Internet Blogging

Then:

Blogging or writing a 'web log' has now been around since roughly 1996.  While other types of blogs online the practice of blogging gets its start with websites that regularly update their content.  The practice of blogging with its more formal systems like we see on Blogger.com and WordPress don't appear until later, but the idea of journal online that others can read and interests others.  The idea of sharing one's thoughts and ideas took off though during the Iraq War in 2003 as alternatives to traditional news sources.  Many blogs of that time were focused on giving alternatives opinions and consideration to other 'facts' that might reflect on the conduct and implications of the war.

The first blogs, as mentioned before were more websites that were updated regularly and often involved several contributes.  The blogging that is known today really didn't get its start until the World Wide Web with its system of addresses became standard. This allowed a blog to have its own address and accessibility limited only by the web itself.  This combined with the increasing popularity of the Internet, led to more and more people longing to express themselves in written form.

Blogging has grown from humble beginnings to well over one million blogs on the Internet.  As blogging continued to be more and more popular certain companies sought to create hosting sites and standardized blogging came into existence.  These platforms made it possible that anyone could create a blog and start blogging in a matter of minutes.  This made things easier and the popularity of blogging has increased tremendously over the last 15 years because of it.        

Now:

Today blogging is probably bigger than it has ever been.  Bloggers come in all types and interests but basically fall into four categories 1) Hobbyists who blog for fun, 2) Professionals who blog part or full time for money, 3) corporate bloggers that write to enhance their position and 4) multi-author bloggers who collaborate on a blog for various purposes.  All of them have one thing in common and that is they are writers who use the platform of blogging to write and post so others can read their work.

Types of blogs are even more varied than their authors as there is literally a blog for very topic under the sun.  Bloggers, even hobbyists, can make money from their blogging either through monetizing or advertising.  Some make money from the blog they contribute to as part of their income.  In any case, blogs reflect their authors to a high degree.

If there is any current effect blogging has, it is that it creates an alternative form of journalism. Journalism that cannot be controlled.  Bloggers have taken on established journalism and at times been considered more trustworthy than the mainstream journalism.  There is no shortage of difference in opinions or viewpoints in the blogger sphere.

The one thing the blogger sphere has bee subject to is fashion.  Blogs have changed over the years but the one constant is this idea of what is fashionable/  For a time it was cooking blogs, then it was business blogs, etc. More broadly the kind of personal family blogs that were once very common have fallen off in popularity as people embrace social media to be connected instead of blogs.  Blogs then adapt but some types remain a constant.

Political blogs are very popular and in many ways this reflects how many blogs started.  Social issues, health issues and other types of issue related blogs have long dominated the world of the blog and still do. Blogging has always been a soapbox of sorts where people can express opinions but that has led to problems that still continue to this day.

The question that is often encountered is are bloggers actually journalists that are responsible for their content or are they just people who write their opinions on the Internet.  Often this question comes down to a question of legality as to whether bloggers can be sued for slander or liable.  This often comes down to the popularity of the blogger and how much influence they have.  At what point does a blogger cross the line from person with an opinion to professional journalist and subject to the code of professionals remain and will remain a question for some time.

Blogging's influence is also another question.  How many people read blogs and are influenced to act or think a certain way based on what they read?  Is the influence of blogging rising or falling?  Is a blog being attached to a website simply something people now expect rather than an unique feature?  Is social media undercutting the influence of blogging?  These are questions people are asking about blogging and the answers are difficult to find.  As we turn to the future of blogging there are many challenges.



Later: 

If blogging has anything to set as its foundation on it is the simple fact is that writing as a form of communication has been around for a long time.  It was simply a matter of time before the internet provided a means for more and more people to write.   Writing has been around for a long time and as long as the internet is a place where people can write, blogging will be a part of that desire to write. The great difference is that now anyone can have a public voice through writing if they wish.

So far blogging has not taken a downturn as far as number of people participating and it does not look like it will take a downturn at least in the near future as the growth has been fairly steady and consistent.  Even with the advent of video blogging the growth of blogging a a whole has not slowed down.  It seems ot be more ad more mainstream and often writers of all types now have a blog as a matter of course as part of their careers as writers.  Many other professionals are seeing the same thing.

This growth has not been without its consequences. It is much harder for to get noticed as a blogger with more people blogging.  The future of blogging might require a greater understanding of all forms of social media to get noticed and for professional bloggers this presents greater challenges.  In the past if one simply had a unique concept they could get popular very quickly as being the only on doing that particular thing but now it is harder to even get initial exposure.  

According to blogger.com I have been blogging personally since March 2006 and if my math is correct I have currently around ten blogs.  Most of them lay dormant and I have deleted probably twice that number in the last decade.  I have tried other platforms as well so I have some knowledge of how this works and enough history to make the observation that I don't see blogging going away anytime soon, I also see that it is going to get harder and harder to make a living at it as more people continue to enter the blogger sphere.  It is going to take someone who is savvy at more than just writing to have a profitable blog.  In my humble opinion.

References:

Blogging. (2015). In J. Watson & A. Hill, Dictionary of media and communication studies. London, United Kingdom: Bloomsbury. Retrieved from http://0-search.credoreference.com.libcat.ferris.edu/content/entry/dictmedia/blogging/0

Blogging. (2014). In J. Boulton, 100 ideas that changed the web. London, UK: Laurence King. Retrieved from http://0-search.credoreference.com.libcat.ferris.edu/content/entry/lkingideas/blogging/0

Ciment, J. (2013). Blogs and blogosphere. In R. Chapman & J. Ciment (Eds.), Culture wars in America: An encyclopedia of issues, viewpoints, and voices. London, United Kingdom: Routledge. Retrieved from http://0-search.credoreference.com.libcat.ferris.edu/content/entry/sharpecw/blogs_and_blogosphere/0  

Public Broadcasting Programing

Then:



The initial foundation of public television was laid in 1952 when the FCC reserved channels for educational television but it was not until 1967 until the notion of 'public television" emerged.  The idea of using money to publicly fund television stations with the purpose of education, enriching culture and providing information.  The next two years would see the development of a system of programming that remains in effect to this very day.

The biggest thing to understand about public television programming is that neither the national Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB) or Public Broadcasting System (PBS) can produce programming.  All programming for public television stations has ot be created by the local stations or produce by other sources.  This was to prevent both of these organizations which are run by politicians who owe party allegiance politically, from using public broad casting as a political propaganda tool at least in theory.  Despite this, many have accused the public stations of being used in the past by the government from time to time to spread an agenda.

To further the notion of separation from government, funding must be provided by multiple sources.  While all stations receive some funding from the federal government which includes local donations, local underwriting and grants.  These sources for public funding have also been the source of questions regarding programming content as who provides private funds has been a source of controversy in the past.

The one thing that can be said is that from a funding aspect, public television has always struggled for funding and over the years has stayed afloat despite these struggles.  Mostly funding is probably connected with the quality of programming and so it becomes a viscous cycle of getting good funding to get good programming, but if the programming is not quality, the funding drys up and you enter a downward spiral.  The value of public television may be diminishing as other alternate sources of educational television are have begun to crop up as well as different delivery systems.

Technologically, public broadcasting has not always kept up over the years.  In the beginning, the stations were small and low powered and I remember as a kid in the days of the Big Three we could not even get a signal and it was only the advent of cable where it became more mainstream and outside the confines of urban areas or college campuses.          



Now:

The great issue facing public broadcasting now is this funding problem.  Commercial television has advertising and fee services to keep their funding high, but public television programming is not allowed to advertise to make money so sometimes the alternate sources of funding are just not there.  To make matters worse, many have questioned the neutrality of public broadcasting as far as the political spectrum is concerned and there have been many times that politicians have threatened to remove CPB or cut funding at the federal level.

Public broadcasting also now faces more competition than ever before.  For profit educational companies produce programming that can be purchased and often has a higher quality.  Streaming services and educational programs are available on demand or through services such as Netflix and others.  The issue of the purpose and necessity of PBS reoccurs often and those who support public broadcasting have to do even more and more work to keep things running and budget cuts threaten programming.

The vast majority of funding comes from individuals and businesses but if other sources provide the same educational level of programming as public sources than is the motivation for both these individuals and business going to continue.  Programming has changed because of this and you see more and more public television programming being purchased from outside sources to run on the stations. Their long running relationship with the British Broadcasting Corporation and often buys the rights to show programs (that are older or no longer running) in the United States.

As we look at the programming that is currently being produced, controversy continues.  In 2010 the Republican dominated Congress suggested cutting funding to PBS as an unnecessary luxury in a budget that was strained to the limit at the time.  Funding at a federal level is now openly questioned regularly and this has public broadcasters nervous.

The political side of this has not gone away either as conservatives attack PBS regularly and have done so since the 1980s as they assert that political commentary shows like Frontline take a more liberal and left side stance.  PBS counters that they try to be balanced but the conservatives state that the fact they can level criticism and liberals do not indicates as bias.  Should the tax payers fund something that is used for a political agenda?  This is the constant question that revolves around PBS and their programming.

Mostly though the issue is funding and recently in July it was announced by Home Box Office (HBO), who produces Sesame Street for PBS, that they would be cutting three long time cast members.  They public line was that this was or the good of the show but the rumors were more along the lines of getting rid of the three most expensive actors to make the show cost less to produce.  This kind of thing happens from time to time affecting a lot of PBS programming.  There is a constant challenge to cut costs and yet keep the quality of programming high.

Later: 

The real challenge of looking at the future of public broadcasting is that very few people want to talk about it.  In many senses, it faces the same challenges as regular television but without corporate funding it faces greater monetary challenges.  The challenges of internet services for television as well as things like Netflix are going to cut deeper into the ability of all regular broadcast television and public broadcasting will far greater challenges as it tries to adapt.

From a programming viewpoint there are other sources coming into the programming realm that also do not have a profit motive.  As not for profit websites create educational and informational content including a video component; it might be said their are filling the role public television was originally created to produce.  The internet itself might be considered as an educational tool so does public television have a place in a world where their programming could be duplicated by other means?

I personally have mixed feelings about this situation.  On the one hand, I have some emotional connection to public television in the areas of being part of my childhood and my children's childhood with programs like Sesame Street.  At the same time I see my granddaughters learning from new media and so the necessity of public broadcasting becomes the focus.

I also could say that my horizons have been widened by watching shows on cable through public broadcasting that exposed me over to the years to art and culture as well as being one small window to other countries through the BBC.  That said, the internet can do the same thing and I have far more choice a selection as to what culture and art I want to view and learn about.   All things come to an end and I think pubic broadcasting might be seeing the beginning of the end.

References:

Goldstein, J. (2004). Public television. In A. DiStefano, K. Rudestam & R. Silverman, Encyclopedia of distributed learning. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Retrieved from http://0-search.credoreference.com.libcat.ferris.edu/content/entry/sagedl/public_television/0

Chapman, R. (2013). Public Broadcasting Service. In R. Chapman & J. Ciment (Eds.), Culture wars in America: An encyclopedia of issues, viewpoints, and voices. London, United Kingdom: Routledge. Retrieved from http://0-search.credoreference.com.libcat.ferris.edu/content/entry/sharpecw/public_broadcasting_service/0

@. (2013). Funding Cuts Leave The Future of PBS in Question. Retrieved September 27, 2016, from http://screenrant.com/pbs-funding-cuts-cpb-mcrid-106473/ 

 

Low Power FM (Frequency Modulation) Radio

Then:


It seems that the development of Frequency Modulation (FM) Radio in the 1920s by Edwin Armstrong was always part legal controversy.  Armstrong almost immediately finds himself embroiled in controversy with his former friend Sarnoff and this leads to legal issues.  Despite the superiority of FM radio in the areas of removing static, higher signal quality and a way to get past night time broadcasting problems, Sarnoff was too invested in Amplitude Modulation (AM) financially to have a competitor so he for the most part stifled the development of FM radio and used the government to help him.  Mostly this involved legal battles but the FCC did outlaw simulcasts of AM and FM together and the stations would stick with AM.

While it is easy to get caught up in the big legal battle the fact is that smaller low powered FM stations were always the subject of legal controversy and overbearing regulation.  Initially the government in 1948 licensed smaller stations for educational and non-profit situations.  These "Class D: stations were initially accepted on university and college campuses but later the Public Broadcasting Act of 1967 forced smaller stations up to higher standards.  This forced many smaller stations outside education to close and later in 1978 further government regulation to upgrade in power forced many smaller stations to shut down and in the earlier 1980s all but the university stations were pretty much gone.  The regulations pretty much had crushed the smaller stations.

At some point though the public rebelled and many people began to start and operate small FM stations illegally.  Mbanna Kantako in 1986 became famous by operating a small radio station in his living room and supposedly launched the 'micro radio' revolution.  Kantako argued that his first amendment rights were being denied him because of the overbearing regulation that favored radio with purely commercial interests.  He would have continued all the way to the supreme court except no major radio group continued with the prosecution so he never got to argue his case before the supreme court.

The final real case of the past that was related to Low Power FM was United States vs. Dunifer. Dunifer started his Low Power FM station in 1992 and was fined $20,000 for not having sufficient power.  Dunifer argued that the law only stated that a radio station had to have sufficient power to broadcast and he demonstrated that low power FM stations had sufficient power to do just that. In the end the case basically became the catalyst of a micro radio revolution that created stations that went up faster than the FCC (Federal Communications Commission)  could shut them down.



Now:

By 1998, there were more than 1000 illegal micro stations operating in the US.  The FCC shut down about 250 stations at that time but it was become clear that they were losing.  The problem was greatly increased by the fact that these illegal stations were using the new found organization benefits of the internet to avoid both fines and capture by the authorities.  The public was soon learning the potential of low powered FM.   Finally under tremendous pressure the FCC was set to create a regulations standard for Low Powered FM that would have allowed the licencing of 10000 low powered stations in 2000.

Congress itself intervened and the standards that y brought o bear pretty much limited the ability once again of small stations to gain traction.  The lobbying for restricting of licencing had its effect as well and in the early millennium there were roughly 1300 stations classified as Low Powered FM.  This has dropped as the increasing regulations have dropped this number to 500.  However there seems to be a change in the winds that even now is being felt as FM stations as a whole turning to online broadcasting.

One might think this would be the answer, but the truth is that while internet radio does have some conveniences, statistics bear out that many people still listen to regular FM radio and statistics range from 10 to 15% percent of radio listeners listen to the online version.  93% of radio listeners still listen to conventional FM or AM radio and so the move to online may be slightly overstated as to its significance.  That said if larger stations do move more online nad attract listeners that would open up more room for low powered FM to be less regulated and less controlled by the FCC and the government in general.

Changing technology is changing the game for Low Powered FM but it is doing so far slower than what might be expected.  Then again what could be happening is that online broadcasting might be made more for the small radio market than the large scale FM stations.  This is the shift that may actually be happening but the future is a little difficult to see.  Although very recently there was a major victory in 2013.

Later:

According to Pew Research, pod casting has grown from 13% to 21% in the last three years (2013-2016) for the market of 21 years of age and younger.  I mention pod casting because it may make the argument for or against low powered FM possibly irrelevant over time or provide a way where there might be a interesting or more balanced output between online broadcasters, Low Powered FM and the Large market broadcasters who are trying to stretch their market into online.  Online broadcasting does not have many of the limitations of regular broadcasting but it seems not to be growing as fast as many thought it would.  That said, the potential is there because you don't have frequencies to crowd the airways with online broadcasting so limiting radio stations or the number of broadcasters is unnecessary.

Part of this will of course involve the slow passing of time as older radio listeners give way to new ones.  This would mean that online radio and pod casting might slowly overtake regular broadcasting.  This might mean that Low powered local stations might begin to serve a role that is vacated by online broadcasting by being more locally oriented.  So far, as stations have gone online they have become more generic and this is increased as the number of radio station owner has become more limited.

In this way, low powered FM may very much be a reflection of the long term battle FM radio has had as a general whole.  It above all things has had to fight for its existence against the corporate power of RCA.  The legal battles that have surrounded FM in the earlier days still surround low powered FM as it fights against the larger corporate and non-corporate stations.  The thing that it now might face is peace as online pod casting might give voice to those who currently use Low Powered FM for that purpose.

In the end FM was designed to clear up problems that AM simply did not have the ability to fix,  The irony is that despite its technical advantages it has long lived in controversy.  Through its past. present and future, one of its children Low powered FM continues to live in that realm of controversy.  I suppose Armstrong might smile and appreciate the irony that at least on of his technical children is still causing problems even though he created it in the first place to clear up problems. I know I certainly do.

References:

Opel, and Opel, A. (2010). Low-Power FM radio (United States). In J. Downing (Ed.), Encyclopedia of social movement media. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Retrieved from http://0-search.credoreference.com.libcat.ferris.edu/content/entry/sagesmm/low_power_fm_radio_united_states/0

Whittaker, R. (n.d.). The Dawn Of Radio History. Retrieved September 26, 2016, from http://www.cybercollege.com/frtv/frtv020.htm

Irvine, V. (2015). Topic: Radio Industry. Retrieved September 26, 2016, from https://www.statista.com/topics/1330/radio/