Search Results

The Internet cannot substitute broadcasting as a distribution method for radio. I have covered this before: A Collapse of the Internet Narrowly Avoided – Why 4G is Hyped – 21 Reasons Why FM is Almost History – Internet Radio Expensive in France Too. So has radio futurologist James Cridland: 3G – radio’s future? – 4G for radio? No thanks. Radio needs broadcasting. FM is broadcasting. Is radio via FM too valuable to society to be switched off and substituted by DAB/DAB+? Before answering this question, let me ask and answer some others. Was analogue TV too valuable to society to be switched off and substituted by digital TV? No, this has already happened in most western countries. Why? Because television viewers demanded more channels of higher quality and analogue TV was too expensive and not advanced enough to provide this. And people watch more television than they watch radio in most western countries (182 vs. 101 minutes per day in Norway). Did viewers complain? Hardly at all. So, how about radio? The FM frequencies are full. That means that there is no more room for additional radio channels. FM is very expensive due to high power consumption (one transmitter is needed per channel) and a lot of transmitters required to cover large areas. But maybe the existing radio channels are enough, maybe people are happy with the current selection. If that is the case, maybe FM is so valuable that it cannot be switched off. But this way of arguing is like speaking for maintaining the shop system that has always been present in a communist country. The food selection consists of two kinds of cheese (both from the same valley), three kinds of bread (all white), one kind of butter (who needs low fat anyway?) and a couple salami types (made by a mixture of animals you don’t even want to be able to name). Who is satisfied by this? Well, the customers have never know that French cheese, brown bread and baguettes, Irish butter and hundreds of kinds of sandwich meat from a range of animals even exist. They have therefore never complained very much (unless the food was outdated or tasted worse than normal). Neither has the farmers providing the cheese or the bakeries making the bread. They have always seen very little competition. That is good for business. They are virtually guaranteed a profit, no matter how low the quality of their food. Why would they want to change this? Let the fight begin Competition forces better quality. That is also true for radio. In Norway, Norwegian Broadcasting Corporation (NRK) had a monopoly on television and radio until the early 90s. Most people (even those of us employed by NRK) think that the quality of programmes improved greatly after commercial competitors entered the scene. After all, people suddenly had a choice. That means that they don’t have to pick your product or programme anymore. I would like the same to happen again to radio. More frequencies. More choice. More possibilities for good radio, new related services, interactive radio and on demand too. And I live in a country of less than 5 million people. Imagine what the situation is like in other, more populous countries. Where the market for new top quality radio stations with talented on-air personalities may be blooming, but where there are no available frequencies. In order to make more frequencies available and enable a fair competitive environment, FM needs to be switched off in a range of countries. Not only in Norway. So that there aren’t possibilities for “communist shops” anywhere anymore. Not even where the listeners are too busy listening to their existing channels to even bother to try the new ones. Radio channels should fight for their listeners. Before fighting you have to train. A lot. Those who train become better. Those who train the most usually win the fights. If both sides train equally much you get good fights. Let the fights begin, on even ground. Switch off FM. Give even better radio to the people. So, is radio via FM too valuable to society to be switched off? Not more than “small communist shops.” They are valuable to society if located inside a museum. The same is the case with FM which should continue to exist in a museum, where it is heading and where it very soon belongs.

I hate having to get visas in advance. Of course not to do so, may cause problems. Visitors to Nauru are required to get the visa in advance, but I was studying Mandarin in Taipei at the time and not too keen on going through the slow process of sending my application and passport off to get it sorted. So I relied on travel related luck and a big and very innocent smile. It has worked before. But before was before. This time such a strategy caused problems in Brisbane, from where I was going to fly out from on Our Airline, the only airline flying into Nauru. I was checking in, and the woman behind the counter obviously asked for my visa. – Do I need a visa? I thought I could get one when landing. – No, you cannot. – Really? Are you sure? I have purchased the ticket ages ago, and I have really been looking forward to this trip. Is there no way of getting around this? (Very lame, yes, I know. And my cheesy smile probably didn’t do much good either, will have to practice on that later.) – I am sure. I have worked here for over ten years. – Damn (uttered very silently)! – I will see what I can do, but do not get your hopes up. Double damn. She walked over to another counter and called someone from a phone there. It seemed like a very long conversation, given the possible denial of service I was facing in the very near future. She came back over and started typing something on the computer. – So…is it going to be possible for me to go? – Hmm. Yes, it looks like it. You’re lucky! She meant it. And I was. I even got a window seat. Fishing conference The plane, a very old 737, was almost full. Surprisingly so, until I realised that they were throwing an international fishing conference on Nauru. Not too international, though. Most participants seemed to be from Taiwan (Nauru has acknowledged Taiwan as a country – most countries have not as China requires countries to pick us (China) or them (Taiwan)), Solomon Islands and Australia. Then again, not many people have even heard about Nauru, the world’s third smallest country (after the Vatican and Monaco), let alone imagined that it is possible to actually go there. I arrived Nauru (INU) late at night, and it seemed like the entire village (or country) had arrived to greet everyone arriving. Some of those there, it emerged, didn’t really have a choice. The runway is also a part of the 19 kilometer long road around the island, and the road is blocked every time a plane arrives (which is not very often). Instead of driving the other way around the island, they rather check out who is coming from the “mainland” (aka. Australia, Tuvalu or Solomon Islands) before continuing. Checked in luggage is overrated. It takes extra time, constrains mobility and gets lost every once in a while. I usually only travel with hand luggage, so also this time, making me the first person to leave the luggage room of one of the smallest airport buildings I have seen (and I am from Naustdal, a small village in Norway with a the very small neighbouring airport of Førde bringeland (FDE)). The serious looking customs guy behind a tiny wooden counter looked at me for one second, called me over and asked without hesitation: – Are you the tourist? The scene was set. It was only me, the locals and some other foreign people working with fish. No other tourists? I was thrilled. And then he smiled. – Welcome to Nauru! Of course my non-existing visa meant that the custom guy had to hold on to my passport until I was gonna leave. I wasn’t worried. Crime can’t be high on an island with less than 9,000 people, 19 kilometers of roads and nowhere to hide. Run around a country So, what do you do on Nauru? Well, it’s a pretty circular island, surrounded by coral reefs. With, as mentioned, a road running around it. A road running around it. How many countries can claim having the same? And I had never ran around a country before. Now, I have. Nauru is just south of the Equator though, so running around the island just after lunch does not come recommended. Now, I know. I have never sweat that much since I for the first time ate a phall curry at Balti Curries in the main street of Falmouth, Cornwall in 1997.  But I made it. Just to arrive back at the hotel to discover that the water was switched off during the day. There is not much freshwater on Nauru. I air dried pretty fast and picked the computer furthest from other people at the Internet cafe afterwards. A choice of two The hotel situation on Nauru is rather limited. Od’n Aiwo Hotel is the cheaper hotel “downtown” while there is a more expensive “resort” on the other side of the island. The latter has a bar and hot water and is on a beach, but I still decided to go central. There was no hot water, and a woman visiting for fishing conference was in my room upon arrival (all the doors were open and she liked my room better than hers, so she tried to nick it), but there were no major issues, really. The main problem was finding it. I arrived at night, and without any taxis I decided to walk through the dark. That was working out great until a guy in a pickup stopped and asked if I wanted a ride. He and two teenagers had picked up a relative coming by the plane, so the car was full, but not the back. I jumped in. – Where are you going? – I’m going to the hotel. (I couldn’t remember the name. But I mean, who can remember Od’n Aiwo in the middle of the night anyway?) – No problem, he said in a slight American accent and sped off. Very friendly of him to pick up a total stranger in complete darkness. But then again, no crime to talk of. And I was the single person. The four of them could have trashed me if I were up to no good. The only problem was that he took me to the wrong hotel. Not his fault, of course. I was saved by the local bus driver who arrived 25 minutes later with the other plane passengers. He drove me to Od’n Aiwo free of charge. – Enjoy your stay, he shouted after letting me off. So, what does the central hotel mean`? “Central” means a choice of one shop, a couple of bottle shops, an Internet cafe, a police station, the city hall and two restaurants. Coming from Naustdal, I immediately felt at home. I tried both restaurants, one Chinese and one, well, let’s call it non-ethnic. The Chinese will get the Michelin star of the country thanks to decent food and big portions. It’s on the first floor of the hotel. There’s nothing that even resembles a wine list, but they’ll let you bring beers from the local bottle shop. There may not be much to do on Nauru, but it is like a stereotypical Pacific island. (Of course it is a Pacific island, but that’s not the point.) The beaches are beautiful, so is the water temperature. The food selection is somewhat limited, there’s almost no nightlife on offer, but people are very friendly and just being able to run around a country makes it all even more worthwhile. I’ll be happy to come again. My Tour de Nauru time might need improving, and that won’t happen just after noon. At least I wore sunscreen.

I am here writing about the possibility to go by boat from Libreville to Sao Tome. But before you read on. Are you impatient, restless or just bad at relaxing? Well, if that is the case, read no more. The paragraphs that follow are not for you. What I am about to tell will make painting the third layer of a very white wall seem like Christmas Eve to a six year old, in comparison. I am impatient, restless and bad at relaxing. Etc. But let me start from the beginning. When I suddenly found myself in Libreville, Gabon with a visa to Sao Tome & Principe two hours after applying for it, I was pretty excited about going there. I have the reasonably expensive hobby of collecting countries. All of them. That also puts Sao Tome & Principe on the list. Gabon is one of a very few countries with an embassy and a direct flight, making it a perfect starting point. (Note that Sao Tome & Principe does not give you a visa upon arrival. If you manage to get on a plane or a boat without a visa, you will be sent back the same way, on your own expense.) The wrong Wednesday But this was a Wednesday. Not just the normal kind. It was Wednesday before Easter. That Wednesday. I was on a normal Easter vacation, not even thinking that airlines would change their schedules during Easter. It is only fair to point out at this stage, that I am not talking about just any airline. I am talking about Ceiba, the airline of Equatorial Guinea, allegedly one of the most peculiar countries in the world. Ceiba is for instance banned to fly in Europe. But that’s not all, and let me quote from Wikipedia: Media reports said that in 2009, the boss of CEIBA, a Senagalese citizen of Gambian origins named Mamadou Jaye, left Equatorial Guinea with a suitcase with 3.5 billion CFA francs (about five million euros or 6.5 million United States dollars) and spare ATR aircraft parts to negotiate trade deals with Côte d’Ivoire, The Gambia, Ghana, and Senegal and to establish a West African office for CEIBA. Jaye never returned to Equatorial Guinea. That kind of an airline. It turned out that Ceiba did not fly to Sao Tome on this particular Friday (even though they normally fly to Sao Tome only on Fridays and Mondays – Good Friday is Good Friday). So there I was, on Wednesday before Good Friday finding out that I could not go to Sao Tome via air until Monday. Which would be too late. There was always the possibility of flying via Luanda, Angola, but with no direct flights from Libreville, and at substantial cost. That left the boat option to cover the 300 kilometers of ocean. Harbour hell I walked down to the harbour, asked my way to the Sao Tome ticket office, and found some sort of a shack where they sold other tickets. I asked for assistance, and one of the guys behind the counter took me to a friend, a guy called Ricardo on a very small cargo boat named Andrea, carrying loads of colorful mattresses and some oil barrels. I frowned. This is the boat to Sao Tome? It would sink if a seagull shat on the wrong side of it. And yes, Ricardo was definitely going to Sao Tome. But not until the following day. Did I need to leave today? – Yes! – OK, OK. Wait, I will check. Off he ran, soon coming back with a guy titled the Financial Manager of the docks. He asked me, via translator in charge Ricardo, whether I had a visa. I showed him. He looked at it and discussed my two hour old visa with some guys standing nearby before suggesting that we follow him. We walked into a run down, badly lit warehouse. It was not exactly designed based on carefully monitored customer behavior pattern in Harrods, rather designed based on the mind of Alfred Hitchcock. A metal shop, two sleeping workers, a stairway, a narrow hall and an open door later, there were to my surprise no thugs to be found, but two lovely ladies. I asked how long it would take to go by boat to Sao Tome. – 15 hours, Ricardo said. Well, this is Africa and they are trying to sell me something. I’ll add 30% to that. 20 hours is still bad, very bad actually, but given the options…. I nodded. They started writing out my ticket, I paid for it and I felt safe. Kind of. Until they told me, again through Ricardo, that my passport had to go to the police and would be returned before the departure of the vessel. Damn, I hate leaving without my passport. On my way back to the docks, I picked up 1.5 litres of water and 1 litre of apple juice plus 6 bananas and 4 oranges. Enough for 20 hours when they include a night. The boat part starts here After getting my ticket, I had to wait for over 2 hours to board the ferry. Or, ferry I thought. Marstal of Sao Tome was docked, being loaded, and seemed pretty ready to leave. So, how fast can that ferry go, I asked Ricardo, who seemed to have finished his duties of the day and was chilling next to me on a bench in the shadow in the harbour. – Well, you are not taking that ferry. That one is going to Cameroon, he said. – So, which boat am I taking, I asked. – That one. He pointed past the ferry to a pretty run down cargo vessel. Beautiful (where is the symbol of irony?)! From a shabby ferry of the type that could have been seen roaming the fjords of Norway only 20 years earlier to this, this, this floating thing. Bloody hell! Consider the options, consider the options… Half an hour later I was on board the thing, aka. M/V Maryvana. On board were also five fellow passengers; Two Sao Tome & Principe guys whom I had actually met in the Embassy earlier, two girls and a baby. The time was 17:18. Of some reason I checked it. Leaving Libreville At 18:20, everything was loaded, unloaded and the boat unhooked from the big ropes. We were off! There is not much to say here, really, except that the boat moved exceptionally slow at 7 knots (10-11 km/h). I also befriended Fidele, the chief engineer. – Fidele, like Fidel Castro, he said in decent English when introducing himself. He has a sister working in a hotel in Oslo, he told me. And then he complained about African wages and said that he wanted to move to Europe. Not having planned for this boat trip, I had no sleeping bag or blanket in my backpack. Only clothes, toiletries and my laptop. I found a pretty quiet spot on the 58 meter long but narrow boat and laid down on some plastic covers that were tied up. Kind of soft. Softer than the steel plates, at least. I tried a couple of dozen sleeping positions and eventually fell asleep. After a while I was woken up by one of the girls. It had started to rain a little. She spoke no English, but she handed me a blanket. Hers. And she pointed me to underneath the roofed part in front of the cockpit area. I was too tired to protest and laid down on the blanket on the steel plate. I somehow kind of managed to sleep again. I soon wake up after feeling big rain drops on my face. A storm was approaching. The captain ordered us below deck to the galley. It was cramped down there, but no rain. The storm could still be heard and very much felt. One of the Sao Tome guys puked a couple of times. I was woken by Fidele at 07:00 in the morning. I went back up on deck. Still pretty rough, but no rain. We’d been at sea for almost 13 hours. But I could still not see land. Why not? I checked my phone with built-in GPS. We’re only 40% there. Fcuk! We’d with the same speed need another 18 hours to get to Sao Tome, totaling at over 30 hours, twice as much as what Ricardo had told me. Where’s the voodoo doll when you need it? I considered a variety of self torture methods in order to rather experience physical than mental pain. None were evaluated as cruel enough, and I somehow managed to convince myself to start looking at this as the perfect possibility into self realization and meditation. I have always loved the sea breeze and smell of the sea, so it kind of worked. But slow it was, slow it was. And my self imposed meditation was made less effective by the occasional Ceiba curse. At 15:10 (14:10 Sao Tome time) we started seeing the outline of a mountain, of Sao Tome. Awesome! It can’t take more than 6 hours, from here. 9 hours later we were close. Really close. Maximum 20 minutes away. Then the engine stopped. What the? The anchor was dropped. – What’s the problem? Second night on deck Fidele translated. The customs had closed for the night, so we couldn’t go to shore. I had two options. Exploding, or not exploding. I chose the latter, but it didn’t work. Another night on deck. Lovely, really. This time, I took my backpack and used a t-shirt as a pillow and a shirt as a blanket on the steel. Not too bad. With the gentle sea breeze and a great view of the stars. But two nights in a row on deck of a cargo vessel? And with only a few bananas and orange to eat? I was woken by local fishermen in boats with outboard engines at around 6. My fellow passengers were already up, seemingly enthusiastic. For no reason. It took another 2.5 hours until the captain could start the engines and navigate us to the docks. And then we still had to stay aboard 30 minutes for the customs officers to go through the boat (after all, being called Maryvana, drug smuggling would not be a surprise) and check our passports. At 09:17, I was on land, yet again. 39 hours and 59 minutes after boarding. Bloody hell! In retrospect, a nice trip though. To ride a boat that was never intended to carry passengers has a certain charm to it. If you have the time and patience. And it is much more memorable than a 45 minute plane ride. If you go with someone, bring a case of beer or two and enough food, it can probably be totally ace. And after arrival in the tiny town of Sao Tome, you can easily walk from the docks downtown in 5-10 minutes. If you want to do this trip, just don’t tell your loved ones at home that you’ll be unavailable for only 15-20 hours due to lack of phone coverage (as I did). They might end up being sleepless in Seattle or Stockholm, waiting for your first sign of life. Which may, as demonstrated, take ages. Telenor (the 7th biggest mobile network operator in the world), my phone carrier, has for instance no roaming agreements with the carrier here (nor in Djibouti, Myanmar, Somalia, Vanuatu, North Korea (surprise) and Nauru), so there was no signal to be picked up, even when anchored outside the island. Summarized Location: Libreville docks (or Sao Tome docks for return) Buying ticket: 15:30 Boarding: 18:18 (Gabon time) “40%” there: 07:24 Sao Tome in sight (barely): 15:10 Arriving just outside Sao Tome: 23:38 (Sao Tome time) Docked and tied up: 08:47 Feet back on ground 09:17 (10:17, Gabon time) Total travel time: 39 hours, 59 minutes. Ticket price: 95,000 XAF (probably overcharged, half of it was “tax”), you shouldn’t pay more than 50-60,000 if you can haggle a little and you’re not desperate because of Easter. Bring: A blanket, enough food and drinks and a deck chair/bed if you are really sophisticated. The crew of nine are not mean, they just don’t have more food than they need themselves. There are cargo vessels going several days a week, so this is a realistic option if you are not too impatient. There is also supposedly a passenger ship (Marstal II, the sister ship of the ferry I thought I was going to take) that runs occasionally. That should be somewhat faster, but without the “charm” of a cargo vessel.

We hear about it everyday. A new phone, a new social network, a new pattern or a new invention. There is nothing wrong with this, obviously. I like new. You like new. Everybody likes new, want to be new or just be associated with something new. The problem is that too many trend setters, journalists and consultants are taking part in a race. The race of new, about being first to tell you about what is new. Or even better, what will be new tomorrow? This is of course a good thing. Who would want to miss out on the newest gadget or website? I wouldn’t. The problem occurs when too many people compete about telling you about it. Sometimes it seems like they need to make it sound newer than it sounded when their colleagues or competitors just told you about it yesterday. There are many people who want to tell you what is new. Some people think there are too many. I recently read a Facebook status update. A friend of mine considered adding “expert on social networks” to his resume, but decided against it as there are already 36 with such titles to the dozen. And some colleagues, who are actually among the top specialists in the field of new media in general, made a mockery out of it all on April 1st when they on one of NRKs websites NRKbeta.no wrote an article about all of them leaving NRK to start their own consultancy called SosialMedia.no (Social Media). The “company” can, among other things, “offer courses in social media and award Gold Standard Social Media Expert badges.” It was an April Fools’ joke, but it very well pinpointed the fact that many companies now see a need to hire professionals to come tell them what is new. Is the problem of new new? Not even the problem of new is new. Nostradamus and George Orwell are only two examples. They tried to predict the future, sometimes allegedly more successfully than others. People soon turned to them to hear more about new. Recently the Swedish professor Micael Dahlén published a book called “Nextopia” where he discusses what expectations of new can lead to. He argues that today expectations about what is just in front of us, but not yet entirely within reach, is what drives us as people. The craving for new. Dahlén has interviewed loads of people about how they feel about life now, in the past and in the future. We are pretty happy with the current situation, although less so than with the past. What stands out is that nothing compares with the future, including our expectations to what will happen in just a day or two. Nextopia is the future, according to Dahlén. – Nextopia is the next fantastic date, it is iPad 2 or the incredible career opportunity that waits around the next corner. Nextopia is our driving force, our reason to get out of bed in the morning, he tells Norwegian daily Aftenposten. He claims that after something has happened, the actual events cannot compare with the expectations you had before it actually happened. What about old? To hear about something new that you may be able to try soon is in some ways a good thing. In other ways it is a problem as you are growing accustomized into always having something new to look forward to, thus never being satisfied with what you already have. Merely being new is however no longer an asset in its own right. New and different, preferrably also groundbreaking, is the current ideal in order to lift eyebrows of listeners or bypassers. Where does this leave old? Old is no longer synonymous with tested and proven and even the expression “good old” now seem to be used more often than not jokingly. Old has turned into a disadvantage, also when a solution, service or product works perfectly well. One of those “old” things is broadcasting. Broadcasting is the technology that enables everyone – without limit – in a coverage area to receive the same radio or TV signal. Some media experts do claim that broadcasting is out of date and needs to be replaced by the Internet. There are many reasons why this is wrong, capacity restrictions, gate keepers, net neutrality issues, breach of civil rights through data retention, mobile coverage and crisis communication are just some of them. Broadcasting is old, but is works perfectly to do what it is supposed to do. Just like wheeels, boats, tables and chairs. Broadcasting is also near an all time high, having risen the last few years. People are watching more broadcasted television content and listening more to live radio than before. In Norway the figure is 182 minutes per day for television, 101 minutes for radio. New is not necessarily bad. To strive for new only for the sake of new is.

Norwegian Broadcasting Corporation (NRK) recently broke the national record of web tv streaming. During the World championship in Skiing in Oslo last month, 134,000 simultaneous streams were consumed across Norway at the most popular event (the mens cross country relay). That is an estimated three times higher than the previous national record. Very impressive! This was furthermore something NRK would previously have been unable to achieve. This time, a CDN agreement with Akamai, ensured that the content was distributed more evenly throughout the Internet in Norway than what has previosuly been the case (when everything was streamed from NRKs servers in Oslo). But what happened in reality? NRK offers different qualities of available web tv streams, HD quality at 3.2Mbps being the top notch one. Normally, the average bandwidth per user is somewhat lower at 2.5Mbps. NRKs solution serves adaptive streaming, meaning that the bandwidths being made available varies on network conditions, network load, your own bandwidth, etc. Selfishness? During the men’s relay the average bandwidth per user was as low as 1.5Mbps, according to my friend and colleague, Mr. Bjarne Andre Myklebust who is NRKs Head of IP Distribution. He says: “The infrastructure clearly told us that it was filling up. The Internet in Norway was suffering and the world championship showed us that there are limitations to what the web can deliver. The Internet is only a supplement for delivery of TV and radio. Using the web to transport such data consuming services blocks other users from using the infrastructure to more important and sensible tasks.” People not interested in sports were denied optimal access to other services as NRKs users were almost killing the Internet thanks to the vastly popular skiing contest. Watching big events live via web TV when there is a broadcasted option borders to selfishness. The bandwidth consumed can be better utilized by others that have no option but to use an Internet-only service. New gatekeepers revealed What is also worrying is that certain city councils even shut down the access to NRKs website which offered access to the web tv streams for all their employees and all schools. Random IT officers did in other words suddenly act as gate keepers of some of the content on the Internet. CTOs of certain companies supposedly did the same. Why? Because their local networks were crippled and unusable for what they are ment to do: providing communication between employees and systems, possibilities for research, access to teaching materials, etc. Even NRK as a public service broadcaster provides news and a lot of educational resources used by teachers and students, and this was blocked together with the web TV traffic from NRKand made inaccessible to those affected. The Internet is certainly becoming faster and faster all the time, but the Internet is not made for transport of the same content to many at the same time. Broadcasting is perfect for that, the Internet is perfect for interactivity, communication and on demand services. This case again shows weaknesses when the Internet is used in ways that it was never intended for. And the weaknesses are not only related to capacity or gatekeepers, there are at least 11 other reasons. To repeat myself yet again, combination of technologies is the only smart and sensible way forward when it comes to distribution of radio and TV. Let me rub this in through some pity theft. I have below stolen and slightly rewritten a very well put paragraph from a recent blog post of James Cridland who writes about radio: The internet is a rubbish way of reaching mass-market audiences; it doesn’t work reliably well in a mobile situation, and is many times more expensive to broadcast to large audiences. Broadcast fixes all of that. However, the Internet is excellent at niche content, out-of-area content and additional information – lots of things that are difficult or impossible to achieve through broadcasting. The future is multi-platform. It’s not a war.

I have been talking about the combination between broadcasting and the Internet for a long time. Why not use the best of two worlds to deliver services that outshines what only one of them can do? The problem so far has been the lack of devices to do so. But that is now changing. IDAG (International DMB Advancement Group) has teamed up with Enspert, tablet maker number two in Korea, to launch several tablet models under the brand name Identity. Their press release came out today. The tablets run Android and have screen sizes ranging from 7 to 9 inches. They will hit stores in several countries on four continents in June, including Australia, Germany, Netherlands, Norway, South Africa and Vietnam. It is access to an API communicating with the DMB player that makes it possible to combine broadcasting and the Internet. That opens various possibilities such as the following examples: 1. Give thumb up or thumb down to a TV programme or a part of a TV programme while watching just by pressing the screen. 2. Chat by typing messages on screen while watching TV or listening to radio. Can be done via Twitter, Facebook or any other suited service. Example below. 3. Touch the screen to vote for a competitor in i.e. American Idol. 4. Touch the screen to via 3G or WLAN, download the next episode of True Blood one week before it airs on TV. Some or all of these services may be free of charge from a public broadcaster, while commercial broadcasters will have great possibilities to enable new and exciting business models.

Mark Thompson, the General Director of the BBC, spoke about mobile TV to the Guardian yesterday. Thompson wants broadcasters which clearly includes the BBC, mobile phone manufacturers, telecom operators and the UK government to work together to create a “road map” for broadcasted mobile television. “I believe that there’s a strong case for the UK’s broadcasters, mobile phone operators, Ofcom and government to come together to develop a roadmap for the introduction of mobile TV in this country. This would be complementary to the availability of TV content on demand, whether streamed or cached on the device and would enable the public to access time-critical content – news, major sports events and so on – wherever they are.” No meetings have yet been planned, but he calls for the process to be “kickstarted.” So what does that mean? I have not spoken to Mark Thompson about this, but if you want to kickstart something, you are usually in a hurry. I do therefore believe that this may open the way to mobile TV in the UK in time for the Olympics in London next summer. In order to do so, there is only one feasible standard out there, namely DMB. DMB services are being introduced in more and more countries as we speak (the last ones being Netherlands, Vietnam, Malaysia, South Africa, Dominican Republic and Belgium). A little DMB help from the EU Todays speech by Neelie Kroes, the Commissioner for Digital Agenda, should also help Tompson pick the technology to proceed with when it comes to mobile tv. She mentions the usage of open standards, and DMB, DAB and DAB+ specifically. Those three are all part of the same family (they can use the same transmitters and antennas and be received by the same receivers), and BBCs various digital radio channels via DAB already covers 86% of the UK population (set to increase to 93% by the end of the year). Devices, as Mark Thomson mention, are also plentiful when it comes to DMB. There is already a wide range of available receivers on the market. And a new generation of terminals, mobile phones and tablet PCs (with GSM, 3G and/or Wifi that also enables interactivity and on demand programmes) are about to be introduced. The DMB network in Greater Oslo was up and running less than 9 months after Norwegian Mobile TV Corporation was founded. There is still plenty of time to get everything up and running way ahead of the summer games in 2012. Especially if other broadcasters, device manufacturers, telecom operators and Ofcom (the British Post and Tele Authority) listen to Thompson’s wish for a kickstart.

Neelie Kroes, the EUs Commissioner for Digital Agenda, spoke at the Association of European Radio’s (AER) 20th Anniversary Conference today. She demonstrates a competent and future proof understanding that radio needs clear conditions for it to continue to blossom in the long term, in a digital manner. She pinpoints that there is no single way forward, radio needs to be delivered via multiple platforms, where listeners want and expect it. She calls for the usage of open standards, and mention DMB, DAB and DAB+ specifically. This will help the market to grow, and will benefit broadcasters, manufacturers of receivers, telecom operators and not least the users. The decision of Germany to launch a nationwide radio network via DAB+ in August 2011 and Norways decision to shut off FM in January 2017 may have contributed to her strong belief in the need for digitalization of radio, but through her speech she clearly helps radio, the best media for delivery of pictures, develop even further in the future. The highlights of her speech follows below, although I would recommend you to read all of it here. While awareness of digital radio is low, the population is already well aware of the benefits of digital audio and they have had it in compact discs and iPods for years. We cannot forget the European aspects of this issue. My job is to help content providers scale up their offer at least to the Single Market size – and that cannot be done with FM analogue radio alone. I think that there is great potential for digital radio, as the UK and Danish experiences demonstrate. From the Commission’s discussions with Member States, we have not yet reached clear-cut conclusions at European level on a number of fundamental questions: how can radio best participate in convergence? What incentives would encourage user and manufacturers to shift to the digital format? I need your support to develop the right answers to those questions. They will probably cover not only technical issues (e.g. spectrum efficiency of second generation standards and interoperability), but also political and economic issues. The ecosystem of radio must change, to the benefit of the many of us who enjoy its programmes on a daily basis. We must all think creatively. Let me give you just one example. In the absence of standards agreed by the market, in the absence of digital radio in 16 Member States, I welcome the efforts of the WorldDMB industry group. They have developed receiver specifications which integrate DAB, DAB-plus, and DMB standards in one receiver. This is possible because these are open standards! In conclusion, let me say that I am optimistic that the radio Single Market has a digital future. I am determined that you should have access to the full benefits of the Single Market. To get there, we will need EU-wide coordination. Rest assured I am your ally in your efforts to give people the radio they want, how they want it. More food for thought The following blog posts are also highly relevant and may be of interest. Plains, Trains and Automobiles DAB 20 Times greener than FM 1484 Transmitters Too Many 21 Reasons Why FM is Almost History

TDF is a French company that builds and runs networks. All kinds of networks. For both telecom operators and broadcasters. TDF should therefore not have any invested interest in favouring one network over another. TDF Proves Internet Radio Too Expensive The following is therefore rather interesting. TDF has published a study that looks at the delivery of radio via the Internet compared to via broadcasting. It shows that there are potentially very high costs to broadcasters and listeners alike if radio is to be delivered over the mobile network. Or ‘prohibitively expensive’ as the English translation put it. The point of the study was to give a realistic estimate of costs involved if a radio station was to migrate from broadcasting its station to distribution via a mobile network such as 3G. The average person in France listens to radio for 179 minutes a day. (The figure for Norway is 101 minutes, in comparison.) The 179 minute figure is not expected to drop, but TDF created the hypothesis that 39 minutes of that listening would happen via telecom networks. 80% of all radio listening in France is to the 20 biggest radio stations from the big four broadcasters, Radio France, RTL, NRJ and Lagardère. If those 20 stations were to distribute the 39 minutes of radio listening a day via 3G or LTE, it would set them back over $100 million (74 million Euro) a year. That is, on average, five million dollars per year per radio station. If those costs were passed onto the broadcasters from the telecom operators (and, why wouldn’t they be?), the radio stations would be unprofitable. Unless, of course, the radio stations passed the costs on to you, as a listener. Likelyhood is that listening then would drop, again making the radio stations unprofitable. Potentially disastrous What if those 39 minutes were not 39 minutes, but the entire 179 minutes? The costs would then not be 101,700,000 American dollars per year anymore, but 467,000,000 given the same pricing. And keep in mind. No discounts would be given. Rather the contrary, actually. After all, such a situation would be disastrous for the telecom operators as their entire networks would have been taken down. And then some. The study clearly shows that mobile networks cannot compete against dedicated broadcast transmission systems. Such as DMB/DAB/DAB+, the de facto standard for mobile TV and digital radio. A digitally broadcasted station has no bandwidth limitations, everyone can be reached in a cost-effective manner. There is no additional cost per new listener. And maybe equally important to public broadcasters, listeners can listen to their radio for free, with neither of them having to stay friends with a gate keeper. My challenge to TDF is to do a similar study for TV. In the meantime, feel free to look at my earlier calculations done for both TV and radio if all traffic were to go via the Internet. Or read why LTE/4G is hyped. TDFs study was published eleven months ago but only recently brought to my attention.

Why can’t we just move all distribution of live television and radio to the Internet? Then you’ll get everything through one cable, or even wirelessly. It’s got to be the solution. After all, the Internet service providers (ISPs) out there outbid each other in promising you the broadest, fastest and cheapest broadband to your home in order to give you the Internet, TV, radio, on demand films, news, Internet banking and much more. They wouldn’t do that if they couldn’t deliver, would they? The funny thing is that ISPs at the same time are limiting how much data you can use per month, as well as wanting to charge media houses to stream TV and radio content to end users since media houses are ‘causing so much strain to the broadband networks.’ That means that ISPs want to charge both their end-users and the media houses. So maybe it isn’t all that easy after all. I will try to illustrate the situation through plains, trains and automobiles. Plains Plains are in reality nothing more than space that may be covered by i.e. grassland, woodlands or forests. There is only a certain amont of space available. If you use too much of it for one purpose, less is available for other purposes. If you want to build 16 lane motorways, there will be less space for grass or forests. The same applies to frequencies. They are also like natural resources. There is only a certain amount available, and you have to choose what to . Trains Trains are effective. A big train can transport almost one thousand people. Trains have their own tracks, don’t run into traffic problems and can therefore go very fast. They are not affected by traffic jams on roads and their speed limits are also much higher than those for cars. But they can only run where there are tracks and they run according to a fixed schedule, not necessarily exactly when passengers want them to. Trains and railroads are similar to broadcast TV and radio. An unlimited number of people can watch or listen to a programme simultaneously. But TV viewers or radio listeners can only enjoy their shows whenever they are on (unless they record them). Automobiles Automobiles or cars are great. They can go almost everywhere and give you personal freedom. But there are speed limits and other traffic rules and roads are easily clogged if too many cars are on the same streets. You can always build new lanes to a road, but you will then have to use of the limited plains to do that. But the more lanes that are available, the more people will hit the streets. And not only private cars, but also lorries, vans and trucks. The bigger the road, the more vehicles it can hold, the more vehicles it will have to hold and the worse the potential traffic jams at peak hours. And they use more energy per passenger than what is the case for trains. So what? Trains and automobiles have different purposes and do different things well. Both use of the limited space that is available on the plains, both must co-exist and both are dependant of each other. If you take away one of them the other one will struggle and be unable to do what it has been designed to do. Just imagine forcing every passenger on a train to take his or her own car to the road during rush our, or to force every driver onto a train at the same time. The space on the plains must be optimized in order to accommodate for trains and automobiles, both of which are needed. Doesn’t that sound like broadcasting and the Internet? The title of this blog post was inspired by the film called Planes, Trains and Automobiles, starring Steve Martin, John Candy and Kevin Bacon.

Once upon a time there was a spoiled little kid that received everything he pointed at, and more. The other kids, his brothers and sisters, were not so lucky, and they only became more and more disappointed. Why didn’t they get what their spoiled brother did? Or at least some of it? After a while the disappointment turned into silence. They could not be bothered to react anymore, they just realized that they were being treated differently. Was this from a fairytale by H.C. Andersen? I certainly hope not. He wrote much better children stories than I ever will. Too many options? So what is the point of this little story? It is an attempt to describe what governments, network operators and broadcasters may be doing wrong too often in order to increase uptake and encourage constructive dialogue with users. They usually start building new services or networks in the big cities. The issue with big cities is that people there already have ‘everything’. They have amusement parks, theatres, cinemas, restaurants, ice skating rinks, cafes, pubs, and concert halls. And access to all kinds of media. Even digital radio (DAB) and MiniTV (DMB) too. The two latter services are services that make the ‘other kids,’ in this case rural towns and villages, go silent. Yet again, the cities have received beneficial treatment. 80% of Norwegians are covered by DAB signals, around 20% by DMB. What would have happened if the other kids got something that the spoiled one didn’t? Well, then he would probably have wanted it (based on my knowledge of spoiled kids). And what would have happened if DAB and DMB had been introduced in the countryside first? First of all, I believe that rural populations are more open for such new services as they are not at all spoiled when it come to what is on offer. They might even be grateful for being given such opportunities. After all, 10% of Norwegians can receive only one or two radio stations. And they do certainly not have amusement parks or cinemas. Cities last? By first introducing DAB and DMB outside the cities the uptake would have been likely to be much higher (percentage wise) than what is currently the case. And feedback from those users would probably have been more productive and positive. Spoiled kids usually don’t even say thanks, let alone explain why they are not satisfied. But they do complain easily. (– Why do I need this? I like the other one better. This is not what I wished for.) Why were the DAB and DMB networks built in the cities first? If you look at the cost calculations, it makes sense. Every transmitter in urban areas will cover many more people than what is the case in rural Norway. But maybe this is not the most important factor initially. Maybe the goal should be to properly introduce a new service in a population that has time to appreciate it. Because they are not spoiled with choice or because they don’t even have an option. Only the population in the 13 biggest cities have access to 5 radio channels from NRK (Norwegian Broadcasting Corporations) via FM. The rest only have access to 3, 2 or 1 NRK channels. Less than 83% of Norwegian households have access to broadband at home. And do remember, the Internet Won’t Solve Everything, even if everyone has broadband. Those living in rural areas have a much less varied choice when it comes to media alternatives than their counterparts in cities. Competition is limited, if at all present, and helping increase choice through new distribution technologies should be prioritized. This is now luckily being done in some countries. In Norway thanks to a government that has decided to give digital radio to everyone, increasing choice of radio stations thirteenfold to those living in the smallest villages. A rural world This blog post has not been written to blame broadcasters, governments or network operators in Norway or elsewhere for what has been done. DAB and DMB networks have been built with the best of intentions, namely to reach out to as many people as possible, often with limited budgets or in order to introduce a commercial service that needs as many users as possible to attract advertisers. And DAB and DMB services are certainly picking up speed and attracting fans in more and more countries. So is the access of advanced and attractive terminals. I just think that there may be a lesson there somewhere. For next time. Because there are people outside Oslo too. In fact, 57% of Egyptians, 27% of Russians, 23% of Norwegians, 18% of Americans, 13% of Danes and 10% of British live in rural areas. But who lives in Oslo and other cities? Well, almost all journalists writing about trends, media and technology and most analysts commenting and presenting on these issues do. That is quite natural, after all most media houses, analysts and creative agencies are based in cities. But that is still a problem, because they do not, or at least only rarely, get to experience the situation of people that live on the countryside. With poor, if any broadband connection, limited access to TV channels and radio stations. That is reflected in a fair amount of the articles that they write. It is actually a good reality check to go rural for a while. I am from Naustdal, a small village on the Norwegian West Coast, and I do therefore get to experience the different media world every time I am at home. It’s a good thing that the area compensates with a stunning scenery, fish in fjords and rivers, berries in the forests and unbelieveable hiking possibilities. P.S. My apologies to any spoiled kids out there, former or present, that may feel intimidated by the usage of ‘spoiled kid’ as a term. And I do not suggest that the inhabitants of cities are spoiled, we just have a much better choice of services than people living on the countryside.

Today the Norwegian Ministry of Culture published a 76 pages long report to the government, to be made into legislation, saying that FM will be switched off in January 2017. In April 2011, an 8 page long summary was made available in English. From the report (own translation): The Ministry has concluded that it is beneficial to switch off FM in 2017. This will give the listeners almost 6 years transition time. The combination of a clear shut off date for FM and some years of transition time makes it more likely that the proportion of digital radio receivers will be high at the time of shut off. There are some criteria The Ministry demands a coverage of NRKs radio stations that is equal to that P1 [the main radio station] currently has on FM by January 1st 2015. The commercial radio stations must reach at least 90% of the population. Digital radio must include additional value to the listeners [such as extra radio channels or additional services]. Half of the listeners in Norway must listen to radio digitally [via DAB, Internet or the digital TV network] in some form during the day for the switch off to happen in January 2017. If this is not the case by the start of 2015, the switch off will be postponed for two years. Inexpensive and technically satisfactory solutions for radio reception in cars must be widely available by early 2015 for the switch off to happen in January 2017. This includes converters from DAB to FM that ensures a stable and robust signal reception. If such equipment is not available, the switch off date will be delayed until 2019. Look to Norway This makes Norway the first country to decide to switch off analogue radio. That is a smart move, as FM is long overdue as a technology and because FM maintains differences between audiences as it is way too costly to build in order to give everyone the same channel offering. DMB/DAB/DAB+ is the open standard that ensures that radio as the last media goes digital in Norway. Broadcasters will now start to plan and build increased coverage taking digital radio coverage to 99.8% (the same as FM) by 2017. What does this mean? This means that 99.8% of Norwegians will get access to 13 radio stations from NRK – the Norwegian Broadcasting Corporation by 2017, while using only half the electricity as FM needs today. And FM delivers only one (1) radio station to around 5% of Norwegians, two radio stations to another 5% and 3-7 national radio stations to the rest. Now, all 99.8% will get the same radio offering, the same 20+ stations. That is both a tool for democratization and a vast increase in choice. At least 90% will get access to additional commercial radio stations. This also means that NRK and commercial broadcasters cooperate on distribution of content, while still competing on the content itself. That radio goes digital also opens up for apps (for i.e. Android devices with DMB/DAB) that will combine and integrate both broadcasting and the Internet in innovatove manners. This will include the possibility to rate and discuss programmes and tie these comments and opinions to a time line that can be archived and indexed. It furthermore opens up for touch screen voting, shopping and competitions while watching TV or listening to radio. Increased choice of devices What has now happened in Norway is also a very clear signal to manufacturers of mobile phones, tablets, navigation equipment and kitchen radios. Norway is a small country, but it has traditionally been one of the trendsetters when it comes to media, mobile services and technology. Others countries will follow and prices of receivers will drop dramatically while products will become plentiful and more innovative. But will this not mean that millions of devices will have to be thrown into the garbage? Not necessarily. You can first of all buy a little converter that converts the DAB signal into an FM signal so that it can be picked up by your FM receiver, without any physical modification. Second of all, we are 6 years away from the FM switch off date. The guarantee time of a gadget in Norway is currently 2 years. The Purchasing Act (kjøpslova med reklamasjonsrett) does however also state that the life expectancy of any device should be at least five years. The switch off date is more than five years away and 800,000 radios are sold in Norway every year. By the switch off date, most households will therefore have purchased a DAB radio anyway. Just make sure that your new radio will be a DAB radio (all DAB radios also have built in FM). And comparatively speaking, to change your radio within 6 years is not a big deal. The average Norwegian buys a new mobile phone (that easily costs 10-20 times that of a DAB radio) every 18 months and a new computer every 2-3 years. Better broadband connections A bonus effect will also be that the broadband connections (both fixed and mobile) will become faster and more stable as a lot of radio and television viewing will shift from Internet distribution to broadcasting via DMB/DAB/DAB+. That improves quality of service for all Internet users out there and is good news for ISPs and telecom operators whose customers will notice a better service. In a perfect world, this should even lower the prices for broadband connections as current and future traffic is being taken off the networks. International impact This is furthermore a clear signal to other countries that governments must play a role in digitalization of radio. Creating transparent and clear terms will help broadcasters, device manufacturers, ISPs, telecom operators and end users to plan ahead for long-terms conditions and usage patterns. To make such a decision that FM will be switched off should also help take the focus off the destructive ping-pong style discussions about standards and help the verbal fighters focus on making great content and relevant services. The focal poimt should be how to best combine and integrate broadcasting of content with Internet services. With radio finally going digital, open APIs will enable endless of exciting opportunities for apps, loads of apps with killer content. Which country will follow Norways example next, and when? The only thing certain is that many countries will follow. Road tunnels Norway is also a country of fjords and mountains and a rural population. That means a lot of road tunnels. Most of these have so far been without radio coverage, but this is set to change with the digitalization of radio. All tunnels above 500 meters in length will get DAB installed by the Norwegian Road Authority as the DAB system in the tunnels will double as an emergency warning system in case of accidents or fires. More than 500 tunnels, out of approximately 1,200 tunnels in the country, are over 500 meters long. Read more about why it makes sense to go from FM to DMB/DAB/DAB+ here: The 2800% Difference. Help the BBC Save 74%. DAB 20 Times Greener than FM. The Impending Retirement of FM. 2034 Transmitters are 1484 Too Many. And on the relation to Internet as a distribution channel: Why MNOs Should Love, Not Loathe Broadcasting. Why the Internet Won’t Solve Everything.