From omaclay at gmail.com Thu Dec 1 15:02:36 2016 From: omaclay at gmail.com (Otis Maclay) Date: Thu, 1 Dec 2016 17:02:36 -0600 Subject: [grc] reflections about KRAB Message-ID: >From Radio World http://www.cfmediaview.com/lp1.aspx?v=6_2428064121_106868_16 O. -------------------------- Why not give veterans a monthly stipend when they walk in the door,.. THEN figure out how much they're supposed to get? From wings at wings.org Thu Dec 1 21:07:15 2016 From: wings at wings.org (Frieda Werden) Date: Thu, 1 Dec 2016 21:07:15 -0800 Subject: [grc] KRAB archive link Message-ID: http://l.facebook.com/l.php?u=http%3A%2F%2Fkrabarchive.com%2F&h=JAQGk05ZR -- Frieda Werden, Series Producer WINGS: Women's International News Gathering Service www.wings.org From mike at brownbroadcast.com Mon Dec 5 12:28:10 2016 From: mike at brownbroadcast.com (Michael D. Brown) Date: Mon, 5 Dec 2016 12:28:10 -0800 Subject: [grc] Form 316 for LPFM (for BOD changes)__Clarified Message-ID: <52C8AC04F78B4E1DA1DD4D4AF66447E3@Darth> Since 73.865(e) is so poorly and confusingly worded, we got fresh clarification from the FCC today: 1. Authorized LPFMs must file an electronic Form 316 whenever the BOD changes by more than 50%, whether suddenly or gradually. The transfer is from the "old board" to the "new board". 2. The original baseline is the BOD listing that was contained in the 318 that led directly to the original CP. Once an LPFM gets an original CP, they cannot update the BOD in a 318; they must use the 316. It's therefore superfluous to list the BOD in any subsequent 318. 3. Stations should make it abundantly clear in the 316 that the station continues to meet the localism requirements (73.853(b), e.g.: headquarters or 75% of the board, etc). It's also a good idea to add a statement that the board changes were part of the normal operation of the organization. Based on the dearth of 316 filings, it appears that most LPFMs are ignoring this requirement. Not good..... === References: https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/47/73.865 https://transition.fcc.gov/Forms/Form316/316.pdf https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/47/73.853 === Disclaimers: 1. I'm not an attorney. 2. The above applies only to LPFM. thank you MB Michael D. Brown Brown Broadcast Services, Inc. 3740 SW Comus St. ? Portland OR 97219-7418 USA mike at brownbroadcast.com ? www.brownbroadcast.com offc 503-245-6065 ? cell 503-703-3202 ? fax 503-245-5773 From taproot at lmi.net Mon Dec 5 22:38:43 2016 From: taproot at lmi.net (taproot at lmi.net) Date: Mon, 5 Dec 2016 22:38:43 -0800 (PST) Subject: [grc] programming advice In-Reply-To: <03082f1d-9f27-d95c-a6fb-208a27c8d7c9@davismedia.org> References: <03082f1d-9f27-d95c-a6fb-208a27c8d7c9@davismedia.org> Message-ID: <43976.66.117.140.18.1481006323.squirrel@webmail.lmi.net> While on the subject of programming advice, consider having a specific term for each program, say two or three years, with an end point subject to being renewed by the station upon review. No programmer, set of programmers or particular segment of your audience should come to feel they 'own' a particular time slot. I think this is very important, and the stations that don't get this right can let themselves into a whole lot of trouble with power struggles and turf wars. Stations spend a fair bit of effort thinking about creating programs, recruiting programmers and attracting listeners, but sometimes they have not worked out very well how to end programs and replace them to keep their air sched constantly fresh and evolving. If programmers have their own 'show-for-life' they may not care about the station's larger mission or any other part of the listenership beyond their own. If the station is dominated by programmers that have their shows for decades because there is no process or will to remove or replace programming periodically they can form a proprietary clique that runs the station for their own mutual benefit, which can lead to the station's calcification and declining vibrancy and relevance. Somebody, whether program director, or program council, must be able to recover programming time from any programmer, or group of programmers, no matter how popular with their particular audience, to insure the interests of the station's mission and larger community of stakeholders are kept primary. Curt > When I talk to producers about "plugola" (which this is) I don't get buried too far into the weeds on regulation. Because you'll end up trying to explain the exact line they cannot cross, and they'll try to push up to this line. Which isn't what you want. > > Step back, remember that all noncommercial radio is educational (by definition), and ask the programmer if the goal is to educate the listener (through new music, or however) or promote their material? If education is indeed the goal, how could only playing their material possibly be a good educational experience for the listener? As a teacher, would you only allow students to read books you wrote? From jeff at davismedia.org Tue Dec 6 12:34:04 2016 From: jeff at davismedia.org (Jeff Shaw) Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2016 12:34:04 -0800 Subject: [grc] [NFCB List] Form 316 for LPFM (for BOD changes)__Clarified In-Reply-To: <52C8AC04F78B4E1DA1DD4D4AF66447E3@Darth> References: <52C8AC04F78B4E1DA1DD4D4AF66447E3@Darth> Message-ID: This is great clarification, thanks for sharing Mike. I'm left with the question: is there no mechanism to update LPFM Boards regularly at the FCC- i.e. as it *actually* happens and before it gets to more than 50% changeover (and therefore 'transfer of control')? On 12/5/16 12:28 PM, Michael D. Brown wrote: > Since 73.865(e) is so poorly and confusingly worded, we got fresh > clarification from the FCC today: > > 1. Authorized LPFMs must file an electronic Form 316 whenever the > BOD changes by /more than/ 50%, whether suddenly or gradually. The > transfer is from the "old board" to the "new board". > > 2. The original baseline is the BOD listing that was contained in > the 318 that led directly to the original CP. Once an LPFM gets an > original CP, they cannot update the BOD in a 318; they must use the > 316. It's therefore superfluous to list the BOD in any subsequent 318. > > 3. Stations should make it abundantly clear in the 316 that the > station continues to meet the localism requirements (73.853(b), e.g.: > headquarters or 75% of the board, etc). It's also a good idea to > add a statement that the board changes were part of the normal > operation of the organization. > > > /Based on the dearth of 316 filings, it appears that most LPFMs are > ignoring this requirement./ Not good..... > > === > > References: > https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/47/73.865 > https://transition.fcc.gov/Forms/Form316/316.pdf > https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/47/73.853 > > === > > Disclaimers: > > 1. I'm not an attorney. > 2. The above applies only to LPFM. > > > > > > thank you > > MB > > > > > Michael D. Brown > Brown Broadcast Services, Inc. > 3740 SW Comus St. ?Portland OR 97219-7418 USA > mike at brownbroadcast.com ? > www.brownbroadcast.com * > offc 503-245-6065* ?* cell 503-703-3202 *?* fax 503-245-5773* > > > > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "NFCB Listserve" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send > an email to listserve+unsubscribe at nfcb.org > . > To post to this group, send email to listserve at nfcb.org > . > Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/a/nfcb.org/group/listserve/. From michael at michaelrichards.us Tue Dec 6 14:06:16 2016 From: michael at michaelrichards.us (Michael Richards) Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2016 22:06:16 +0000 Subject: [grc] [NFCB List] Form 316 for LPFM (for BOD changes)__Clarified In-Reply-To: References: <52C8AC04F78B4E1DA1DD4D4AF66447E3@Darth> Message-ID: Not for LPFMs, but for full power NCEs. This is known as the biennial "ownership report." LPFMs are intentionally free from this requirement to make LPFM operations less resource-intensive. But even for full power stations, an ownership report does not replace a transfer of control application once there's a 50 percent change since the last time the FCC approved the board members. As a policy matter, the law requires the FCC approve those who control a broadcast license. Once you hit 50 percent changes since the last time the FCC reviewed the collective control group, the potential for deadlock effectively allows the new 50 percent to say no to any decision (by creating the deadlock). Thus the requirement for filing a transfer of control application. Michael W. Richards, Attorney 7008 Westmoreland Avenue Suite E8 Takoma Park, MD 20912 Tel. 202.657.5780 michael at michaelrichards.us On Twitter: Commlawguy ------------------------------------------------------- TAX ADVICE DISCLAIMER: Under applicable U.S. Treasury Regulations, please be advised that any U.S. tax advice contained in this email or any attachment hereto is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, either (i) for purposes of avoiding penalties imposed under the U.S. Internal Revenue Code, or (ii) for promoting, marketing, or recommending to another party any tax-related matter addressed herein. This message was sent by an attorney. It is confidential and may contain privileged attorney-client communication or work product intended only for the individual or entity named within the message. If you are not the intended recipient, or the agent responsible to deliver it to the intended recipient, any review, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message is prohibited. If this email message was received in error, we would appreciate your notifying us by reply e-mail and deleting the original message from your system. Thank you for your cooperation -----Original Message----- From: Jeff Shaw [mailto:jeff at davismedia.org] Sent: Tuesday, December 06, 2016 3:34 PM To: _GRC list ; listserve at nfcb.org Subject: Re: [NFCB List] Form 316 for LPFM (for BOD changes)__Clarified This is great clarification, thanks for sharing Mike. I'm left with the question: is there no mechanism to update LPFM Boards regularly at the FCC- i.e. as it *actually* happens and before it gets to more than 50% changeover (and therefore 'transfer of control')? On 12/5/16 12:28 PM, Michael D. Brown wrote: > Since 73.865(e) is so poorly and confusingly worded, we got fresh > clarification from the FCC today: > > 1. Authorized LPFMs must file an electronic Form 316 whenever the > BOD changes by /more than/ 50%, whether suddenly or gradually. The > transfer is from the "old board" to the "new board". > > 2. The original baseline is the BOD listing that was contained in > the 318 that led directly to the original CP. Once an LPFM gets an > original CP, they cannot update the BOD in a 318; they must use the > 316. It's therefore superfluous to list the BOD in any subsequent 318. > > 3. Stations should make it abundantly clear in the 316 that the > station continues to meet the localism requirements (73.853(b), e.g.: > headquarters or 75% of the board, etc). It's also a good idea to > add a statement that the board changes were part of the normal > operation of the organization. > > > /Based on the dearth of 316 filings, it appears that most LPFMs are > ignoring this requirement./ Not good..... > > === > > References: > https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/47/73.865 > https://transition.fcc.gov/Forms/Form316/316.pdf > https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/47/73.853 > > === > > Disclaimers: > > 1. I'm not an attorney. > 2. The above applies only to LPFM. > > > > > > thank you > > MB > > > > > Michael D. Brown > Brown Broadcast Services, Inc. > 3740 SW Comus St. ?Portland OR 97219-7418 USA mike at brownbroadcast.com > ? www.brownbroadcast.com > * offc 503-245-6065* ?* cell > 503-703-3202 *?* fax 503-245-5773* > > > > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "NFCB Listserve" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send > an email to listserve+unsubscribe at nfcb.org > . > To post to this group, send email to listserve at nfcb.org > . > Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/a/nfcb.org/group/listserve/. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "NFCB Listserve" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to listserve+unsubscribe at nfcb.org. To post to this group, send email to listserve at nfcb.org. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/a/nfcb.org/group/listserve/. From gavindahl at gmail.com Tue Dec 6 14:52:43 2016 From: gavindahl at gmail.com (Gavin Dahl) Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2016 15:52:43 -0700 Subject: [grc] KDNK hiring GM Message-ID: KDNK General Manager Job Description December 2016 Job Overview: The General Manager at KDNK leads the staff, leads income generation and budget management, and bears primary responsibility for station operations. The General Manager develops strategy and policy with and reports to the Board of Directors. About KDNK: KDNK-FM (licensed as Carbondale Community Access Radio) serves a listenership in beautiful Western Colorado that includes Aspen and the entire Roaring Fork Valley, Leadville, and the Colorado River Basin. In addition, we serve listeners with streaming services over the internet. KDNK broadcasts a diverse slate of music shows by a large on-air volunteer core, NPR and other news sources, and award winning, locally produced news programming. The station also enjoys a relationship with another non-profit that trains youth radio programmers. KDNK earns income from memberships, underwriting, grants, events and fundraising initiatives. Our mission is to provide public access radio that connects community members to one another and the world. www.kdnk.org Our staff includes two full-time journalists, a full-time program/music director, part-time music librarian, part-time membership/volunteer coordinator, morning NPR host, and part-time underwriting director. We have professional contractor support for our broadcast equipment/FCC compliance, computer network, bookkeeping, auditing, and website. KDNK owns its broadcast facility in the core of Carbondale?s Creative Arts District, which includes on- air and production rooms, offices, and a classroom that allows live musical broadcasts. Carbondale is a fun, artistic, multi-cultural and deeply involved community in a connected valley that offers a high quality of life. Primary Areas of Responsibility: Leadership and Administration Responsible for hiring, firing and disciplining personnel, and determining compensation within the budgetary and staffing confines established by the Board of Directors Work with Board and staff to identify strategic goals and annual work plans and budgets to accomplish them Demonstrate excellent organization, management and communication skills Supervise and lead staff, including annual reviews and job descriptions. Responsible for adherence to all laws governing station management Implement Board policy as directed Cultivate a healthy, professional environment among staff, Board, and volunteer programmers Administration, Finance, and Risk Management Write grants and/or oversee grant writing Lead fundraising efforts, including bi-annual membership drives and annual fundraising events Manage budget and cash flow and with Treasurer insure that financial reports to the Board are accurate, timely and forward-thinking Protect and maintain station real estate and improvements Responsible for adherence to all laws and rules governing station management, including FCC and IRS regulations Responsible for risk-management compliance Maintain necessary licenses and permits from any and all governmental agencies Community Act as ambassador/liaison among station volunteers, local officials, grantors, donors and other key constituencies including the community at large Promote station ideals including: localism, community service, cooperation among local nonprofits, volunteer/member diversity, and programming diversity Recruit, inspire, and maintain volunteer core Oversee public-relations and marketing efforts on-air and via other media including website, newsletters, advertisements and social media Programming Protect and oversee maintenance of station facilities and signal, internet broadcast stream, hardware (including transmitter and translators), software, music inventory, digital programming, and all other station assets Oversee and foster the maintenance of professional-quality volunteer programming which meets the needs of the community, including digital content Manage and ensure compliance with FCC, CPB and other regulations, including copyright and royalty law With Programming staff, engage Citizen Advisory Board in shaping programing Qualifications This position requires the ability to manage both professional staff and volunteers, financial acuity, comfort in development tasks, and commitment to and familiarity with public broadcasting and its regulations. The applicant should describe management level abilities in each of the four areas listed above, please provide examples. Please list your competencies with any digital tools (ex. business programs, radio production, digital content, etc). Previous professional experience in nonprofit media is preferred. Applicants with successful non-profit management are encouraged to apply. Send resume including references, cover letter, and any other information to board at kdnk.org before 5 p.m. on January 9, 2017. KDNK is an Equal Opportunity Employer. Competitive salary ($55,000 to $60,000 DOE), benefits include partial health insurance and full dental insurance coverage. No phone calls please. http://kdnk.org/post/kdnk-hiring-general-manager From pdhertz at gmail.com Tue Dec 6 17:38:17 2016 From: pdhertz at gmail.com (Paul Hertz) Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2016 19:38:17 -0600 Subject: [grc] programming advice In-Reply-To: <43976.66.117.140.18.1481006323.squirrel@webmail.lmi.net> References: <03082f1d-9f27-d95c-a6fb-208a27c8d7c9@davismedia.org> <43976.66.117.140.18.1481006323.squirrel@webmail.lmi.net> Message-ID: Paul Riismandel of Radio Survivor has two recent blog posts with programming advice, which touch upon this issue and a number of other related issues. http://www.radiosurvivor.com/2016/11/28/trapped-grid-community-radio-risks-irrelevance/ http://www.radiosurvivor.com/2016/11/30/public-access-vs-public-service-addressing-biggest-hidden-tension-community-radio/ On Tue, Dec 6, 2016 at 12:38 AM, taproot--- via grc wrote: > While on the subject of programming advice, consider having a specific > term for each program, say two or three years, with an end point subject > to being renewed by the station upon review. No programmer, set of > programmers or particular segment of your audience should come to feel > they 'own' a particular time slot. > > I think this is very important, and the stations that don't get this right > can let themselves into a whole lot of trouble with power struggles and > turf wars. Stations spend a fair bit of effort thinking about creating > programs, recruiting programmers and attracting listeners, but sometimes > they have not worked out very well how to end programs and replace them to > keep their air sched constantly fresh and evolving. > > If programmers have their own 'show-for-life' they may not care about the > station's larger mission or any other part of the listenership beyond > their own. If the station is dominated by programmers that have their > shows for decades because there is no process or will to remove or replace > programming periodically they can form a proprietary clique that runs the > station for their own mutual benefit, which can lead to the station's > calcification and declining vibrancy and relevance. Somebody, whether > program director, or program council, must be able to recover programming > time from any programmer, or group of programmers, no matter how popular > with their particular audience, to insure the interests of the station's > mission and larger community of stakeholders are kept primary. Curt > > > When I talk to producers about "plugola" (which this is) I don't get > buried too far into the weeds on regulation. Because you'll end up > trying to explain the exact line they cannot cross, and they'll try to > push up to this line. Which isn't what you want. > > > > Step back, remember that all noncommercial radio is educational (by > definition), and ask the programmer if the goal is to educate the > listener (through new music, or however) or promote their material? If > education is indeed the goal, how could only playing their material > possibly be a good educational experience for the listener? As a > teacher, would you only allow students to read books you wrote? > > _______________________________________________ > grc mailing list > grc at maillist.peak.org > http://maillist.peak.org/mailman/listinfo/grc > From mike at brownbroadcast.com Tue Dec 6 18:00:57 2016 From: mike at brownbroadcast.com (Michael D. Brown) Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2016 18:00:57 -0800 Subject: [grc] Correction to LPFM 316 threshold Message-ID: It appears that the FCC case history is clear: The threshold is 50% of the BOD changing, not "more-than-50%". Michael D. Brown Brown Broadcast Services, Inc. _____ From: Michael D. Brown [mailto:mike at brownbroadcast.com] Sent: Monday, December 05, 2016 12:28 PM To: __LPFM Adisory List (lpfm-advisory at prometheusradio.org); _GRC list (grc at maillist.peak.org); 'listserve at nfcb.org' Subject: Form 316 for LPFM (for BOD changes)__Clarified Since 73.865(e) is so poorly and confusingly worded, we got fresh clarification from the FCC today: 1. Authorized LPFMs must file an electronic Form 316 whenever the BOD changes by more than 50%, whether suddenly or gradually. The transfer is from the "old board" to the "new board". 2. The original baseline is the BOD listing that was contained in the 318 that led directly to the original CP. Once an LPFM gets an original CP, they cannot update the BOD in a 318; they must use the 316. It's therefore superfluous to list the BOD in any subsequent 318. 3. Stations should make it abundantly clear in the 316 that the station continues to meet the localism requirements (73.853(b), e.g.: headquarters or 75% of the board, etc). It's also a good idea to add a statement that the board changes were part of the normal operation of the organization. Based on the dearth of 316 filings, it appears that most LPFMs are ignoring this requirement. Not good..... === References: https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/47/73.865 https://transition.fcc.gov/Forms/Form316/316.pdf https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/47/73.853 === Disclaimers: 1. I'm not an attorney. 2. The above applies only to LPFM. thank you MB Michael D. Brown Brown Broadcast Services, Inc. 3740 SW Comus St. ? Portland OR 97219-7418 USA mike at brownbroadcast.com ? www.brownbroadcast.com offc 503-245-6065 ? cell 503-703-3202 ? fax 503-245-5773 From bame at riverrock.org Tue Dec 6 18:21:41 2016 From: bame at riverrock.org (Paul Bame) Date: Tue, 06 Dec 2016 21:21:41 -0500 Subject: [grc] Correction to LPFM 316 threshold In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: See also 73.865e for lpfm variation? Sent from BlueMail ? On Dec 6, 2016, 21:02, at 21:02, "Michael D. Brown via grc" wrote: >It appears that the FCC case history is clear: The threshold is 50% of >the >BOD changing, not "more-than-50%". > > >Michael D. Brown >Brown Broadcast Services, Inc. > > > > > > > > _____ > >From: Michael D. Brown [mailto:mike at brownbroadcast.com] >Sent: Monday, December 05, 2016 12:28 PM >To: __LPFM Adisory List (lpfm-advisory at prometheusradio.org); _GRC list >(grc at maillist.peak.org); 'listserve at nfcb.org' >Subject: Form 316 for LPFM (for BOD changes)__Clarified > > >Since 73.865(e) is so poorly and confusingly worded, we got fresh >clarification from the FCC today: > >1. Authorized LPFMs must file an electronic Form 316 whenever the >BOD >changes by more than 50%, whether suddenly or gradually. The transfer >is >from the "old board" to the "new board". > >2. The original baseline is the BOD listing that was contained in >the 318 >that led directly to the original CP. Once an LPFM gets an original >CP, >they cannot update the BOD in a 318; they must use the 316. It's >therefore >superfluous to list the BOD in any subsequent 318. > >3. Stations should make it abundantly clear in the 316 that the >station >continues to meet the localism requirements (73.853(b), e.g.: >headquarters >or 75% of the board, etc). It's also a good idea to add a statement >that >the board changes were part of the normal operation of the >organization. > > >Based on the dearth of 316 filings, it appears that most LPFMs are >ignoring >this requirement. Not good..... > > >=== > >References: >https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/47/73.865 >https://transition.fcc.gov/Forms/Form316/316.pdf >https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/47/73.853 > >=== > >Disclaimers: > >1. I'm not an attorney. >2. The above applies only to LPFM. > > > > > >thank you > >MB > > > > >Michael D. Brown >Brown Broadcast Services, Inc. >3740 SW Comus St. ? Portland OR 97219-7418 USA > mike at brownbroadcast.com ? > www.brownbroadcast.com >offc 503-245-6065 ? cell 503-703-3202 ? fax 503-245-5773 > > > > > > >_______________________________________________ >grc mailing list >grc at maillist.peak.org >http://maillist.peak.org/mailman/listinfo/grc From dklann at wdrt.org Wed Dec 7 06:07:05 2016 From: dklann at wdrt.org (David Klann) Date: Wed, 7 Dec 2016 08:07:05 -0600 Subject: [grc] [Solved] Sound Quality Issues In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Thanks to everyone who weighed in on our "phase error"! After continuing to chase this over the past month, it turns out that it was not a wiring "phase" issue or really a hardware issue at all! Well, it *was* a hardware issue, but way down in the depths of the central processing unit(s) (CPU) of the audio workstation we are using. At Ken's and others' suggestions, we used Audacity as sort of an oscilloscope. We zoomed in on the audio tracks to the point where we could see the individual samples as "dots" and found that the left and right channels were out of sync. The channels were sufficiently out of sync (a few milliseconds) that it sounded like a phase error. What the heck would cause this? I posted a similar call for help on the Linux Audio Users mailing list (http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user). One of the replies on that list suggested turning off all but one of the CPUs on our four-CPU workstation. That was the ticket: It was a timing error introduced by the computer itself! Lesson learned (for me anyway): be careful running audio applications on multi-core computers (which most are these days), and make sure you know well the hardware configuration of the computer! Thanks again! ~David On 11/10/2016 04:54 PM, Will Floyd wrote: > Definitely sounds like a phase issue. Because of multiplexing that > happens at the fm processor, a phasing issue up the chain will cause > some wacky effects that are often less obvious to the ear. My > recommendation would be to listen to the source before it undergoes any > processing. I'd bet the culprit is a stereo balanced cable somewhere > with one side mis-wired. > > On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 3:26 PM, David Klann via grc > > wrote: > > Greetings Fellow Radio Geniuses! > > We're running into an audio quality issue here at WDRT 91.9fm in rural > Western Wisconsin. I'm past the point of tearing my hair out in search > of the root cause. I'll outline what I can here, and answer further > questions as they come in. Thanks in advance for your thoughts and help > diagnosing this. > > Some facts: > > - The quality of *some* (not all) spoken-word audio recorded in our > "Studio B" sounds like it was recorded with the person speaking through > "a metal pipe while in a tunnel" (that's the best description we've been > able to come up with) > > - It *sometimes* depends on the radio people are listening to when it > happens > > - Music recorded in the same studio from any source (analog vinyl, CD, > digital source, etc) sounds just fine > > - One listener has noticed that it sounds "bad" when they listen with > their home receiver set to "mono" mode, and when they switch to "stereo" > mode it sounds fine > > - The same audio sent to our Internet stream *usually* sounds "normal", > but sometimes sounds "bad" > > This has been an otherwise productive exercise for us because we've > learned of a few other misconfigurations in our audio chain. But this > one continues to haunt. > > Again, I appreciate any thoughts you can share, and will provide more > info as requested. If off list, I'll summarize the "fix" to the list > when we figure this out. > > Thanks! > > ~David Klann > WDRT, 91.9fm, Viroqua, WI > > > > _______________________________________________ > grc mailing list > grc at maillist.peak.org > http://maillist.peak.org/mailman/listinfo/grc > > > > > > -- > Will Floyd > Technical Director | Prometheus Radio Project > will at prometheusradio.org | > 215.727.9620 x524 -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 195 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: From Communityradiogoddess at yahoo.com Wed Dec 7 10:19:02 2016 From: Communityradiogoddess at yahoo.com (Donna) Date: Wed, 7 Dec 2016 13:19:02 -0500 Subject: [grc] programming advice In-Reply-To: <666277809.698131.1479257098552@mail.yahoo.com> References: <666277809.698131.1479257098552@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Defining between shifts and shows helps to define programming and broadcast schedules too. Donna DiBianco Station Start-up Specialist > On Nov 15, 2016, at 7:44 PM, Donna Dibianco via grc wrote: > > blockquote, div.yahoo_quoted { margin-left: 0 !important; border-left:1px #715FFA solid !important; padding-left:1ex !important; background-color:white !important; } There are plenty of programming resources out there, of noteRadio4all.net. Audioport.org. PRX.org > Now, your singer songwriter who wants to play his/her own music is Plugola, among other things.As a training and operations person, I advise you implement a training and certification process immediately.Should you need assistance, please contact me off-list so we can chat about it, and what services I offer (shameless plug) > > > Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone > > > On Tuesday, November 15, 2016, 6:18 AM, John Halpin via grc wrote: > > Greetings All, > > WHPW-lp in Harpswell Maine is in the process of testing our equipment and > will begin airing locally produced programming by Dec. 01. > > We have had a wave of interest from potential producers. One of those is a > singer/songwriter who is proposing a show in which they are the host and > also all of the material played/performed is their own. I have concerns > that this could be very close to if not over the line of what might be > considered self promotion or "plugola". I'm certainly not an expert on > this so I'm asking for input and opinion from those who may have faced a > similar type of question with their stations. Being a public access > community station, we don't want to dampen the enthusiasm of those who wish > to participate. But we also don't want to run afoul of the regulations that > we are bound to through our licensing. Your insight and counsel on this > subject would be much appreciated. Thanks, > > > John Halpin > WHPW-lp > harpswellradio.org > 207-833-6618 > _______________________________________________ > grc mailing list > grc at maillist.peak.org > http://maillist.peak.org/mailman/listinfo/grc > > > > _______________________________________________ > grc mailing list > grc at maillist.peak.org > http://maillist.peak.org/mailman/listinfo/grc From ken at wfmu.org Wed Dec 7 13:24:48 2016 From: ken at wfmu.org (Ken Freedman) Date: Wed, 7 Dec 2016 16:24:48 -0500 Subject: [grc] Job Opening: Morning Show Host on WFMU Message-ID: WFMU / Auricle Communications seeks a Morning Show Host to be the live On-Air Talent for weekday drivetime, 6-9am Monday through Friday. WFMU, the nation's renowned Freeform radio station is developing a new weekday morning drive time program based on full service non-commercial music / news / traffic weather for the New York, New Jersey Metropolitan area. The music component will be a diverse mix of song-based rock and roll, pop, soul, punk, dance, funk and hip-hop. A familiarity with WFMU's rich history of musical programming and culture is a prerequisite, as is three years live on-air music presentation experience and familiarity with various social media platforms. Live on-air tryouts for the program will take place from January to April 2017 with a permanent hire being made by May 1, 2017. Salary: $30,000 to start for 15 hours on air per week, plus benefits and ?pledge drive? -based bonuses. Interested parties should send resume, cover letter and five minute audio demo reel (MP3, WAV or Flac) file to: WFMU Morning Program Search PO Box 2011 Jersey City, NJ 07303-2011 or via email to: them at wfmu dot org Deadline for applications: December 31, 2016 Auricle Communications is an Equal Opportunity Employer. It is the policy of Auricle Communications to provide equal employment opportunity (EEO) to all persons regardless of age, color, national origin, citizenship status, physical or mental disability, race, religion, creed, gender, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity and/or expression, genetic information, marital status, status with regard to public assistance, veteran status, or any other characteristic protected by federal, state or local law. In addition, Auricle Communications will provide reasonable accommodations for qualified individuals with disabilities. From settled at gmail.com Wed Dec 7 13:47:24 2016 From: settled at gmail.com (Brian Shiratsuki) Date: Wed, 7 Dec 2016 13:47:24 -0800 Subject: [grc] three KALX people killed in last friday's oakland warehouse disaster Message-ID: From spinningindie at gmail.com Wed Dec 7 14:01:21 2016 From: spinningindie at gmail.com (Spinning Indie) Date: Wed, 7 Dec 2016 14:01:21 -0800 Subject: [grc] three KALX people killed in last friday's oakland warehouse disaster In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: It's so terrible... and according to KALX, it's four KALX volunteers... There were other radio folks there too, at least three others that I am aware of that had done high school, college or professional radio. I expect it will be even more, as those who attended were connected with underground art communities. So sad. http://kalx.berkeley.edu/news/oakland-warehouse-fire On Wed, Dec 7, 2016 at 1:47 PM, Brian Shiratsuki via grc < grc at maillist.peak.org> wrote: > killed-in-oakland-warehouse-fire/> > > > _______________________________________________ > grc mailing list > grc at maillist.peak.org > http://maillist.peak.org/mailman/listinfo/grc > From jawsofjusticeradio at yahoo.com Fri Dec 9 20:01:43 2016 From: jawsofjusticeradio at yahoo.com (Jeffery Humfeld) Date: Sat, 10 Dec 2016 04:01:43 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [grc] A possible probe from a Brietbart type organization. References: <226050543.177150.1481342503069.ref@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <226050543.177150.1481342503069@mail.yahoo.com> ?All,? ? KKFI's Station Manager Barry Lee sent this email out to all of our programmers. ?I think that in these times we should all be on guard against those who would rather we did not exist and would like to silence us all. Folks, ?Last Monday a guy came in to visit the station without an appointment and asked a series of very hypothetical questions designed, I think, to probe ways the station could get into trouble with the FCC.?? ?He was a skinny guy, blonde hair, glasses, with a blue backpack somewhere between 19 and 22 years old--looked like a college student.? He did not want to volunteer and seemed uninterested in a tour of the station.?? ? He had started the conversation with Phil at the front desk and I happened to hear his questions and introduced myself.? ? He had a series of questions that seemed to be centered on ways people could harm the station.? ? I don't think he was crazy. ? After discussing this with Judy Ancel, who has had some unfortunate experiences with the Breitbart organization, we believe this person may have been a scout from Breitbart or some similar right wing organization looking for ways to either prank us or get us into trouble with the FCC.? I gave him no answers he could use.? I hope I'm wrong about this.?? ? These folks specialize in bogus interviews with people which they then edit to make your answers sound like they agree with whatever scenario they are using to attempt to discredit organizations. ? If anyone attempts an impromptu interview with you during office hours, politely refer them to office staff.? If they attempt to come in after hours, refer them to our office hours and phone number and ask them to make an appointment. ? So far, we've not had any problems in the past with these sorts of organizations, but their activities might be ramping up with the election of the new President. ? Be extra vigilant in the parking lots day and night and at night if someone does not adequately identify themselves, do not let them into the building or the station.? IF they claim to be guests on a show that hasn't started yet, refer them to the hosts of that show.? If they are real guests, they should have contact info for the show that they claim to be guests on. ?? Let's hope we continue to be left alone by these kinds of right wing organizations, but it's not a bad idea to be aware of what's out there.?? ?? If anyone has had something similar happen to them in recent days, let me, Mike, or Bill know.? ? ?? -Barry??Lee From michael at michaelrichards.us Sat Dec 10 10:23:02 2016 From: michael at michaelrichards.us (Michael Richards) Date: Sat, 10 Dec 2016 18:23:02 +0000 Subject: [grc] A possible probe from a Brietbart type organization. In-Reply-To: <226050543.177150.1481342503069@mail.yahoo.com> References: <226050543.177150.1481342503069.ref@mail.yahoo.com> <226050543.177150.1481342503069@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Wow! That is quite a cautionary tale. For those LPFMs who have committed to a Main Studio for at least 20 hours per week, and full power community stations who must have a main studio no matter what, it may be best to keep banter about potential pratfalls to a minimum. A friendly re-direction of the conversation might help deflect a misanthropic fishing expedition. For LPFMs, as there is no public file requirement, there is nothing for anyone to inspect. The Main Studio commitment is simply to encourage community engagement. You can engage on LPFM FCC regulatory issues by simply referring anyone to the FCC's website . That might serve as a name, rank and serial number answer in any dodgy situation. For LPFMs, the specific FCC webpage is https://www.fcc.gov/media/radio/lpfm For full power stations, you might simply punt on regulatory issues by referring the visitor to "The Public and Broadcasting," which is an FCC booklet that is a required part of every public inspection file. It is also available online at https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-940A2.pdf Stations might also want to check state law on surreptitious recordings, just in case of a faux-journalistic sting directed against the station. Some states require everyone being recorded to consent (especially in a private space, such as a station's main studio/offices). If you are in one of those states, this would at least give you extra legal protections (including, in some states, allowing you to press criminal charges). This was an issue in the Bill Clinton-Monica Lewinsky sex scandal. Maryland bans surreptitious voice recording (you must have consent to record). Monica Lewinsky's friend, Linda Tripp, was indicted as a result of surreptitious recordings of Monica discussing oval office encounters. Here are a couple of links that explain it well -- mostly from the perspective of a news reporter. But you can see which states have these kind of laws that might be useful as a counterweight to any faux-newsgathering sting. http://www.dmlp.org/legal-guide/recording-phone-calls-and-conversations http://www.dmlp.org/legal-guide/recording-phone-calls-and-conversations http://www.rcfp.org/rcfp/orders/docs/RECORDING.pdf Remember, that these items may not be 100 percent accurate today -- for instance, Illinois has had changes due to court intervention. But these represent a good starting point to come up with a station policy -- which may well be prudent in the current political and social climate, as Barry Lee's post so poignantly illustrates. Be prepared! (I say, as the proud father of an Eagle Scout?.) Michael W. Richards, Attorney 7008 Westmoreland Avenue Suite E8 Takoma Park, MD 20912 Tel. 202.657.5780 michael at michaelrichards.us On Twitter: Commlawguy ------------------------------------------------------- TAX ADVICE DISCLAIMER: Under applicable U.S. Treasury Regulations, please be advised that any U.S. tax advice contained in this email or any attachment hereto is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, either (i) for purposes of avoiding penalties imposed under the U.S. Internal Revenue Code, or (ii) for promoting, marketing, or recommending to another party any tax-related matter addressed herein. This message was sent by an attorney. It is confidential and may contain privileged attorney-client communication or work product intended only for the individual or entity named within the message. If you are not the intended recipient, or the agent responsible to deliver it to the intended recipient, any review, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message is prohibited. If this email message was received in error, we would appreciate your notifying us by reply e-mail and deleting the original message from your system. Thank you for your cooperation -----Original Message----- From: grc [mailto:grc-bounces at maillist.peak.org] On Behalf Of Jeffery Humfeld via grc Sent: Friday, December 09, 2016 11:02 PM To: _GRC List Subject: [grc] A possible probe from a Brietbart type organization. All, KKFI's Station Manager Barry Lee sent this email out to all of our programmers. I think that in these times we should all be on guard against those who would rather we did not exist and would like to silence us all. Folks, Last Monday a guy came in to visit the station without an appointment and asked a series of very hypothetical questions designed, I think, to probe ways the station could get into trouble with the FCC. He was a skinny guy, blonde hair, glasses, with a blue backpack somewhere between 19 and 22 years old--looked like a college student. He did not want to volunteer and seemed uninterested in a tour of the station. He had started the conversation with Phil at the front desk and I happened to hear his questions and introduced myself. He had a series of questions that seemed to be centered on ways people could harm the station. I don't think he was crazy. After discussing this with Judy Ancel, who has had some unfortunate experiences with the Breitbart organization, we believe this person may have been a scout from Breitbart or some similar right wing organization looking for ways to either prank us or get us into trouble with the FCC. I gave him no answers he could use. I hope I'm wrong about this. These folks specialize in bogus interviews with people which they then edit to make your answers sound like they agree with whatever scenario they are using to attempt to discredit organizations. If anyone attempts an impromptu interview with you during office hours, politely refer them to office staff. If they attempt to come in after hours, refer them to our office hours and phone number and ask them to make an appointment. So far, we've not had any problems in the past with these sorts of organizations, but their activities might be ramping up with the election of the new President. Be extra vigilant in the parking lots day and night and at night if someone does not adequately identify themselves, do not let them into the building or the station. IF they claim to be guests on a show that hasn't started yet, refer them to the hosts of that show. If they are real guests, they should have contact info for the show that they claim to be guests on. Let's hope we continue to be left alone by these kinds of right wing organizations, but it's not a bad idea to be aware of what's out there. If anyone has had something similar happen to them in recent days, let me, Mike, or Bill know. -Barry Lee _______________________________________________ grc mailing list grc at maillist.peak.org http://maillist.peak.org/mailman/listinfo/grc From anniegarrison at gmail.com Mon Dec 12 18:14:59 2016 From: anniegarrison at gmail.com (Ann Garrison) Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2016 18:14:59 -0800 Subject: [grc] NewsUp! and submissons to t Message-ID: At this point there's so much nerve rattling news that the Russians are coming (LOL) that I can't remember whether we all received a note announcing the new NewsUp! section on Pacifica Audioport.org. Just to recap, this is a section that Ursula Ruedenberg and Greta Anderson organized so that those of us producing news around the Pacifica Network can make our news reporting available to other producers - especially newscast producers - when it's not so local that it won't be of interest beyond our local audiences. My first upload to the "NewsUp!" section of Audioport was an interview with World Beyond War founder and author David Swanson: Should California secede from the USA? Would smaller states be less violent and more democratic? This 8 minute and 2 second segment should have news value for at least a year because Yes California, the California secession movement, plans to campaign for a ballot measure in 2018 and another in 2019. I will therefore ask whether that can be left in NewsUp! for longer than the one week expiration date we discussed. I also shared "The 2016 presidential election recount: Black Agenda Report Editor Bruce Dixon on reasons for the Stein recount ." This is the short - 4 minutes, 24 seconds - story that I produced for last Saturday's KPFA Evening News. Its immediate news value has passed now that Republican judges have shut down the recounts in Pennsylvania and Michigan and the Wisconsin recount has widened Trump's margin by 162 votes. The issue of election integrity, however, will continue into its next phase wth the CIA telling us the Russians hacked the DNC/Podesta e-mail to influence our presidential election. I know that Bruce Dixon will say that the issues he named there are still the real issues and that the accusations of Russian interference are a distraction. For real, Ann Garrison Independent Journalist, SKYPE: Ann Garrison, Oakland 415-503-7487 From anniegarrison at gmail.com Mon Dec 12 22:54:19 2016 From: anniegarrison at gmail.com (Ann Garrison) Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2016 22:54:19 -0800 Subject: [grc] Revised intro regarding recount story Message-ID: I just revised the anchor/host intro for my story about the recounts that Dr. Jill Sten petitioned for in Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin; the new intro summarizes the outcomes in all three states, and it should give the story currency for the remainder of the week that it's downloadable on Audioport. http://audioport.org/index.php?op=program-info&program_id=110364&nav=& Also, fyi, my "summary," "notes," and "host/announcer script" will most likely be the same, as they are for the two stories I posted this week. For real, Ann Garrison Independent Journalist, SKYPE: Ann Garrison, Oakland 415-503-7487 From ksholcomb at gmail.com Tue Dec 13 07:59:49 2016 From: ksholcomb at gmail.com (Karen Holcomb) Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2016 09:59:49 -0600 Subject: [grc] transfering emails Message-ID: Hi there, Could my husband Bob Nagy, Chief engineer at KUHS be added to the listserve and my name removed? I always forward the messages to him anyway. He can so the same for me if need be. So please add rjnagy at gmail.com and delete ksholcomb at gmail.com. Many many thanks, and Happy holidays! Karen Holcomb KUHS Hot Springs, Arkansas From lanny at kllg.org Tue Dec 13 14:22:55 2016 From: lanny at kllg.org (Lanny Cotler) Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2016 14:22:55 -0800 Subject: [grc] rebroadcasting full power shows on LPFMs Message-ID: <06640AB6-8409-485C-93CF-0C7EB7ED8FAA@kllg.org> Gentlepeople, Is this really a question about FCC law? A full-power FM station, public not commercial, responded to our request to rebroadcast one of their locally-produced shows thus: It is not legal for low power radio stations to broadcast our shows. It isn't a station policy, it is an FCC law. Due to the nature of the low power vs high power license, we aren't able to share shows because we are a high power station. Can any of your verify if this is the law? I think I remember an FCC law that say LPFM cannot SIMULTANEOUSLY broadcast a show from a full-power station. But to download the archive from the full-power PUBLIC radio station so that we can REBROADCAST IT AT ANOTHER TIME?I don?t think that is against FCC law. Am I correct? Lanny KLLG-LP ~ 97.9 FM Lanny Cotler, General Manager A Project of Little Lake Grange #670 Willits Hometown Radio?Low Power, High Energy P.O Box 820, Willits, CA 95490 707-367-1812 LANNY at KLLG.ORG WWW.KLLG.ORG From bame at riverrock.org Tue Dec 13 14:44:49 2016 From: bame at riverrock.org (Paul Bame) Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2016 17:44:49 -0500 Subject: [grc] rebroadcasting full power shows on LPFMs In-Reply-To: <06640AB6-8409-485C-93CF-0C7EB7ED8FAA@kllg.org> References: <06640AB6-8409-485C-93CF-0C7EB7ED8FAA@kllg.org> Message-ID: <6f0a32ca3c4223b991c61b877549d995@riverrock.org> Of course I am not a lawyer and this is not legal advice, but "the signal of" doesn't mean "the programming of" I don't think. ?73.879 SIGNAL RETRANSMISSION. An LPFM licensee may not retransmit, either terrestrially or via satellite, _the signal of_ a full-power radio broadcast station. From mae at recnet.com Tue Dec 13 15:03:31 2016 From: mae at recnet.com (Michelle Bradley) Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2016 18:03:31 -0500 Subject: [grc] rebroadcasting full power shows on LPFMs Message-ID: <9o2lfpcocd592nnstegcmpy0.1481670211084@email.android.com> The intention of the rule is to keep LPFMs from being translators.. ? It is perfectly legal to rebroadcast a program.. just not a station simultaneously. ? Happy Connecting. Sent from my Sprint Samsung Galaxy S? 5 -------- Original message -------- From: Lanny Cotler via grc Date: 12/13/16 17:22 (GMT-05:00) To: grc Subject: [grc] rebroadcasting full power shows on LPFMs Gentlepeople, Is this really a question about FCC law? A full-power FM station, public not commercial, responded to our request to rebroadcast one of their locally-produced shows thus: It is not legal for low power radio stations to broadcast our shows. It isn't a station policy, it is an FCC law. Due to the nature of the low power vs high power license, we aren't able to share shows because we are a high power station. Can any of your verify if this is the law? I think I remember an FCC law that say LPFM cannot SIMULTANEOUSLY broadcast a show from a full-power station. But to download the archive from the full-power PUBLIC radio station so that we can REBROADCAST IT AT ANOTHER TIME?I don?t think that is against FCC law. Am I correct? Lanny KLLG-LP ~ 97.9 FM Lanny Cotler, General Manager A Project of Little Lake Grange #670 Willits Hometown Radio?Low Power, High Energy P.O Box 820, Willits, CA 95490 707-367-1812 LANNY at KLLG.ORG WWW.KLLG.ORG _______________________________________________ grc mailing list grc at maillist.peak.org http://maillist.peak.org/mailman/listinfo/grc From anniegarrison at gmail.com Thu Dec 15 12:29:21 2016 From: anniegarrison at gmail.com (Ann Garrison) Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2016 12:29:21 -0800 Subject: [grc] How many stations associated with this list have a newscast? Or plan to? Message-ID: This year's GRC was very much oriented to the new LPFM stations coming on line and to their technical concerns. I know this isn't a very systematic way to do a survey, but I'd like to know how many stations now have a daily - or less than daily - newscast. And how many hope to in the future. Perhaps Ursula and Greta can devise a more systematic way of surveying this list. I think this could probably be done with a Doodle Poll but I've never created one myself. For real, Ann Garrison Independent Journalist, SKYPE: Ann Garrison, Oakland 415-503-7487 From loonfoot at gmail.com Thu Dec 15 13:40:46 2016 From: loonfoot at gmail.com (Robert Park) Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2016 15:40:46 -0600 Subject: [grc] How many stations associated with this list have a newscast? Or plan to? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Such a survey needs to distinguish between local news and national (or international) news and between news gathered by the station or some other organization. Our LPFM station, for example, broadcasts Democracy Now! on weekday mornings and the 6 min. daily news summaries from Public News Service evenings Mon. - Sat. We also broadcast brief stories from the Wisconsin News Connection (affiliated with Public News Service) when they are available, about twice a week. The station has no paid staff, no studio and no reporter (other than me). However I do occasionally broadcast news from our part of Madison on Neighborhood News at Noon on Saturday, such as an announcement of a bake sale at a nearby library or a recording from a neighborhood meeting with the mayor or police chief. We also have a weekly "Crime Alert" feature a few min. long recorded by the head of a neighborhood watch group for the station. In addition, through a local program sharing agreement with our full power community radio station, WORT, I often rebroadcast selected talks shows from their station which sometimes include recent local news. Bob Park Program Director WIDE-LP 99.1 FM http://widelp.org/ https://twitter.com/WIDE_LP (See also http://lpfm.madisonwi.us/) On Thu, Dec 15, 2016 at 2:29 PM, Ann Garrison via grc wrote: > This year's GRC was very much oriented to the new LPFM stations coming on > line and to their technical concerns. > > I know this isn't a very systematic way to do a survey, but I'd like to > know how many stations now have a daily - or less than daily - newscast. > And how many hope to in the future. > > Perhaps Ursula and Greta can devise a more systematic way of surveying this > list. I think this could probably be done with a Doodle Poll but I've never > created one myself. > > For real, > Ann Garrison > Independent Journalist, > SKYPE: Ann Garrison, Oakland > 415-503-7487 > _______________________________________________ > grc mailing list > grc at maillist.peak.org > http://maillist.peak.org/mailman/listinfo/grc > From loonfoot at gmail.com Thu Dec 15 14:44:31 2016 From: loonfoot at gmail.com (Robert Park) Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2016 16:44:31 -0600 Subject: [grc] How many stations associated with this list have a newscast? Or plan to? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I think the City of Monona LPFM station, WVMO-LP, is also working with high school students for local news. Is that right Will? On Thu, Dec 15, 2016 at 4:19 PM, Mike Elmore wrote: > We are making news reporting a partnership with local high school and > colleges. A great opportunity for high school students (typically in the > drama department) that would be interested in doing news reporting and > english students interested in Journalism. We also partner with Journalism > majors in local colleges to cut their teeth on reporting / broadcasting. > > Mike Elmore > *Producer / Host* > Rye Seronie University, 93.9 WLXU | Lexington Community Radio > m: 859.693.4877 <(859)%20693-4877> > w: rsuniversity.net e: producer at rsuniversity.net > > > > > On 12/15/2016 4:41:13 PM, Robert Park via grc > wrote: > Such a survey needs to distinguish between local news and national (or > international) news and between news gathered by the station or some other > organization. > > Our LPFM station, for example, broadcasts Democracy Now! on weekday > mornings and the 6 min. daily news summaries from Public News Service > evenings Mon. - Sat. We also broadcast brief stories from the Wisconsin > News Connection (affiliated with Public News Service) when they are > available, about twice a week. The station has no paid staff, no studio > and > no reporter (other than me). However I do occasionally broadcast news from > our part of Madison on Neighborhood News at Noon on Saturday, such as an > announcement of a bake sale at a nearby library or a recording from a > neighborhood meeting with the mayor or police chief. We also have a weekly > "Crime Alert" feature a few min. long recorded by the head of a > neighborhood watch group for the station. In addition, through a local > program sharing agreement with our full power community radio station, > WORT, I often rebroadcast selected talks shows from their station which > sometimes include recent local news. > > Bob Park > Program Director > WIDE-LP 99.1 FM > http://widelp.org/ > https://twitter.com/WIDE_LP > (See also http://lpfm.madisonwi.us/) > > On Thu, Dec 15, 2016 at 2:29 PM, Ann Garrison via grc > > wrote: > > > This year's GRC was very much oriented to the new LPFM stations coming > on > > line and to their technical concerns. > > > > I know this isn't a very systematic way to do a survey, but I'd like to > > know how many stations now have a daily - or less than daily - newscast. > > And how many hope to in the future. > > > > Perhaps Ursula and Greta can devise a more systematic way of surveying > this > > list. I think this could probably be done with a Doodle Poll but I've > never > > created one myself. > > > > For real, > > Ann Garrison > > Independent Journalist, > > SKYPE: Ann Garrison, Oakland > > 415-503-7487 <(415)%20503-7487> > > _______________________________________________ > > grc mailing list > > grc at maillist.peak.org > > http://maillist.peak.org/mailman/listinfo/grc > > > _______________________________________________ > grc mailing list > grc at maillist.peak.org > http://maillist.peak.org/mailman/listinfo/grc > > From anniegarrison at gmail.com Thu Dec 15 16:09:33 2016 From: anniegarrison at gmail.com (Ann Garrison) Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2016 16:09:33 -0800 Subject: [grc] How many stations associated with this list have a newscast? Or plan to? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: That sounds great. I believe that our Pacifica NewsUp! idea is to make news of more than local interest available to stations who want to put together a newscast that combines local, national and international news. I believe that you have to become a Pacifica affiliate to have access to Audioport, but if you want to do that, you need to contact Ursula or Greta about the cost; I believe that it's sliding scale, depending on the size of your station and its audience, but I'm not sure. Greta Anderson's story on the Louisiana run-off elections held last Saturday were terrific. This is a perfect example of a state story with national implications. The Senate run-off elected the Republican, maintaining the Senate balance of 52 Republicans to 48 Democrats. In the House run-off Clay Higgins beat Scott Angelle for the state's Third District House Seat. Higgins is a NOLA police captain most famous for this video . San Angelle is paid $45,000 to sit on a state commission that regulates pipeline construction and $380,000/yr. to serve on the Board of Directors of Sunoco Logistics, the subsidiary of Energy Transfer Partners which is about to take over its parent. Sunoco Logistics and Energy Transfer Partners are the two corporations whose pipeline has been stopped at Standing Rock. They hope to get past the water protectors and run it all the way down through Louisiana to the Gulf. For real, Ann Garrison Independent Journalist, SKYPE: Ann Garrison, Oakland 415-503-7487 On Thu, Dec 15, 2016 at 2:44 PM, Robert Park via grc wrote: > I think the City of Monona LPFM station, WVMO-LP, is also working with high > school students for local news. Is that right Will? > > On Thu, Dec 15, 2016 at 4:19 PM, Mike Elmore > wrote: > > > We are making news reporting a partnership with local high school and > > colleges. A great opportunity for high school students (typically in the > > drama department) that would be interested in doing news reporting and > > english students interested in Journalism. We also partner with > Journalism > > majors in local colleges to cut their teeth on reporting / broadcasting. > > > > Mike Elmore > > *Producer / Host* > > Rye Seronie University, 93.9 WLXU | Lexington Community Radio > > m: 859.693.4877 <(859)%20693-4877> > > w: rsuniversity.net e: producer at rsuniversity.net > > > > > > > > > > On 12/15/2016 4:41:13 PM, Robert Park via grc > > wrote: > > Such a survey needs to distinguish between local news and national (or > > international) news and between news gathered by the station or some > other > > organization. > > > > Our LPFM station, for example, broadcasts Democracy Now! on weekday > > mornings and the 6 min. daily news summaries from Public News Service > > evenings Mon. - Sat. We also broadcast brief stories from the Wisconsin > > News Connection (affiliated with Public News Service) when they are > > available, about twice a week. The station has no paid staff, no studio > > and > > no reporter (other than me). However I do occasionally broadcast news > from > > our part of Madison on Neighborhood News at Noon on Saturday, such as an > > announcement of a bake sale at a nearby library or a recording from a > > neighborhood meeting with the mayor or police chief. We also have a > weekly > > "Crime Alert" feature a few min. long recorded by the head of a > > neighborhood watch group for the station. In addition, through a local > > program sharing agreement with our full power community radio station, > > WORT, I often rebroadcast selected talks shows from their station which > > sometimes include recent local news. > > > > Bob Park > > Program Director > > WIDE-LP 99.1 FM > > http://widelp.org/ > > https://twitter.com/WIDE_LP > > (See also http://lpfm.madisonwi.us/) > > > > On Thu, Dec 15, 2016 at 2:29 PM, Ann Garrison via grc > > > wrote: > > > > > This year's GRC was very much oriented to the new LPFM stations coming > > on > > > line and to their technical concerns. > > > > > > I know this isn't a very systematic way to do a survey, but I'd like to > > > know how many stations now have a daily - or less than daily - > newscast. > > > And how many hope to in the future. > > > > > > Perhaps Ursula and Greta can devise a more systematic way of surveying > > this > > > list. I think this could probably be done with a Doodle Poll but I've > > never > > > created one myself. > > > > > > For real, > > > Ann Garrison > > > Independent Journalist, > > > SKYPE: Ann Garrison, Oakland > > > 415-503-7487 <(415)%20503-7487> > > > _______________________________________________ > > > grc mailing list > > > grc at maillist.peak.org > > > http://maillist.peak.org/mailman/listinfo/grc > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > grc mailing list > > grc at maillist.peak.org > > http://maillist.peak.org/mailman/listinfo/grc > > > > > _______________________________________________ > grc mailing list > grc at maillist.peak.org > http://maillist.peak.org/mailman/listinfo/grc > From lanny at kllg.org Thu Dec 15 20:25:13 2016 From: lanny at kllg.org (Lanny Cotler) Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2016 20:25:13 -0800 Subject: [grc] Profanity Philter... Message-ID: <25F0B464-B31D-451F-B7C5-BB266EA47268@kllg.org> Gentlepeople, We?re hoping to purchase our phone hybrid system soon. Since our station wants to spring for a two-caller rig, where the host can put two callers on the air at the same time, we?ve been warned that we MUST HAVE A PROFANITY FILTER. Is this discretion the better part of valor? Is this necessary? I ask since I?ve been told this will cost over $2000. True? We?d appreciate any comments or suggestions on how to proceed. Radiologically, Lanny PS: KLLG motto is ?Connecting the Community" KLLG-LP ~ 97.9 FM Lanny Cotler, General Manager A Project of Little Lake Grange #670 Willits Hometown Radio?Low Power, High Energy P.O Box 820, Willits, CA 95490 707-367-1812 LANNY at KLLG.ORG WWW.KLLG.ORG From lanny at kllg.org Thu Dec 15 20:27:01 2016 From: lanny at kllg.org (Lanny Cotler) Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2016 20:27:01 -0800 Subject: [grc] Profanity Philter... Message-ID: Gentlepeople, We?re hoping to purchase our phone hybrid system soon. Since our station wants to spring for a two-caller rig, where the host can put two callers on the air at the same time, we?ve been warned that we MUST HAVE A PROFANITY FILTER. Is this discretion the better part of valor? Is this necessary? I ask since I?ve been told this will cost over $2000. True? We?d appreciate any comments or suggestions on how to proceed. Radiologically, Lanny PS: KLLG motto is ?Connecting the Community" KLLG-LP ~ 97.9 FM Lanny Cotler, General Manager A Project of Little Lake Grange #670 Willits Hometown Radio?Low Power, High Energy P.O Box 820, Willits, CA 95490 707-367-1812 LANNY at KLLG.ORG WWW.KLLG.ORG From terryo at wortfm.org Fri Dec 16 04:10:16 2016 From: terryo at wortfm.org (Terry O'Laughlin) Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2016 06:10:16 -0600 Subject: [grc] Profanity Philter... In-Reply-To: <25F0B464-B31D-451F-B7C5-BB266EA47268@kllg.org> References: <25F0B464-B31D-451F-B7C5-BB266EA47268@kllg.org> Message-ID: Larry, We're budgeting to buy an Eventide BD-600, which several places offer for just under $3,000. We currently use a BD-500 which does not have digital in and out and has some reboot after power down issues. These units are remote controlled from the studio where we have a "dump" button. We currently program the BD-500 to dump 8 seconds. It does this nicely with no dead air and many people don't notice the snip. We may try stacked 5 sec bumps (first push 5 sec, second push another 5 sec) for longer outbursts or two profanity in quick succession. It takes our BD-500 several minutes to rebuild the 8 secs of buffered audio and the dump capability is severely limited during that rebuilding time. It was disconcerting to volunteer programmers at first because the long audio delay on the air signal. When they accidentally switched their monitors from studio to air, they often went bonkers. Now people are used to it. I can't say it gets used often or well, but our DC attorney tells us that in the event profanity slips out, the FCC is more lenient with stations that have a dump system (aka profanity filter) installed. Terry O' WORT-FM On Thu, Dec 15, 2016 at 10:25 PM, Lanny Cotler via grc < grc at maillist.peak.org> wrote: > Gentlepeople, > > We?re hoping to purchase our phone hybrid system soon. Since our station > wants to spring for a two-caller rig, where the host can put two callers on > the air at the same time, we?ve been warned that we MUST HAVE A PROFANITY > FILTER. > > Is this discretion the better part of valor? Is this necessary? I ask > since I?ve been told this will cost over $2000. True? > > We?d appreciate any comments or suggestions on how to proceed. > > > Radiologically, > > Lanny > > > > PS: KLLG motto is ?Connecting the Community" > > > > > > > > > > KLLG-LP ~ 97.9 FM > Lanny Cotler, General Manager > A Project of Little Lake Grange #670 > Willits Hometown Radio?Low Power, High Energy > P.O Box 820, Willits, CA 95490 > 707-367-1812 > LANNY at KLLG.ORG > WWW.KLLG.ORG > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > grc mailing list > grc at maillist.peak.org > http://maillist.peak.org/mailman/listinfo/grc > From david at ibisradio.org Fri Dec 16 04:47:53 2016 From: david at ibisradio.org (David Goodman) Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2016 07:47:53 -0500 Subject: [grc] Profanity Philter... In-Reply-To: <25F0B464-B31D-451F-B7C5-BB266EA47268@kllg.org> References: <25F0B464-B31D-451F-B7C5-BB266EA47268@kllg.org> Message-ID: Lanny, start with training. As in teach your people not use obscene and indecent (as defined by the FCC) language on the air. I really don't think it's necessary to spring for a $3,000 unit. And when it DOES happen, make sure to have a due diligence/enforcement process in place. That will impress the FCC more than the gear. Cheers, dg On Thu, Dec 15, 2016 at 11:25 PM, Lanny Cotler via grc < grc at maillist.peak.org> wrote: > Gentlepeople, > > We?re hoping to purchase our phone hybrid system soon. Since our station > wants to spring for a two-caller rig, where the host can put two callers on > the air at the same time, we?ve been warned that we MUST HAVE A PROFANITY > FILTER. > > Is this discretion the better part of valor? Is this necessary? I ask > since I?ve been told this will cost over $2000. True? > > We?d appreciate any comments or suggestions on how to proceed. > > > Radiologically, > > Lanny > > > > PS: KLLG motto is ?Connecting the Community" > > > > > > > > > > KLLG-LP ~ 97.9 FM > Lanny Cotler, General Manager > A Project of Little Lake Grange #670 > Willits Hometown Radio?Low Power, High Energy > P.O Box 820, Willits, CA 95490 > 707-367-1812 > LANNY at KLLG.ORG > WWW.KLLG.ORG > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > grc mailing list > grc at maillist.peak.org > http://maillist.peak.org/mailman/listinfo/grc > -- I.B.I.S. Radio Jamaica Plain, Boston, MA From curious at radiocurious.org Fri Dec 16 07:40:16 2016 From: curious at radiocurious.org (curious at radiocurious.org) Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2016 07:40:16 -0800 Subject: [grc] Fwd: Re: Profanity Philter... In-Reply-To: <564f54a9-09b6-9252-24f3-c87303764cf7@radiocurious.org> References: <564f54a9-09b6-9252-24f3-c87303764cf7@radiocurious.org> Message-ID: <201612161540.uBGFeLoq008415@mail.pacific.net> Lanny, Being discrete as I know you to be, I'm curious as to what you think of this idea... Have a profanity filter fund raiser specifically for the 2 caller hybrid. Do on-air pitchs throughout the programming day. Ask every listener to donate $1 for every profane word the comes to mind, regardless of how: Whether it is heard, spoken or a benign thought. Damn it! counts. Explain in the pitch how a 2 caller hybrid will "connect the community." Have a public invited profanity filter fund raiser event at the grange and see how long it takes to raise $2K. How about at New Year's Eve? Innuendos are half price. Show "What the Bleep" at 9:30 pm. Barry Radio Curious On 12/15/2016 8:27 PM, Lanny Cotler via grc wrote: > Gentlepeople, > > We?re hoping to purchase our phone hybrid system soon. Since our station wants to spring for a two-caller rig, where the host can put two callers on the air at the same time, we?ve been warned that we MUST HAVE A PROFANITY FILTER. > > Is this discretion the better part of valor? Is this necessary? I ask since I?ve been told this will cost over $2000. True? > > We?d appreciate any comments or suggestions on how to proceed. > > > Radiologically, > > Lanny > > > > PS: KLLG motto is ?Connecting the Community" > > > > > > > > > > KLLG-LP ~ 97.9 FM > Lanny Cotler, General Manager > A Project of Little Lake Grange #670 > Willits Hometown Radio?Low Power, High Energy > P.O Box 820, Willits, CA 95490 > 707-367-1812 > LANNY at KLLG.ORG > WWW.KLLG.ORG > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > grc mailing list > grc at maillist.peak.org > http://maillist.peak.org/mailman/listinfo/grc > > From ad253 at freeelectron.net Fri Dec 16 08:46:05 2016 From: ad253 at freeelectron.net (al davis) Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2016 11:46:05 -0500 Subject: [grc] Profanity Philter... In-Reply-To: <25F0B464-B31D-451F-B7C5-BB266EA47268@kllg.org> References: <25F0B464-B31D-451F-B7C5-BB266EA47268@kllg.org> Message-ID: <20161216114605.2a2a0d35@floyd.freeelectron.net> On Thu, 15 Dec 2016 20:25:13 -0800 Lanny Cotler via grc wrote: > We?re hoping to purchase our phone hybrid system soon. Since our station wants to spring for a two-caller rig, where the host can put two callers on the air at the same time, we?ve been warned that we MUST HAVE A PROFANITY FILTER. > > Is this discretion the better part of valor? Is this necessary? I ask since I?ve been told this will cost over $2000. True? First, I am not convinced that you need it. What is much more important is due diligence. If you have the delay unit and don't use it, or most of your people don't know how to use it, that's a bigger problem than not having it. If you really think you need it, you can do it with a space-junk computer and software. Just "record" what comes in, then play it back 10 seconds delayed. It's ok that you start playing before it has completed recording. It just keeps running until you stop it. A variant of this might be available as a side-effect of streaming or your STL. Let the stream software be your delay. Originate a stream locally and play it. I once set up a dumper based on the station's STL. The STL was using stream software (darkice, icecast, mplayer), so there was an inherent delay in the STL. So, just mute the transmitter. The mute takes effect immediately, even though the audio is delayed 10 seconds or so. Technically, it worked quite well, but nobody at the station was willing to use it, or anything really, even though they pressured me for it. So that goes back to the first paragraph of my reply. It's all about your station's culture, including knowing how to prevent it, and how to handle it. No equipment can fix that. From mae at recnet.com Fri Dec 16 08:47:14 2016 From: mae at recnet.com (Michelle Bradley) Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2016 11:47:14 -0500 Subject: [grc] Statement of REC Networks: Grants of Guel applications and denial of Application For Review Message-ID: The Media Bureau and full Commission actions of the past 24 hours only demonstrate that the LPFM rules are broken and also that the agency is unwilling to enforce certain sections of the Communications Act when it is inconvenient or, like in this case, they were called out on it. One of the issues at hand was whether false statements made on an initial application but then are amended on a subsequently-filed amendment are still considered willful false statements, especially in cases where the amendment was made after a considerable amount of time. For example, if an applicant filed that their main studio was in a "virtual office" facility such as those operated by companies likeRegus or in the case of one Southern California applicant, a main studio located in a UPS Store, just for the purpose of getting the application into the system even though they had no intention of actually broadcasting from these locations, should those//statements get swept under the rug when the application is declared a singleton? Or, to paraphrase, Pat Benatar, can you blacken their eye and then apologize? Every time you fill out an application with the FCC, you are reminded: WILLFUL FALSE STATEMENTS ON THIS FORM ARE PUNISHABLE BY FINE AND/OR IMPRISONMENT (U.S. CODE, TITLE 18, SECTION 1001) AND/OR REVOCATION OF ANY STATION LICENSE OR CONSTRUCTION PERMIT (U.S. CODE, TITLE 47, SECTION 312(a)(1)), AND/OR FORFEITURE (U.S. CODE, TITLE 47, SECTION 503). While the Department of Justice enforces and prosecutes under Title 18, it is the FCC that enforces Title 47 and has the authority to deny permits if false information was given. Media Bureau staff had already determined that site assurance had not been obtained in some cases but due to the Audio Division's mishandling of the investigation, the evidence had to be thrown out. We do note though that we do not consider filing an NCE application without site assurance as a 312(a)(1) or 503 violation as no statement was specifically made that there was site assurance. This is different when an application states that there is a main studio even when the space is only a 8" x 6" x 12" box. We did what we could to call attention to the fact that the LPFM application and licensing process does lack integrity. We saw this happen in 2001 with the Lyle Evans catholic church applications as well as in 2013 with obvious filers such as Cesar Guel, Robert Lund, EWTN and the Seventh-Day Adventists as well as less obvious filers such as New Tang Dynasty. It is obvious that we need to fix LPFM for the next generation. The damage done in the 2013 window is likely irreversible but we do have the power to change the rules for the next window to reduce the chances of the gamesmanship that we saw in 2013 from happening again. We will never eliminate all gamesmanship because no matter how a rule is written, you know there will be a crackerjack attorney out there trying to find a way to work around it. My attempts to approach what was left of the LPFM advocacy community with ideas for a new qualification rules for the next generation of LPFM applications fell on deaf ears mainly because many of these organizations (such as Prometheus) have shriveled away after the passage of the Local Community Radio Act and others are too involved in station building and full-power projects, they don't have the time for the next generation. Attempts to drum-up support around an existing membership organization is met with resistance because of past actions by that organization under different leadership many years ago. In 2017, REC, whether on our own (as we did with LP-250) or as part of a larger faction (which is what we prefer) is going to move forward on new qualification rules that will apply towards any new organization wishing to enter LPFM whether it is through assignment of license or through a future filing window. With this, we need support from the LPFM community including comments and suggestions on what went wrong in the 2013 window and what can be done to change things for the next window, whenever that will be. Since any rule changes will not directly impact existing LPFM stations, I do ask on LPFMers for their ideas. I know that especially with the new administration that is coming in, there will be a lot of reluctance to change federal regulations but I do feel that changes to LPFM qualifications is not a political hot-button like network neutrality. I still feel that LPFM stations need to form a membership organization or join an existing organization such as NFCB. We need to work together and strength comes in numbers. It's time to fix LPFM for the future of our service. Michelle Bradley Founder REC Networks From juice at whidbey.com Fri Dec 16 13:50:49 2016 From: juice at whidbey.com (Tom Voorhees) Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2016 13:50:49 -0800 Subject: [grc] FCC denies request to revoke WBAI license Message-ID: <335a68cdc3db38e24eb2f9da2a41f7da3fa4ef0a@webmail.whidbey.com> How will the Trump FCC deal with such listener complaints ?? Tom. http://www.radioworld.com/article/listener-rebuked-in-request-to-deny-a-station-its-license/300064 [1] Listener Rebuked in Request to Deny a Station its License by Susan Ashworth on 12.15.2016 In its last Open Meeting of the year, the Federal Communications Commission tackled a number of radio-related issues, including denying a listener request that a station have its licensed revoked due to objectionable programming. Daniel Miller, a listener in New Jersey, wrote to the FCC several times over the last two years to complain about the programming choices of station WBAI(FM) in New York City. The station is part of a network of radio stations operated by Pacifica Foundation. In his most recent Informal Objection in August, Miller pressed the Media Bureau to deny renewing the station?s license. Miller said the noncommercial, listener-supported station is broadcasting content that Miller finds objectionable. He refers to programming that he said aired on WBAI about an escaped fugitive who was involved in the shooting of a state trooper; the WBAI programming allegedly described the fugitive as a ?hero,? a sentiment that Miller said is not protected by free speech. This isn?t the first time this kind of objection has been filed against the station. Informal objections were filed by two other listeners in 2014 and 2015 over a variety of issues including theft, fraud, bribery, improper business practices, public file violations and a lack of diverse programming. The Media Bureau addressed those objections jointly, including Miller?s, in August and said it was unable to substantiate any of the allegations. The bureau also found that WBAI?s programming decisions are protected under the First Amendment. Miller filed an Application for Review to contest the Media Bureau?s finding; but on Dec. 14 the full commission moved to support the Media Bureau?s original decision and denied Miller?s application. When it comes to programming, the commission said, a ?licensee has broad discretion ? based on its right to free speech ? to choose, in good faith, the programming it believes serves the needs and interests of its community of license. We will intervene in programming matters only if a licensee abuses that discretion.? The commission also said that it would not take adverse action on a license renewal application based upon the ?subjective determination? of a listener who claims the station has broadcast purportedly inappropriate programming. Under the Communications Act, the commission can only deny a broadcast station?s application for renewal if the station failed to serve the public interest, committed a serious violation of the act or rules, or committed a series of violations that constitute a pattern of abuse. None of those were applicable in this case, the commission said. - See more at: http://www.radioworld.com/article/listener-rebuked-in-request-to-deny-a-station-its-license/300064#sthash.b7plmXyc.dpuf Links: ------ [1] http://www.radioworld.com/article/listener-rebuked-in-request-to-deny-a-station-its-license/300064 From wings at wings.org Mon Dec 19 11:30:28 2016 From: wings at wings.org (Frieda Werden) Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2016 11:30:28 -0800 Subject: [grc] Why we need community radio (link) Message-ID: http://www.radiosurvivor.com/2016/11/14/reminder-need-community-radio/ -- Frieda Werden, Series Producer WINGS: Women's International News Gathering Service www.wings.org From gbayou at gmail.com Tue Dec 20 11:23:23 2016 From: gbayou at gmail.com (gretchen k) Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2016 14:23:23 -0500 Subject: [grc] =?utf-8?q?=28deadline_extended=29_CFP_/_APPEL_-_The_Future_?= =?utf-8?q?of_First_Nations=2C_Inuit=2C_and_M=C3=A9tis_Broadcasting?= =?utf-8?q?=3A_Conversation_=26_Convergence?= Message-ID: Greetings, I'm writing to you on behalf of the planning committee of The Future of First Nations, Inuit, and M?tis Broadcasting conference. This activity will take place in regions across Canada from February to May 2017, culminating in a national three-day conference in Ottawa in June 2017. Please note the CFP deadline has been extended (see below) and a registration form for this event is now available online. For details visit: www.IndigenousRadio.ca If you have already submitted a proposed activity, the Project team thanks you for your interest and will consider your submission after the new deadline. Thank you for sharing this information with others you know who might be interested in participating in these events. Gretchen King On behalf of The Future of First Nations, Inuit, and M?tis Broadcasting conference planning committee. CALL FOR PROPOSALS: The Future of First Nations, Inuit, and M?tis Broadcasting: Conversation & Convergence Regional Events - February to May 2017 National Conference - June 15 to 17, 2017 Website: www.IndigenousRadio.ca DEADLINE EXTENDED: The new deadline for making proposals is January 16, 2017 for Winnipeg with a rolling deadline for the other regional events (closing one-month prior to the activity) and a deadline of May 1, 2017 for the national conference in Ottawa. REGISTER: We encourage all participants to register now using this form: https://goo.gl/forms/I51Si8a7sKNDY5tm2 With the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission?s Native Broadcasting Policy (CRTC 1990-89) review proposed to take place next year (CRTC Three Year Plan 2016-2019), The Future of First Nations, Inuit, and M?tis Broadcasting: Conversation & Convergence will kick-start discussions in the practitioner, policy and academic worlds. From February to May 2017, six regional one-day gatherings will be held across Canada: *Winnipeg, MB ? 17 February 2017 *Chisasibi, QC ? 20 March 2017 *Iqaluit, NU ? 10 April 2017 *Edmonton, AB ? 21 April 2017 *Campbell River, BC ? 8 May 2017 *Halifax, NS ? 18 May 2017 These regional gatherings will culminate in the convening of a national three-day conference in: *Ottawa, ON ? 15-17 June 2017 at the University of Ottawa. The preparation of these events is based on a respectful engagement with Indigenous Peoples to support their needs as it relates to scholarship and research about Indigenous media, specifically the CRTC?s upcoming public review of the Native Broadcasting Policy. Although the timing of the Native Broadcasting Policy review itself is critical, unfortunately, there is no active and established national association for the Indigenous radio sector. This void is the impetus for these outreach activities leading up to the national conference that will bring together First Nations, Inuit, and M?tis broadcasters, the general public, established and emerging scholars as well as civil society actors and organizations working in the areas of Indigenous issues, communications law, and media policy to discuss the main challenges facing the sector today in preparation for the upcoming CRTC policy review. How to make a proposal: We are seeking proposals for paper presentations, panels, workshops, round-table discussions, focus groups, and public or private meetings that will be organized into three streams related to Indigenous media policies, practices, and research. We also invite hands-on media and technology skill-sharing workshops targeting Indigenous youth participants, but open to all who are interested. To make a proposal, choose the option ?Propose an activity? and fill out the form: http://indigenousradio.ca/Propose-an-Activity.php Proposals can be made for the regional events and/or national conference. Each proposal submitted should address one or more of the following questions guiding the organization of these events: 1. What is the state of the Indigenous broadcasting sector as identified by Indigenous broadcasters? 2. What do Indigenous Peoples want and need from the Indigenous broadcasting sector? 3. What urgent challenges need to be addressed by changes to policy in order to ensure the Indigenous broadcasting sector can fulfill those needs? 4. What insights do key stakeholders working in the areas of Indigenous issues, communications law, and media policy offer on the ways forward? 5. What investments and skills are needed for the reclamation and preservation of regional languages and to implement a sustainable future for First Nations, Inuit, and M?tis broadcasting? Deadline for the presentation of proposals: The new deadline for making proposals is January 16, 2017 for Winnipeg with a rolling deadline for the other regional events (closing one-month prior to the activity) and a deadline of May 1, 2017 for the national conference in Ottawa. Register: We encourage all participants to register now using this form: https://goo.gl/forms/I51Si8a7sKNDY5tm2 If you should have any questions or concerns, please contact the Project Team at: indigenousradio2017 at gmail.com. From wings at wings.org Tue Dec 20 12:21:31 2016 From: wings at wings.org (Frieda Werden) Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2016 12:21:31 -0800 Subject: [grc] FCC chair steps down, guaranteeing a GOP majority Message-ID: http://readersupportednews.org/news-section2/318-66/40940-fcc-chairman-tom-wheeler-to-step-down-jan-20-guaranteeing-gop-majority -- Frieda Werden, Series Producer WINGS: Women's International News Gathering Service www.wings.org From wrirmax at gmail.com Tue Dec 20 18:37:34 2016 From: wrirmax at gmail.com (Max) Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2016 21:37:34 -0500 Subject: [grc] FCC chair steps down, guaranteeing a GOP majority In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: And yet the same bastids are against Municipal Wireless internet ... Free Market my ass! I just posted this to my FB connections as a reason to SUPPORT COMMUNITY RADIO! After all, Egypt has demonstrated that government CAN and WILL cut off the internet! Sincerely, Max On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 3:21 PM, Frieda Werden via grc < grc at maillist.peak.org> wrote: > http://readersupportednews.org/news-section2/318-66/ > 40940-fcc-chairman-tom-wheeler-to-step-down-jan-20- > guaranteeing-gop-majority > > -- > Frieda Werden, Series Producer > WINGS: Women's International News Gathering Service www.wings.org > _______________________________________________ > grc mailing list > grc at maillist.peak.org > http://maillist.peak.org/mailman/listinfo/grc > -- -- Sincerely, Christopher Maxwell Richmond, Va. Keep the long side to the sun (south) !! And higher than the ground around. Founder: http://www.WRIR.org Founder: Virginia Commonwealth University recycling program Acting Executive Director: http://www.VirginiaSolarEnergyAssociation.org From anniegarrison at gmail.com Tue Dec 20 21:35:03 2016 From: anniegarrison at gmail.com (Ann Garrison) Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2016 21:35:03 -0800 Subject: [grc] Interesting program, source Message-ID: Native America Calling: Other Pipelne Fights in the Pipeline http://www.nativeamericacalling.com/thursday-december-15-2016-pipeline-fights-pipeline/ I also joined a Facebook group called "No Bayou Bridge Pipeline!" https://www.facebook.com/groups/595013960684476/?notif_t=group_r2j_approved¬if_id=1482296564114240 For real, Ann Garrison Independent Journalist, SKYPE: Ann Garrison, Oakland 415-503-7487 From ursula at pacifica.org Wed Dec 21 12:54:18 2016 From: ursula at pacifica.org (Ursula Ruedenberg) Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2016 14:54:18 -0600 Subject: [grc] Collaborate on National Broadcast on Inauguration Day Message-ID: Pacifica radio is making plans for coverage of Inauguration Day. We are looking to incorporate voices from around the country in the broadcast. Can you send us some content? mp3 form 128 and up bit rate. 1-3 minutes a segment. Topics: What do you see in your community in response to the election - as a consequence of the election or in response? (for instance here in Ames, on one hand, the Mosque got a threatening and obscene letter and on the other hand, the city held an "inclusive Ames" public discussion meeting to the tune of 300 people and churches have statements on their signs like "we include everyone," etc. Interviews with young people about their vision for the future. Question to ask people in your area: What is your call to action - how does hope and growth look to you in the next 4 years? What needs to happen locally? Do you have congress people or other public figures who will play a prominent role in the new administration pro or against Trump Admin? Can you report from your local perspective? Please begin each interview by asking the person to state their *name* and *where they are from*, and what the listener needs to know about them (e.g., "I'm a parent of a disabled child". Please contact me, Ursula Ruedenberg ursula at pacifica.org Thank you! Having a voice is the best medicine! -- Ursula Ruedenberg Pacifica Affiliate Network Manager 510-812-7989 pacificanetwork.org From anniegarrison at gmail.com Wed Dec 21 13:18:52 2016 From: anniegarrison at gmail.com (Ann Garrison) Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2016 13:18:52 -0800 Subject: [grc] Collaborate on National Broadcast on Inauguration Day In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I assume you're talking about on-the-ground reporting since the limit is 3 minutes. For real, Ann Garrison Independent Journalist, SKYPE: Ann Garrison, Oakland 415-503-7487 On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 12:54 PM, Ursula Ruedenberg via grc < grc at maillist.peak.org> wrote: > Pacifica radio is making plans for coverage of Inauguration Day. We are > looking to incorporate voices from around the country in the broadcast. > Can you send us some content? mp3 form 128 and up bit rate. 1-3 minutes a > segment. > > Topics: > > What do you see in your community in response to the election - as a > consequence of the election or in response? (for instance here in Ames, on > one hand, the Mosque got a threatening and obscene letter and on the other > hand, the city held an "inclusive Ames" public discussion meeting to the > tune of 300 people and churches have statements on their signs like "we > include everyone," etc. > > Interviews with young people about their vision for the future. > > Question to ask people in your area: What is your call to action - how does > hope and growth look to you in the next 4 years? > > What needs to happen locally? > > Do you have congress people or other public figures who will play a > prominent role in the new administration pro or against Trump Admin? Can > you report from your local perspective? > > Please begin each interview by asking the person to state their *name* > and *where > they are from*, and what the listener needs to know about them (e.g., "I'm > a parent of a disabled child". > > Please contact me, Ursula Ruedenberg ursula at pacifica.org > > Thank you! Having a voice is the best medicine! > > > > -- > Ursula Ruedenberg > Pacifica Affiliate Network Manager > 510-812-7989 > pacificanetwork.org > > > > _______________________________________________ > grc mailing list > grc at maillist.peak.org > http://maillist.peak.org/mailman/listinfo/grc > From anniegarrison at gmail.com Wed Dec 21 13:18:52 2016 From: anniegarrison at gmail.com (Ann Garrison) Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2016 13:18:52 -0800 Subject: [grc] Collaborate on National Broadcast on Inauguration Day In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I assume you're talking about on-the-ground reporting since the limit is 3 minutes. For real, Ann Garrison Independent Journalist, SKYPE: Ann Garrison, Oakland 415-503-7487 On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 12:54 PM, Ursula Ruedenberg via grc < grc at maillist.peak.org> wrote: > Pacifica radio is making plans for coverage of Inauguration Day. We are > looking to incorporate voices from around the country in the broadcast. > Can you send us some content? mp3 form 128 and up bit rate. 1-3 minutes a > segment. > > Topics: > > What do you see in your community in response to the election - as a > consequence of the election or in response? (for instance here in Ames, on > one hand, the Mosque got a threatening and obscene letter and on the other > hand, the city held an "inclusive Ames" public discussion meeting to the > tune of 300 people and churches have statements on their signs like "we > include everyone," etc. > > Interviews with young people about their vision for the future. > > Question to ask people in your area: What is your call to action - how does > hope and growth look to you in the next 4 years? > > What needs to happen locally? > > Do you have congress people or other public figures who will play a > prominent role in the new administration pro or against Trump Admin? Can > you report from your local perspective? > > Please begin each interview by asking the person to state their *name* > and *where > they are from*, and what the listener needs to know about them (e.g., "I'm > a parent of a disabled child". > > Please contact me, Ursula Ruedenberg ursula at pacifica.org > > Thank you! Having a voice is the best medicine! > > > > -- > Ursula Ruedenberg > Pacifica Affiliate Network Manager > 510-812-7989 > pacificanetwork.org > > > > _______________________________________________ > grc mailing list > grc at maillist.peak.org > http://maillist.peak.org/mailman/listinfo/grc > From mike at brownbroadcast.com Fri Dec 23 14:27:28 2016 From: mike at brownbroadcast.com (Michael D. Brown) Date: Fri, 23 Dec 2016 14:27:28 -0800 Subject: [grc] Missoula LPFM kickoff! Message-ID: http://www.missoulacurrent.com/headline/2016/12/missoula-community-radio/ Michael D. Brown Brown Broadcast Services, Inc. 3740 SW Comus St. ? Portland OR 97219-7418 USA mike at brownbroadcast.com ? www.brownbroadcast.com offc 503-245-6065 ? cell 503-703-3202 ? fax 503-245-5773 From sabrinadroach at gmail.com Fri Dec 23 17:16:09 2016 From: sabrinadroach at gmail.com (Sabrina Roach) Date: Fri, 23 Dec 2016 20:16:09 -0500 Subject: [grc] National LPFM Org Message-ID: Also sent to NCEorg I'm game to work on fundraising for one, but first, let's map out exactly what it would provide and what the costs are. As some folks don't feel like NFCB is a good fit, would Alliance for Community Media be a fit? There are many PEG stations that have LPFMs. Harrington handles their nonprofit back office and could do the same for a national LPFM organization. Sabrina From lanny at kllg.org Fri Dec 23 17:37:56 2016 From: lanny at kllg.org (Lanny Cotler) Date: Fri, 23 Dec 2016 17:37:56 -0800 Subject: [grc] National LPFM Org In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <969DD975-C4C3-4B99-8C06-DBE1237385D8@kllg.org> I?d love to learn more about how PEG stations and LPFMs work together. I happen also to be on the board of our local (Willits, CA) PEG (Public Access) station. I?ve thought little about the connection twixt the twain. KLLG-LP ~ 97.9 FM Lanny Cotler, General Manager A Project of Little Lake Grange #670 Willits Hometown Radio?Low Power, High Energy P.O Box 820, Willits, CA 95490 707-367-1812 LANNY at KLLG.ORG WWW.KLLG.ORG > On Dec 23, 2016, at 5:16 PM, Sabrina Roach via grc wrote: > > Also sent to NCEorg > > I'm game to work on fundraising for one, but first, let's map out exactly > what it would provide and what the costs are. > > As some folks don't feel like NFCB is a good fit, would Alliance for > Community Media be a fit? There are many PEG stations that have LPFMs. > Harrington handles their nonprofit back office and could do the same for a > national LPFM organization. > > Sabrina From sabrinadroach at gmail.com Fri Dec 23 18:02:12 2016 From: sabrinadroach at gmail.com (Sabrina Roach) Date: Fri, 23 Dec 2016 21:02:12 -0500 Subject: [grc] National LPFM Org In-Reply-To: <969DD975-C4C3-4B99-8C06-DBE1237385D8@kllg.org> References: <969DD975-C4C3-4B99-8C06-DBE1237385D8@kllg.org> Message-ID: Lanny - I'm so excited to learn you're on a PEG board. It would be awesome if you replied back to the list about why you joined that board. Like how your LPFM and the PEG station serve community. I got an email from someone who wanted to know more about PEG, so I drafted a slightly different version of my last email: I'm game to work on fundraising for one, but first, let's map out exactly what it would provide and what the costs are. As some folks don't feel like NFCB is a good fit, would Alliance for Community Media be a fit? There are many PEG stations that have LPFMs. Harrington handles their nonprofit back office and could do the same for a national LPFM organization. For folks who are unfamiliar with PEG - it's Public Access Education and Government TV funded by cable franchise agreements. They are mission aligned with community radio but have exponentially more money. They also have a great deal to learn from community radio's individual giving programs and community engagement. It's not uncommon for PEG's to have annual operating budgets over a million and for their EDs to make 80-100K. Their equipment suppliers make more money available at the regional level for PEG gathering sponsorships than radio service and equipment companies do. I've been on the Alliance for Community Media NW Region Board for several years and just joined the Foundation of ACM board. At the regional organizing level, PEG sponsorship $ made it possible for us to do a NW Community Media Summit in 2015. We're producing one for March 2017 and are using it to expand the notion of what is community media and who makes it. It's a great way to strengthen relationships regionally so that we can support each other. In 2013 when the future of NFCB and the Alliance for Community Media at the national level were iffy, at the regional level we began to plan how we'd support each other. I think we've arrived at a time when NFCB and ACM are strong AND we need to think about what LPFM uniquely needs -- as well as how we're moving that mutual support forward at the national level and regionally. Sabrina On Fri, Dec 23, 2016 at 8:37 PM, Lanny Cotler wrote: > I?d love to learn more about how PEG stations and LPFMs work together. I > happen also to be on the board of our local (Willits, CA) PEG (Public > Access) station. I?ve thought little about the connection twixt the twain. > > > > > > > > > *KLLG-LP ~ 97.9 FM* > Lanny Cotler, General Manager > A Project of Little Lake Grange #670 > Willits Hometown Radio?Low Power, High Energy > P.O Box 820, Willits, CA 95490 > 707-367-1812 <(707)%20367-1812> > LANNY at KLLG.ORG > WWW.KLLG.ORG > > > > > > > On Dec 23, 2016, at 5:16 PM, Sabrina Roach via grc > wrote: > > Also sent to NCEorg > > I'm game to work on fundraising for one, but first, let's map out exactly > what it would provide and what the costs are. > > As some folks don't feel like NFCB is a good fit, would Alliance for > Community Media be a fit? There are many PEG stations that have LPFMs. > Harrington handles their nonprofit back office and could do the same for a > national LPFM organization. > > Sabrina > > -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: PastedGraphic-4.tiff Type: image/tiff Size: 68172 bytes Desc: not available URL: From mae at recnet.com Fri Dec 23 18:31:02 2016 From: mae at recnet.com (Michelle Bradley) Date: Fri, 23 Dec 2016 21:31:02 -0500 Subject: [grc] National LPFM Org In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: It is one thing to have an LPFM organization to gather and share war stories and come up with tips and perhaps exchange programming. *But what will happen when our spectrum and operating conditions are under threat? *With the new administration, there is a potential of a treat to NCE broadcasters mainly due to the GOP's hatred of NPR and the non-NPR NCE stations may get dragged through the mud. The only thing that could save us from that is the large number of Christian NCE stations that would also get dragged through the mud with any changes at the FCC (and we know they don't want a "war of Christianity".) With that said, I saw someone post on here earlier that LPFM is nothing like full-power (NCE) stations. That is a very inaccurate statement from a policy standpoint. *LPFM is an NCE station with a smaller reach and fewer rules.* All rules related to underwriting, fundraising, etc. that apply to full-power NCE stations also apply to LPFM. If issues come up, will this new LPFM organization have the resources available to put feet on the street in DC? Do you want to run the risk of losing something because there is a conflicting opinion between two groups that are perceived to advocate for non-commercial radio? We lost LP-250 in 2012 because of a similar situation. I have been working closely with the NFCB to make them more LPFM accommodating. There are some out there who are opposed to the NFCB based on incidents that took place several years ago under a different leadership structure. Sally and Ernesto are really working to help get LPFM better supported within the organization. This will happen faster if we demonstrate willingness through our numbers. "LPFM" is a service class, just like D, A, C3, C2, C1, C0, C, B1 and B. We should be looking at the type of station, which if you are subscribed to this list, you are likely a secular *community radio station*. Community radio stations come in all shapes and sizes. The policy issues that face LPFM stations are likely the same as those that also impact full-power NCE stations. Also think about this. A large majority of full-power NCE stations that are represented by organizations like NFCB are in the 88~92 MHz spectrum (the reserved band) while a large majority of LPFM stations are in the 92~108 MHz spectrum. LPFM's "enemy" is not the NCE stations, it is the commercial FM stations represented by the NAB. Myself, I would rather see a single *well-established* organization approach the FCC with a message supportive of all secular community stations. Since Prometheus has been narrowed down to two people and no longer has the funding or infrastructure to advocate much beyond the internet (which is similar to the situation that I am in), they are no longer an option without a major infusion. Despite the number of LPFM stations out there, they are spread among six different segments and those stations that would like subscribe to this list (in the "community radio" and "cause based" segments) are in the minority (where "faith-based") has the biggest piece of the pie. Some LPFMs that I spoke to are concerned about NFCB's $500 low-tier membership rate. So, if a new LPFM organization was to enter with a lower membership rate, will they be able to sustain and have the resources to provide services to their membership and be able to still provide advocacy? It's going to be a tough stretch if you ask me. Organizations like the ARRL are able to sustain with low(er) membership fees because of the large number of licensed hams that could be potential members. There is strength in numbers. I would rather strengthen an existing organization. Get pro-LPFM people on their board to further that organization's support of LPFM. The only (existing) organization that I feel that LPFM stations can fit into on a nationwide basis is the NFCB. If LPFM does decide to establish their own organization, I will support it but I do feel that you will be shooting yourself in the foot if you expect such an organization to be ready to address policy issues. Just my two cents worth here. Have a happy holiday season everyone. In 2017, we need to focus on getting LPFM stations up and running so we can eventually have these stations in an organization whether it's through an established one like NFCB or an LPFM-only one. I will be spending 2017 chugging policy and hoping the FCC does not act negatively on LPFM (or NCE in general). Michelle Bradley Founder REC Networks http://recnet.com =m ** On 12/23/2016 8:16 PM, Sabrina Roach via grc wrote: > Also sent to NCEorg > > I'm game to work on fundraising for one, but first, let's map out exactly > what it would provide and what the costs are. > > As some folks don't feel like NFCB is a good fit, would Alliance for > Community Media be a fit? There are many PEG stations that have LPFMs. > Harrington handles their nonprofit back office and could do the same for a > national LPFM organization. > > Sabrina > _______________________________________________ > grc mailing list > grc at maillist.peak.org > http://maillist.peak.org/mailman/listinfo/grc From loonfoot at gmail.com Fri Dec 23 18:59:17 2016 From: loonfoot at gmail.com (Robert Park) Date: Fri, 23 Dec 2016 20:59:17 -0600 Subject: [grc] National LPFM Org In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I would like to see a NFCB membership fee for LPFMs based on a percentage of staff salaries paid by the station. (That would be $0 for those of us with no paid staff, and should be well below $500 for stations with a single part-time staff person.) For the Madison WI area we have an association of area community LPFM stations, with our first newsletter due out in January. (See http://lpfm.madisonwi.us/.) On Fri, Dec 23, 2016 at 8:31 PM, Michelle Bradley via grc < grc at maillist.peak.org> wrote: > It is one thing to have an LPFM organization to gather and share war > stories and come up with tips and perhaps exchange programming. *But what > will happen when our spectrum and operating conditions are under threat? > > *With the new administration, there is a potential of a treat to NCE > broadcasters mainly due to the GOP's hatred of NPR and the non-NPR NCE > stations may get dragged through the mud. The only thing that could save us > from that is the large number of Christian NCE stations that would also get > dragged through the mud with any changes at the FCC (and we know they don't > want a "war of Christianity".) > > With that said, I saw someone post on here earlier that LPFM is nothing > like full-power (NCE) stations. That is a very inaccurate statement from a > policy standpoint. *LPFM is an NCE station with a smaller reach and fewer > rules.* All rules related to underwriting, fundraising, etc. that apply to > full-power NCE stations also apply to LPFM. > > If issues come up, will this new LPFM organization have the resources > available to put feet on the street in DC? Do you want to run the risk of > losing something because there is a conflicting opinion between two groups > that are perceived to advocate for non-commercial radio? We lost LP-250 > in 2012 because of a similar situation. > > I have been working closely with the NFCB to make them more LPFM > accommodating. There are some out there who are opposed to the NFCB based > on incidents that took place several years ago under a different leadership > structure. Sally and Ernesto are really working to help get LPFM better > supported within the organization. This will happen faster if we > demonstrate willingness through our numbers. > > "LPFM" is a service class, just like D, A, C3, C2, C1, C0, C, B1 and B. > We should be looking at the type of station, which if you are subscribed to > this list, you are likely a secular *community radio station*. Community > radio stations come in all shapes and sizes. The policy issues that face > LPFM stations are likely the same as those that also impact full-power NCE > stations. > > Also think about this. A large majority of full-power NCE stations that > are represented by organizations like NFCB are in the 88~92 MHz spectrum > (the reserved band) while a large majority of LPFM stations are in the > 92~108 MHz spectrum. LPFM's "enemy" is not the NCE stations, it is the > commercial FM stations represented by the NAB. > > Myself, I would rather see a single *well-established* organization > approach the FCC with a message supportive of all secular community > stations. Since Prometheus has been narrowed down to two people and no > longer has the funding or infrastructure to advocate much beyond the > internet (which is similar to the situation that I am in), they are no > longer an option without a major infusion. > > Despite the number of LPFM stations out there, they are spread among six > different segments and those stations that would like subscribe to this > list (in the "community radio" and "cause based" segments) are in the > minority (where "faith-based") has the biggest piece of the pie. Some > LPFMs that I spoke to are concerned about NFCB's $500 low-tier membership > rate. So, if a new LPFM organization was to enter with a lower membership > rate, will they be able to sustain and have the resources to provide > services to their membership and be able to still provide advocacy? It's > going to be a tough stretch if you ask me. Organizations like the ARRL are > able to sustain with low(er) membership fees because of the large number of > licensed hams that could be potential members. > > There is strength in numbers. I would rather strengthen an existing > organization. Get pro-LPFM people on their board to further that > organization's support of LPFM. The only (existing) organization that I > feel that LPFM stations can fit into on a nationwide basis is the NFCB. > > If LPFM does decide to establish their own organization, I will support it > but I do feel that you will be shooting yourself in the foot if you expect > such an organization to be ready to address policy issues. > > Just my two cents worth here. Have a happy holiday season everyone. In > 2017, we need to focus on getting LPFM stations up and running so we can > eventually have these stations in an organization whether it's through an > established one like NFCB or an LPFM-only one. I will be spending 2017 > chugging policy and hoping the FCC does not act negatively on LPFM (or NCE > in general). > > Michelle Bradley > Founder > REC Networks > http://recnet.com > > =m > > ** > > On 12/23/2016 8:16 PM, Sabrina Roach via grc wrote: > >> Also sent to NCEorg >> >> I'm game to work on fundraising for one, but first, let's map out exactly >> what it would provide and what the costs are. >> >> As some folks don't feel like NFCB is a good fit, would Alliance for >> Community Media be a fit? There are many PEG stations that have LPFMs. >> Harrington handles their nonprofit back office and could do the same for a >> national LPFM organization. >> >> Sabrina >> _______________________________________________ >> grc mailing list >> grc at maillist.peak.org >> http://maillist.peak.org/mailman/listinfo/grc >> > > _______________________________________________ > grc mailing list > grc at maillist.peak.org > http://maillist.peak.org/mailman/listinfo/grc > From mae at recnet.com Fri Dec 23 20:43:41 2016 From: mae at recnet.com (Michelle Bradley) Date: Fri, 23 Dec 2016 23:43:41 -0500 Subject: [grc] National LPFM Org In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: If there was a dedicated LPFM-only national membership organization, how much would you be willing to budget per year for membership? =m On 12/23/2016 9:59 PM, Robert Park wrote: > I would like to see a NFCB membership fee for LPFMs based on a > percentage of staff salaries paid by the station. (That would be $0 > for those of us with no paid staff, and should be well below $500 for > stations with a single part-time staff person.) > > For the Madison WI area we have an association of area community LPFM > stations, with our first newsletter due out in January. (See > http://lpfm.madisonwi.us/.) > > On Fri, Dec 23, 2016 at 8:31 PM, Michelle Bradley via grc > > wrote: > > It is one thing to have an LPFM organization to gather and share > war stories and come up with tips and perhaps exchange > programming. *But what will happen when our spectrum and operating > conditions are under threat? > > *With the new administration, there is a potential of a treat to > NCE broadcasters mainly due to the GOP's hatred of NPR and the > non-NPR NCE stations may get dragged through the mud. The only > thing that could save us from that is the large number of > Christian NCE stations that would also get dragged through the mud > with any changes at the FCC (and we know they don't want a "war of > Christianity".) > > With that said, I saw someone post on here earlier that LPFM is > nothing like full-power (NCE) stations. That is a very inaccurate > statement from a policy standpoint. *LPFM is an NCE station with a > smaller reach and fewer rules.* All rules related to > underwriting, fundraising, etc. that apply to full-power NCE > stations also apply to LPFM. > > If issues come up, will this new LPFM organization have the > resources available to put feet on the street in DC? Do you want > to run the risk of losing something because there is a conflicting > opinion between two groups that are perceived to advocate for > non-commercial radio? We lost LP-250 in 2012 because of a > similar situation. > > I have been working closely with the NFCB to make them more LPFM > accommodating. There are some out there who are opposed to the > NFCB based on incidents that took place several years ago under a > different leadership structure. Sally and Ernesto are really > working to help get LPFM better supported within the > organization. This will happen faster if we demonstrate > willingness through our numbers. > > "LPFM" is a service class, just like D, A, C3, C2, C1, C0, C, B1 > and B. We should be looking at the type of station, which if you > are subscribed to this list, you are likely a secular *community > radio station*. Community radio stations come in all shapes and > sizes. The policy issues that face LPFM stations are likely the > same as those that also impact full-power NCE stations. > > Also think about this. A large majority of full-power NCE > stations that are represented by organizations like NFCB are in > the 88~92 MHz spectrum (the reserved band) while a large majority > of LPFM stations are in the 92~108 MHz spectrum. LPFM's "enemy" is > not the NCE stations, it is the commercial FM stations represented > by the NAB. > > Myself, I would rather see a single *well-established* > organization approach the FCC with a message supportive of all > secular community stations. Since Prometheus has been narrowed > down to two people and no longer has the funding or infrastructure > to advocate much beyond the internet (which is similar to the > situation that I am in), they are no longer an option without a > major infusion. > > Despite the number of LPFM stations out there, they are spread > among six different segments and those stations that would like > subscribe to this list (in the "community radio" and "cause based" > segments) are in the minority (where "faith-based") has the > biggest piece of the pie. Some LPFMs that I spoke to are > concerned about NFCB's $500 low-tier membership rate. So, if a > new LPFM organization was to enter with a lower membership rate, > will they be able to sustain and have the resources to provide > services to their membership and be able to still provide > advocacy? It's going to be a tough stretch if you ask me. > Organizations like the ARRL are able to sustain with low(er) > membership fees because of the large number of licensed hams that > could be potential members. > > There is strength in numbers. I would rather strengthen an > existing organization. Get pro-LPFM people on their board to > further that organization's support of LPFM. The only (existing) > organization that I feel that LPFM stations can fit into on a > nationwide basis is the NFCB. > > If LPFM does decide to establish their own organization, I will > support it but I do feel that you will be shooting yourself in the > foot if you expect such an organization to be ready to address > policy issues. > > Just my two cents worth here. Have a happy holiday season > everyone. In 2017, we need to focus on getting LPFM stations up > and running so we can eventually have these stations in an > organization whether it's through an established one like NFCB or > an LPFM-only one. I will be spending 2017 chugging policy and > hoping the FCC does not act negatively on LPFM (or NCE in general). > > Michelle Bradley > Founder > REC Networks > http://recnet.com > > =m > > ** > > On 12/23/2016 8:16 PM, Sabrina Roach via grc wrote: > > Also sent to NCEorg > > I'm game to work on fundraising for one, but first, let's map > out exactly > what it would provide and what the costs are. > > As some folks don't feel like NFCB is a good fit, would > Alliance for > Community Media be a fit? There are many PEG stations that > have LPFMs. > Harrington handles their nonprofit back office and could do > the same for a > national LPFM organization. > > Sabrina > _______________________________________________ > grc mailing list > grc at maillist.peak.org > http://maillist.peak.org/mailman/listinfo/grc > > > > _______________________________________________ > grc mailing list > grc at maillist.peak.org > http://maillist.peak.org/mailman/listinfo/grc > > > From bame at riverrock.org Sun Dec 25 07:14:05 2016 From: bame at riverrock.org (Paul Bame) Date: Sun, 25 Dec 2016 10:14:05 -0500 Subject: [grc] National LPFM Org In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <480606566b8cf7af03bef03760f0ed6b@riverrock.org> I'd like to share my particular view of the Prometheus effort cleverly-named CORASON (Community Radio Solidarity Network) by Allan Gomez, which never quite got the organizing capacity it needed to thrive because the post-2013 LPFM world was incredibly consuming and the big Prometheus grants ran out. This is my view of it, not that of Prometheus, to be clear. CORASON was to start by Prometheus offering valuable services (education, discount FCC services, alert service, free and low-rate consulting, an audio training and sharing network) to address the obvious short-term immediate needs -- based on our daily interactions with stations about what they need plus our well-educated guesses. AND SIMULTANEOUSLY doing so by organizing peer relations among LPFMs into a solidarity network. This network was the goal -- it would be strong and effective and lead itself. This model is not common that I know of in the mainstream US world, and the organizing would need to be carefully designed and tireless at first. It might look initially like a Prometheus-led network; but the goal was the obsolescence of our role. Like the "inverted pyramid" management practiced by some station managers, our role would no longer be to lead but rather to support (which wouldn't be as attractive to traditional funders probably). As the network grew powerful, Prometheus would continue to exist, or not, at the network's direction and support, as a client of that network. Prometheus' work then would be absolutely relevant based on the live needs of that LPFM network rather than our own very-well-educated guesses. Our organization's natural prioritization of the continuing of our organization itself would be attenuated if not disappear, hence we could stop trying to come up with moneymaking ideas and twist ourselves into being attractive to grantors. This could lead to a sustainable way to support policy work for example -- instead of trying to sell the funding of that work to foundations or even to stations, the need would galvanize out of the common interest of LPFMs (and potentially others) who had enough (meager) resources together to make it happen. Also in the Resident Chump era, a solidarity network would be tons more resilient than our current landscape where taking out a few of our expert organizations would be easy and cause a rather terrible blow to grassroots radio. It is no coincidence that solidarity networks are what survives and sometimes beats tyranny. I'm not sure what all that means to the current discussion, but I really wanted to share it. To repeat: this is my view of a Prometheus idea and is definitely different than other Prometheans who were in the room, so I do not speak for Prometheus in this. From bame at riverrock.org Sun Dec 25 08:12:32 2016 From: bame at riverrock.org (Paul Bame) Date: Sun, 25 Dec 2016 11:12:32 -0500 Subject: [grc] National LPFM Org In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <87e3f21cfcdef48e52f164e941bf45aa@riverrock.org> Whether NFCB is a decent fit is a complicated question and I'm open to learning that my hesitations are out of place. My concerns are not entirely rational and come as a result of two things 1. I believe that to thrive with a huge if not 100% volunteer base, that LPFMs are going to need nontraditional structures even more than "normal" grassroots radio station -- that GRC's values[1] in organizational structure and programming values are far more important to LPFMs than ever. 2. NFCB in the past was anathema to those values, which was a driving force for forming GRC. The paper by Marty and Cathy on the genesis of GRC is hard to find, but I host a copy on an old web site. It is _full_ of amazing and important reading in my opinion: http://savegrassrootsradio.org/wiki/GrassrootsRadioMovement Not clear in that paper is what was going on, and went on, among radio stations and networks. I lost years of happy life, the radio station I co-founded, good friends, and personal safety in my home community, due to a struggle which mirrored all of those which were ignited by the NFCB/CPB Healthy Station Project specifically and the values it promoted more generally; and I'm only one of many. To be fair, NFCB is very different than they used to be, with great people in the right places, and have done and are doing some awesome things, and understand the previous rift very well. Still I recommend digesting the paper above, and if you find yourself drawn to "grassroots radio" values, to really make sure that NFCB embraces (and teaches) those values; or beware that you will have to constantly and consciously counterbalance with your own values while using NFCB's valuable resources or you may slide into the abyss which consumed other radio stations. [1] To those coming only recently to GRC, the values expressed in the paper above may not be apparent if all you've seen is the conferences. From mbbm at brownbroadcast.com Sun Dec 25 13:13:52 2016 From: mbbm at brownbroadcast.com (Betty McArdle) Date: Sun, 25 Dec 2016 13:13:52 -0800 Subject: [grc] National LPFM Org In-Reply-To: <87e3f21cfcdef48e52f164e941bf45aa@riverrock.org> References: <87e3f21cfcdef48e52f164e941bf45aa@riverrock.org> Message-ID: <79BF8158CDE349E48097E7089B163F6F@Rabido2> I have thought about this idea a lot. I would prefer to work with NFCB (and help to provide funds) to enable them to provide the services LPFMs need at an affordable level of dues. I have been involved in starting a new organization and there is a lot to it, a lot! The money and time it would take to start a new group would be better served diversifying NFCB. NFCB is already at a point where it can be at the table influencing what takes place in Washington, D.C. Let's put our energy, time and money into bringing on another staff person at NFCB who would specialize in LPFM. I don't know what Alliance for Community Media could provide for LPFMs. Current members of NFCB enjoy such benefits as negotiated music licensing costs, group buys, important legal updates, resources to raise money and best practices to assist station leaders and volunteers to be more effective and work smarter, downloads of critical documents, legal and underwriting handbooks, educational webinars, NFCB helps educate member stations about compliance issues, trends and initiatives you can apply to your own community radio station, a variety of discounts and services to community radio stations. SoundExchange, Pop Up Archive transcription tools, streaming, Spinitron and gear are among the many resources member stations get at reduced rates as members, email listserve - a fantastic place to get advice from stations like yours, to ask colleagues how to deal with various questions, and learn about opportunities for your organization to do what it does even better and more effectively, NFCB partners with media organizations to give member stations a seat at the table when it is time to understand the community radio space, its history and its needs,the annual conference comes to its member stations often at discounted rates. I got much of this information from the NFCB website. Much of it I already knew as an NFCB member. I would hate to see a further division grow between full-power community radio stations and LPFM community radio stations. They are all community radio stations. Please think this through before making a decision about trying to start a new organization. Betty McArdle Community Media Assistance Project (CMAP) betty at c-map.org This email has also been sent to the NCE listserv. -----Original Message----- From: grc [mailto:grc-bounces at maillist.peak.org] On Behalf Of Paul Bame via grc Sent: Sunday, December 25, 2016 8:13 AM To: Sabrina Roach Cc: owner-grc at peak.org Subject: Re: [grc] National LPFM Org Whether NFCB is a decent fit is a complicated question and I'm open to learning that my hesitations are out of place. My concerns are not entirely rational and come as a result of two things 1. I believe that to thrive with a huge if not 100% volunteer base, that LPFMs are going to need nontraditional structures even more than "normal" grassroots radio station -- that GRC's values[1] in organizational structure and programming values are far more important to LPFMs than ever. 2. NFCB in the past was anathema to those values, which was a driving force for forming GRC. The paper by Marty and Cathy on the genesis of GRC is hard to find, but I host a copy on an old web site. It is _full_ of amazing and important reading in my opinion: http://savegrassrootsradio.org/wiki/GrassrootsRadioMovement Not clear in that paper is what was going on, and went on, among radio stations and networks. I lost years of happy life, the radio station I co-founded, good friends, and personal safety in my home community, due to a struggle which mirrored all of those which were ignited by the NFCB/CPB Healthy Station Project specifically and the values it promoted more generally; and I'm only one of many. To be fair, NFCB is very different than they used to be, with great people in the right places, and have done and are doing some awesome things, and understand the previous rift very well. Still I recommend digesting the paper above, and if you find yourself drawn to "grassroots radio" values, to really make sure that NFCB embraces (and teaches) those values; or beware that you will have to constantly and consciously counterbalance with your own values while using NFCB's valuable resources or you may slide into the abyss which consumed other radio stations. [1] To those coming only recently to GRC, the values expressed in the paper above may not be apparent if all you've seen is the conferences. _______________________________________________ grc mailing list grc at maillist.peak.org http://maillist.peak.org/mailman/listinfo/grc From shhhhh at sonic.net Mon Dec 26 18:05:28 2016 From: shhhhh at sonic.net (shhhhh) Date: Mon, 26 Dec 2016 18:05:28 -0800 Subject: [grc] How much bandwidth to run a VPN? In-Reply-To: <8ab6a4ec284dbb739f55c8fe17eff210@kxcj.org> References: <8ab6a4ec284dbb739f55c8fe17eff210@kxcj.org> Message-ID: Howdy collective expert mind! How much bandwidth do we need to run a VPN as our STL? We are also building a microwave STL but it's taking longer than we planned-- of course! And yes, both ends will be on the same network. Related to this, the (very) local ISP is offering us public or private static IPs-- which is better/worse? We're trying to get on-air *this* week-- yikes! /Keeeth Station Manager KXCJ-LP Cave Junction, OR 105.7FM o:(541)512-KXCJ keeeth[at]kxcj.org ...community-based radio by, for, and about the Illinois Valley! From simon at kmud.org Tue Dec 27 10:18:47 2016 From: simon at kmud.org (Simon Frech) Date: Tue, 27 Dec 2016 10:18:47 -0800 Subject: [grc] How much bandwidth to run a VPN? In-Reply-To: References: <8ab6a4ec284dbb739f55c8fe17eff210@kxcj.org> Message-ID: <776D4127-8E60-4198-ADED-1BCAB7B073D8@kmud.org> Keeeth, Are you sending a full WAV stream, like CD quality, uncompressed 16kHz, 44.1 kilobits per second? I found this calculator http://www.theaudioarchive.com/TAA_Resources_File_Size.htm#Bit_Rate_Tutorial and it tells me that this would take 1411.20kbps, or 1.4112mbps. You?d want to have some extra, so if the ISP can give you 2mbps I think you?d be fine, and you can use the same link for the telemetry, i.e. access the transmitter remote control and look at the codec. A VPN would make it more secure, it?s like your own line on someone else?s network. If you have a public IP address it?s easy for you to access the transmitter from anywhere, but that also makes it more vulnerable to hacking. The private email address would just be on the ISP?s network, you?d have to be on that network to access the transmitter, unless you set up your own network bridge. Hopefully someone else will weigh in and make sure I?m correct on this. Congratulations on almost being on the air! Simon > On Dec 26, 2016, at 6:05 PM, shhhhh via grc wrote: > > > > Howdy collective expert mind! > > How much bandwidth do we need to run a VPN as our STL? We are also > building a microwave STL but it's taking longer than we planned-- of > course! And yes, both ends will be on the same network. > > Related to this, the (very) local ISP is offering us public or private > static IPs-- which is better/worse? > > We're trying to get on-air *this* week-- yikes! > > /Keeeth > Station Manager > KXCJ-LP Cave Junction, OR 105.7FM > o:(541)512-KXCJ keeeth[at]kxcj.org > ...community-based radio by, for, and about the Illinois Valley! > _______________________________________________ > grc mailing list > grc at maillist.peak.org > http://maillist.peak.org/mailman/listinfo/grc From ad253 at freeelectron.net Tue Dec 27 21:00:11 2016 From: ad253 at freeelectron.net (al davis) Date: Wed, 28 Dec 2016 00:00:11 -0500 Subject: [grc] How much bandwidth to run a VPN? In-Reply-To: References: <8ab6a4ec284dbb739f55c8fe17eff210@kxcj.org> Message-ID: <20161228000011.24bebe88@swag.freeelectron.net> On Mon, 26 Dec 2016 18:05:28 -0800 shhhhh via grc wrote: > Related to this, the (very) local ISP is offering us public or private > static IPs-- which is better/worse? "static" vs "dynamic" IP .. The IP number is like a phone number for your computer. "Static" means it is always the same. "Dynamic" means it can change without notice, and often does. The significance is that when someone tries to call you, if the number is always the same they have a way to do that. If it changes, callers don't know what number to use so they can't call you. What this means in an internet perspective is that if you want anything available to the public, you need static. If all you do is call out, dynamic is ok .. so nearly all consumer internet is dynamic. To get static you need a business account, and need to pay extra for static. You might want static so you can access your studio or transmitter from home. From ad253 at freeelectron.net Tue Dec 27 21:19:23 2016 From: ad253 at freeelectron.net (al davis) Date: Wed, 28 Dec 2016 00:19:23 -0500 Subject: [grc] How much bandwidth to run a VPN? In-Reply-To: References: <8ab6a4ec284dbb739f55c8fe17eff210@kxcj.org> Message-ID: <20161228001923.1d3af152@swag.freeelectron.net> On Mon, 26 Dec 2016 18:05:28 -0800 shhhhh via grc wrote: > How much bandwidth do we need to run a VPN as our STL? We are also > building a microwave STL but it's taking longer than we planned-- of > course! And yes, both ends will be on the same network. VPN doesn't give any clue about bandwidth needed. To do your STL, the bandwidth you need depends of the data rate of your stream. An uncompressed stream at 44 KHz needs about 1.5 mbits/sec, officially. If your actual usage is close to the channel capacity, you will occasionally get dropouts, so I recommend a capacity of around twice what you really expect to use. That would be about 3 mbit/sec for uncompressed. This is more than the usual home internet gives you. You can use less than that if you use data compression, such as MP3, Ogg-Vorbis, AAC, or Opus. Whatever you use, figure that your UP-link speed needs to be twice what you actually use. So, for a 300k MP3, figure you need 600k to avoid dropouts. A Barix will do this. If your net is less than that, you can use a lower rate, but the lower rate will have worse sound quality. It's up to you to decide what quality/bandwidth tradeoff works for you. In general, the higher the rate the better, and for a given rate Opus tends to sound best, with Ogg or AAC not quite as good as Opus, and MP3 worse. For MP3, I would figure 256k minimum. For Ogg, figure around 75k minimum. AAC needs a similar rate to Ogg. At low rates, as they degrade, Ogg degradation tends to sound "analog", AAC degradation (and more so MP3) tends to sound more synthetic. Which is better or worse is a matter of opinion. Conclusion .. the ordinary consumer internet will get your signal through with the right algorithms. You need to decide what quality is good enough. With so much stuff coming in as mp3, the STL is probably not the weak link most of the time. From sabrinadroach at gmail.com Wed Dec 28 15:08:42 2016 From: sabrinadroach at gmail.com (Sabrina Roach) Date: Wed, 28 Dec 2016 18:08:42 -0500 Subject: [grc] What is a trustworthy VPN? Message-ID: I'd love hivemind input on which VPN's they like. I'm a Riseup user for listservs I manage and am starting to use Signal for texting. If it's useful to know that to know where my values are. If I should also be looking at other products that are nonprofit and secure, lmk. I also would like to know what one pays for a good VPN. Thanks! Sabrina On Mon, Dec 26, 2016 at 9:05 PM, shhhhh via grc wrote: > > > Howdy collective expert mind! > > How much bandwidth do we need to run a VPN as our STL? We are also > building a microwave STL but it's taking longer than we planned-- of > course! And yes, both ends will be on the same network. > > Related to this, the (very) local ISP is offering us public or private > static IPs-- which is better/worse? > > We're trying to get on-air *this* week-- yikes! > > /Keeeth > Station Manager > KXCJ-LP Cave Junction, OR 105.7FM > o:(541)512-KXCJ keeeth[at]kxcj.org > ...community-based radio by, for, and about the Illinois Valley! > _______________________________________________ > grc mailing list > grc at maillist.peak.org > http://maillist.peak.org/mailman/listinfo/grc > From bame at riverrock.org Wed Dec 28 17:08:36 2016 From: bame at riverrock.org (Paul Bame) Date: Wed, 28 Dec 2016 20:08:36 -0500 Subject: [grc] What is a trustworthy VPN? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Trustworthy means different things to different people. If you mean reliable bandwidth all the time with few to no outages that's one thing. If you mean reliably anonymous that's another thing. If you mean you want a private VPN to connect your office and road-warrior seamlessly, that's another set of stuff. So VPN can be a fairly ambiguous term because VPNs are so broadly useful. Riseup runs a VPN which is probably a bit more reliably anonymous than some, given their values. In the past it has also sometimes been overloaded. I haven't used it in a while. Also beware that appears their canary died and what that might mean: https://riseup.net/canary I believe Wikileaks protected sources with some sort of double VPN arrangement. Tor is your friend for anonymity rather than a VPN. On 2016-12-28 18:08, Sabrina Roach via grc wrote: > I'd love hivemind input on which VPN's they like. > > I'm a Riseup user for listservs I manage and am starting to use Signal > for > texting. If it's useful to know that to know where my values are. If I > should also be looking at other products that are nonprofit and secure, > lmk. > > I also would like to know what one pays for a good VPN. > > Thanks! > Sabrina > > > On Mon, Dec 26, 2016 at 9:05 PM, shhhhh via grc > wrote: > >> >> >> Howdy collective expert mind! >> >> How much bandwidth do we need to run a VPN as our STL? We are also >> building a microwave STL but it's taking longer than we planned-- of >> course! And yes, both ends will be on the same network. >> >> Related to this, the (very) local ISP is offering us public or private >> static IPs-- which is better/worse? >> >> We're trying to get on-air *this* week-- yikes! >> >> /Keeeth >> Station Manager >> KXCJ-LP Cave Junction, OR 105.7FM >> o:(541)512-KXCJ keeeth[at]kxcj.org >> ...community-based radio by, for, and about the Illinois Valley! >> _______________________________________________ >> grc mailing list >> grc at maillist.peak.org >> http://maillist.peak.org/mailman/listinfo/grc >> > _______________________________________________ > grc mailing list > grc at maillist.peak.org > http://maillist.peak.org/mailman/listinfo/grc From ad253 at freeelectron.net Thu Dec 29 05:43:25 2016 From: ad253 at freeelectron.net (al davis) Date: Thu, 29 Dec 2016 08:43:25 -0500 Subject: [grc] What is a trustworthy VPN? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20161229084325.53a142b8@swag.freeelectron.net> On Wed, 28 Dec 2016 18:08:42 -0500 Sabrina Roach via grc wrote: > I'd love hivemind input on which VPN's they like. The only one worth using is the one you set up yourself. > I'm a Riseup user for listservs I manage and am starting to use Signal for > texting. If it's useful to know that to know where my values are. If I > should also be looking at other products that are nonprofit and secure, > lmk. That has nothing to do with VPN. VPN = "Virtual Private Network" is a way of extending your "Private Network" to multiple sites by tunneling through the public Internet. It makes it look like your multiple sites are all on the same private network, when they really are not. It is used to enhance security by making your stuff accessible at your multiple sites without directly exposing your stuff to the public Internet. If you know how to set one up, great. If you don't, you can do without. The cost of doing without is either that your stuff is only available where it physically is, or you expose it to the public Internet. Exposing your stuff to the public Internet may be the only way to do what you need to do. In this case, you can have some protection by choosing good passwords and using port mapping on your router. Almost any router, including the consumer ones, will do this. Paul mentioned: "Tor is your friend for anonymity rather than a VPN." If anonymous web surfing is what you want to do, yes. That's what Tor is for. That's not what VPN is for. So-called VPN and log-in services over the web are not really private. They are middle-men. They are less secure than exposing your stuff to the public Internet would be. > I also would like to know what one pays for a good VPN. Zero. It's either free software or should come with the operating system. From eugene at wcrsfm.org Thu Dec 29 09:06:49 2016 From: eugene at wcrsfm.org (Eugene Beer) Date: Thu, 29 Dec 2016 12:06:49 -0500 Subject: [grc] STL Bandwidth Message-ID: <00d801d261f5$f28e0080$d7aa0180$@wcrsfm.org> Keeeth and GRC, We use an old-fashioned telco DSL with no VPN to get our studio signal to our transmitter (128 Kbps stream). The DSL bandwidth is a very reliable and steady 2 Mbps download and 300 Kbps upload. The slow upload speed does degrade graphic performance of Windows Remote Desktop which we use fairly often, but it's bearable. Our transmitter site is not at a "home residence," so the one cable company that serves that area would require a "business" account at more than twice the DSL cost. Years ago we used an ISP providing 16 Mbps-rated cable service, but during high neighborhood usage times (4 pm weekdays, when kids got home from school), we would get break-ups and buffering delays. We used to pay extra for a static IP, but now use a dynamic one. Its address has only changed once during the past year when we rebooted the DSL modem, so it's not that big a concern since we can quickly remap the new IP to the DNS domain that we have control of (xxx.wgrn.org). Eugene Beer Chief Engr, WCRS-LP and WGRN-LP Columbus, OH From ad253 at freeelectron.net Sat Dec 31 06:29:49 2016 From: ad253 at freeelectron.net (al davis) Date: Sat, 31 Dec 2016 09:29:49 -0500 Subject: [grc] STL Bandwidth In-Reply-To: <00d801d261f5$f28e0080$d7aa0180$@wcrsfm.org> References: <00d801d261f5$f28e0080$d7aa0180$@wcrsfm.org> Message-ID: <20161231092949.4cd004d8@swag.freeelectron.net> On Thu, 29 Dec 2016 12:06:49 -0500 Eugene Beer via grc wrote: > We used to pay extra for a static IP, but now use a dynamic one. Its > address has only changed once during the past year when we rebooted the DSL > modem, so it's not that big a concern since we can quickly remap the new IP > to the DNS domain that we have control of (xxx.wgrn.org). "Your mileage may vary ..." One station I used to be involved with had two internets .. one cable, one DSL .. both standard, both dynamic. The cable kept its IP number all the time, through many reconnects over a long time. No need to pay extra for static here. The DSL would change several times per week, even in the middle of a session. If it was used to source a stream, every time the IP changed the stream would drop then reconnect with the new number. After a while, they decided to pay the extra to lock down the IP number, problem solved. There is a difference between true static IP and locking down the number on a DHCP server. True static IP usually gives you a protected subnet, and sometimes more than one number, so it is more expensive. For the usual case of a radio station needing something stable, usually locking down the DHCP is good enough. At the studio, the risk is small. At the transmitter, a surprise change of IP number may make it impossible to access anything there. With some kind of notification, this can be dealt with, but be sure to do it. From eugene at wcrsfm.org Sat Dec 31 08:13:33 2016 From: eugene at wcrsfm.org (Eugene Beer) Date: Sat, 31 Dec 2016 11:13:33 -0500 Subject: [grc] STL Bandwidth In-Reply-To: <20161231092949.4cd004d8@swag.freeelectron.net> References: <00d801d261f5$f28e0080$d7aa0180$@wcrsfm.org> <20161231092949.4cd004d8@swag.freeelectron.net> Message-ID: <00af01d26380$d5d7f770$8187e650$@wcrsfm.org> > For the usual case of a radio station needing something stable, usually locking down the DHCP is good enough. Good point, Al, I wasn't aware "locking down the DHCP" was available. When we had a static IP, I believe they provided 5 IP addresses. At that time our transmitter was at a City of Columbus Public Safety tower site (a water treatment plant under Homeland Security directives), so we needed to schedule a weekday-only escort to gain access to our transmitter. Not good if the IP were to change on us.... Eugene -----Original Message----- From: al davis [mailto:ad253 at freeelectron.net] Sent: Saturday, December 31, 2016 9:30 AM To: grc at maillist.peak.org Cc: Eugene Beer Subject: Re: [grc] STL Bandwidth On Thu, 29 Dec 2016 12:06:49 -0500 Eugene Beer via grc wrote: > We used to pay extra for a static IP, but now use a dynamic one. Its > address has only changed once during the past year when we rebooted > the DSL modem, so it's not that big a concern since we can quickly > remap the new IP to the DNS domain that we have control of (xxx.wgrn.org). "Your mileage may vary ..." One station I used to be involved with had two internets .. one cable, one DSL .. both standard, both dynamic. The cable kept its IP number all the time, through many reconnects over a long time. No need to pay extra for static here. The DSL would change several times per week, even in the middle of a session. If it was used to source a stream, every time the IP changed the stream would drop then reconnect with the new number. After a while, they decided to pay the extra to lock down the IP number, problem solved. There is a difference between true static IP and locking down the number on a DHCP server. True static IP usually gives you a protected subnet, and sometimes more than one number, so it is more expensive. For the usual case of a radio station needing something stable, usually locking down the DHCP is good enough. At the studio, the risk is small. At the transmitter, a surprise change of IP number may make it impossible to access anything there. With some kind of notification, this can be dealt with, but be sure to do it.