"Larry Ozarow" wrote in message
...
David Eduardo wrote:



I think as long as the programming carried by domestic SW stations
appeals to a small number of hobbyists and whackos, the FCC doesn't
care. If it actually started to cross over and appeal to substantial
market segments, they would tighten up a bit to protect the big guys.


Then the National Association of Religious Broadcasters would tie it up in
the courts.

Of course, the big guys would be free to buy up all the domestic
broadcasters.

Frank Dresser

"Doug Smith W9WI" wrote in message
...

47CFR73.788: (note second sentence)

(a) A licensee of an international broadcast station shall render only
an international broadcast service which will reflect the culture of
this country and which will promote international goodwill,
understanding, and cooperation. Any program solely intended for and
directed to an audience in the continental United States does not meet
the requirements for this service.

47CFR73.701:

(a) International broadcasting stations. A broadcasting station
employing frequencies allocated to the broadcasting service between
5,950 and 26,100 kHz, the transmissions of which are intended to be
received directly by the general public in foreign countries. ...

(73.701 goes on to mention the existence of government-owned
international stations but that the FCC doesn't regulate them)

("International broadcast stations" are the only type defined as allowed
to use shortwave frequencies - there are no rules authorizing a
"domestic shortwave service", so any stations broadcasting between 1710
and 54 mHz must meet the definition of "international" stations.

I'm not sure whether the 5,950 kHz figure in 73.701 has been amended to
accomodate the tropical-band stations like WWCR, or if WWCR etc. has a
waiver to allow use of the lower frequency.)

(there is nothing in my copy of the rules to indicate when these
regulations were established. My *suspicion* is that they predate WWII,
as in the early days of radio, smaller domestic stations feared loss of
their network affiliations - and most of their audience - to
high-powered distant stations. (that's why WLW lost their 500kw permit)
Domestic shortwave would be a real nightmare to these small domestic
stations. )
--
Doug Smith W9WI
Pleasant View (Nashville), TN EM66
http://www.w9wi.com


Interesting. Has the FCC ever made any attempt to enforce any domestic
programming restrictions on a SW broadcaster?

Also, I'm not sure domestic SW broadcasters would be much of a threat to
small domestic broadcasters. No more threating than the Mexican boarder
blasters. Maybe the protection was for the radio networks who were trying
to head off any possibility of another network or networks being formed on
the cheap on SW.

Isn't there a similar sort of ban on carrying long distance phone calls
which effectively protected the AT&T monopoly?

Frank Dresser

On Tue, 02 Sep 2003 04:38:08 GMT, Doug Smith W9WI
wrote (quoting regulations):

47CFR73.788: (note second sentence)

(a) A licensee of an international broadcast station shall render only
an international broadcast service which will reflect the culture of
this country and which will promote international goodwill,
understanding, and cooperation. Any program solely intended for and
directed to an audience in the continental United States does not meet
the requirements for this service.

It's really semantics. (We go through this about once a year in this
newsgroup...I'm surprised WLS/Chicago's Jay Marvin hasn't weighed in
yet, he's a regular participant in these threads ;)

None of the programs on WWCR, etc. "solely" direct their programs for
a continental U.S. audience. WWCR and similar broadcasters direct
their signals to other countries, anywhere from Canada or Mexico (my
favorite: WBCQ/Monticello, ME's direction to Mexico, which basically
puts most of the United States in the middle) to Europe or Asia.

Legally, their beams have the "unintended consequence" (cough) of
covering a good part of the continental U.S. But as long as one
English speaking person in Mexico can listen to WBCQ, they should be
OK with the law. You don't think the FCC realizes this? If this law
has been on the books for over 30 years, why haven't they done
anything about these "domestic-targetting SW stations"? No part of
this law indicates that the stations actually have to SHOW any
evidence of listeners in their target areas, or to show how large
those audiences are.

The first part of this regulation is interesting. I can hardly see
the FCC stepping in and requiring WWCR, WBCQ, etc. to air programs
only that "promote international goodwill, understanding and
cooperation". The FCC is loathe to get into programming issues for AM
and FM stations, let alone SW stations that have a handful of
listeners nationwide.

Mike

On Tue, 02 Sep 2003 19:16:22 GMT, "Frank Dresser"
wrote:

It's really semantics. (We go through this about once a year in this
newsgroup...I'm surprised WLS/Chicago's Jay Marvin hasn't weighed in
yet, he's a regular participant in these threads ;)

Jay doesn't post much, if any, any more. Not even in the chi.* newsgroups.

Since he's doing an earlier shift now...maybe he doesn't have as much
time :D But when he was posting, he was involved in at least two
similar threads.

I don't know if it's even enforcable. I'm sure somebody in government
thought long and hard about going after some show hosts and broadcasters
after Bill Clinton's "Hate Radio" comment about the Oklahoma City bombing.
I'd like to know if the FCC has ever tried enforcing these rules. There's
alot of regulations and laws on the books, and some of them are
contradictary.

To basically paraphrase "Passport to World Band Radio"... "Congress
can't pass a law to circumvent ionospheric physics". ;)

The upshot...as long as WWCR, WBCQ, WJCR, et al. are nominally
targetting foreign countries with their signals, they're probably OK,
and again, going into content isn't something the FCC has a taste for.
If they do it THERE, that opens up the can of worms on the AM and FM
bands.

Mike

Doug Smith W9WI wrote:

mAximo wrote:
"http://CBC.am/" writes:


Domestic SW broadcasting in the US is illegal!

The law has been on the books since the 1970s.


You've been taking lessons from Brian Denley, eh? You fail to cite any
relevant statute.

47CFR73.788: (note second sentence)

(a) A licensee of an international broadcast station shall render only
an international broadcast service which will reflect the culture of
this country and which will promote international goodwill,
understanding, and cooperation. Any program solely intended for and
directed to an audience in the continental United States does not meet
the requirements for this service.

That would make nearly all private SW broadcasts in the US illegal,
since they are clearly for a domestic audience. There are a couple
religious stations which broadcast in Spanish for Latinoamerica but most
private SW in the US is not only in English but deals with topics of
interest to only US listeners.

47CFR73.701:

(a) International broadcasting stations. A broadcasting station
employing frequencies allocated to the broadcasting service between
5,950 and 26,100 kHz, the transmissions of which are intended to be
received directly by the general public in foreign countries. ...

(73.701 goes on to mention the existence of government-owned
international stations but that the FCC doesn't regulate them)

("International broadcast stations" are the only type defined as allowed
to use shortwave frequencies - there are no rules authorizing a
"domestic shortwave service", so any stations broadcasting between 1710
and 54 mHz must meet the definition of "international" stations.

I'm not sure whether the 5,950 kHz figure in 73.701 has been amended to
accomodate the tropical-band stations like WWCR, or if WWCR etc. has a
waiver to allow use of the lower frequency.)

North America, under international agreement, cannot use the tropical
bands, which here is defined as SW freqs below 5950 khz. I suspect WWCR
is doing what on CB would be called "freebanding" or operating out of
band illegally.

(there is nothing in my copy of the rules to indicate when these
regulations were established. My *suspicion* is that they predate WWII,
as in the early days of radio, smaller domestic stations feared loss of
their network affiliations - and most of their audience - to
high-powered distant stations. (that's why WLW lost their 500kw permit)
Domestic shortwave would be a real nightmare to these small domestic
stations. )

I was led to think that the rules dated from the early days of the Cold
War and were designed to avoid "propagandizing" broadcasts.

"Doug Smith W9WI" wrote in message
...

(a) International broadcasting stations. A broadcasting station
employing frequencies allocated to the broadcasting service between
5,950 and 26,100 kHz, the transmissions of which are intended to be
received directly by the general public in foreign countries. ...

The legislation on this goes back to the late 30's...

" It was the FCC, however, that gave broadcasters the greatest potential
assistance. In May 1939, the FCC reassessed the non-commercial status of
shortwave broadcasting. Realizing that shortwave was no longer
"experimental" in any real way, they made the decision to allow time to be
sold for advertising. The Commission also opened up more frequencies for
international use. However, the decision was not purely beneficial to the
broadcasting companies. The FCC required the construction and maintenance
of new, high-powered broadcast facilities and included a "culture rule."
This stipulation required the broadcasters to engage in programming that
"will reflect the culture of this country and will promote international
good will and understanding," stating further that programs created for
domestic audiences did not fit this definition.[xvii] In practice, the
costs of building the new facilities and creating original programming would
outpace any actual revenue generated by advertising. "

The "culture rule" was suspended after considerable NAB lobbying, but
returned later and became today's law.

I can't find the specific legislation, but the inference that domestic
activities were proscribed is clear.

Speaking of Jamming, something seems to be upsetting the WBCQ signal on
5105. Anyone else notice this?

Kinda sounds like the sync locking on my sony.

mike

"Gregg" wrote in message
...
Behold, Frank Dresser signaled from keyed 4-1000A filament:


"http://CBC.am/" wrote in message
...
Domestic SW broadcasting in the US is illegal!

The law has been on the books since the 1970s.





So what does the law say? And what happened in the 70s? I have the
impression that the SW broadcasters had to give up thier transmitters at
the start of WW2. These transmitters were used for propaganda
broadcasts during the war. After the war ended, the broadcasters were
offered thier transmitters back, but were prohibited from targeting the
US. Those that didn't take the transmitters back were paid by the
government. Most of the broadcasters took the money. Those
transmitters were used to start up the VOA.

And countless jammers that exist today.

--
Gregg
*Perhaps it's useful, even if it can't be SPICE'd*
Visit the GeeK Zone - http://geek.scorpiorising.ca

"Mike Ward" wrote in message
...

To basically paraphrase "Passport to World Band Radio"... "Congress
can't pass a law to circumvent ionospheric physics". ;)


Of course not! That would be stupid!!

The upshot...as long as WWCR, WBCQ, WJCR, et al. are nominally
targetting foreign countries with their signals, they're probably OK,
and again, going into content isn't something the FCC has a taste for.
If they do it THERE, that opens up the can of worms on the AM and FM
bands.

Mike

The FCC can still fine on the air talent and penalize stations if their
content is out of bounds. One of the FCC commissioners wanted to yank the
radio station that hosted the Opie & Anthony church stunt. They didn't, but
they could have.

So how many complaints does the FCC get concerning the domestic SW
broadcasters? Plenty, I'll bet -- as long as there are such groups as the
Southern Poverty Law Center and others out there.

And I have to believe there are, or at least were, people in the FCC who
would love sweep the hate speech from the SW airwaves. I know that's a
couple layers of supposition there, but I don't think it's foolish
supposition.

I'd like to know if this has ever been enforced. And if it can be enforced
now:

47CFR73.788: (note second sentence)

(a) A licensee of an international broadcast station shall render only
an international broadcast service which will reflect the culture of
this country and which will promote international goodwill,
understanding, and cooperation. Any program solely intended for and
directed to an audience in the continental United States does not meet
the requirements for this service.

If this can't be enforced, this can't be used to claim domestic SW
broadcasting is illegal.

Frank Dresser

"Frank Dresser" wrote in message
...

The FCC can still fine on the air talent and penalize stations if their
content is out of bounds. One of the FCC commissioners wanted to yank the
radio station that hosted the Opie & Anthony church stunt. They didn't,
but
they could have.

The FCC can only fine the licensee of the radio station. They do not fine
the talent. Should any other laws, Federal or State or local be broken by an
announcer's actions, it is up to those in charge of enforcemnt to separately
prosecute the talent, something the FCC is not chartered to do.

I'd like to know if this has ever been enforced. And if it can be
enforced
now:

47CFR73.788: (note second sentence)

(a) A licensee of an international broadcast station shall render only
an international broadcast service which will reflect the culture of
this country and which will promote international goodwill,
understanding, and cooperation. Any program solely intended for and
directed to an audience in the continental United States does not meet
the requirements for this service.

This is the original wording from 1939, I believe. The "culture of this
country" thing is a direct aprt of that regulation.

"Frank Dresser" wrote in message
...

So's the "international broadcast service" and the "goodwill,
understanding,
and cooperation" parts. But, as far as I can tell, it's a dead issue.
I'm
inclined to think it can't be legally enforced. Or maybe nobody at the
FCC
cares.

Since the original rule was intended to protect the 1-A clears, the point is
very, very moot now. (And that was the reason WLW was kept form continuing
as a 500 kw station, too).