[cma-l] DCMS consultation meetings on amendments to communityradiolaw
Office - ccr-fm
office at ccr-fm.co.uk
Wed Oct 19 10:45:05 BST 2011
Ian, Roger n all
Thanks for the support and kind words ...... Regarding the meeting, there'd
be no flies on the wall, they'd all be sat on my head ! :-)
On a serious note ..... I did complain about the rules right from the
outset, but verbally to Ofcom and at CMA meetings. I had a rather
spectacular 'rant' as you say at the meeting in Openshawe when 300 gathered
and the Labour Minister (can't remember her name - from Salford) was
confronted .... That was back in 2007/8 ...... I repeat, I didn't get to
carried away at first because in my wildest dreams I never thought that we
would still be talking about this tripe 4 years down the line. I truly
believe that the Government Ministers be them Labour / Liberal or Tory have
actually made themselves look stupid and incompetent. We've got this
coalition in power now complaining at every opportunity about what a mess
Labour made and yet what have they done regarding this ..... 18 months down
the line 'nowt' and even though I respect very much the fact that Ed
Vaizey wrote to me personally via our local MP David Rutley, his rhetoric
regarding a number of issues was quite patronising ...... but at least he
replied and hats off to him for that.
The Labour chap not 'Andy Burnham' the one that followed him was
about as much use as a chocolate teapot !
This is a classic example of actions speak louder than words and we have
gone through the whole process. Now it's action stations.
1) Observations and remarks
2) Further observations
3) Complaints
4) Moaning
5) More complaints, Observations and remarks
6) Legal points and loopholes
7) More complaints, more moaning, more whinging and some rants
HOPE !
8) Disappointment
9) Involvement of outside parties giving them information, a trail, a
history, and of course complaints
10) Period ...... At least 3 years off and on
11) Action
We are now at number 11, and the action is either as a group or by
ourselves, it appears as if it is by ourselves. That's fine, no prob's,
we've done nothing wrong. The restrictions will still remain for now, but we
will now go around them, over them, under them using the loopholes. Our
loopholes are excellent, because we have a trail, we have documents to prove
what our supporters have signed up for and it doesn't include ON-AIR PAID
ADVERTS so ...... we'll give em' away free !
And being the nice chappy that I am, I'll even via this message board give
the DCMS their arguments that they will use against us. Problem is, they are
going to fall flat on their faces as they have got nothing on us.
What we can't do is entice NEW sponsors / donors / supporters on the proviso
that they will get free adverts. This could be seen as a deliberate breaking
of the rules. However, if Herbert Bloggs the window cleaner happens to tell
Fred Goggins the butcher that he signed up for Package ? whatever ?
(Website / Flyers / Newsletter / assisting websites only) and these
wonderful people at CCR sometimes 'adhoc' lob an advert in as well then
where's the problem ???
I accept that on this one there is a discrepancy, so for now, we will play
safe and NOT go down this route. We will stick to the absolute BOMBPROOF
guidelines that the regular ones who have stuck by us from the start on the
same package for the same price. If we wish to chuck in some FREE adverts
for them, then we will. We ain't even going to tell them ...... they will be
driving in their car one day and hear it ...... I will then possibly receive
a phone call and explain the situation.
My reckoning is that at least these people will like what we do and stick
with us .... In otherwords they will be bolted on.
So, we have turned a dire situation into a winning situation. We shouldn't
have to do this, but the authorities give us no other alternatives. A
shambolic way to treat voluntary sector people and people who work with
others with disabilities disgraceful !
The big mistake that we have made is that we should have done it 12 months
ago, because since October 2010 we have lost 19 sponsors ALL
leaving us due to not being able to have an advert and adding to the
mountain of people who say this process is a mickey mouse process.
This evening, Heidi Reid and myself are going to Warrington to a disability
awards ceremony. I don't know whether we will win anything, but we have been
nominated for the work that we do with youngsters with disabilities. These
are youngsters with mental issues, youngsters with epilepsy (which I suffer
with) so all this stress doesn't really help my situation and others who
simply are slow learners.
We are very proud of this .... ALL our money goes towards this work and
paying the bills ........ And what do the DCMS do ...... sod all ! that's
what, sod all !
And when the day comes when I do meet them TRUST ME, YOU
WON'T WANT TO BE A FLY ON THE WALL, coz I've got 4 years of angst bursting
to get out and the barrage will possibly last about 10 minutes. Better get
the Guiness Book of records on hand as well .. I may be added to the section
LONGEST RANT !
LOL
Keep smiling :-) If you didn't laugh, you'd cry.
I'm not a bad guy really, bark worse than the bite ..... Nontheless very
determined when up against clear injustices.
Nick
_____
From: cma-l-bounces at mailman.commedia.org.uk
[mailto:cma-l-bounces at mailman.commedia.org.uk] On Behalf Of Ian Hickling
Sent: 19 October 2011 07:36
To: rj.thorne at btinternet.com; cma-l
Subject: [cma-l] DCMS consultation meetings on amendments to
communityradiolaw
OK Roger - I was joking!
Regarding this:
CR is being badly treated by the authorities. Why should commercial
businesses be protected by law from the activities of community projects?
It's nonsense.
I agree!
But we all knew about that from the very beginning.
Did we complain then?
Have we been complaining continuously ever since?
What results have we seen?
What does this tell you about effective communication?
------------------------------------
Ian Hickling
Partner
transplan UK
_____
From: rj.thorne at btinternet.com
To: cma-l at commedia.org.uk
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2011 23:13:16 +0100
Subject: Re: [cma-l] DCMS consultation meetings on amendments to
communityradio law
Please don't speak for me - I'm not fed up with his moaning, though I'd say
that "ranting" is a better description of Nick's posts at times! As is
regularly pointed out he can be inaccurate, and certainly often comes out of
left-field. But usually worth a read even if just for the entertainment.
Underneath it all though the man is correct. CR is being badly treated by
the authorities. Why should commercial businesses be protected by law from
the activities of community projects? It's nonsense.
I would pay money to be a fly on the wall at a meeting between Nick and the
DCMS.....
From: cma-l-bounces at mailman.commedia.org.uk
[mailto:cma-l-bounces at mailman.commedia.org.uk] On Behalf Of Ian Hickling
Sent: 18 October 2011 14:18
To: office at ccr-fm.co.uk; Alan Coote; cma-l
Subject: [cma-l] DCMS consultation meetings on amendments to communityradio
law
Nick
I'm going to do this in public, because we're all fed up with your moaning.
No - actually - we do appreciate what you're saying.
Let's get some facts into this.
Firstly - about Key 103 - if it is that causing the problem.
That's on 103,0 at 347 metres AOD and an antenna elevation of 40m with an
aggregate 4kW on Saddleworth Moor and you're on 102,8 with 25W at 153m AOD
and 34m antenna elevation and an aggregate 48W at Bolligton - 27km due south
with a complete geological signal block anywhere to the east of you.
103,0 is second adjacent to you, which providing you're both within
specification, means no part of your transmission envelopes overlap more
than at -60dB.
That is one millionth of full power level.
So - any cross-talk you're getting can only be attributed - forgive me for
being blunt - to the use of crap radio receivers.
I'm sure you wouldn't want legislation introduced to allow for that?
No fault of the rules, the broadcasters or of Ofcom.
There is a possible solution of moving your frequency either one channel
further away from Key 103 or somewhere entirely different - but that's a
much bigger exercise as I'm sure you'll understand.
Secondly - the so-called "crackle crackle hiss hiss crackle" is not being
generated by you or by them.
It's your radio picking up other random signals which are of a level higher
than the wanted one.
This may be because of low signal strength - or again the radio itself - or
more likely its aerial aystem.
Again, not the fault of the rules, the broadcasters or of Ofcom.
Thirdly - your idea of upping power by 1W at a time. Beside it being
completely outside any concept of engineering planning logic, it would do no
good at all. Power (allied with propagation format) gets you penetration;
height gets you range. So - to increase coverage area you'll need to provide
your antenna with a better view of its target. Therefore more height - or an
entirely new location. That's always assuming that you are actually emitting
your full ERP, which in itself may be part of the problem.
Look - buy me a decent lunch and I'll spend a day with you looking at the
problem and I'll do you a Spectrum Audit Scan which will show just how near
or effective other broadcasters are. And I'll analyse your problem
crackle/hiss areas too.
Then we might be able to come up with a good practical sound engineering
solution.
------------------------------------
Ian Hickling
Partner
transplan UK
_______________________________________________ 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/20111019/92d7bef8/attachment.html>
More information about the cma-l
mailing list