Frank Baird says:

As a Christian, I know that every church or Christian organization I have belonged to would never stomp on others like this. You can’t convince people to believe in Christ while being a bad neighbor. If a “Christian” station does this, they are not really being Christian. There are lots of things today and in the past that label themselves Christian, but when compared to the Bible, are clearly revealed to be not what they claim.

Eugene Shubert says:

In other words, mass mediocrity is to be favored above student learning and the force of law effectively disallows the dissenting opinions of a minority.

zeke says:

Are these the same pseudo-christians cults who believe in the death penalty, carrying guns and killing for oil?

I dont think my god and their god have met, so Im pretty sure that screwing over some students isnt considered bad.

Obviousman says:

Many churches are a business. They should put Norwood 1st Baptist Church, Inc. or Norwood 1st Baptist Church, LLC. I’m surprised many aren’t again selling papal indulgences again.

Also, many stumped so hard for Bush that their tax exempt status should be yanked. Their should be no mandatory religion as only nuts want to live under a forced Christian version of Middle East regimes. Those who don’t believe in the separation of Church & State &/or the Constitution should pack their bags & go somewhere & form another country.

Lastly, as one smart con artist once said, “You want to be rich. Start a religion.” It may have been someone named L. Ron H*****rd…

Parallax Abstraction says:

“I guess the only student radio the FCC deems worthy is when the students are students of God.”

So much for Church & State.

Zoke says:

>>Are these the same pseudo-christians cults who believe in the death penalty, carrying guns and killing for oil?

No. They aren’t.

radiomike says:

A couple of things that are missed here…While I fully support WAVM’s efforts, an undertanding of the rules is order:

The station is a Class D station that was allowed to remain at 91.7, likely due to no other places for it to go. It was not protected from being bumped by new applicants, nor from incursion of interference from new applicants. With the applications being filed for new stations, 3 in total, including CSN, and UMASS, in addition to the tentative awardee, the station filed for the upgrade to Class A and 125 watts.

With the approval of the FCC’s point system, the criteria is clear. If you look at the FCC’s comparative process, before getting to point analysis, the first two criteria are service related to populations. In the FCC’s order, it states:

“In the present group, Living Proof would serve Lunenburg, Massachusetts, CSN International would serve Lexington, Massachusetts, the University of Massachusetts would serve Stow, Massachusetts, and NCE Station WAVM(FM), licensed to Maynard School Committee, serves Maynard, Massachusetts.
(Maynard School Committee proposes to make major modifications to existing station WAVM(FM). Accordingly, we consider only WAVM(FM)’s area of newly added service in our 307(b) analysis. See Reexamination of the Comparative Standards for Noncommercial Educational Applicants, 16 FCC Rcd 5074, 5094 (2001).)

Living Proof is the only applicant to claim that it would provide a new first or second NCE service to 10 percent of the population, and to at least 2,000 people, within its service area, and therefore, that it is eligible for a fair distribution preference. (Living Proof’s 60 dBu contour encompasses 38,111 people. Living Proof’s claimed aggregated first and second service is 25,567 people.)”

So, unless the other applicants, including WAVM, can prove that Living Proof’s Claim is false, they will lose. This is the only thing that WAVM can do, and it has to be at the “snapshot” of when the applications were filed, not now.

It did not even get to the points criteria, where established stations and organizations would have preference. Had all these stations been equal, and had gone to points, then WAVM would have likely had a preference. Immediately, CSN and Living Proof would be dropped out for lacking local presence. In the case of Diversity, again, WAVM would have won over UMASS. Sad to say, the supplemental filings were key in this regard in stating service populations.

Sad to say, WAVM’s claims of this “opens the floodgates for any other station to challenge the station’s license and take its frequency” Is not really valid, as they are a Class D station that did not have the protection in the first place, and sadly, this all could have been prevented, had the station followed through with its upgrade to Class A status in 1981. However, for whatever reason, the station did not complete its upgrade, and the permit expired in 1982. Had that happened, all of this would be moot.

I have only disdain for religious broadcasting and especially satellite fed broadcasts from afar. However, the FCC can not look at program content of a service, on the technical nature of the application. I hope the station finds a way to stay on the air, perhaps even “buying out” the winner.

J. says:

This whole situation sickens me. While the above poster is correct on a technical level, I still don’t see how the two stations can co-exist on the same channel with the proposed plans. The non-com band (88.1 thru 91.9) is already pretty crowded, but the religious organization can find another channel if they really wanted to. They’re not gonna bother, though, because another engineering study will cost them a lot of money. An angle the HS might want to pursue is the fact that if indeed this station will be re-broadcasting the organization’s network (full of your usual Dobson/Robertson-esque drivel) there won’t be any local staff, because everything can be operated remotely. They’ll have a little computer/satellite hands-off setup at the xmtr building, and perhaps a local contract engineer on call, and that’s it. They won’t be able to AFFORD to have a local studio and staff, they’re not going to want to spend the money on such a small station. How does it “Serve The Public Interest” (in FCC speak) to completely remove an established active radio station’s staff and operators? Here will be another signal that can be used to provide infrormation to the public that’s not even operated locally! Make these right-wing a-holes PROVE that they’re gonna be on hand 24/7 with a REAL business plan to run this station hands-on in the same fashion that the HS students do. I’ll betcha they won’t be able to do it. The bottom line, however, is that the Feds can do whatever the hell they WANT to do, regardless. And the current climate in Washington, unfortunately, dosen’t put these kids on an even playing field with the bible-thumpers. Non-commercial radio isn’t supposed to be about money and politics. I thought that was the whole point of it. It’s pretty sad.

radiomike says:

I would find it hard to believe that the FCC would grant two applications. The fact they were in an MX group speaks for itself. Perhaps some give on both parties can make this happen. However, I think most of the posts speak to while it is unfair, the compartive rules were drawn up to remove any bias to granting a station based on its programming or ownership. It was drafted to mazimize the spectrum use first. Thus, as claimed by Living Proof, they were the only one to claim first or second non-commercial service to 10% or more of the population. ON THIS BASIS ONLY, they win. The other 3 applicants including Maynard, could not make this claim. It may be grossly unfair to WAVM, but it does grant the application that will serve the most new people. Thus, a local applicant, whose application was not prepared as well, to maximize the frequencies potential, can lose out to another entity, without bias.

However, to be honest, WAVM may not ever have to go off the air. Their Class D station may be fine, as it is and they may be able to keep doing what they are doing, either through direct FCC action, or they can ask for a waiver based on the unique circumstances that exist. One thing for sure, is that they will have to be on the air more than they are right now.

Janet says:

If anyone is upset enough about this to write to the FCC about it – well, that’s what we need. People can petition this decision by writing to:

Mr. Peter H. Doyle
Chief, Audio Division
Media Bureau
Federal Communications Commission
Washington, DC 20554

Please reference this number:

1800B3-ALV

Letters must be received by November 4.

Big thanks to anyone who does this!

Janet
Concerned Maynard Resident

Patti M. says:

I used to live in Maynard, and now I live in Stow. I’m pretty P.O.’d about this signal grab, and decided rather than complain impotently on blog after blog, I’d put my displeasure on paper and mail it to the FCC.

Here’s the letter I I wrote and mailed today. If you would like to paraphrase my letter in your own letter, feel free.

——-

Ms. Marlene Dortch
Federal Communications Commission
445 12th Street SW
Washington, DC 20554

Re: 1800B3-ALV
91.7 FM, WAVM, Maynard, Massachusetts

Dear Ms. Dortch:

I understand that the Federal Communications Commission is considering an application from Living Proof, Inc., to acquire the frequency currently used by WAVM. As I read the FCC letter to all parties concerned (dated 6 October 2005), part of the decision criteria is that “[a]n NCE FM applicant is eligible to receive a Section 307(b) preference if it would provide a first or second reserved channel NCE aural service (in the aggregate) to at least ten percent of the population, provided that this constitutes at least 2,000 people, within the proposed station’s 60 dBu contour.”

According to the aforementioned letter, “Living Proof would serve Lunenburg, Massachusetts, CSN International would serve Lexington, Massachusetts, the University of Massachusetts would serve Stow, Massachusetts, and NCE Station WAVM(FM), licensed to Maynard School Committee, serves Maynard, Massachusetts. Living Proof is the only applicant to claim that it would provide a new first or second NCE service to 10 percent of the population, and to at least 2,000 people, within its service area, and therefore, that it is eligible for a fair distribution preference.”

If WAVM in Maynard, Massachuetts, had been allowed to increase the station’s broadcasting power from 10 to 250 watts, as they requested five years ago, their broadcasts would have been able to reach a wider audience than they have now.

I am dismayed at the agency’s decision to strip WAVM of their signal and turn it over to a group with no ties to the local community. WAVM is a community-based radio station has direct benefit to the community, providing valuable experience to students, many of whom have gone on to careers in the broadcasting industry. WAVM also benefits the community at large. For example, WAVM television and radio broadcast the annual Beacon Santa Telethon, which raises money for local families who need financial assistance. As far as I am concerned, these are very good uses of airwaves.

I find it odd that Living Proof, Inc., a California organization with no ties to the local community, would be given preference for the frequency currently used by WAVM—one that they have used for some 31 years. WAVM has demonstrated benefit to the local community, whereas Living Proof, Inc., has not, and I resent that, according to the aforementioned letter, “Living Proof, Inc. is TENTATIVELY SELECTED to be awarded a construction permit for a new NCE FM station in Lunenburg, Massachusetts.”

I ask you to reconsider your “tentative” decision.

Respectfully,