SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
In a speech given to the Future of Radio and Audio Symposium (PDF), Federal Communications Commission Chairman Ajit Pai encouraged smartphone makers to activate FM radio chips, but stopped short of supporting a government mandate to do so:
As you know, the vast majority of smartphones sold in the United States do, in fact, contain FM chips. The problem is that most of them aren't activated. As of last fall, only about 44% of the topselling smartphones in the United States have activated FM chips, and the percentage is lower in Canada. By comparison, in Mexico that number is about 80%. So it's not just that the United States and Canada could be doing better. We could be doing a lot better. It seems odd that every day we hear about a new smartphone app that lets you do something innovative, yet these modern-day mobile miracles don't enable a key function offered by a 1982 Sony Walkman.
You could make a case for activating chips on public safety grounds alone. The former head of our Federal Emergency Management Administration has spoken out in support of this proposal. The FCC has an expert advisory panel on public safety issues that has also advocated enabling FM radio chips on smartphones. It pointed out that, "[h]aving access to terrestrial FM radio broadcasts, as opposed to streaming audio services, may enable smartphone users to receive broadcast-based EAS alerts and other vital information in emergency situations—particularly when the wireless network is down or overloaded."
Moreover, most consumers would love to access some of their favorite content over-the-air, while using one-sixth of the battery life and less data. As more and more Americans use activated FM chips in their smartphones, consumer demand for smartphones with activated FM chips should continue to increase.
I'll keep speaking out about the benefits of activating FM chips. Having said that, as a believer in free markets and the rule of law, I cannot support a government mandate requiring activation of these chips. I don't believe the FCC has the power to issue a mandate like that, and more generally I believe it's best to sort this issue out in the marketplace. For despite the low numbers, we are seeing progress; in the last two years, the percentage of top-selling smartphones in the United States that have activated FM chips has risen from less than 25% to 44%.
Reported at Chicago Tribune and Recode.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by iamjacksusername on Monday February 20 2017, @03:19PM
In 2016, 191 million phones were sold in the North America. The RIAA wants a piece of that pie. I am sure there will be some "royalty" added to the sale of each smartphone once FM becomes mandatory.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/412212/global-smartphone-shipments-north-america/ [statista.com]
The broadcast industry is dying. I do not know anybody under the age of 60 that listens to Broadcast radio. Addtionally, many young people today do not own a car. For example, the only FM radio I own is the one that came with my car. Because of this, the broadcast industry is missing out on a whole demographic simply because they do not have access. The RIAA controls FM radio as they use it as a promotional tool so FM Radio broadcasters pay close to $0 in royalties. By including FM for free on the phone, the RIAA has a captive channel to groups they do not currently have access to.
Internet streaming is not the money maker the RIAA hoped it would be. It turns out that most people do not care so much about the music they listen to and are not willing to pay a monthly fee. So, it's back to the promotional model. There is a reason that YouTube has become the goto platform for music promotion that professional promoters are willing to pay to use: it is free to consume and ubiquitous.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 20 2017, @05:35PM
I sometimes download the pod cast of this American life, does that count as MAILCHIP radio?
(Score: 2) by mcgrew on Monday February 20 2017, @08:59PM
In 2016, 191 million phones were sold in the North America. The RIAA wants a piece of that pie. I am sure there will be some "royalty" added to the sale of each smartphone once FM becomes mandatory.
I don't think so, hardware manufacturers are far more politically connected than the RIAA, and that would raise the retail price of their phones with them getting no benefit. AFAIK the RIAA gets nothing from the sale of a radio, why should a radio in a phone be any different than a radio in a car or a pocket, sans phone?
mcgrewbooks.com mcgrew.info nooze.org
(Score: 2) by dry on Tuesday February 21 2017, @04:18AM
I'm under 60 and regularly listen to the radio as there isn't much else to listen to at home, bored of my music while driving and radio is about the only reasonably priced choice at my work. With the price of cell service in Canada, I've better things to do with my money.,
(Score: 2) by gidds on Tuesday February 21 2017, @02:50PM
I suspect this is a location-dependent issue. Here in the UK, radio listening is still pretty popular.
DAB is taking some share away from FM, but they're both free-to-air, broadcast media. (Many channels are also broadcast on Freeview, the terrestrial digital TV platform, ditto.)
[sig redacted]