Many AM stations are also devoted to programming for immigrant audiences, often in Spanish or other languages. The rest of the day, though, often features vital agricultural information for nearby farmers or spotlights community events that families might otherwise miss. The afternoon hours on some stations are dominated by right-wing talk, perhaps accounting for the many conservative legislators lined up behind the effort to save AM. But it’s also vibrant, particularly in rural America. Hence carmakers’ reluctance to install this legacy tech in products they market as ultramodern. The fan base for AM is older - much older - and dwindling. Yet it turns out AM and FM together account for about 60 percent of all in-car listening, even in the age of satellite radio and streaming. Adults these days might think that kids these days have never even placed their fingers on a dial. There are nearly 4,200 AM stations across the nation, and more than 82 million Americans per month listen to them. The upshot, according to industry insiders, is that no AM in cars will mean no AM at all before long. And, yes, AM stations could offer their programming other ways - though for much of their audience, listening while driving is the point. Yes, AM stations could move to FM if cars lose AM - though cost structures might make it more difficult for them to survive on that band. What happens then? The answer could be AM radio dies. Officials ought to find a way because the alternative is equipping vehicles forevermore with what will someday be an obsolete technology. Cruz want the Government Accountability Office to report on whether any alternative communications systems could achieve the same reach and reliability as AM broadcast radio during emergencies. What’s more, it’s free.Īll this makes sense - for now. It can also reach everyone, all the time, even in areas with no cell service or WiFi and even amid a natural disaster that knocks out broadband. Its simplicity makes it less vulnerable to hacking or other manipulation by adversaries than more complicated systems with more possible points of failure. As FEMA’s deputy administrator argued in congressional testimony last spring, however, AM is nothing if not reliable. Their primary reason: The Federal Emergency Management Agency relies on AM to transmit emergency alerts.įEMA has been expanding its ability to deliver these crucial messages via more modern media. Markey (D-Mass.) and Ted Cruz (R-Tex.) would require car manufacturers to maintain AM broadcast radio by default in new vehicles, electric or not, at no additional charge. A bipartisan bill co-sponsored in the Senate by Edward J. Still, protests from AM’s allies are coming through loud and clear - from both sides of the aisle. And even as AM declines in popularity, keeping antiquated AM radios in cars costs manufacturers. The reason is twofold: Electric motors render the fuzzy sound of AM stations fuzzier still. The question is whether Congress should accelerate the process.Īutomakers, including BMW, Mazda, Volkswagen and Tesla, are starting to remove AM radios as standard equipment from new electric vehicles - and Ford was on the verge of removing them from all new vehicles before backtracking under pressure from broadcasters and their allies. Electric vehicles, however, might do the job. Justin Wolfers is a professor of public policy and economics at the University of Michigan and a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution.Contrary to the popular refrain, video never really did kill the radio star. For more detail, read the Wolfers-Rothschild article, "Forecasting elections: voter intentions versus expectations." While most polling asks who respondents intend to vote for, Wolfers and co-author David Rothscshild (Microsoft Research) found, "over the last 60 years, poll questions that asked people which presidential candidate they expected to win have been a better guide to the outcome than questions asking people whom they planned to vote for." When asking for voters' beliefs on who will win the election, Rangel's lead widens, indicating that the primary might not actually be that close. Writing on Congressman Charles Rangel's reelection chances, Leonhardt (managing editor of The Upshot) uses Wolfers' research to argue that recent polls might show the primary challenge as closer than it actually is. "An indirect path to accuracy in election polling," a May 21 article by David Leonhardt for the New York Times' recently launched blog, The Upshot, cites work by Ford School Professor Justin Wolfers.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |