[cma-l] is there anybody in there?

[Richard Berry]

As a station, we don't do repeats here but with my compliance hat I do find myself agreeing with ofcom. Listeners must be able to trust in what we do. It might not be spontaneous for a presenter to remind listeners that the lines are only open for the live show but it's morally right, surely?

Let's assume that the listeners enjoy the show, they like the content and the presenter. But they can only ever listen to the repeat. They don't know it's a repeat, so they call in and never get through or text and never get their message read out or responded to. They'll soon feel that their passion and engagement is not being rewarded and will stop being so loyal. Ofcom said "presenting a pre-recorded programme that invited audience participation in this way nevertheless risked a breach of listeners? trust"

So, options? Get presenters to present interactions on shows where there are repeats in such a way that the listeners are not misled. In this case, the station repeated the wrong show. They banged on a tape of a show that was presented as live, rather than having a standby show on or extending the on-air presenter until cover arrived.

For me, there are 2 lessons here. 1) Have a proper plan for emergency cover, 2) When you repeat shows that demand immediate interaction make sure the listeners know – if the show asks for ideas for the NEXT show or that texts and calls during the repeat will be collected and used in the next available show (as the station will do and ofcom accepts) I can't see a problem with repeating.

Richard


Richard Berry
Senior Lecturer in Radio
University of Sunderland
Tel: (+44) 0191 515 2239
Social: @sunderlandradio


From: Julian Mellor <julian at 10radio.org<mailto:julian at 10radio.org>>
Date: Thu, 26 May 2011 09:27:23 +0100
To: CMA-L <cma-l at commedia.org.uk<mailto:cma-l at commedia.org.uk>>
Subject: [cma-l] is there anybody in there?

Earlier this week I saw Ofcom's ruling about a breach of the broadcasting code by a community station not far from here.

Apparently a request show was repeated, a member of the public called in to speak to the presenter, was told that in fact the show was a repeat, and so the said member of the public complained to Ofcom that the station was in breach of rule 2.2 (not to materially mislead).  Instead of find the complaint malicious and trivial, Ofcom found against the station and said that they had breached the trust of their listeners.

This raised alarm bells for me as we repeat most of our programmes and most invite listeners to email or text in with comments (and sometimes requests). However, rarely, if ever, do presenters give a date stamp during their programmes so the repeat could be perceived to be live (although there is absolutely no intent to deceive or mislead and most listeners know our schedule well enough or look at the website to see if its live or not).  Equally some presenters, especially newbies, often read out the contact details for want of something to say, but then forget to check the emails (which could be construed as deception).

I raised the issue with Ofcom of this seemingly draconian interpretation of rule 2.2 (introduced to stop broadcasters running pseudo competitions on premium lines) and pointed out that, as a community station staffed entirely by volunteers, we don't have the capacity to monitor, enforce and edit everything to the level they seem to be requiring.  I said that it would be likely to drive away presenters and stop us repeating anything.  Surely, I said, Ofcom does not want to constrain community broadcasters in this way.

They came back the same day (preferring to call rather than write) and said it is indeed their intention to constrain broadcasters.  The way around it, they said, is for any repeated shows to give a date reference when inviting listeners to make contact.  Furthermore,  presenters must not invite contact if they are likely to forget to check the messages.

I sent out an instruction to our presenters and already one has come back saying it will destroy his spontaneity and, given that he can't guarantee that a date reference will always be given, he is withdrawing his repeats (4 hours of lost programming per week and many saddened listeners).

I instinctively react against people banging on about nanny states, red tape etc, but this seems absolute madness and inspires me to move to Tunbridge Wells from where I shall write to my MP.

How does everyone else deal with the issue?

(And for the avoidance of doubt this is written live at 9:15am on Thursday 26 May but I may be away from my desk when you reply)

Julian

................................................................................

10Radio: community radio for the 10 parishes
1 Croft Cottage, West St, Wiveliscombe, Somerset, TA4 2JP
Hear us on 105.3fm & www.10radio.org<http://www.10radio.org>

JM tel: 01984 623 104
Studio and office tel: 01984 624 137

For details of our training, team building, hire and broadcast services, please go to www.10radio.com<http://www.10radio.com>

10Radio CIC
Registered Office: 1 Croft Cottage, West St, Wiveliscombe, Somerset, TA4 2JP
Registered in England and Wales Number: 6004252

_______________________________________________ Reply - cma-l at commedia.org.uk<mailto:cma-l at commedia.org.uk> The cma-l mailing list is a members' service provided by the Community Media Association - http://www.commedia.org.uk Twitter: http://twitter.com/community_media http://www.facebook.com/CommunityMediaAssociation Canstream Internet Radio & Video: http://www.canstream.co.uk/ _______________________________________________ Mailing list guidelines: http://www.commedia.org.uk/about/cma-email-lists/email-list-guidelines/ _______________________________________________ To unsubscribe or manage your CMA-L mailing list subscription please visit:http://mailman.commedia.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/cma-l
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.commedia.org.uk/pipermail/cma-l/attachments/20110526/c989110d/attachment.html>