[cma-l] Re: Bad news on the DDR and local television‏

[Peter Reid]

Hello Chris.

I’m not sure who you are.  Are you the guy that spoke at the Public Voice/CMA DDR event back at the beginning of the year?

Whatever, many thanks for your response.

No, I am not suffering under the ‘dangerous illusion’ that local and community television (LCTV) is simply going to be handed down to us by those in power and I am well aware that there is still much serious hard work to be done before the matter is settled.

My emails were intended to stimulate a little more discussion about LCTV and to act as an antidote to the dangerous defeatism on these issues, and the apparent acceptance of Ofcom’s December ’06 position, that I have heard expressed by some elements within the leadership of the community media sector.  This, despite the fact that, as you say, those proposals have been heavily criticised and that Ofcom’s own consultations have demonstrated strong public support for LCTV.  Ofcom may choose to ignore this but these facts remain strong weapons for the sector.  Capitulation now, to Ofcom’s position, would, I believe, be a grave error.

“As things stand now...” nobody knows what will happen.  Not unless Gordon Brown has made his mind up and let others in on the secret.  Even if he had decided against supporting LCTV there would still be a battle to be had until legislation was enacted or the auction took place.  So defeatism now is dreadfully misplaced.  I hope this is not a sentiment you share Chris, though it’s not entirely clear from your email.  

You say “The only chance for bringing about a change in this thinking is massive public support for local television...” if that were true then the case would be lost because clearly the vast majority of the public know little or nothing about LCTV so are not about to start campaigning for it.  If you believe this then perhaps you are amongst those who take a defeatist view.

This is certainly not my view and ought not to be the view of anybody who holds a position of leadership within the community media sector.  As was stated by Patrick Atagana of DCLG and John Mottram of Ofcom recently and quoted in Peter Lewis’s email of 30.11.07, the case has to be got across to people at government and ministerial level.  It is now especially, that the leadership of the community media sector has to make the case to government. That is where the battle will be won and the leadership of the community media sector needs to be making the case at that level unremittingly. 

If I could use a sporting analogy, football is a game of 90 minutes but increasingly frequently we are seeing the winning goal being scored in the 94th minute (the 4th minute of extra time).  In other words, the community media sector may seem to be up against powerful opposition but it has all the weapons at its disposal to win the game and must maintain the pressure until the end to break down a seemingly impenetrable defence.  The game is there to be won.  The team that gives up before the final whistle is the team that loses.  I certainly won’t be giving up and I don’t expect my team to either.

You mention the Times article and the HoC CMS Committee.  I may be wrong, and if so perhaps someone with better technical knowledge than me could inform this list, but the article, and therefore the James Purnell quote, seem to me to be referring to the demands for spectrum allocation made by the mainstream broadcasters - BBC, ITV, C4 and Five - and therefore are not applicable to the demands for allocation made by the community media sector.  I’m not aware that James Purnell, who is known to be a keen supporter of community radio, has issued any policy statement on LCTV.  Again, if anyone knows different I for one would like to hear about it.  Citing this as evidence of high-level opposition to LCTV therefore seems erroneous.

With respect to the HoC committee it’s a shame, verging on dereliction of duty, that they have failed to recognise what a rejuvenating and transforming influence a national LCTV network would have on the national TV and film industry, providing a seedbed of programme ideas, actual programmes and trained craftspeople.  (Not to mention the boost it would give to the film and television equipment industry.)  New ideas are something the industry is desperately in need of.  The millions of pounds that have been fed into the film industry has barely lead to a handful of decent films and hardly any great ones - ok, maybe one or two.  A national LCTV network would facilitate the development of great swathes of talent that are routinely ignored by the mainstream and that would reinvigorate the industry - an urgent necessity in the face of global competition.  Implicit in this of course, and equally as important, is the fact that LCTV would give a voice to all underrepresented groups in society and this would also eventually feed into mainstream film and television production and broadcasting, thereby enriching the cultural life of the whole country.

All of this of course is not to even touch on the numerous and profound benefits LCTV would contribute to community development, local regeneration and renewal, local democratic development and the growth of the third sector.  (That’s for another email on another day.)

In the face of so much profit to be made by the private sector and so much money to be acquired by the government it would be perverse and simply greedy if they failed to make a percentage of the spectrum available for community cultural and social purpose.  The government needs to do more than acquire money to win elections, it needs to serve the country - convincingly.  LCTV would provide a payback to the country, and therefore possibly to the government as well, that even Phillip Rutnam (Ofcom) was prepared to acknowledge cannot be measured in pounds and pence and would not be delivered by the private sector.

This was even recognised in America, the High Temple of Free Enterprise, when the FCC drafted the regulation of the cable networks.  When doing so they required the franchised companies to make available production facilities and broadcasting channels to any community that asked for them.  As you will probably know, as a result of this America now has a national network of over 1500 LCTV channels supporting its communities and feeding its film and television industries.  

If in 1930 the establishment of BBC television had depended on public support and the BBC had had only the meagre promotional resources now available to the community media sector to curry that support it must be doubtful that it would have ever taken off and British television might have become a purely commercial concern.  Fortunately, those in power at the time had the foresight to recognise the potential of the BBC.  The same is true for community radio.  Belief that only a mass public uprising in support of LCTV can now secure its future is seriously misplaced, as are all other forms of capitulation.  Yes, we all must do all we can to develop political support, but it is essential that the leadership of the community media sector is making the case for LCTV uncompromisingly at the highest level and any who feel unable to do so or that the case is lost should urgently rethink their positions.

I don’t believe that the government and its members are impervious to the case for LCTV (the surface of which I’ve barely scratched here) and it is they who will make the final decision, not Ofcom, and as I have said previously, many believe Gordon Brown to be supportive, he undoubtedly is very keen on the principle of community ownership.

So I don’t share your gloom.  I believe our case unremittingly and properly put can and will win the day and I therefore continue, cautiously and without complacency, to look forward to the development of a national network of LCTV channels beginning soon.

Best regards,

Peter.



________________________________
> From: chris_booth at dsl.pipex.com
> To: cma-l at commedia.org.uk
> Date: Sun, 2 Dec 2007 22:09:47 +0000
> Subject: [cma-l] Bad news on the DDR and local television
> 
> Dear Peter,
>
I, and I suspect many others involved in lobbying Ofcom local television for the last few years, cannot share your sense of rosy optimism about the likelihood of the development of a national network of community television channels commencing soon.  As things stand, exactly the opposite will happen.  Ofcom have made it clear that they favour the wholesale sell-off of spectrum to the highest bidder, despite the widespread rejection of this idea in the last public consultation on the DDR.  Over the summer Ofcom held an seminar in London in which they made it clear (as did the Times article) that they will come back with exactly the same, previously rejected proposal in the next DDR public consultation.  Ofcom's argument is that one cannot interfere in a free market and that technical innovation, which they equate with social innovation and social worth, will necessarily emerge from giving over spectrum to the highest bidder.  Dave Rushton, Marilyn Hyndman, the CMA and others have amassed plenty of information over the years about the importance of local television which they have presented to various Ofcom forums, to no avail.  I believe that no representative from Ofcom has yet even visited Northern Visions in Belfast to view the important work it does.  You can present all the valid arguments you want for a course of action, but if those in power are in the unshakeable grip of an ideology that doesn't acknowledge the validity of any arguments other than its own, you won't get anywhere. 
 
Nor should one expect the government or MPs to support local television as things stand.  On November 15th the all-party House of Commons Culture Media and Sport Committee published its report on Public Service Content.  Item 117 on Page 40 of the Report states:
 
"We note the enthusiasm of some witnesses for the potential for local television and the view that the Government needs to take action to support the provision of local content.  However, whilst we do see some value in local content, we are not convinced of the need to intervene to support local television, particularly by giving away spectrum for broadcasting on digital terrestrial television.  If providers want to offer local television services, we believe that more targeted delivery platforms, such as broadband, are more appropriate."
 
If Ofcom and the Committee get their way the entire digital spectrum will be sold off to the highest bidder and after that no one is going to give away spectrum for local television services when they are paying such a high price in the first place.  Spectrum is regarded as a scare commodity by Ofcom and the various industries that want to get their hands on it, so it will be keenly bid for.  Once it is sold off, the chances for non commercial, socially or publicly oriented uses for such spectrum will be gone for ever.  The only chance for bringing about a change in this thinking is massive public support for local television, or at the very least rejection of Ofcom's proposal to auction off all spectrum to the highest bidder.  When you write "The case for community media, properly put, simply cannot be rejected", that may be so but that doesn't mean it will be acted on or answered; it will simply be ignored and sidestepped in the pursuit of market freedom, technical innovation and other supposedly more worthy aims.  To think that this matter will simply be resolved by the rational arguments is a dangerous illusion.  I would urge you, other CMA members and anyone else you know who wants local digital terrestrial television to lobby for it, not passively expect it to happen because it is clearly the most socially responsible use of spectrum and you have a touching faith that those in power will do the right thing.
 
Regards,
 
Chris Booth. 
_________________________________________________________________
Telly addicts unite!
http://www.searchgamesbox.com/tvtown.shtml