What does all this mean?

The FCC recently released two Reports and Orders that pave the way for a low power non-commercial radio service after more than a decade of disputes with commercial radio licensees and translator applicants.  What this effectively means is local nonprofit entities will soon be able to apply for their own 100 watt FM radio stations.  You may have heard much fanfare surrounding the recent notice, after a previous rulemaking in July 2011, the Local Community Radio Act becoming a law at the opening of 2011, and a slough of other updates from the FCC over the past five years.  If you have been waiting around for the past decade wondering exactly why this ordeal is taking so long, we sympathize.  The slow-moving issue has a lot to do with political and engineering issues—two realms that have do not mesh well.

Let’s start at the beginning:

Creation of a FCC-sanctioned low power radio service (LPFM) is rooted in the ‘90’s.  In 1996 Congress passed the Telecommunications Act, opening the floodgates to massive consolidation of broadcast media ownership, stoking the disappearance of locally-owned media.  An unlicensed microradio movement gained momentum with Stephen Dunifer's Free Radio Berkeley at center stage as an example of what could be done.  At the beginning of a fight with the FCC, Dunifer's stint in court resulted in lower court rulings affording merit to the notion that restricting broadcast access has First Amendment implications.

Proposals for FCC rulemakings to develop a licensed low power radio service were submitted to the FCC in the late 90's, including one by Amherst Alliance.  Finally in 2000, a FCC Report and Order was released authorizing both 100-watt and 10-watt radio service.  The radio service utilized a simple methodology: all currently licensed radio channels had a specific radius (km) of protection.  If a channel could be found outside these protected areas, that frequency could be utilized for LPFM service (this is generally referred to as LPFM “spacing rules”).  Applications for LPFM licenses were only available during designated filing windows. 

When filing windows finally opened for the new low power channels, over 3000 applications were submitted.  In April 2001, the National Association of Broadcasters (NAB), representing commercial broadcasters, retaliated by encouraging Congress to pass The Radio Broadcasting Preservation Act—which severely limited LPFM spacing rules.  In simple terms, it required an LPFM station to have a minimum buffer space of three FM channels from commercial radio stations.  In early 2003, the FCC dismissed a large amount of LPFM applications applied for in 2000 that did not comply with the new spacing rules. The Broadcast Protection Act had made it so LPFM service could not fit into the broadcast spectrum in most urban areas.

In March 2003, the FCC opened a filing window for FM translators.  FM translators are licensed at up to 250 watts and used chiefly for rebroadcasting commercial stations in areas of poor coverage. More recently translators began rebroadcasting commercial HD-2 signals to create another analog FM channel and even rebroadcast existing AM stations on FM. Religious broadcast networks and public broadcasters use them as well. The most controversial aspect of translator service is that they can be attained by speculators, granted without cost, and then re-sold at a huge profit.  Translators can cover up to 5.5 times the area of an LPFM, but had been allowed channel spacing much more liberal than low-power stations.   Oddly enough, NAB is pro-translator, but anti-LPFM, defying the laws of physics.  Translators use a “contour-to-contour” based methodology for protecting licensed radio channels, while LPFM utilizes a less-accurate spacing formula for placement.

The 2003 translator filing window netted about 13,000 applications.  Roughly 4,000 were submitted by the same two entities.  Several other entities filed dozens of applications apiece.  The applicants virtually swiped every available open frequency on the FM dial in urban areas. 

In 2005, DC public interest law firm The Media Access Project drew attention to the trafficking scheme of three Idaho-based translator applicants who were systematically reselling the permits they were granted from the FCC.  REC Networks played a crucial role in analyzing the impact of the pending translator applications and alerting the FCC.  Soon afterward, the FCC announced a six-month freeze to evaluate the possible preclusive impact of translator grants on LPFM.

Since 2005, public comments have flown back-and-forth from translator applicants—who want the translator processing to continue—and LPFM advocates who claim that processing all the translators would not only have precluded LPFM licensing in urban areas, but was a poor way to allot the remaining available FM spectrum.

Finally in 2007 the FCC agreed to limit the impact of translator speculators and preserve some spectrum for future LPFM applicants. They planned to implement a ten-application cap for all pending translator applications.  This meant all translator applicants needed to pick a maximum of ten applications to be processed, while the rest of the pending applications were to be discarded.  This proposed rulemaking took until late 2010 to be resolved  since neither translator applicants nor LPFM advocates were excited about the protocol.

Concurrent to the long translator debate, LPFM advocates were attempting to get Congress to repeal the technical limitations passed under false pretenses in the Radio Broadcasting Preservation Act.  Without repealing the third adjacent channel protection stipulation, LPFM could not be implemented in urban areas.  Prometheus Radio Project was instrumental in fighting for this legislation.

On the cusp of the FCC voting to implement the ten-application translator processing cap, California-based Common Frequency submitted a study showing that if the FCC pursued the ten-cap, it would allow translator applicants to claim virtually all the radio channels within urban areas, killing LPFM before it could even be enacted.  Common Frequency’s work delayed the planned vote on ten cap processing that would have eviscerated the urban low power radio service.

In December 2010, legislation was passed in Congress to rectify the impact of the Radio Broadcasting Preservation Act.  The Senate passed the Local Community Radio Act (LCRA) which was soon after signed by the President soon after.

For the first half of 2011, the FCC looked for alternatives to ten cap translator processing to balance LPFM and translator services.  The LCRA, derived as a compromise between LPFM advocates and commercial broadcasters, contained language that both helped and limited LPFM.  First, the law stipulated that spectrum must be equally available for translator and LPFM service. Additionally the LCRA provided for“second adjacent waivers, which meant low-power service could be placed two channels away from full power commercial station, just like translators.  The ultimate goal for LPFM advocates was for LPFM service to take advantage of the same liberal “contour” methodology as translator service, putting the competing services on equal footing.  However, stipulated within the LCRA was a mandate that the FCC could not reduce the spacing separations between co-channel (the same frequency), and first adjacent channels.  This nullified the ability for LFPM service to be wedged-in in some urban markets like translators can.  Also, in areas of mountainous terrain, a channel may be wide open but the first adjacent and co-channel spacing may preclude the licensing an LPFM facility on the channel.

In July 2011, the FCC released a notice of proposed rulemaking that outlined a plan to reserve a certain amount of low-power channels for each radio market.  If a certain number of viable open LPFM channels could not be found within 31 x 31 grids centered on each radio market, all of the pending translator applications for the market would be dismissed.  LPFM advocates backed this plan. Full power radio licensees and pending translator applicants thought it went too far.

Finally on March 19, the FCC released two important documents pertaining to LPFM:

Fourth Report And Order And Third Order on Reconsideration

Fifth Report and Order, Fourth Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, and Fourth Order on Reconsideration

The first R&O assesses comments about translators vs. LPFM service, translator trafficking, and the use of FM translators to rebroadcast AM stations.  The second R&O primarily deals with technical and processing modifications specific to LPFM.

Rec Net has a comprehensive analysis on the rulemaking. 

Is your area considered a “limited” market or an “available” market? It is important to understand what the rulemaking means for LPFM opportunities in your community:

Fourth R&O:  This R&O further interprets the meaning of Section 5 of the LCRA as it pertains to a proposed FCC regimen for balancing pending translators and new LPFM service.  FCC has now designated “Spectrum Limited” (SL) and “Spectrum Available” (SA) markets related to LPFM channel availability.  The listing of these markets are available as appendices to the R&O here and here. What the FCC has done is framed a 31 x 31 grid (as measured by latitude/longitude coordinates) looking for a certain number of available open LPFM channels.  In specific markets where 75% of the regional population within that 31 x 31 grid resides in a smaller grid (21 x 21), the FCC will opt to use the smaller grid to look for LPFM availability.

In most markets, the determination of whether there are openings for LPFM is dependent on how many translator applications are pending in these markets. (LPFM and translators roughly utilize the same channels.)  If the FCC does not find enough open LPFM channels, they designate the market SL.  This means all the translators in that market will be dismissed to make room for LPFM opportunities.  The exception to translator dismissal is if a translator applicant shows it is not infringing upon a future LPFM licensing opportunity, In SA markets, the FCC will allow translator applications to continue to be processed.  What this means is there are currently translator applications bunched in groups that are competing for a limited amount of channels.  Those applications will either go to “auction”, with the highest bidder receiving the channel if all the applications in a group are commercial applicants (the non-commercial applicants in the group will be discarded), or the applications will go to a point system hearing if all the applicants are non-commercial. 

On top of the SL/SA markets, translator applicants will be limited to 50 applications to be processed nationally, and limited to one granted application per market.  In addition, the FCC is officially allowing any FM translator to be used in association with rebroadcasting an AM station.

Fifth R&O:  This R&O delves into the specific technical issues concerning LPFM:

Changes in relationships dealing with second and third adjacent channels:  The rulemaking intends to relax the requirement that LPFM has to be located on channels that are at least four adjacent channels distance from a licensed full power radio station.  The LCRA removes the third adjacent spacing consideration, which was originally mandated via the Radio Broadcasting Preservation Act. The FCC now is also authorized to give “second adjacent waivers,” meaning LPFM stations do not need to comply with second-adjacent channel spacing rules in certain circumstances.  Such waivers will open the airspace in congested urban markets.  The FCC is considering how decide what criteria should be taken into consideration when granting these waivers.  Currently, translators have second adjacent waivers if they can show the interference area is limited to areas with no population.

LP-10 and LP-250?:  Traditionally, LPFM has been implemented as a 100 watt radio service (LP-100) at a maximum antenna height of 30 meters in average terrain.  10 watt service (LP-10)  has never been implemented.  The current rulemaking asks if LP-10 should be permanently discontinued.  But LP-10 service is relevant.  In places like New York and San Francisco where there are not a lot of LP-100 channels (the New York/Brooklyn area has no LP-100 channels available), LP-10’s can be squeezed-in to serve dense populations of hundreds of thousands of people.  The Commission also asks whether a 250-watt low power service (LP-250) should be implemented.  LP-250 coverage would work well in low-density population areas.   

Eligibility:  The FCC is looking to fix loopholes in the local entity requirements for low power applicants.  The Commission is also looking to grant preferred status to Native Tribes, and other proposed measures to bolster Native licensing.   

Other measures:  FCC is proposing possible changes to the way it processes “mutually exclusive” applications (cases where two or more competing applicants apply for a radio channel), time-sharing agreements (when more than one entity shares time on an LPFM station), and LPFM-translator cross-ownership.

How can you get involved with the rulemaking?

The FCC allows the public to comment on rulemakings.  It is a two step-process.  The public can comment 30 days from when the rulemaking is published in the Federal Register.  Then within 45 days of being published within the Federal Register the FCC allows reply comments.  Reply comments are analysis of the other comments submitted.  As soon as comment dates are established use the FCC's Electronic Comment Filing System (ECFS).  A way to submit a comment is to make a pdf of your comment, go to the ECFS page, and click on "submit a filing".  On the next page type "99-25" under "Proceeding Number", and your contact information.

The availability of proposed LPFM service varies from city to city.  We advise you to check Recnet's channel predictor which depicts where LPFM service might be available within radio markets.  If there appear to be limited radio opportunities in your city, let the FCC know!

FCC VOTES TO PURSUE NEW RULES TO EXPAND LOW POWER RADIO TO URBAN AREAS
RULEMAKING IN RESPONSE TO COMMENTS SUBMITTED BY CA NONPROFIT COMMON FREQUENCY

“The Media Bureau has carefully reviewed the Common Frequency study.  It has found that the methodology is reasonable.”  

       - FCC's THIRD FURTHER NOTICE OF PROPOSED RULE MAKING, MM DOCKET 99-25 (FCC 11-105)

On Tuesday July 12, 2011 the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) voted for a proposed rulemaking that will  make room for new non-commercial Low Power FM (LPFM) broadcast channels in major urban areas.
 
Earlier this year, President Obama signed new legislation allowing for the proliferation of low power FM (LPFM) radio service—a service that was first proposed by the FCC in 2000.  Even with the legislation, no channels may have existed for new applicants in many major urban areas  - even before the FCC could open a filing window for them.
 
The debate lay over balancing the licensing of translator (repeater FM stations) and LPFM service.  Both services compete for the same FM channels.
 
Last year, the FCC indicated it would use a modified processing regime to license many of these translators. Common Frequency submitted studies to the FCC demonstrating that after licensing these translators according to the FCC's proposed protocol, almost no FM channels would be left for LPFM service in urban areas.  Common Frequency provided to the  FCC simulations and select market studies showing the impact of using the proposed “10-cap” processing proposal.
 
On July 12, the FCC voted on a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking addressing Common Frequency's concerns.  The FCC proposes balancing LPFM and translator service based upon research data including stipulating possible market-specific tiers for systematic dismissal of translator applications in order to preserve space for new LPFM service in major cities.  Such a proposal will lead to the proliferation of LPFM service in cities nationwide, Nonprofits, schools, and churches would thus have a true opportunity to apply for new radio stations to serve their cities.

Common Frequency's studies are available for viewing below:

Ex Parte Presentation September 27, 2010:  Model and Report of CF's Top 150 Market "Ten Cap" Simulation

Ex Parte Presentation November 12, 2010:  Study and Report of Select Markets as a Result of Previous Market Simulation

Ex Parte Presentation February 2, 2011:  Translator Precessing Cap Modification Simulation

Common Frequency's newest Board member, journalist Sue Wilson, was the guest for today's =Making Waves= on KDVS. We talked about an aggressive progressive named Ryan Clayton confronting Andrew Breitbart, the conservative provocateur, at the Netroots Nation conference last Friday. Sue was there.

Sue says Breitbart "is trying to run away from the monsters he's created." He is being sued by one of his victims, but his attacks on NPR, ACORN and Rep. Weiner are all considered successes. And she also debunks the myth of the focus group-tested meme that "the liberal media" controls American thinking.

Plus, we discussed the questionable judgment of CNN devoting so much airtime to Erick Erickson, another incendiary partisan allowed to, as David Brock of Media Matters says "disable journalism". Normally I devote my attention to local, independent public media but I think what's really important here is the outrage Sue speaks to, about what Breitbart represents in terms of the crumbling standards for information dissemination in our democracy.

And stay tuned because we wrapped the show with a clip from Wilson's documentary Broadcast Blues, a dramatic story of two journalists who were fired by a Fox affiliate for refusing to lie about a story on Monsanto the station preferred to silence. Sue took the film on an 11-city tour through Florida, encouraging more citizens to demand public interest obligations from broadcasters.

Listen HERE.

Learn all about the upcoming opportunity to apply for local community radio licenses on today's episode of =Making Waves= on KDVS. Featuring Tracy Rosenberg of Media Alliance, Vanessa Maria Graber of Prometheus and our own Todd Urick, the audio was recorded June 4th in San Francisco. Dave Id who posted more thorough coverage on Indybay, did the recording. Listen HERE.

To get started organizing for your own LPFM station, check out Radio Summer.

Tracy Rosenberg, Todd Urick, Sabrina Roach, Clay Leander, Gavin Dahl, Vanessa Graber, Jeff Shaw and Brandy Doyle were among the participants at the kick-off of Radio Summer, organized by Prometheus Radio Project. Hosted at the downtown San Francisco main library by Media Alliance, the event attracted more than 30 people. (No, we didn't already all know each other!) It was a fun, geeky and informative occasion. Particularly exciting was the presence of so many representatives from local online and unlicensed radio stations. Media Alliance just posted a video of the entire panel:

Radio Summer Bay Area from Media Alliance on Vimeo.

Irreverent world traveller Jim Ellinger, of Austin Airwaves infamy, joined Radioactive Gavin deep in the vinyl vault for this week's edition of =Making Waves= on KDVS. He teased me about Davis being "too clean" and complimented the town's reputation for great co-ops. Then we got down to business. He told us stories: rebuilding a Haitian radio station after the earthquake, showing up with a video camera while an FCC field agent was visiting a popular pirate radio operation, and helping out the fabulous microradio KFLIP. Ellinger says the FCC should grant licenses for emergencies or festival events on a 30-day basis. Listen HERE.

This week on =Making Waves= Radioactive Gavin from Common Frequency and Vanessa Maria Graber from Prometheus Radio Project journeyed down the road to Vallejo, CA for a tour of new community radio station KZCT. The station has been broadcasting on FM for 5 months now, but existed in its online form for 5 years while navigating FCC bureaucracy, supported by Common Frequency. We talked with OzCat Radio founders David Martin and Katie Martinelli about starting a new community radio station in a diverse city where only 16,000 out of 120,000 residents are registered to vote. "We plan to enlighten people," Martin said. "It's a bigger picture than just playing music on the radio." Listen HERE.

Not long before our visit, OzCat was the victim of racist tagging but they remain committed to their work, unfazed. Martin said of the station's apparent detractors, "they act out when they're scared of something so we got 'em scared. We grew strength from it." The station is nevertheless a huge success story in community media in Northern California. You can tune in to their great music programs HERE. When Vanessa and I walked into the building early Wednesday morning, co-founder Katie Martinelli was making breakfast in the large kitchen to feed some DJs. In the second half of the program, we clear up any misconceptions about whether the author of The Da Vinci Code did, in fact, help them start their station!

This week's =Making Waves= radio show on KDVS featured brilliant community radio champion Michelle Eyre of Rec Net. We spoke on the phone live on the air. In a letter to Congress this week, she wrote: "It is finally time to fix the non-commercial educational FM radio service, a service that means well but is currently being abused and in need of some tender loving care."

Considering last week's widely criticized rapture hoax, perpetrated by Harold Camping's 'mega-ministry' Family Stations, Eyre seeks limits to how many FM licenses these large satellite operations should be allowed to hold at the expense of local access to the public airwaves. Fighting for media justice for 25 years as a key researcher providing FCC commentaries, Eyre is also an outspoken LGBT advocate and the founder of J1 Radio.

She coined the term "Great Translator Invasion" and anyone interested in pursuing LPFM opportunities in the year ahead ought to get familiar with Rec Net's work on this important issue.

Listen HERE.

The last two editions of =Making Waves= on KDVS featured great audio clips. Last week's program featured audio from the National Conference for Media Reform of ColorLines Magazine publisher Rinku Sen along with journalist Laura Flanders. Listen HERE. This week's show featured 4 great clips. Gigi Sohn of Public Knowledge testifed against the AT&T merger with T-Mobile before the US Senate, earning coverage worldwide of her 'back to the future' phone stunt. Eli Pariser of MoveOn.org talked about the problem of online filter bubbles. Dr. Jared Ball's commentary "Who You Callin' A Pirate?" took on corporate control of culture. Rap News took on the assassination of Osama Bin Laden. Listen HERE.

Speaking at the opening plenary of the 2011 National Conference for Media Reform, hosted by Free Press, Laura Flanders is the host of Grit TV. The news and discussion program airs daily on Free Speech TV (which you can see on Channel 15 if you're a cable TV subscriber here in Davis) and also online at the Firedoglake blog. For years, she has hosted RadioNation, the nationally syndicated weekly radio program of The Nation magazine. She is also the author of Blue Grit: Making Impossible, Improbable and Inspirational Change in America, an investigation into what people at the grassroots know that Democratic Party leaders need to learn, and the Bush administration expose Bushwomen: Tales of a Cynical Species. Flanders was founding direc­tor of the Women’s Desk at the media watch group, Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting, where for more than 10 years she produced and hosted CounterSpin.

Speaking at the closing plenary of the same conference was Rinku Sen, the publisher of ColorLines Magazine as well as president and executive director of the Applied Research Center. A leading figure in the racial justice movement, she has woven together journalism and organizing to further social change for over 20 years. She is also the chair of the Media Consortium.

The FCC will soon open a rulemaking to decide how to process over 1000 pending applications for translators. The handling of these applications is the most significant question in the implementation of the Local Community Radio Act, because the outcome will determine whether any channels are available for low power stations in urban areas. Advocates fought to pass legislation for ten years because only 3.6% of nearly 12,000 Census-designated Urban Areas contain an LPFM station. Keeping LPFM out of urban areas disproportionately affects people of color and hurts diversity on the airwaves. Greater population density means big city stations will have the listeners, volunteers and community partnerships needed to serve as neighborhood hubs and literacy resources.

Brandy Doyle, policy director at Prometheus Radio Project and Common Frequency's Gavin Dahl posed for this photo outside the FCC in Washington, DC after visits with commissioners' staffers. Ours may have been the very last meeting with Commissioner Meredith Baker's staff before the announcement of her resignation as a regulator to join Comcast. We wondered why the staffers were acting so strangely! The Media and Democracy Coalition brought attention to LPFM as well as the public interest opposition to the proposed T-Mobile merger with AT&T during a day of advocacy. (*Gavin did not visit with any members of Congress or their staffs on the Hill during this trip, due to his Digital Arts Service Corps status.)

If you love underground radio, the opening of this week's radio program will give you chills. "It's a huge loss... The voice of the underground... Where else are you ever going to hear that?" This week's edition of =Making Waves= features Shelley Robinson, the director of Canada's national campus and community radio association, the NCRA. We talk about the forced closure of CKLN, 'the voice of the underground' in downtown Toronto, based at Ryerson University for over 25 years. As Shelley says on the show: "It had about 170 volunteers... a super diverse station... They shut down 6pm on a Friday with no big fanfare. A huge loss." CLICK HERE to listen.

Also, Robinson talks about the big controversy in the queer community over Dire Straits, the CAB's CBSC code and all the Canadian alphabet soup you can eat. 

Our friends at the Peace and Justice Center of Sonoma County in Santa Rosa hosted a workshop and discussion on Wednesday May 4th about grassroots fundraising, led by prominent local activist Carl Patrick. He instructed that grassroots fundraising is not just about getting money, it's about getting supporters more invested in your organization. Small donations allow your group more independence, whereas dependence on large foundations can be limiting. Shifting control requires creating a vision that's achievable, first, he said.

It was clear that the attendees shared discomfort with talking about money. We identified our fears: coming on too strong could offend, reluctance because others are also broke, butterflies about big donors and distaste for brazen schmoozing. We are sick of people with no money having to support grassroots groups. Charity rarely changes structural problems in society. We want to show people we care about their lives, not just their money. It isn't always easy to be concise, but telling our own stories feels so important. And of course there's the old catch-22, that it takes money to make money.

Carl told us that 7 out of 10 people in the US give money to nonprofits. 85% of the money donated comes from families with household incomes under $60K. Poor people give a higher percentage of their annual income. A total of $240B was given to nonprofits by private donors last year, according to stats from Kim Klein's 'Grassroots Fundraising Journal.' The biggest barrier is not asking.

Tips for making personal asks for financial support:

Ground yourself and think about what's going on in the world. Don't be on autopilot, find out why each donor will support the work that you do. Be cool and unattached to the outcome, give options. Be clear, concise and direct. Ask folks to give an amount that's meaningful to them. Be excited and thankful for whatever is given. Be prepared with other ways to get involved. And be sincere.

Common Frequency Technical Director Todd Urick led a workshop focused on the radio aspirations of students from UC-San Diego and UC-Merced at the semi-annual University of California Radio Network gathering over the weekend. 100 people from Berkeley, Irvine, Santa Cruz, and other campuses around the state converged in Santa Barbara for an all-day conference on Saturday April 30. It was inspiring meeting so many young people who are passionate about radio. The next morning Common Frequency conducted a "license brainstorm session" with students who Jennifer Waits described on Radio Survivor as "eager to learn how to move forward." Options for these fledgling groups include applying for LPFM channels next year or raising enough money to buy an existing signal.

Hosted by the mighty KCSB, ramping up to celebrate 50 years on the air, UCRN brought together student DJs and reporters from around the state. The keynote speech was delivered by USF professor Dorothy Kidd, who framed student radio in the context of international communications rights. Americans tend to take freedom of the press for granted, which is perilous for democracy. Connecting the recent sale of KUSF to global struggles for cultural expression, she outlined several key strategies for students to proactively defend their radio stations. As described by Jennifer Waits, they were:

1. Recognize the value of your station and make sure your administration appreciates your station

2. “If you’re not moving beyond your comfort level, you’re not doing a good job.”

3. Connect your station to specific "learning outcomes" on campus and if possible, have professors teach radio classes

4. Help to raise the profile of college and community radio by working with other stations and by reaching out to community groups, artists, musicians, citizen journalists and politicians in order to talk about the "poaching" of the left side of the dial.

Today's =Making Waves= radio show features highlights from the panel on UC-Davis campus called “Whose Stations? Our Stations! Community Voices, Educational Radio, and KUSF in Exile.” Hear professor and community media scholar Dorothy Kidd, communications attorney Alan Korn and KUSF music director Irwin Swirnoff discuss the battle for community and student radio in the city of San Francisco.

CLICK HERE to download the audio or you can open the link in a new window to stream it.

Before Alan Korn began practicing law and fighting for communications rights, he was a college radio DJ, music writer & longtime rock n roller whose past bands benefitted from getting their demos played on KUSF. At Common Frequency's event on April 23rd he explained the thinking behind the official petition to deny the transfer of KUSF's radio license with the Federal Communications Commission. 

Common Frequency was also pleased to host community media scholar and University of San Francisco professor Dorothy Kidd. She talked about building a campaign for a communications commons and how the sale of KUSF is an example of a media enclosure, or privatization of public resources.

I also wanted radio listeners to hear what Irwin Swirnoff from Save KUSF had to say about the importance of student media advocating on its own behalf. Thanks again to everyone who pledged their support to KDVS last week. Also, comments from panelist David Martin and moderator Tracy Rosenberg were left out of the broadcast for time consideration.

On Saturday evening, April 23th, 2011, Common Frequency hosted a benefit concert and panel discussion at the UC Davis Technocultural Studies building. We want to thank intern Sharmi Basu for producing an excellent event, and all the other people who made it happen. The video shot by Davis Media Access will be available soon. Meanwhile, even if you missed out on your chance to join us in person, it isn't too late to support Common Frequency with a financial contribution. CLICK HERE to donate.

Created 5 years ago by activist engineer Todd Urick and a group of dedicated volunteers, Common Frequency is a growing local nonprofit supporting innovative student and community-run radio, primarily on the West Coast. We're part of a national coalition touting the last opportunity to apply for free local broadcast licenses, thanks to the Local Community Radio Act, signed into law by President Obama earlier this year. Simultaneously, we're working with 20 nonprofit groups to help launch new FM radio stations in their communities. We have received funding for these projects from an AmeriCorps program called Transmission Project, as well as the Media Democracy Fund. We seek a new studio space, much-needed broadcast equipment, solar and wind power materials and increased staffing capacity.

Here's the video, filmed by Davis Media Access: