On Wed, 7 Jun 2023 09:09:32 -0700, Siri Cruise
<chine.bleu@www.yahoo.com> wrote:

>Gerald wrote:
>>> Radio Radio wrote:
>>>> That House of Representatives subcommittee hearing about AM radio that we
>>>> told you about earlier will be held on the morning of Tuesday, June 6.
>>>
>>> Who is threatenning their licenses?
>>>
>>
>> Nobody. Most automakers plan to not offer AM radios in their products mainly
>> to do with the electrification of vehicles (interference) and lack of demand.
>
>Then why is Congress interfering? This is question for the market.
>If manufacturers can sell cars without them, the market has
>spoken. If they cannot be sold without, the market has spoken. If
>people buy portable radios, that market has spoken. If some
>technical innovation is needed, wait and see what the market
>shapes and people decide what is important by how they spend their
>money.
>
>Since people can buy a radio separate from the car, it's not like
>some monopoly trying to control the market. Let the market resolve
>this itself.

That's not entirely true. While you can buy your own radio the reason
they are leaving them off is that they aren't putting in the proper
shielding to prevent interference from the new systems. So your new
radio is going to have the same problem with AM radio interference.
Which is why the FCC put in laws that kept this from being an issue.
Why they aren't getting involved at this point and telling
manufacturers that their cars need to comply with the current laws is
another matter.

shawn <nanoflower@notforg.m.a.i.l.com> wrote:
>Wed, 7 Jun 2023 09:09:32 -0700, Siri Cruise <chine.bleu@www.yahoo.com> wrote:
>>Gerald wrote:
>>>>Radio Radio wrote:

>>>>>That House of Representatives subcommittee hearing about AM radio that we
>>>>>told you about earlier will be held on the morning of Tuesday, June 6.

>>>>Who is threatenning their licenses?

>>>Nobody. Most automakers plan to not offer AM radios in their
>>>products mainly to do with the electrification of vehicles
>>>(interference) and lack of demand.

>>Then why is Congress interfering? This is question for the market.
>>If manufacturers can sell cars without them, the market has
>>spoken. If they cannot be sold without, the market has spoken. If
>>people buy portable radios, that market has spoken. If some
>>technical innovation is needed, wait and see what the market
>>shapes and people decide what is important by how they spend their
>>money.

>>Since people can buy a radio separate from the car, it's not like
>>some monopoly trying to control the market. Let the market resolve
>>this itself.

>That's not entirely true. While you can buy your own radio the reason
>they are leaving them off is that they aren't putting in the proper
>shielding to prevent interference from the new systems. So your new
>radio is going to have the same problem with AM radio interference.
>Which is why the FCC put in laws that kept this from being an issue.

Let's phrase that correctly. FCC isn't a legislative body. FCC is a
standards-making body and a regulator and a censor, but it has only the
authority granted to it in its telecom bill, the Federal Communications
Act of 1934.

Generally, FCC doesn't have authority over receivers or other consumer
electronics equipment that they function as intended. For instance,
federal courts have struck down certain FCC attempts to force cable to
distribute channels that can be received with the viewer's own
receiver. Right now, there is not a single channel in clear QAM I can
receive from Comcast. PEG, broadcast, and brokered channels are all
encrypted. I have an ATSC 1.0 receiver which is clear QAM compatible.
Long long ago, it was possible to receive On Demand being watched by
other people on the block in clear QAM. I knew pr0n was being watched
but not by whom.

>Why they aren't getting involved at this point and telling
>manufacturers that their cars need to comply with the current laws is
>another matter.

FCC has the ability to set standards for devices that output energy in
the broadcast spectrum and thus interfere with the broadcast itself but
not the reception. I don't see how FCC has regulatory authority in this
scenario as the interference is within the vehicle and there isn't
enough energy output to interfere with the broadcast.

There is a broadcast antenna near where I used to live, and I do travel
by there at times. I cannot receive FM near the transmitter. The signal
doesn't interfere enough with AM to block reception.

Here's an example of FCC having no authority over how a signal, even one
they literally regulate, interferes with reception.

In article <21c18i9vl8nedn4060bps3hiuke8n0aln0@4ax.com>,
shawn <nanoflower@notforg.m.a.i.l.com> wrote:

> On Wed, 7 Jun 2023 09:09:32 -0700, Siri Cruise
> <chine.bleu@www.yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >Gerald wrote:
> >>> Radio Radio wrote:

> >>>> That House of Representatives subcommittee hearing about AM radio
> >>>> that we told you about earlier will be held on the morning of
> >>>> Tuesday, June 6.
> >>>
> >>> Who is threatenning their licenses?
> >>>
> >> Nobody. Most automakers plan to not offer AM radios in their products
> >> mainly to do with the electrification of vehicles (interference) and
> >> lack of demand.
> >
> >Then why is Congress interfering? This is question for the market.
> >If manufacturers can sell cars without them, the market has
> >spoken. If they cannot be sold without, the market has spoken. If
> >people buy portable radios, that market has spoken. If some
> >technical innovation is needed, wait and see what the market
> >shapes and people decide what is important by how they spend their
> >money.
> >
> >Since people can buy a radio separate from the car, it's not like
> >some monopoly trying to control the market. Let the market resolve
> >this itself.
>
> That's not entirely true. While you can buy your own radio the reason
> they are leaving them off is that they aren't putting in the proper
> shielding to prevent interference from the new systems. So your new
> radio is going to have the same problem with AM radio interference.
> Which is why the FCC put in laws that kept this from being an issue.
> Why they aren't getting involved at this point and telling
> manufacturers that their cars need to comply with the current laws is
> another matter.

L.A. has an AM talk radio duo on KFI-- the John & Ken Show-- that I very
much enjoy. They came on during my commute and I'd listen to them in the
car every day. Now that I'm retired and not in the car every afternoon,
I've discovered the show is archived as a podcast on iHeartRadio, so I
can listen to it over the internet whenever I want regardless of when
and where I am.

So I'm still patronizing an AM radio show, but not over AM broadcast.