September 27, 2005

(b)Roadcasting

Thinking about "Roadcasting" a bit this week. The article by Mr Kennedy [here] has had me pacing the hallways in thought.

My ex-flatmate has an iPod FM transmitter. She tunes her car radio into a frequency and "picks up" a transmission from her iPod Mini. Its a wireless solution, and range is no more than 4-5 metres.

Roadcasting is an advance on this idea, where each iPod/laptop broadcast can be tapped on a larger scale by way of community P2P. They are effectively Mobile Radio Stations.

The software would learn your musical tastes and then sift through the "broadcasts" on offer from various vehicles and choose the one – or mix of songs – that might suit your tastes. You wouldn't know which car the music was coming from as the only identification would be that you would get the chosen nickname of the "broadcaster".

The technology is described by the creators (a car manufacturer) as a unique, fun and exciting innovation. I think one major downfall is when some new technologies come through, the designers tend to forget that there are existing rules out there, and it seems the approval of their invention is made through a technicality. In this case, I refer to existing radio licenses. The device has every intention to overshadow existing frequencies (and broadcasts), although this largely depends on what kind of reach Roadcasters are able to have. 4-5 metres like iPod transmitters? or 4-5km like LPFM in NZ?

Not investigating RSMs stand on this, I wonder if existing FM license owners have submitted their dispute to this. A car radio is the most powerful radio station receiver out there, and "in the car" is the highest radio-listening zone, yet now with this technology, it allows each vehicle to leech the 'medium' that radio stations use, yet choose to override them with their own 'pirate-type' jukeboxes. I will get to "level of threat" a bit later.

The lines are blurring with every new invention and the rules should be changing with them. I would like to think that we could place black and white rules before approval is given to a new technology, but nearly always, the technology evolves in an unforseen way and creates loopholes. Maybe a detailed grandfather clause would fix this, or could there be a positive spin to these loopholes?

My next thought: The two ugly sides of copyright infringement.

Roadcasting is in a form of P2P technology, using the airwaves instead of internet as its medium. This medium is heavily regulated and really is a can of worms. Broadcasting Standards, Licensed Frequency Infringement, Copyright Law, Technical Standards and eventually (like blogs and podcasts), advertising will find a way in (quite easily I suspect) bringing Advertising Standards into it as well. Traditional radio offers us either talk, music, or a mix of both (or a talking clock in some places). I go back to blurring lines: Is Roadcasting for private use, or public use? This I think is a very important question that will ultimately hold its fate.

I guess the "level of threat" needs to be determined by existing radio and record companies. It directly impacts radio, and the record companies may see it as an uncontrolled medium.

Dubber points out to me that "the fact that the record industry is doing its utmost to prevent this going on at all entirely misunderstands the role of music as an occasion for shared and social experience." True. It always seems to be the record companies who are the bad guys in any equation with multimedia technologies. Radio on the other hand is much more transparent.

As a working example, Radio has embraced iPods (so far). Having listeners time-shift their stations content is still considered 'listening', and has potential to INCREASE crucial radio listenership statistics like TSL (time spent listening) especially around survey time, because iPod users are more relaxed when listening, and listen over longer periods of time. Their morning trip may take 45 minutes and a radio show may be 60 minutes long. If the iPod listener pauses, then continues to listen on the trip home for example, then that 60 minutes of listening can be accurately measured as listening to the radio. Radio advertising (or sponsorship) will still be heard (or partially heard), so its considered a win. Same deal with podcasters, although it leaves commercially driven podcasters behind when it comes to zoning. Ads in highly subscribed podcasts (dayparts) may increase the rate-card for that show. Another win for all (less ads, more revenue). If podcasting had never come around, would radio have gone the other way and not supported iPods? I don't think so. They are just another way to market and listen to your station - and in this respect, Roadcasting might just be another way existing radio can evolve within its medium.

I find myself at the opposite end of my initial reaction to Roadcasting. A technology that threatens traditional radio, yet radio itself can embrace (and probably monopolise). I suspect Radio, the Record Companies, and RSM will be looking carefully at this.

September 26, 2005

Is Auckland Shot?

In the event of a major earthquake, eruption or any other major disaster how would Auckland fare?

May I paint a grim picture of our existing peak traffic flows in Auckland, if we are capable and how we would evacuate the city:

It is likely that in the event of a major earthquake, the Harbour Bridge would no longer exist, and thus the only way out of the region would be south.

The motorway would only be partially usable, due to the large parts which are actually overbridges being damaged to the point of no longer being usable.

Great South Road is a rather narrow main road that in much of its length consists of only one lane each way, north or south - at least as far south as Drury.

Much of Auckland is very soft land that in times past used to be swamp land. Anything constructed on those parts of Auckland would strongly feel the impact (of a tsunami or earthquake). [various | Google groups: nz.general]

Auckland does have a civil defence plan [pdf]. It estimates damage reports for earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, cyclone, tsunami, fire, terrorism, biological or chemical accidents, and flooding. No metion of meteorites, however. It details the 5 different emergency levels, and what happens on each level. It is a fairly detailed document, but not the document you want to read during the emergency!! Here is the document to print, staple and put in your emergency first aid kit.

As for keeping your ear on the radio, 80% of all stations out there are likely to be automated at that time, so I suggest either Radio Live, Radio Pacific, Newstalk ZB or National Radio for emergency coverage.

Whats interesting is that "Disaster Reduction Week" is coming October 9-15, and there is a very limited national radio campaign on The Rock, Kiwi, More FM, Edge (why not Radio Live or Pacific ..TRB?), Newstalk ZB (who will also integrate it through their news services), also privates IXX Whakatane and Hokonui Gold in Gore. The advertising will be based around a series of "know what it takes to survive" messages, and promoting the Civil Defence "sting". Sadly, most of these stations will only play 13 ads over the entire week! Bonanza. We're all saved!

I remember starting out in radio, putting together scripts for "in case of emergency" broadcasts. I had bemused looks by my boss at the time (coz we were increasingly using automation at the time), yet I got a quiet nod by upper management for taking initiative.


Take your own actions. Read (and print) this Be Ready Kit [link], get a first aid kit organised so you know that in the event of a natural disaster or other emergency like a chemical spill to terrorism, you'll be sorted.