[cma-l] Offensive language on radio - how to avoid the pitfalls
Office - ccr-fm
office at ccr-fm.co.uk
Thu Sep 22 19:22:06 BST 2011
Excellent excellent points ! good stuff Julian.
Richard also has a point. Please bear in mind that I ain't having a pop at
regulators as Ofcom as far as I can see have been as helpful as they are
permitted. I think also that my comments have got fuddled along the way. I
don't condone ignoring the rules and where the rules are on a level playing
field if you do ignore them or break them deliberately you deserve your
backside smacking
But ..... to mention it again. This Radio playing pitch is NOT level, never
has been level but sadly I am not agreeing with Richard who almost states
that if the going gets tough, one rolls over and dies ..... Er
think not
What is right will always shine through in the end .... sometimes it takes
time, and people get ground down ... but they also get ground up again.
Never forget David and Goliath, things are not a forgone conclusion.
The only time in this debate I would ever stand up and say break the rules
is if I felt the restrictions had bankrupted us and that we had done
everything correct but other people had caused our demise
by God we'd at least go out with a BANG !
''roll over and die'' not on your Nelly !
Keep smiling chaps :-)
Hopefully it won't happen as common sense will prevail in the end and bully
boys will get their come-uppance trust me <> they always do !
Regards
Nick
_____
From: cma-l-bounces at mailman.commedia.org.uk
[mailto:cma-l-bounces at mailman.commedia.org.uk] On Behalf Of Julian Mellor
Sent: 22 September 2011 10:22
To: CMA-L
Subject: Re: [cma-l] Offensive language on radio - how to avoid the pitfalls
That's not really a like-for-like comparison. Broadcasting a song with the
f word at 10am is not the same as letting an unlicensed driver take a
minibus full of disabled kids at 90mph down a packed urban street - or did I
miss something? The better comparison would be an insistence that all
drivers have to have their licence with them when they go out on the road.
It avoids an offence, but that's it.
It's strange how this debate seems to have been polarised into "abide by the
rules" or "ignore the rules". I don't think I have said "ignore the rules".
What I was trying to highlight (obviously not very effectively) was that
systems of rules generally develop and evolve to the point where they favour
those with the greatest capacity to implement them - and the fact that Ofcom
want a special meeting about offensive language in songs raises some
concerns for me that they might be wanting greater regulation.
Anyone who has studied sociology may have come across the concept of 'expert
systems' - systems that implicitly bar the non-experts from participating.
The legal system is an obvious example, but in other fields a system of
rules that is formed to control and regulate will tend to reflect the values
and priorities of those who create the rules. In a consultational
environment where 'stakeholders' get to have a say, it tends to be the
largest organisations who have the capacity to make heavyweight submissions,
challenge the rules they don't like, and push towards rules that preferably
give them a competitive advantage. Food hygiene is an obvious case - the
supermarkets will help devise rules to increase hygiene standards via
pre-packaging, sterile environments etc because they know that while it will
cost them a bit more, it will be an impossible level of compliance for
smaller competitors to achieve - so a system that is set up to protect the
public's health ends up forcing out smaller players and consolidating the
market position of the largest players. Over time of course it levels out,
smaller competitors re-emerge who can absorb the regulations etc - but the
rules still create significant barriers to market entry. (and please don't
take that to read that I am proposing that poisonous food be sold on the
shelves!)
My concern with the offensive language debate (or similar situations) is
that extensions (stress: extensions) to the rules / enforcement /
expectations will tend, possibly through unintended consequences, to favour
the larger players with the capacity to absorb the requirements. Some
community stations may have the capacity / inclination / drive to digest
that higher level of regulation and the BBC obviously have the people with
the time to do the auditable risk analysis etc that gets them off the hook.
But as a station that broadcasts to a small rural community (where it's
inevitable that presenters know the listeners) we simply don't want to
offend - it's not good for business! 99.x% of the time I am sure that we
don't, but the reality of the situation is that sometimes we might, and if
we do we apologise, we take counter-measures, and we move on. And because
of where we are, that works. What I would hate to have is added layers of
intervention and bureaucracy that would support (possibly lone or
vindictive) complainants who have taken offence, that result in
investigations and in the process take up huge amounts of our time, and
ultimately curtail our ability to provide social gain and a service of value
to our community.
And the reality check on the whole thing: my 6 year old son is probably
exposed to language on his way to school that is infinitely worse than
anything we (or others) broadcast. In a world where media is increasingly
delivered by the unregulated internet, this could be about layers of rules
that actually make no difference whatsoever to the world we live in!
Julian <ducks>
* In some ways this debate is not the best use of my time either, but it
concerns broad principles of regulation which I believe are important so its
worth spending a bit of time thrashing them out
On 21 Sep 2011, at 19:02, Richard Berry wrote:
Nick,
I'm sorry but the rules ARE the same for all. What differs is your ability
to meet those rules. You could see this as a problem and try and fight it (a
battle which you will never win) or you could apply your energy to working
how you do comply.
If you don't have people to throw at the problem, use systems or technology.
To use Ian's comparison. if you were running a community transport charity
would you let anyone turn up a drive the minibus and let them speed,
double-park etc and then blame the law when the police came knocking? Of
course you wouldn't. You'd ensure training was in place and grant your
volunteers with the sense to follow the law. Radio is no different. Train
them, tell the rules and put whatever safeguards you need in place.
Ofcom have been VERY clear here and we should take note of their advice.
Richard
From: Office - ccr-fm <mailto:office at ccr-fm.co.uk>
Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2011 6:27 PM
To: 'Richard Berry' <mailto:richard.berry at sunderland.ac.uk> ; 'CMA-L'
<mailto:cma-l at commedia.org.uk>
Subject: RE: [cma-l] Offensive language on radio - how to avoid the pitfalls
Peter n' all
I think all in all Peter is correct ... infact a lot of people chipping in
their threepennith have been right .... however I would like to correct one
thing (yep ! here I go again)
Peter states ''the rules are the same for everyone'' er ?
no they ain't ? and it is because some of the rules are
different as to why some of the stations can't afford to have more hands on
deck which would thus reduce the probability of music getting through that
shouldn't.
The rules are not the same and that is basis of all of my whinging. The
playing field isn't level with the commercial boys, and to rub salt in the
wounds it ain't level within our own fraturnity either.
Regards
Nick
_____
From: cma-l-bounces at mailman.commedia.org.uk
[mailto:cma-l-bounces at mailman.commedia.org.uk] On Behalf Of Richard Berry
Sent: 21 September 2011 15:50
To: 'CMA-L'
Subject: Re: [cma-l] Offensive language on radio - how to avoid the pitfalls
Without risking repeating what's been said already, the message here from
ofcom is quite clear: swearing on the radio is not acceptable. However, you
will notice that in 2 of the cases the matter was seen as 'resolved' due to
the efforts made by the station to ensure compliance.
Those looking for conspiracy will no doubt see it here and complain that
community radio is been beaten with a stick and those who get paid to do
radio have escaped. But the point to see here is actually that if you have
robust and appropriate compliance systems ofcom will recognise what you've
done.
Part of the deal of taking on a licence is you follow the rules and those
rules are the same for everyone. Obviously, by its nature community radio
takes more risks. Capital will only play around 140 different tracks at any
one time and it those are picked very carefully indeed by their music team.
Community stations will play much more than that and so the risks are
increased of playing something a bit naughty.
You could tackle this in one of a number of ways. Insist only tracks on a
playout system are played and these can only be added by a single person. or
presenters can add tracks but won't be released for automation until they've
listened to and approved. Presenter contracts emphasising their compliance
role may also be a useful check. You may of course be of the view that the
important part of what you do as a station is what the presenters say and
where they come from - not the music they play - and so a locked-down
schedule of music is not only useful but sometimes desirable. As you will
note that the live swearing on Radio 1 escaped sanction because they had
audit-able evidence of the steps they took to ensure compliance.
This goes back to my often made point in this field that if you make the
effort to ensure compliance and something goes wrong then ofcom will be more
understanding. Training and development is at the heart of this. This may be
time consuming and generally a pain but it's what we're all about - or at
least it should be.
Richard Berry
Senior Lecturer in Radio
University of Sunderland
Tel: (+44) 0191 515 2239
Social: @sunderlandradio
From: Office - ccr-fm <office at ccr-fm.co.uk>
Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2011 13:35:43 +0100
To: 'Julian Mellor' <julian at 10radio.org>, 'CMA-L' <cma-l at commedia.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [cma-l] Offensive language on radio - how to avoid the pitfalls
Dear All
Could I go back to my absolutely square one, point one, the beginning etc
etc and point out that if weren't scratting our backsides for funding
because of the restrictions we could lighten the load of the unemployment
service / job seekers by about 600 persons and knock all the skittles down
with one bowl by having one or two more hands on deck (possibly
professionals) (which = better training)
This I believe is the point ...... we will never find the remedy if we don't
understand the symptoms. The symptoms are VERY IMPORTANT .... If they are
caused by and created by us (Community Radio) then we have to take it on the
chin when the big chiefs come down on us .... if however they are part of
theblame (which the restrictions are) then a re-think needs to happen.
Preferably sooner rather than later.
Everyone is trying to do their best under the circumstances, us included. I
personally think we all deserve a medal operating in the main very good
services with little help from people who live in Ivory Towers and have no
idea of what is actually going on. These people get my gander right up and
one day very soon I shall bump into one or two of them and they will not
like it up em' Mr Mainwaring ! :-) LOL
Regards
Nick
Soldier on chaps and do your best !
_____
From: cma-l-bounces at mailman.commedia.org.uk
[mailto:cma-l-bounces at mailman.commedia.org.uk] On Behalf Of Julian Mellor
Sent: 21 September 2011 12:31
To: CMA-L
Subject: Re: [cma-l] Offensive language on radio - how to avoid the pitfalls
Interesting debate.
It does seem that there are two models of community radio.
One is a radio station that happens to use community and voluntary
resources. The operational style is probably very similar to commercial
radio.
The other is a community project that happens to produce radio.
It's not to say one is better than the other, and I'm sure some stations
combine both. But we very much fall into the second model.
Hardly anyone had previous radio experience before we setup six years ago,
but we had lots of community development experience. We setup primarily to
do community development. In that context, we're not going to be negligent
and we're not going to ignore what we have signed up to do. But we are going
to be realistic about what volunteers can be expected to do, and what they
can achieve and deliver in the absence of full-time hands-on management.
>From the conversations I've had, people from the more commercial and
possibly top down model really struggle with this approach. But it works
for us, it works for our community, and from what Ofcom have said having
monitored our output, it works for them as well.
So getting back to the original point, a regulatory system which relies upon
stations having fully resourced staff and management teams presents extra
challenges for volunteer run stations such as ours. If, at the meeting in
October, Ofcom seem inclined to move towards increased regulation or
expectations, I would ask that the Jaqui and the CMA represent the
difficulties that this will pose for stations operating with minimal
resources.
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_mediahttp://www.facebook.com/CommunityMediaAsso
ciation 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
Visit http://www.sunderland.ac.uk/tv to see the University's new TV ads
Visit http://www.sunderland.ac.uk/tv to see the University's new TV ads
_______________________________________________
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/20110922/977308ae/attachment.html>
More information about the cma-l
mailing list