Terrestrial Radio Looks To Charge Subscription Fees, But Still Doesn't Compete With Satellite

from the blah-blah-blah dept

Wed, Apr 18th 2007 7:40pm — Carlo Longino

While terrestrial radio broadcasters keep insisting that satellite radio is no competition for them, their actions continue to betray that fallacious argument. But in addition to all the doublespeak, terrestrial broadcasters are also trying to figure out how they can start charging for their content -- a move that would only underline the fact that they do indeed compete with satellite radio providers. iBiquity, the company that develops the HD Radio digital radio technology for terrestrial broadcasters, says it's chosen a provider of "conditional access" technology, which will give broadcasters the ability to charge subscription fees for their content, offer pay-per-listen events, or additional subscription-based services. The fact that terrestrial broadcasters want to start charging for content (apart from sounding like a really bad idea) would seem to further undermine the NAB's claim that they don't compete with XM and Sirius. Of course, perhaps you could argue that if terrestrial broadcasters tried to make people pay for the stuff they broadcast, it really wouldn't be much competition for the satellite companies, but somehow we don't think that's the point the NAB is trying to make.

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

13 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

PopeRatzo, 18 Apr 2007 @ 7:54pm

Wait, how can they *not* be competing with satellite radio? That is one seriously weak argument.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Dave M, 18 Apr 2007 @ 7:56pm

Terrestrial pay service already exists for FM
"terrestrial broadcasters are also trying to figure out how they can start charging for their content "

Terrestrial FM broadcasters have been doing just that for years: SCA (Subsidiary Communications Authorization) broadcasts of background music, data (stockquotes, sports scores, etc.), reading services for the visually impaired, and more. It takes special receivers to receive the subcarrier signals, and it's "illegal" to receive and enjoy the signals without paying/permission.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
AZIZA, 18 Apr 2007 @ 8:03pm

Not for me
Podcasts stack up like unread newspapers and magazines, and after trying out the idea of paying for podcast content, I realized that it wasn't for me, just like I would never again subscribe to a newspaper.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Mr. Lucas Brice, 18 Apr 2007 @ 8:16pm

Bad Idea
If they want to charge me to listen to the flippin' radio, which is about 20 minutes of commercials out of every hour, I'll take my radio and fling it down the stairs. Then I'll stomp on it until it's just bits of plastic and wires. Then I'll sweep up the pieces and flush them down the loo.
Next, I'll buy a parrot and teach it to talk and sing and I'll put a little handle on him so I can carry him around with me and listen to him at work and in the car.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Erv, 18 Apr 2007 @ 8:20pm

dumb
charge for radio? good luck with that
[ link to this | view in thread ]
MrStipulation, 18 Apr 2007 @ 8:50pm

Maybe...
I used to have satellite radio but dropped it because the only time I listened was in the car between home and work (about 15-20 min drive), and the price did not agree with the time I listened to it.

If they offered alacarte programming where I could get just a few channels that I was interested in at a discounted price I would get it again.

As for terrestrial radio. There would have to be major changes before I considered paying for their content. For starters, kill the RIAA-selected playlists. They SUCK. Period. Also, NO to VERY FEW commercials. I would not pay extra to get radio with a million and one ads.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Iron Chef, 19 Apr 2007 @ 1:13am

Sirius + XM = CBS?
It may be just a rumor, but reports have surfaced that CBS could be interested in buying either Sirius or XM as a defensive move.

According to a report on investment research website Briefing.com, CBS could make a bid for XM "and/or" Sirius sometime in the near future...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Fred Flint, 19 Apr 2007 @ 4:45am

This reminds me of the birth of cable TV. I'm sure there must be a few people around who remember the early days when the local Cable Telco convinced us to pay for their service because it was commercial free!

Well, that didn't last long. Now we're still paying more and more and more for Cable TV and at the same time we get to spend most of our time watching commercials.

Paying to be inundated with commercials! What a concept! Now we'll get to do it via radio.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Apr 2007 @ 5:35am

when Radio starts charging, I'll start hacking
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Kyle Johnson, 19 Apr 2007 @ 6:29am

Public Airwaves?
How can radio charge for content when they are using the PUBLIC airwaves to transmit? The FCC licenses grant them access to the PUBLIC airwaves, not ownership of them.

Not that I really care that much. I listed to about 30 minutes of radio a day (in the morning as my alarm), and I could even do without that if they want to charge me for it.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
John, 19 Apr 2007 @ 8:35am

Big stations don't need this
and small ones will only die off. Lets get serious, KFYI in Phoenix rakes in the bg bucks in advirtising because they give a product people want, Big name shows and great local coverage. Why would they piss off 4 million current and potential listeners just to lock up their product. Little stations with poor advertising streams will only disappear, they don't have the money to advertise a subscription based service, and if I don't listen to them now and if they lock up their product there is little chance I will stumble on them while spinning the dial.

To me the only real reason I had satellite radio was for spatial coverage and consistency of the shows over that coverage. Note I said had, there were to many little things that pissed me off, static from the little fm transmitter, losses of signal in the trees and there insistence on taking the good programing like the Oldies radio and putting $%#^ sports games on there with no warning!

Hey Sirius if I want to listen to ESPN I would change the channel!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Pro, 19 Apr 2007 @ 10:23am

Re: Public Airwaves?
Yeah, that bugs me too... They're filling my airspace with radiation for something that isn't public. That seems fundamentally wrong to me.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
PocketRadio, 6 Feb 2009 @ 10:36am

HD Radio is a farce!
Yea, good-luck with that one: http://hdradiofarce.blogspot.com
[ link to this | view in thread ]