You simply hate US commercial radio, which explains your frequent nihilist rants here.
Actually I don't. I was simply posing a counterpoint to YOUR rant.
Where on God's green earth did you ever get the idea "the public is not compensated for use" of the radio spectrum? Have you never heard of spectrum auctions and annual spectrum use fees paid by every single freakin' radio station in the US?
OK...you're an owner. How much of your revenue goes into a spectrum fee? The Congrssional budget office says the spectrum fee brings in under $50 million a year. That's covering a $20 billion industry! There have been numerous proposals in Congress to increase the spectrum fee during the past ten years and none have passed. Those who object to the commercial use of the public airwaves (and I'm NOT one of them) feel the fee is way too low. The criticism, and you've no doubt heard it, is a radio station is a license to print money. Those with an agenda who can't own one object to commercial radio on that basis.
It's BILLIONS of dollars paid into the US Treasury annually directly related to use of the public airwaves, specifically, the RADIO spectrum.
I understand all that, but the commercial radio industry is NOT paying billions for the use of the spectrum. As I said, the figure is much lower than that. The issue here is commercial terrestrial radio.
And radio "should not be used for entertainment?" In The BigA's future world of radio, his legislative ban on "entertainment on the radio" will surely make for a must-hear product I'm sure.
Once again, this is not MY opinion, but that of numerous public interest groups who speak at these local FCC hearings that were held around the country. These hearings were held during the last two years in Seattle, Washington DC, Nashville, Portland Maine, and Chicago (among others). You can read transcripts of these hearings at fcc.gov. You can read about the Chicago hearing at StopBigMedia.com. You call them "nitwits?" Ironically, their URL is similar to StopIBOC.com.
I haven't proposed a ban on entertainment, but these groups are coming up with all kinds of new laws, and there are at least two Commissioners who attend these groups' conventions, and say they agree. These particular two Commissioners may find themselves in the majority in four months.
So I'd be a little concerned about what they think.
BTW: on another thread on this board, you brayed to the effect that "the FCC will not get involved" when it comes to cases of IBOC-AM adjacent channel interference. Actually, that - like many of your posts - is just made-up crap.
OK...so you came up with one example. Out of how many cases where interference has been claimed? To read your posts and others here, this interference is widespread. If so, why have there only been a couple of complaints to the agency charged with regulation of the airwaves?