Mr_Adams wrote: There you go, it takes a lot of money to get your voice heard on radio. that's another part of the problem. Another thing the federal government shouldn't be aloud to do is require a license to broadcast. maybe state governments should have that power, but not the fed. they have their sticky little fingers in every nook and cranny. If it didn't cost millions to secure broadcasting licenses, you could have local talk shows sponsored by local small businesses. What a novel idea?
First, regulating radio channels is a practical matter... the same way we have stop signs and other traffic rules on roads. If the channels were not regulated, then it would be a "whoever has the most powerful receiver" competition. You would NOT see multiple stations by small businesses, you would see only the biggest and most powerful station essentially "drowning out" the others.
Per the fees -- well, again, the past few decades have seen the move to "we have to make everything profitable".
BUT, this is a very old problem. Do you know, for example, that one reason there is a reduced rate for mailng periodicals through the post office is because it was recognized that having much charge, some argued any charge, would limit people's access to information. Without free access to information, there IS NO Democracy (or republic).
This is about freedom of information and ensuring that everyone has access to multiple sides of every question.