Like many other authors looking to sensationalize and editorialize, this author forgets that poor people exist and forgets that rural areas exist. Also, the aut

Like many other authors looking to sensationalize and editorialize, this author forgets that poor people exist and forgets that rural areas exist. Also, the author seems be unaware that an emergency could make existing infrastructure unusable. AM radio's value for emergency situations is that it can be received literally hundreds of miles from the transmitter. What're the reasons for NOT including AM? The only thing I found is mention that including it will "hinder progress". What progress? Since when does including the most basic, tiny bit of functionality somehow "hinder progress"? Is there literally any other reason at all? Please, someone, tell me. Is this really a news piece if the author can't even come up with the slightest reason beyond the most specious bit of bullshit from a self-interest group?