I do agree that AM radio receivers are cheap to build and not a burden to require.
The actual burden of AM isn't the hardware it takes up, but rather the frequencies it hogs. Keeping AM indefinitely alive means we are reserving prime low frequency bandwidth for a dated tech for no real good reason.
Heck, I'd even agree that keeping the AM bandwidth dedicated to audio broadcasts is a desirable thing. However, I'd argue that it should be converted to a modern broadcasting format that can handle more than sermons and talk radio. Change it into a QAM digital broadcast with a fair bit of error correction and a modern codec and you suddenly can stuff a lot more stations into the same bandwidth, with a long range, and a crystal clear output.
Comments
The actual burden of AM isn't the hardware it takes up, but rather the frequencies it hogs. Keeping AM indefinitely alive means we are reserving prime low frequency bandwidth for a dated tech for no real good reason.
Heck, I'd even agree that keeping the AM bandwidth dedicated to audio broadcasts is a desirable thing. However, I'd argue that it should be converted to a modern broadcasting format that can handle more than sermons and talk radio. Change it into a QAM digital broadcast with a fair bit of error correction and a modern codec and you suddenly can stuff a lot more stations into the same bandwidth, with a long range, and a crystal clear output.