Alarm bells should go to everyone who has a personal interest in broadcasting. The recent admission by former FCC Chairman Reed Hundt of the FCC, and in 1994, was the promotion of broadband through Broadcasting as the only common means with the current Broadband Plan Nacional FCC should be of great concern to all stations. Hundt also admitted that the move from analog to digital radio was delayed by the FCC to take advantage of broadband to run through the stations.

That is an amazing recognition by a former FCC commissioner. Fast forward to 2010, now by forcing broadcasters to reduce the size of its spectrum for broadband is another major hit on the radio. Broadcasters should be alert to fight against this usurpation of power for two reasons. One of them, yes, it is true that broadband has benefited to some extent the broadcasters. Companies like CBS have adopted the new medium with open arms, however, over the air broadcasting still has the lion's share of viewers and listeners and in the near future due to the advantage of engineering content delivery. Torre, fiber optics and cable distribution is still the best way to deliver content in audio or video medium.

You may notice that while streaming online via computer or mobile phone, Internet customer experience backed up because there is enough bandwidth to accommodate hundreds of thousands of people in the record at the same time. Imagine when trying to access streaming million audio and video at home, office or mobile. The backup would be so great that access to the Internet may become unusable. Torres, fiber and cable, however, does not have these problems. The engineer is still good for millions to access. The inhibitor only coverage. Most consumers are satisfied with local coverage and get their information and entertainment from TV that still embrace the great content.

Secondly, government rules only lead to government control at some point. U.S. admits Hundt are following the example of China. If that is true, and follow the history of Google in China where Chinese government regulations impose restrictions on the contents of Google, a case can be that at some point this government will impose its rules on what content can be delivered to people . Hundt says that there will be greater diversity and an open international market, but I maintain that when government gets into the business of monitoring and regulation of content, it will eventually control it. Just look what Hundt and the FCC recognized in the control of the process from analog to digital broadcasters. Consumers were the losers by the delay and television stations have been disadvantaged from a setback in the years of delay. Now radio stations are trying to enter the digital world with a faulty engineering system called HD Radio. It works and is approved by the FCC. Could this be another sinister plan to see the FCC rules in favor of broadband radio to the Internet. Would not surprise me, since the audience Hundt admission of his speech at Harvard.

It may be an extreme view and I'm not there yet, but consider the stations away from the Internet model. Why contribute to our own death A short-term gain in revenues and additional customers through the Internet delivery system may actually lead to long-term disappearance of traditional broadcast model, where local content free with the freedom of expression is the champion of the day .

Only a few short years ago it would have been inconceivable that there would be as many radio listening options as there are today. It isn't just the integration of the computer into our lives, and the logical extension of using those computers as an entertainment option, but rather the sheer volume and choices in streaming radio that have become available. Whatever your taste in music or spoken word, there is an internet radio station that caters to that taste. These days it doesn't matter if your musical development stopped at the Grateful Dead, or that you live' for talk shows that discuss UFOs, you will likely not find one, but many online stations that program that 247.

Several years ago the futurist Faith popcorn talked about the trend toward cocooning - building an individual, comfortable space around each individual. She may as well have been talking about internet radio as that is precisely what this art form has become.

The holy grail of internet radio is profitability, and very few stations or station clusters have achieved it. To a great extent this has helped online radio gain a stronger foothold than it might have otherwise, as it has helped define that medium. That is, internet radio is virtually commercial-free. That means that those stations doing it that are not connected with a commercial broadcast station are doing it for ego, and the love of producing a program that is different than what is available through AM and FM stations.

It will be interesting to see how these stations and the greater online radio industry develops over the next couple of years. The next most important development will likely be the increased availability of internet access in cars. This will seriously challenge traditional broadcasters who have always held that in-car listening was their domain. In the long run, preserving their domain may be center around producing programming that financially strapped internet radio can't - programs with a high personality or local content.

However slowly or quickly in-car internet listening happens is really irrelevant as the battle lines have already been clearly drawn. I suspect that long term viability of AM and FM stations will hinge more on how fast they retrench as purveyors of personality in its many forms, and leave the wall-to-wall music formats to iPods and marginally profitable internet stations.

When this happens as it must, given the economics and strengths of broadcast over internet-delivered formats, the winner will be certainly be the listener, and this is what it should have been about all along!

John Peterson is a 30+ year radio veteran and champion of online radio. He is an online broadcaster operating several stations, and author of the Internet Radio How to do it! - video series that molds traditional radio programming techniques to online radio.

The alarm bells should be going off with everyone that has a vested interest in broadcasting. The recent admission by former FCC Chair Reed Hundt that the FCC, as early as 1994, was promoting Broadband over Broadcasting as the one and only common medium combined with the current FCC National Broadband Plan should be great concern to all broadcasters. Hundt also admitted that the broadcaster move from analog to digital was delayed by the FCC in order to give broadband a running start advantage over broadcasters.

That is an unbelievable admission by a former FCC commissioner. Fast forward to 2010, now by forcing broadcasters to shrink their spectrum for broadband is another major slap at broadcasters. Broadcasters should be very vigilant to fight this power grab for two reasons. One, yes, it is true that broadband has benefited broadcasters to some degree. Companies like CBS have embraced the new medium with open arms, however, over the air broadcast still holds the lions share of viewers and listeners and will for the foreseeable future because of the engineering benefit of content delivery. Tower, fiber optics and cable delivery are still the best way to deliver content in the audio or video medium.

You may notice that while streaming on the Internet via computer or cell phone, customers still experience internet back up because there is not enough bandwidth to accommodate hundreds of thousands of people logging on at the same time. Imagine when millions attempt to access streaming audio and video in their homes, office or mobile. The back up would be so great that internet access could become inoperable. Towers, fiber and cable, however, do not have these issues. The engineering is still good for millions to access. The only inhibitor is coverage. Most consumers are happy with local coverage and get their information and entertainment from broadcasters that still embrace great content.

Second, government rules will only lead to government control at some point. Hundt admits that the U.S. is following the lead of China. If that is true and we follow the Google story in China where Chinese government regulations impose restrictions on Google's content, a case may be made that at some point this government will impose its rules in what content can be delivered to the people. Hundt claims that there will be more diversity and an international open market, but I contend that when the government gets in the business of watching and regulating content, it will eventually control it. Just look at what Hundt and the FCC admitted in controlling the process of analog to digital for broadcasters. The consumers were the losers by the delay and the television broadcasters have been disadvantaged from a set back in years of delay. Now radio broadcasters are attempting to move into the digital world with an engineering flawed system called HD Radio. It does not work and it is FCC approved. Could this be another devious plan at the FCC to see this fail in favor of broadband internet radio. It would not surprise me, since hearing the Hundt admission from his Harvard speech.

It may be an extreme opinion and I am not there yet, but should broadcasters consider moving away from the internet model. Why contribute to our own demise A short term gain in revenue and additional customers via the internet delivery system may in fact lead to the long term vanishing of the traditional broadcast model, where local free content with free speech is the champion of the day.