America's Car Industry Seeks to Crush AM Radio. Will Congress Rescue It? (msn.com) 262
The Wall Street Journal reports that "a motley crew of AM radio advocates," including conservative talk show hosts and federal emergency officials, are lobbying Congress to stop carmakers from dropping AM radio from new vehicles:
Lawmakers say most car companies are noncommittal about the future of AM tuners in vehicles, so they want to require them by law to keep making cars with free AM radio. Supporters argue it is a critical piece of the emergency communication network, while the automakers say Americans have plenty of other ways, including their phones, to receive alerts and information. The legislation has united lawmakers who ordinarily want nothing to do with one another. Sens. Ted Cruz (R., Texas) and Ed Markey (D., Mass.) are leading the Senate effort, and on the House side, Speaker Mike Johnson — himself a former conservative talk radio host in Louisiana — and progressive "squad" member Rep. Rashida Tlaib of Michigan are among about 200 co-sponsors...
A spring 2023 Nielsen survey, the most recent one available, showed that AM radio reaches about 78 million Americans every month. That is down from nearly 107 million in the spring of 2016, one of the earliest periods for which Nielsen has data... Automakers say the rise of electric vehicles is driving the shift away from AM, because onboard electronics create interference with AM radio signals — a phenomenon that "makes the already fuzzy analog AM radio frequency basically unlistenable," according to the Alliance for Automotive Innovation, a car-industry trade group. Shielding cables and components to reduce interference would cost carmakers $3.8 billion over seven years, the group estimates.
Markey and other lawmakers say they want to preserve AM radio because of its role in emergency communications. The Federal Emergency Management Agency says that more than 75 radio stations, most of which operate on the AM band and cover at least 90% of the U.S. population, are equipped with backup communications equipment and generators that allow them to continue broadcasting information to the public during and after an emergency. Seven former FEMA administrators urged Congress in a letter last year to seek assurances from automakers that they would keep broadcast radio available. The companies' noncommittal response spurred legislation, lawmakers said.
Automakers increasingly want to put radio and other car features "behind a paywall," Markey said in an interview. "They see this as another profit center for them when the American driving public has seen it as a safety resource for them and their families...." He compared the auto industry's resistance to the bill to previous opposition to government mandates like seat belts and air bags. "Leaving safety decisions to the auto industry is very dangerous," Markey said.
Lawmakers have heard from over 400,000 AM radio supporters, according to the president of the National Association of Broadcasters.
But the article also cites an executive at the Consumer Technology Association, who says automakers and tech advocacy groups have told lawmakers that requiring AM radio "would be "inconsistent with the principles of a free market.... It's strange that Congress is focused on a 100-year-old technology."
A spring 2023 Nielsen survey, the most recent one available, showed that AM radio reaches about 78 million Americans every month. That is down from nearly 107 million in the spring of 2016, one of the earliest periods for which Nielsen has data... Automakers say the rise of electric vehicles is driving the shift away from AM, because onboard electronics create interference with AM radio signals — a phenomenon that "makes the already fuzzy analog AM radio frequency basically unlistenable," according to the Alliance for Automotive Innovation, a car-industry trade group. Shielding cables and components to reduce interference would cost carmakers $3.8 billion over seven years, the group estimates.
Markey and other lawmakers say they want to preserve AM radio because of its role in emergency communications. The Federal Emergency Management Agency says that more than 75 radio stations, most of which operate on the AM band and cover at least 90% of the U.S. population, are equipped with backup communications equipment and generators that allow them to continue broadcasting information to the public during and after an emergency. Seven former FEMA administrators urged Congress in a letter last year to seek assurances from automakers that they would keep broadcast radio available. The companies' noncommittal response spurred legislation, lawmakers said.
Automakers increasingly want to put radio and other car features "behind a paywall," Markey said in an interview. "They see this as another profit center for them when the American driving public has seen it as a safety resource for them and their families...." He compared the auto industry's resistance to the bill to previous opposition to government mandates like seat belts and air bags. "Leaving safety decisions to the auto industry is very dangerous," Markey said.
Lawmakers have heard from over 400,000 AM radio supporters, according to the president of the National Association of Broadcasters.
But the article also cites an executive at the Consumer Technology Association, who says automakers and tech advocacy groups have told lawmakers that requiring AM radio "would be "inconsistent with the principles of a free market.... It's strange that Congress is focused on a 100-year-old technology."
AM is free (Score:5, Insightful)
The car manufacturers can't squeeze the owner for monthly subscriptions to something that is free.
Re: AM is free (Score:2)
Costs money to make an AM antenna work inside a dash filled with metal and complex electronics. If there isn't a business reason to keep doing the engineering work and making compromises in the dash then the auto industry is going to stop doing it.
Goofy smart cars with a million sensors and a dozen cameras is the high margin market the auto industry is going for. Not the 40+ driver with a 12 year old car that flips on the AM when driving through the desert.
P.s. I wish I cars had better AM radios than they d
Re: AM is free (Score:4)
Yes, those are all the business reasons not to have an AM radio. Everyone is aware of that. That's why car companies are openly talking about not having AM radios.
The potential regulation is to force companies to do something that's not strictly for profit but for the public good.
In civics class, when we children were still unaware of a thing called corporate capture, we were taught that that's supposed to be the purpose of government regulations. This whole topic just makes me nostalgic!
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe I'm a cynic but a Republican controlled Congress seems unlikely to do something for the public good when industry is telling them to cut it
Re: (Score:2)
Re:So is FM (Score:2)
The reason why is because everything electronic creates interference in the AM band now. Numerous switching power supplies, brushless motor controllers, you name it. It's easier and cheaper to stop supporting AM than it is to comply with EMI and RFI emissions.
AM is nice for emergencies (Score:3)
AM carries better though it also tends to get more interference. It's dead simple for someone with electronics knowledge to make an AM radio with materials and tools that are probably far more basic than you'd expect.
If you want to put out an unencrypted signal in the worst conditions and expect the most people to get it, AM would be the way I would suggest to do it. For that reason, I think it'd be nice if AM was kept around as an emergency backup if nothing else.
Re: (Score:2)
For emergency backup you're welcome to throw a $20 battery + crank AM radio in your glovebox. Not sure why people insist that the automaker has to build it in to the car itself if it's really just meant for emergency purposes.
Re:AM is nice for emergencies (Score:4, Insightful)
>Not sure why people insist that the automaker has to build it in to the car itself if it's really just meant for emergency purposes.
To ensure the vast majority of people have it if and when it's needed. Most people aren't getting their homes struck by lightning, but a lightning rod is in every building code I've ever heard of.
Re:AM is nice for emergencies (Score:5, Insightful)
To ensure the vast majority of people have it if and when it's needed. Most people aren't getting their homes struck by lightning, but a lightning rod is in every building code I've ever heard of.
Maybe the building codes should mandate that all houses have AM radios?
Re: (Score:2)
I'm only in my car when I'm driving somewhere and even then, I don't listen to terrestrial broadcast radio. My phone, however, is almost always near me. If we're going to do any regulating for emergency information purposes, it should be to set specific reliability standards for being able to provide emergency information to cell phones.
That's why, like others I'm convinced Congress's primary motivation here isn't keeping people safe during emergencies, it's keeping the right-wing propaganda faucets flowi
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Most cars have an antenna bump on the top that isolates it from the rest of the car, it wouldn't be too difficult to stuff the vulnerable am radio components inside this bump and send a digital signal to the receiver head unit inside the car. Sure there will be an engineering cost developing this but given enough scale it probably wouldn't cost much more that $15 per vehicle.
To borrow a British phrase... (Score:3)
"Automakers say the rise of electric vehicles is driving the shift away from AM ..."
Bollocks.
Radio in general is dying - not just AM radio. And the internet is what's killing it.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
And where in a modern car would you mount such an after market radio?
Holy crap, this.
I sorely miss the days when it was possible to upgrade the dash unit every few years. My previous car, a Toyota Corolla, did a good-enough job with its Bluetooth integration, but it didn't do Carplay or Android Auto...and instead of spending $400 and an afternoon on a stereo that did Carplay, I instead would have had to spend a fortune on a unit that fit that dashboard specifically.
Car manufacturers' excuse to abandon the single-DIN/double-DIN interchangeable unit with difficult-to-replace s
Re: (Score:2)
I sorely miss the days when it was possible to upgrade the dash unit every few years.
I fondly remember lots of DIN type Alpine stuff back in the day. And standard 6x9s in the back, are those even a thing anymore?
That said, my last car had a factory 800w DIRAC tuned system with 16 drivers, including subs under the seats, and was incredibly good. I'm sure an aftermarket system could be better, but integrated systems coming from the factory has its advantages too.
So yeah, we have given up some standardization, but you can still install a wicked system in any new car, for a price. And
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It's supposedly illegal to make a mobile RF noise source already. Was the FCC bribed to ignore EV's?
Re: (Score:2)
It's supposedly illegal to make a mobile RF noise source already. Was the FCC bribed to ignore EV's?
Who said anything about bribery? All electronics emit EM which could interfere with other electronics. Most of the time the interference is negligible but it does happen. When I was growing up with a CRT TV, turning on something like the garbage disposal or a mixer in the kitchen would cause the TV picture to get worse. This situation is occurring because cars are getting more and more electronics than ever before. But the responsibility is on the automakers to ensure that AM works with the electronics. The
Re: (Score:2)
This is the real problem.
FCC type certification should apply to EVs just like they to do televisions and computers.
Re: (Score:2)
From a technical standpoint, the automakers are pointing out that AM in electric vehicles is increasingly less reliable as electronics interfere with the AM signal. It is not an impossible task. It requires more engineering than in the past. That additional engineering costs money on a feature that the automakers cannot monetize. Therefore they would rather not implement it. They make excuses for not implementing it but the real reason is money.
Cannot monetize? What?
I guarantee you without any shadow of a doubt that it's monetized exactly like every other physical feature in a car. If a regulation comes out banning the use of a given material in wiring harnesses, the auto makers research a replacement and sink that cost into the price consumers pay for that car. AM/FM radio is exactly the same. Car-buyers will pay for it.
These guys seem to think it'll cost $3.8 billion for seven years of shielding or $542 million per year. According to th
Re: (Score:2)
I guarantee you without any shadow of a doubt that it's monetized exactly like every other physical feature in a car. If a regulation comes out banning the use of a given material in wiring harnesses, the auto makers research a replacement and sink that cost into the price consumers pay for that car. AM/FM radio is exactly the same. Car-buyers will pay for it.
Let me rephrase: The automakers can technically monetize it. But they would and have received backlash for even attempting to monetize AM radio. Meanwhile the automakers gladly add and maintain satellite radio as they can monetize that.
Re: (Score:2)
This is the only insightful, not-politically-baiting comment in this whole damn thread. Thank you.
Re: (Score:2)
Radio in general is dying - not just AM radio. And the internet is what's killing it.
Correction. Corporations are killing it. A handful (three?) of companies control the vast majority of radio stations in the country. As a result, a rock station on the East Coast sounds nearly the same as a rock station in Little Rock, Arkansas as it does in Seattle, Washington. The only true place to get anything approaching diversity is around large cities such as New York, Chicago, or Houston where the market can have
Re: (Score:2)
The same can be said of any form of regulation: If they all had to be renewed annually, you'd be living in the worst possible conditions all just to sate the greed of some shareholder stooge fantasizing themselves as a wannabe dictator. Corporations are not society's friends. Hell, the modern corporation is an enemy of society hell bent on screwing it over as much as possible, even to the poin
Re: (Score:2)
Radio in general is dying - not just AM radio. And the internet is what's killing it.
Even without the internet, the broadcasters brought this fate upon themselves. Too many obnoxious commercials, banal DJs, and the same 50 songs of the station's assigned genre being played in heavy rotation. Before the smartphone, the iPod, and the Diamond Rio PMP300, I had a pared-down socket 7 Pentium PC in my trunk just for playing MP3s. It was such a breath of fresh air to drive around and just listen to only music.
AM radio is even worse. I already get more than the recommended daily allowance of po
HD Radio signaling for AM radio (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
HD Radio on most AM stations happened well over a decade earlier than 2020. What eventually happened is that the stations now turn off HD Radio after dark because the "AM skip" effect corrupts the digital signal making it unlistenable.
To add insult to injury, most AM broadcasters also turn off their HD Radio signal when broadcasting live sports because of the minimum 20-second delay inherent to HD Radio. It turns out people still listen to baseball games on the radio when in the stadium.
Has anyone actually run the numbers on this? (Score:2)
Where is the data on either side to support its position? I, for one, haven't listened to AM radio, or ridden in a car with someone else listening on AM, in a car in at least a decade... I would guess closer to 15 years, actually. Even out in the middle of godforsaken nowhere at the Black Rock Desert, BMIR uses FM. So what are the numbers on drivers actually listening to AM? I would be absolutely astounded if they were high enough to justify adding AM radio if it wasn't something that's just always been
Re: (Score:3)
The Black Rock desert is plain. FM works well in the flatlands, less well in mountains. Cell phones work even less well in the mountains.
Driving from Butte to Great Falls (Montana) I noticed all the traffic advisory stations were AM.
Re: (Score:2)
like those janky 12-volt power outlets that I've not seen a useful reason why they're included
Dash cams are a useful reason. I've been rear-ended leaving a damn Walmart parking lot because the person behind me was distracted on their phone, and had an Amazon van hit my previous car while it was parked in my driveway.
Keeping it alive. (Score:5, Insightful)
Anyone who done radio or even a crystal radio knows that AM can be the only game in times of crisis.
Noone ever would turn to FM for emergencies. In a car there's all good reasons to keep AM
It reaches WAY further than FM. FM is line of sight, forget about reception in hilly terrain where AM is king.
FM is not a panacea. All they truly want is to save 5 cents for the chip in the radio.
Re: (Score:2)
FCC: Do your damn job (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Anyone who done radio or even a crystal radio knows that AM can be the only game in times of crisis.
Yeah, you can build an AM radio from several lengths of thin wire, a ferrite core, a germanium diode, and a variable capacitor. Catch is, those of us who know this typically also already have enough sense to keep a portable radio, a firearm, and other various supplies around in case of an emergency.
Re: (Score:2)
Hold on let me run to walmart and buy a germanium diode, some magnet wire, a variable capacitor, a high impedance earphone, and a ground rod. The US supply of germanium diodes has dried up but there's plenty of soviet surplus on ebay. Although you could probably substitute a low forward voltage schottky.
Re: (Score:3)
Or a razor blade and a pencil in a pinch.
Frustrating (Score:3, Insightful)
The money behind this doesn't give the slightest crap about emergencies. They're just using that as their lever. They care about all the money they've sunk into AM. The people arguing for this are right wing talk radio. (Clear Channel, Salem, etc.)
And it's frustrating because the straw man they are using is actually RIGHT. I really hate to agree with them, especially when I know they're not acting in good faith.
BUT we could solve everyone's issue here (from an emergency standpoint) but just making a reliable emergency carrier, on a few chosen AM frequencies. The car companies wouldn't have to get all AM frequencies working, or even support analog signals. The emergency carrier could send out analog on one frequency in the AM area, and digital on others. You could use old AM radios to get the analog one (or two or three with a good spread for a little more reliability/avoiding interference) or buy a new radio for the same info (plus maybe pictures, downloads, etc) on a slow digital signal, also in the AM spectrum.
The car companies would only support the digital, which is fine, since it means they don't need to keep AM un-noisy. People could still use old AM radios, and companies could make money selling trivial digital radios for clear (lo-fi) AM data. The same emergency data could also go out on FM, as that will work most of the time, anyhow. Everyone wins. ... except right wing talk radio. Screw them.
Why not mandate it in toilets too? (Score:2)
There’s nothing about cars that warrants the necessity for an AM radio. Nor is it even the best method for reaching people during an emergency. If the radio is off, it does you no good. If you’re out of range, it does you no good. If you’re on the wrong station, it does you no good. A phone shares some of those, but reception tends to be more available along common transit avenues, will alert you even when it isn’t in active use, and doesn’t need to be tuned.
I get more emergenc
Re: (Score:2)
There’s nothing about cars that warrants the necessity for an AM radio.
During an evacuation in an emergency, the most likely place people will be is a car. Think of a hurricane or winter storm evacuation in the US. Could someone bring a portable radio with them? Yes. But the car having an AM radio would be the simplest solution.
Re: (Score:2)
I’d argue the phone they already have is the simpler and better solution. No need to figure out the right station, no need to remember to use it. Tailored messages for specific locations.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
During an evacuation in an emergency, the most likely place people will be is a car.
Okay, let's say I get an emergency alert notification on my phone that says central Florida is going to bite the dust when hurricane Cthulhu arrives. I'll load up my car with everything I can't risk losing and head for I-95 northbound. Since I'll be evacuating to somewhere unaffected by the storm, my cell service should continue to work just fine. That's kind of the whole point of an evacuation - to remove yourself from the path of disaster.
And when it turns out that the alert was just a mistake because
Re: (Score:2)
Okay, let's say I get an emergency alert notification on my phone that says central Florida is going to bite the dust when hurricane Cthulhu arrives. I'll load up my car with everything I can't risk losing and head for I-95 northbound. Since I'll be evacuating to somewhere unaffected by the storm, my cell service should continue to work just fine. That's kind of the whole point of an evacuation - to remove yourself from the path of disaster.
And you are the only one to head I-95 northbound? Or do you think that highway might be jam packed with other cars? What do you think happens to the cell tower when there are that many cell phones in that many cars trying to use that one cell tower that is local to them? Now when you get to your final destination away from the hurricane path, your cell phone connection might be fine.
Re: (Score:2)
If the radio is off, the answer if you're looking for information is to turn it on, if your cellphone isn't working.
If you're out of range, well, the odds are substantially better that you ARE in range of an AM station, because as people are saying they can have ranges darn close to "coast to coast". Because of this, you are much more likely to find a functioning AM station within your reception range because it's actually outside of the disaster area, even if you're 100+ miles from the edge of it. The FM
Localized traffic information is on AM stations (Score:2)
I use AM when Iâ(TM)m driving in the mountains and see a traffic information sign. I can hit the button on my stereo to go to AM and find the right frequency (they are usually one of three) and instantly get road conditions.
Trying to duplicate that over the internet is not likely to be possible or reliable.
Re: (Score:3)
FM stations are more localized than AM stations because of their range and (over here) traffic information is also sent in digital form piggy back on FM stations inside the RDS data. The navigation unit in my parent's car automatically avoids congestions and road blocks reported that way and you can display the information in text form. No internet connection needed.
What exactly seems to be the problem? (Score:2)
We've dropped so many really useful things for the sake of saving a buck, and now suddenly "emergency AM" should be a showstopper? C'mon.
Yes, I want my car radio to be able to switch over to AM radio. But mandate it? Really?
All regulation is inconsistent with a free market (Score:3)
Of course it's inconsistent with a free market, and that's a good thing. Markets are innocent until proven guilty. That's where regulation comes in. Markets in his industry were found guilty of producing cars where the steering wheel crushed your chest in a crash, where the occupants bounced around like ragdolls, and a host of other flaws that would still be in cars if the free market hadn't been found guilty.
conservative talk show hosts and (Score:2)
A little bit of a clickbait title (Score:5, Informative)
In my top-10 market, they moved to FM years ago (Score:2)
In my top-10 market, every top-rated AM station moved to FM years ago. Some of them have been on FM for twenty years now. The top-rated sports talk station (previously "guy talk") has always been FM since the 1990s.
Most of the rest of the AM stations have low-powered FM translators for the fringe parts of their coverage contours.
Interestingly, we also have an experimental, all-digital HD Radio station on AM--the only one in the country.
Coverage, Interference, Free Market (Score:2)
automakers say Americans have plenty of other ways, including their phones, to receive alerts and information
Insufficient cellular coverage. Let's see the automakers go to battle with the telecoms to insist that they provide the 90% coverage that AM does. I'll get my popcorn.
Automakers say the rise of electric vehicles is driving the shift away from AM, because onboard electronics create interference with AM radio signals
And shortwave, public safety bands, radio navigation equipment, etc. The only thing keeping them from deleting shielding is the existence of an AM receiver. The interference with which the public is most likely to notice.
inconsistent with the principles of a free market
The true free market would demand that al cars be provided with a double DIN hole in the dashboard into which the customer c
You Mean (Score:2)
Congress shouldn't pay attention to 100 year old technology? Like aircraft, Internal Combustion Engines and refrigerators?
The Go-To Answer Is (Score:2)
"It's cheaper."
Chernobyl was cheaper too. How did that work out?
Modern cars (Score:2)
Most come with an Emergency (SOS) function built inside, this is in most cases (at least in Europe) an built in 4G mobile e-sim card solution which you pay for via service. They could use that for emergency broadcasts.
Also we have RDS traffic radio (mostly via FM), these will turn on when a nearby traffic incident or disaster warning occurs.
And most people have a cellphone, in theory they can do emergency broadcast reception too.
Emergencies are valid concerns but that's easy (Score:2)
However, the car makers also have a valid point that the m
Follow the momey (Score:2)
What else should the government save? (Score:2, Informative)
What else should the government save? How about:
Anything else?
The manufacturers can remove AM radios (Score:3)
As long as they post some bonds to cover damages and compensation to drivers who weren't able to receive emergency broadcasts. It's all fine in built-up areas, but AM has a much greater reach out in the boonies.
Pinky-to-mouth - a few billion dollars should cover it.
Internet killed the AM radio star! (Score:2)
Already in use (Score:3)
In places on the eastern seaboard, the highways are already signed with the AM frequency to tune to, for both traffic (i.e. on tunnel bottlenecks) and also specifically for emergency information about hurricanes and floods (and how the lanes will be used during those events). Those are local area dedicated transmitters. Not to mention that the government (since the 40s or 50s) already has a commercial AM-radio based national emergency broadcast system. (They can access smartphones, too, but what is still working when the cell towers and stuff are down? AM radio, that's what.)
If the public is as technically illiterate about this as is evidenced here on /., maybe the system needs more clueless-user automation. Maybe the legislation ought to mandate AM radio receivers in all cars that automatically alert the driver when an emergency recognition tone is detected on any AM band. Make it a required safety item in the USA, no need for the user to know anything more than "push the AM button that is flashing, if you aren't already getting better information on the screen in your car or phone". No need to manually tune. Although if you think it's entertaining, you can also dial/scan around and listen whenever you want.
It's worth the $15 part in the car.
FM ownership consolidation = useless in emergency (Score:3)
Where I live, FM radio is almost worthless during a natural disaster. I'm in hilly terrain, so the stations I can receive are limited, and the selection of stations with intelligible reception may change every few miles. Virtually all of those stations are part of nationally-owned radio networks, which means they're playing content from a central, national studio. There's nobody in the local station; if there's a "local DJ," chances are they prerecorded their schtick for the week on Monday.
In a regional emergency, the best one can hope for from the FM stations is that they'll start playing the audio feed from an affiliated local TV station. This isn't very useful, because the TV people are working for their TV audience, who can see what they're talking about. They don't always describe what they're broadcasting. In an emergency, you need clear communication of information, and "let's just use the local TV station's audio feed" doesn't provide this.
While AM radio is increasingly centralized as well, for whatever reason the AM talk stations are more likely to have at least one live body near a microphone in the office, and some vestige of a news organization. That means AM radio is more likely to break into the national programming with local information. I can't recall the last time that happened on FM radio around here.
If the US wants to get rid of AM radio in cars, we need to address how radio consolidation has all but eliminated useful, timely local news on FM radio first.
Re: No one would listen to AM in an emergency (Score:5, Insightful)
No one under 50 perhaps. The rest of us go right to the AM clear channel (nearly âoecoast to coastâ powerhouses) stations for news and weather, especially when driving.
A replacement for AM broadcast radio would need to be as bulletproof, specifically meaning it is a distributed system that doesnâ(TM)t depend on infrastructure such as the internet that can be compromised. FM radio is a poor option due to its limited range of 20-50 miles in the best conditions. Shortwave has been dead in this country for almost a century (and used mainly AM mode anyhow for scheduled programming).
Re: (Score:3)
Something else tangentially related is large events use AM to inform people where to go. For example, in my area, as in other parts of the U.S., there are yearly farm, car, and gun shows. On the highways leading to the event site are signs telling people to tune to AM XXX for information.
There are other edge cases where AM is used outside of emergencies, so as you said something else which is just as reliable will need to be developed.
Re: No one would listen to AM in an emergency (Score:5, Insightful)
We're not talking about replacing the stations, only saying that if you want this option, to go Amazon and grab a $20 AM radio and throw it in your glovebox. Has crank power too, in case the batteries are dead -- so you'll be able to receive any broadcasts no matter what. And as a triple bonus, you can take that with you out of the car and listen to emergency AM elsewhere.
Why in the world does this need to be litigated as though it's an indispensable piece of built-in equipment for the vehicle or that it would be impossible for a customer to add one later for emergency purposes.
Re: No one would listen to AM in an emergency (Score:5, Interesting)
Why in the world does this need to be litigated as though it's an indispensable piece of built-in equipment for the vehicle or that it would be impossible for a customer to add one later for emergency purposes.
Part of putting the AM radio receiver in the vehicle is that the car and receiver must comply with FCC regulations on actually working with the car running. Without the AM radio the car manufacturers can be more lax on RF noise in the frequency range of AM broadcasts, a frequency range that is difficult to shield against because of the long wavelengths. It is the inherent feature of how well this frequency range propagates that makes the spectrum so valued for emergency communications. If the vehicle isn't shielded against this radio band then a portable radio won't help much. An aftermarket radio won't fare well either, but it would mean not having the radio roll about in the car while the driver is trying to adjust the volume or something.
Amateur radio has a frequency band next to the AM broadcast band, and apparently this is used for global communications, especially at night. Amateur radio is using much lower power than broadcast radio, hundreds of watts than thousands of watts, so there's more to this than just putting more power into the air.
Part of the issue is having some general standard on how to communicate to drivers any hazards in the area. There's low power (10 watts or so) radio transmitters along major roadways to inform people of local hazards. This kind of travel information could likely be met with FM broadcast radio, the NOAA/NWS weather band radio broadcasts, perhaps TV or cellular systems, but whatever it is the system needs to be standardized and to be effective as a public safety measure there has to be some kind of expectations drivers have the equipment in their vehicles.
Satellite systems cannot contain the radio beam all that tight for local traffic radio, or cover areas that are over the horizon or behind mountains and such like AM radio can. I can see how some kind of radio receiver should be in vehicles for matters of safety. It might not have to be AM radio but AM radio has done well for this so far. Any shift to something new would be an expensive and lengthy process, look back to the switch to digital TV as a possible example.
Just because the radio is there doesn't mean people have to turn them on. It also doesn't mean people would be prevented from removing them. As I understand the issue this is less about the radios being in the cars but more about the cars not interfering with AM radio if people wish to use it.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
I would think the FCC would be very concerned that Electric Vehicles are putting out so much RF pollution anyway
The FCC does have rules on the limits on noise that any device can produce as an incidental matter of operation. The FCC will allow more power in some bands than others so incidental RF noise isn't all over the radio spectrum, such as microwave ovens are allowed up to 1 watt (or something like that) in the 2.4GHz band used for things like WiFi, Bluetooth, and other similar short range communications. I'll see some speculation that air and/or water (and water in the air) is better at blocking 2.4GHz than f
Re: (Score:3)
> Cars that are driving at a safe distance from each other are not likely to interfere with the AM reception of each other.
Might be interesting but I live in the UK and cars that drive by my house seem to spew out enough RFI to interfere with HD Tv broadcasts.
It's like they have a bubble of a few metres diameter around them, just enough to make my TV go blocky when they drive by.
Re:Because of American politics (Score:4, Insightful)
Yeah that doesnt make any sense. Those "right wing" stations are already using multiple transmission mediums, FM and streaming for example. All you will do is affect the range and their listeners wont "mellow out " and "rejoin society" like you think, just like the crazy far lefies, they will follow the station however they can.
That sort of srgument never worked. In my country in the UK we had the concept of the "video nasty". Basically parents being scared by all sorts of propoganda about the evils of independant VHS horror movies and how your kids will be forever turned into flesh eating cannibals because of seeing these video nasties.
I remember having lessons at school designed to educate us how to identify and protect ourselves from video nasties.
After that, it was the evil video games that will turn all the kids into anti social killers!!!
Then after that Hip Hop and rap.
Now social media, although we find there we have several grains of truth.
People are born right or left and most are central with specific leans to each side depending on the subject. You cant change someones political stance, it is inante to how their brain functions. If it changes, it will by itsefl, as it always has done, usualy due to age. It is well known that the young tend towards the left, and them tend towards the right as they get wiser and older.
Why is that? Probably because the young are too inexperienced to known much of what the hell they are talking about coupled with a jubilant positive outlook with no real hindsight to hold them back, which also explains the large amount of fake and faulty science coming out of univerities getting funding from imaginative ignorants on kickstarter, shadowed by the experienced persons who are uploading debunking videso and trying to educate on why science says its not possible and never has been.
So you get rid of the "right wing" stations to try and b rainwash right wing brains into left wing brains and what will happen? The right wingers will do what they need to do to get the strams or FM instead, or they will listen to podcasts or they will read and publish papers...
These stations are on AM simply because its cheap anyway.
Re: Because of American politics (Score:3)
People are born right or left and most are central with specific leans to each side depending on the subject.
Bullshit. Citation? You claim Right v Left is a genetic trait, not a function of a child's upbringing?
Small Government Hypocrites (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Small Government Hypocrites (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
AM radio has been largely eclipsed by podcasts by its primary demographic - truckers.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You're kidding yourself if you don't think broadcast radio, even AM radio, doesn't use the Internet for distribution of media. How do you think those shows get across the country, exactly? Definitely not the Internet, nope...
Re: (Score:2)
I am also well over 50 and haven't listened to AM radio in a couple of decades at least. In my car, I listen to FM radio, CDs or music on a USB stick.
Re: No one would listen to AM in an emergency (Score:5)
You don't need to know what station to listen to, you just scan the range your radio covers until you get something useful.
In Canada, our communications regulator has an emergency alert system that can send messages over radio stations, TV channels, and to mobile devices. Out of all those options, I'd absolutely choose AM radio because of the range and reduced infrastructure requirements. If anything was still connected, that'd be the one to get the message out.
On the other hand, I'm pretty sure if things were that bad, listening to the radio would be fairly low down on my immediate priority list.
The last time I cared to listen to the radio for emergency information was the Northeast Blackout of 2003.
Re: No one would listen to AM in an emergency (Score:2, Offtopic)
Nonsense.
https://youtube.com/watch?v=hj... [youtube.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: No one would listen to AM in an emergency (Score:5, Interesting)
The 90's did it better than today as today you would be running around like a headless chicken knowing bugger all after 24 hours or less considering your battery will drop like a stone as you constantly try and make calls and desparatley try to find signal.
The old ways are best, tahts why we are keeping them.
Mobile phone range is pitful, they are power hungry, inefficient and way to complicated to rely on. Everyone who has an emergency kit will/should have a standard battery powered radio or even better, one with a wind up capability. ALL emergency organisations that are geared towards saving lives tell you to have one. The same teck from the 90's, 70,s 50's...
Hopfully you will never be in a situation where you find out just how bloody useless your phone really is. And if it still manages to have enough power, maybe the emergency groups, with their AM and CB radios that come in to save your ass might have managed to set up some wifi for you.
Mobile phones didnt find much usage in the UK during 2022's storm that literally ripped up the power network in yorkshire. Cold and freezing conditions, snow blocked roads, no heating, no power and being yorkshire there was barely a mobile signal to begin with. Useless lumps of lithium ion glowy things.
What worked? Landlines. Radios running off batteries. The resilient stuff.
Re: No one would listen to AM in an emergency (Score:5, Informative)
Re: No one would listen to AM in an emergency (Score:5, Insightful)
Most people under 20 would simply curl up and die if wifi and cellular were down nationwide for more than a few hours. (Just a guess.)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: No one would listen to AM in an emergency (Score:3)
Another nice thing about AM is that it's more jam resistant than FM. If someone transmits over, you'll simply hear both voices. That's why AM is still used by the FAA to communicate with airplanes. (With FM, although the reception is clearer, someone else TXing won't be heard.)
Re:No one would listen to AM in an emergency (Score:5, Insightful)
Of course not, the AM reception in my car is terrible. I think that I can only get clear reception for two stations in my area... a Christian gospel station and a right-wing talk radio station. Neither one of those would be something that I would rely on in an emergency.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:No one would listen to AM in an emergency (Score:4)
When shit really hits the fan, people will actually start talking to each other. If one in a hundred knows about AM, you bet those hundred people will use AM.
AM is practically the last thing to go, that's why it's worth keeping around.
Not necessarily in cars though, but: I'd wager in many households the car is the last remaining device capable of receiving non-digital broadcasts.
Re: (Score:3)
AM radio requires the least amount of infrastructure to keep going. In addition to HAM radio I also keep a GE Superadio handy as it has some of the best reception in a portable radio. At night I can often listen to California stations in SW Washington.
https://www.universal-radio.co... [universal-radio.com]
Re: (Score:2)
When shit really hits the fan, people will actually start talking to each other. If one in a hundred knows about AM, you bet those hundred people will use AM.
Word would take a while to pass around a neighborhood, but this comment is dead on, and word that a station is still on the air will pass around along and everyone with a radio will be able to get the news directly for themselves.
A bit over ten years ago there was a big power outage of a good chunk of southern california, into arizona and mexico. There was only a single radio station on the air, an AM station, and supposedly because they had backup generators from some government emergency plan. I think peo
Re: (Score:2)
Here in N Central Florida hurricane evac routes are marked and have info channels on the AM band that is broadcast when a storm is comin'
Re: (Score:2)
Roads are pretty old technology too and congress spends a lot of effort and money on them.
Re: (Score:2)
How well does your fancy electric car work without... wheels?
Wheels are an essential component for a car to perform its primary function - a radio is not.
Living next to any high power EM source may... (Score:2)
Fixed that for you.
The only reputable study I'm aware of that has indicated that AM broadcast stations might cause cancer was a Korean in the early 2000's. But they only saw correlation within 2km of high power (100kw) stations and they weren't confident enough to establish causation. If it does cause cancer, you're going to see the same correlation with FM stations and TV stations. It's all radio/EM, the marketing names we use for it don't ma