Before the
Federal Communications Commission
Washington, D.C. 20554
)
In the Matter of ) MM Docket No. 99-25
)
Creation of a Low ) RM-9208
Power Radio Service ) RM-9242
)
)
COMMENTS
Theresa Prieto, licensee of Station WPLO(AM), Grayson,
Georgia, by her attorney, hereby submits her Comments in
opposition to the proposal to establish a new low power FM
service. For the reasons set forth below, Prieto submits that
the new service should not be established, or if it is
established, it should be restricted to noncommercial operations.
I. LPFM Is Not an Antidote to the Problems Created by
Consolidation
In the Notice of Proposed Rule Making in the proceeding
(ANotice@), the Commission stated that one of the reasons that
it is proposing to establish a low power FM service is that it is
"concerned that consolidation may have a significant impact on
small broadcasters and potential new entrants into the radio
broadcasting business by driving up station prices, thereby
exacerbating the difficulty of entering the broadcast industry
and of surviving as an independent operator." The Commission
sees LPFM as a possible antidote to this problem of consolidation
and closing out of small broadcasters, new entrants and
independents. While it is true that "small broadcasters" and
"independent stations" have been adversely impacted by
consolidation, adding a new LPFM service will simply exacerbate,
rather than relieve their problems of survival. Currently, small
broadcasters and independents are being squeezed by the multi
station operators. If LPFM is created, and especially if it is
allowed to operate on a commercial basis, they will be squeezed
from below by these new small, independent stations that will
compete with them for their niche audiences and advertising
dollars. The establishment of LPFM will likely be the death
knell for many small and independent full power stations that are
struggling to survive in this era of consolidation.
LPFM could have an especially devastating impact on an
independent station serving a specialized audience such as WPLO.
As mentioned above, WPLO broadcasts in Spanish. The Spanish
population of the Altanta metro area is quite small (2.0%)
according to the 1990 Census) and it is scattered in pockets
throughout the region. While small and scattered, this Spanish
language population is large enough to support WPLO. However, if
an LPFM station were to begin broadcasting in Spanish to one of
the pockets of concentrated Spanish speaking population in the
Atlanta area, such a station could siphon off enough of WPLO's
audience, and revenue base, to force it out of business as a
Spanish language station. If this were to happen, and if, as
likely, the LPFM station were to find that it could not survive
on the small Spanish speaking audience that it could reach, the
diversity that currently exists in the Atlanta market, that is
the availability of Spanish language radio programming, would be
lost.
Whether the specialty format is Spanish or some other ethnic
group, in situations where the specialized audience is scattered
in pockets throughout a metro area and is currently being served
by a full power station, the proposal to create LPFM poses a
serious threat to the continuation of such specialized service
and the diversity that it provides. This is so because, in the
first instance, one or more of the pockets of the ethnic audience
will be a tempting target for an LPFM operator looking for a
niche. However, a LPFM station which is only able to reach part
of a small, and scattered, ethnic audience will initially
fragment this audience and the advertisers who target this
auience to the point that the full service station will no longer
be able to survive by programming to the specialized audience,
and ultimately, after the full service station has switched to a
mass market audience, the LPFM will itself fail for want of a
large enough audience for its specialized programming.
In sum, rather than "foster diversity" and create new
opportunities for small, independent broadcasters, the likely
consequence of the creation of LPFM will be to fragment the
audience and revenue base on which existing stations serving
niche audiences depend upon to the point that much of the
diversity that currently exists will be lost. For this reason,
Commentator submits that the Commission should not proceed with
the creation of an LPFM service.
II. Operating Budgets of LPFM Stations Will Not Be Less
Than Those of Full Power Station
Underlying the proposal to establish LPFM is the
Commission=s mistaken belief that, because LPFM stations will
operate with lower power and serve a much smaller area than full
power stations, they will have a "relatively small operating
budget" which will make it possible for them "to offer very
localized exposure attractive to local businesses that could not
otherwise afford radio advertising." The reality is that, with
the exception of the initial cost of acquiring a transmitter and
the monthly power bill, the costs of operating a successful radio
station do not vary significantly based upon the operating class
or power of a station as the primary costs of operating a station
are for personnel, acquiring and producing programming, and
renting studio and transmitter space. Therefore, the costs of
operating a low power FM station will not be significantly less
than the cost of operating a Afull service@ AM or FM station.
In fact, as the production of local programming is more personnel
intensive than acquiring mass market entertainment programming,
the operation of the sort of Acommunity oriented@ low power FM
stations that the FCC envisions would most likely be greater than
the cost of operating a typical Afull service@ station.
III. If Authorized, LPFM Stations Should Be Restricted
to Non Commercial Operation.
If LPFM Stations are authorized, they should restricted to
non commercial operation, otherwise, most LPFM stations will develop
as mini versions of full power stations, offering variations on the
same mass appeal music formats that are already widely available. If
this were to happen, the public policy objectives underlying the FCC=s
decision to establish LPFM service -- providing Acommunity-oriented@
broadcasting and Aadditional diversity in
gram services@ C would not be achieved.
IV. The Problem of Preserving the Integrity of the
Commission=s Technical Rules
A significant risk exists that the creation of LPFM stations
will result in increased interference problems within the FM
band. The risk flows from a combination of factors including the
fact that the FCC lacks the resources to police compliance with
its technical rules and the fact that many of the LPFM operators
will be low budget operations constructed and maintained by
persons with little technical expertise.
V. Conclusion
For the foregoing reasons, it is respectfully submitted that
the Commission should not create LPFM; however, if it does create
LPFM, it should restrict LPFM stations to non commercial
operation.
Respectfully submitted,
/s/ David Tillotson
Law Office of David Tillotson
4606 Charleston Terrace, N.W.
Washington, DC 20007-1911
202/625-6241
Attorney for Teresa Prieto
Dated:April 1, 1999