent
channels, but for second and sometimes third adjacents. Interference for
stations in other markets. To the degree that a station may interfere
with local listening in another market.

An example is Salem Communications WIND. They turned off their IBOC
because it was interfering with local listening in Milwaukee of their
own facility there. So there's no misunderstanding, let me be
clear...Salem turned off their IBOC because their IBOC sidebands from
the Chicago station were interfering with Milwaukee listeners' ability
to enjoy Salem's Milwaukee station.

That's not a DX ing experience.

At my own location, I have had trouble for the past two years
listening to WLS, a LOCAL station, because of IBOC sideband interference
from an out of market station.

No DXing, there, either.

Now, there have been stations sharing frequencies for decades. And
doing so without interfering with each other. IBOC, however, creates
interference, and has been given the green light to remove interference
protection for stations across the country on first second and third
adjacents. Limiting choice. Limiting listening. Even in one's local market.

DXing is a separate issue.

Radio World, a couple of years ago, told the story of a small station
in near Washington, DC, wiped out in it's local market by the second
adjacent sideband of a Washington station. Out of market station,
interfering with a LOCAL station in it's own, protected, market.

The same article illuminated other stations suffering loss of local
coverage within it's own market from IBOC interference.

The industry says, tough ****. Too few listeners to worry about.

For an industry licensed to serve the public interest as a public
trustee, that's a direct abrogation of its responsibilities.

An arrogance that's not been earned.