this post was submitted on 04 May 2024
107 points (96.5% liked)

politics

19072 readers
3868 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Badeendje@lemmy.world 50 points 6 months ago (2 children)

No, AM radio is part of the infrastructure governments can reliably use to inform citizens of danger etc. so it should not easily be removed. And if it's so cheap it can easily be included.

[–] foggy@lemmy.world 12 points 6 months ago (3 children)

That only works if people actively tune into AM radio. The person you're replying to, I think, is implying that the number of people that would be affected by an emergency communication not going over AM radio... while tragic, costs less than losing the ability to have folks like Alex Jones get tiny pockets of crazy scattered all over funneled into one convenient silo.

[–] Semi_Hemi_Demigod@lemmy.world 9 points 6 months ago (1 children)

They should add a rider that reinstates the broadcast ownership rules eliminated in the 1997 Telecommunications Act.

[–] nilloc@discuss.tchncs.de 4 points 6 months ago

Yeah, after listening to NPR’s “divided dial” it feels like a lot of how the US ended up where it is was when we he fairness doctrine was dropped or ignored.

And now citizens United has magnified and worsened it all.

[–] Today@lemmy.world 6 points 6 months ago

There are a lot of parks that have AM station signs for weather and emergency info. We've used it when we were camping during storms.

[–] aard@kyu.de 3 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Ability for AM radios to interrupt other playback for announcements has been around at least since the 90s. Back then it was commonly used to pause cassette playback when traffic announcements were made.

This just requires for the device to monitor radio when on, and to be on - and with how integrated it is in modern days cars functionality I'd say the chance for them to be on is higher than it was in the 90s. So having that functionality is a pretty good way to reach a lot of car drivers.

[–] foggy@lemmy.world -1 points 6 months ago (2 children)

That is straight up not true.

AM radio cannot, has not ever, and will not ever be able to pause a cassette.

Wtf are you smoking?

[–] breadsmasher@lemmy.world 15 points 6 months ago

I believe they are simply smoking facts. Maybe you should look stuff up before being so adamantly incorrect.

The RDS-enabled receiver can be set to pay special attention to this TA flag and e.g. stop the tape/pause the CD or retune to receive a Traffic bulletin. The related TP (Traffic Programme) flag is used to allow the user to find only those stations that regularly broadcast traffic bulletins, whereas the TA flag is used to stop the tape or raise the volume during a traffic bulletin.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traffic_announcement_(radio_data_systems)

[–] aard@kyu.de 5 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

RDS and related protocols like TMC have specifications for both FM and AM transmitters. Those are used to stop playback if an urgent message comes. I'm assuming you have AM stations with such signals in the US (I don't think we have in the EU) - otherwise the AM radio mandate would indeed be stupid.

edit: did some digging (it's been almost 30 years since I cared about that stuff) - seems the US was pretty late to the party for radio data channels, and side channels for AM (which wasn't of that much interest here due to the FM heavy radio landscape in Europe) only was discussed in the early 90s for the US specific variants. I couldn't find any details if that actually ever got implemented. Given that most documentation available on that topic is heavily focusing on EU I'd guess it never got that much use in the US.

[–] MagicShel@programming.dev 4 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

I agree with you. I just think the reason the discussion is so loud is because of right wing AM radio and the people who would love for it to go away - people I don't even disagree with, but it is important and so cheap that any argument over cost is entirely misplaced. You can get AM radio on an IC for $0.41 in quantity. It feels disingenuous to argue against that on a basis of cost or "muh freedoms". Hence, my suspicion of a more political basis.

[–] Badeendje@lemmy.world 3 points 6 months ago

Oh I'll bet you are right on the money with the motivations.

But also don't discount the possibility that car manufacturers are in on the long game.. just remove radio all together so you can offer optional packages only. The reason their entertainment systems need to be reasonably priced is because else the customer will stick to just radio then.

If they remove the alternative.. sky is the limit for the options... Cause no entertainment in a car is not an option for most. Peak Enshittification