How would it be? Broadcast licenses are issued "in the public interest." Also, the weather alerts you are so concerned about are the sort of local content that I am proposing. Why should auto makers be required to install a radio to receive content that might be useless?
How is providing the content the audience wants not operating in the public interest? And you have clearly never driven through highly rural areas with signs telling you to tune into a specific AM station for road and weather conditions.
1. I have. And my experience is the range is very short. 2. Ending a mandate does not mean people in those areas won't have radios.
The range covers the needed area - which is a larger area than that covered by FM stations. So what would be the purpose of ending the mandate?
A broadcaster whose programming does not interest the public will go out of business. (Yes, I know that's not the legal definition of "public interest", but it doesn't matter how Vital And Essential To Our Public Discourse some station's programming is if no one chooses to listen!)
And now that options for media sources are quite literally 2 or 3 orders of magnitude higher than they were pre-1990, no one needs to sit through content they don't care about.
In Ye Olde Dayse, broadcasters typically aired commercials at about the same time, so, flipping channels just meant more commercials. Might as well stay put. This is not the case anymore. (For that matter, less and less media is sent as a continuous stream. People now pick *programs*, not channels.)
I don't say "Let's see what's on Channel 2" anymore. I say, "Let's catch up on 'Abbot Elementary', it's on Hulu." 10 year old me would have been gobsmacked at the idea if I wanted to watch any particular episode of 'Star Trek' at any time, I could.
Why should they be required to install seat belts and airbags? Those "might be useless" too. (Heck and are in fact useless the vast majority of the time.)
You can plan when you might be driving out of cell phone, FM, whatever, range. People don't wake up in the morning planning to get into a head-on collision. How many Americans died because they didn't have an AM radio last year? Because about 20-30,000 died in collisions.
How many people didn’t die last year because they had AM radios?
Man, this side you're ignorantly digging in on really seats you on the side with people who want to demolish all the safety regulations that took decades to claw out. What are you even doing right now. Wild fires & weather events are NOT going to be getting any better, my friend.
I very clearly am in favor of seatbelts and airbags though. Don't you think you're being a tad histrionic? But let's back up. This whole conversation got started because I was suggesting alternatives to "ban Fox News" that would actually be legal/constitutional.
And in doing so suggested relaxing/removing a safety feature - which you are rightfully being dragged for.