[cma-l] is there anybody in there?
Helen Cook
revhcook at btinternet.com
Sat May 28 10:51:36 BST 2011
Thanks - all been very helpful on this.
Helen
Speysound
--- On Fri, 27/5/11, Martin Steers <martin at martinsteers.co.uk> wrote:
From: Martin Steers <martin at martinsteers.co.uk>
Subject: Re: [cma-l] is there anybody in there?
To: "Phoenix Dark-Knight" <phoenix.dark-knight at ne1fm.net>
Cc: cma-l at mailman.commedia.org.uk
Date: Friday, 27 May, 2011, 2:09
Oh, inspired by the discussion on the list I decided to blog about it (mostly saying what I have already said) http://goo.gl/jpBUj but would welcome any further thoughts on the matter.. I am considering blogging about each bulletin, if it might be useful to anyone we will see.
Martin
On Fri, May 27, 2011 at 1:02 AM, Martin Steers <martin at martinsteers.co.uk> wrote:
I dont think it directly came about because of the phone line scandal (to be honest it had been going on for years, it wasnt until the BBC got caught that it really hit the headlines)
If there is anything in your programme that might suggest to your listeners that your show is live and it isnt, then you are misleading your listeners, if its meant to or not is a different issue entirely and not what this rule is about. (although I suspect if there was evidence that it was a deliberate ploy to mislead for what ever reason I imagine ofcom really wouldnt be happy).
Its good that your presenters are not inviting listeners to call during a pre-recorded (although they still could as long as they say its pre-recorded, and what they will do with the calls.. assuming they will get answered or recorded) BUT if they are playing a jingle saying "send us xyz and said email blah blah" and its pre-recorded then yes that could be considered a break as its a direct call to action.. If its a jingle promoting the email for any other reason I dont see why that would cause a problem.. If your presenters are pre-recording they just need to be given guidance or not having calls to action and what would constitute..
Ofcom after several of these types of incidents released a statement about the issue here (Page 17) http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/binaries/enforcement/broadcast-bulletins/obb127/issue127.pdf
Clearly states Ofcoms position on the matter and how they will treat it.. Worth a quick read..
In this case its a simple black and white matter, there was a pre-recorded call to action for which the listener couldnt interact with the programme live.. Regardless of if this was intentional or not (In this case it appears it was just a mistake) it was a breach of the code and Ofcom called it what it was. They have to be fair to all.. However I strongly doubt that the station will receive any fines or penalties as long as they dont do it again.. Like so often with community stations, they get a slap on the wrist and then told what they did wrong and why. Ofcom wants to work with Community Stations to make sure they are doing their best to meet the code, KC etc.
Martin
On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 1:59 PM, Phoenix Dark-Knight <phoenix.dark-knight at ne1fm.net> wrote:
Hi all, I have to say the station being in breach over this doesn't sit right with me either, the way (I imagine) most read the rule is directly associated with the phone-line scandals of years past that mean "don't let people phone up for a competition/equivalent if the show is repeated" not these very wide interpretations of "misleading listeners".
Here at NE1fm we only repeat one show, that mentions it's repeat once or twice when giving out information and doesn't invite calls or emails. However, we also have a number of pre-recorded shows, that are presented as live, and during those times, I know no-one will be in the studios to take calls - now the presenter is not likely to slip a phone number in there if s/he's pre-recording, but what if s/he puts a jingle in with our studio email on? are we in breach?
Also with our open slot programming, we certainly will have presenters, newbies and old hats, who will read out the phone number, txt number and email/website addresses all to add to their content/links, and who might forget or just not bother to check the 2nd computer screen.
I think it's very draconian indeed to suggest we're in breach for this last point, and whilst I appreciate Ofcom's need to protect the listeners from programming that *may* cost people a wasted phonecall or txt (n.b. All our call/txt rates are standard) I can't get behind the logic of this decision.
Phoenix D-K
CBIT/NE1fm 102.5
Virginia House
Georges Road
NEWCASTLE UPON TYNE
NE4 7NQ
[T] 0191 240 1025
[E] phoenix.dark-knight at ne1fm.net
[W] http://www.ne1fm.net
NE1fm 102.5 is owned and operated by CBIT.
CBIT is registered in England & Wales, Company No. 05022142
On 26 May 2011 13:34, <cma-l-request at mailman.commedia.org.uk> wrote:
Send cma-l mailing list submissions to
cma-l at mailman.commedia.org.uk
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://mailman.commedia.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/cma-l
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
cma-l-request at mailman.commedia.org.uk
You can reach the person managing the list at
cma-l-owner at mailman.commedia.org.uk
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of cma-l digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Re: is there anybody in there? (Office - ccr-fm)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Thu, 26 May 2011 11:36:50 +0100
From: "Office - ccr-fm" <office at ccr-fm.co.uk>
Subject: Re: [cma-l] is there anybody in there?
To: <martin at martinsteers.co..uk>, "'CMA-L'" <cma-l at commedia.org.uk>,
"'jaqui devereux'" <jaqui.devereux at commedia.org.uk>
Message-ID:
<!&!AAAAAAAAAAAYAAAAAAAAAFLfoHySwD9Hi/viVsoHZf/CgAAAEAAAADr/XrlRix5PruKb9Lm8J/wBAAAAAA==@ccr-fm.co.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Martin n? all
I forgot to mention in my rant) we (CCR) plug all week long that some
of our programmes are repeated ?.. ie:- 60?s / 70?s / 80?s etc by doing
so PROVES that we are not wishing to deliberately deceive our listeners.
I was on-air last week and mentioned that ??the next programme is a repeat
of Sundays seventies show?? (as I do everyweek) whilst the show
was playing, three people rang up in the first 20 minutes of the show, all
of them said ??oh nevermind I?ll ring back on Sunday?? ????..
I fully understand the rules and I fully understand that they are there to
protect listeners and Joe public ????. It is unfair to encourage listeners
to text / ring shows knowing that they will get no reaction / no answer and
be charged ????? certainly if it is being charged at premium competition
rate.
We don?t have any charges at our station, that is not what we are about and
we take every opportunity and care to ensure that listeners are not deceived
???..
So, my conclusion is this ????.. rule 2.2 needs changing !
it either states clearly that repeated shows are NOT permitted full stop, as
this argument will always rear up it?s ugly head or it is left alone and
everyone gets fined ???? I don?t think there is a community station in the
Land that hasn?t dropped a clanger on this one.
Volunteers simply do not have the time or the will to then finish there show
and go searching and editing out everytime they mention a phone contact.
However, having had my rant I do accept completely that rule 2.2 should
exist, but not if common sense can?t be applied.
The station in breach ?? have they been fined ?? damn shame if
they have.
Nick
_____
From: cma-l-bounces at mailman.commedia.org.uk
[mailto:cma-l-bounces at mailman.commedia.org.uk] On Behalf Of Martin Steers
Sent: 26 May 2011 10:26
To: Julian Mellor
Cc: CMA-L
Subject: Re: [cma-l] is there anybody in there?
Although I never like to see a station get breached, I must admit in this
case they did break the rules, if you read the previous cases and the
statement ofcom made at the time they where trying to clamp down on
recorded, non line calls to action, and I dont think I disagree with it.
If your doing any listener based show that relies heavily on listener
engagement be it song requests, thoughts and feelings or any form of voting
etc then this can not be pre-recorded, and if its repeated I think you need
to make that clear as often as you can to your listeners.
The case that got breached wasnt a repeat, as far as I can tell it was a
pre-record..
And not to be harsh.. but I am afraid "we don't have the capacity to
monitor, enforce and edit everything to the level they seem to be
requiring." goes against what the station signed up for when you applied for
your license and started broadcasting, as a station you have a
responsibility for everything you broadcast and it must all be code
compliant.
I dont know if I agree with having to use the time and date all the time, do
your volunteers have an extra 15 minutes to edit their shows? Would a
generic "Your listening to a repeat of XYZ show from the XYZ date, any
requests taken wont make it to this show but we will try out best to put
them in the next show" and get them to stick it at the start of the show,
and at regular points during the show (maybe over the original calls to
action). You might want to double check with ofcom, but you might find thats
a good step in the right direction and maybe all you need to do. Other
things you could do is make it clear on websites etc that its a repeat, but
use this as a positive to encourage people to listen to the live shows,
maybe also look at either auto replying to any incoming messages explaining
that its a repeat and you hope to get their request next time.. Either
automated or by hand..
The rules and code are there to protect the listeners and broadcasters, it
has to be the same rules for everyone regardless of the amount of listeners,
demographic or if your charging ?1.50 a txt.
Martin
On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 9:27 AM, Julian Mellor <julian at 10radio.org> wrote:
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
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
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
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/20110526/6f064797/attachment.html
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
cma-l mailing list - cma-l at commedia.org.uk
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/
_______________________________________________
To unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription please visit:
http://mailman.commedia.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/cma-l
End of cma-l Digest, Vol 46, Issue 41
*************************************
_______________________________________________
Reply - 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
-----Inline Attachment Follows-----
_______________________________________________
Reply - 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/20110528/46aa4c3e/attachment.html>
More information about the cma-l
mailing list