[cma-l] CR and the 50%

[Tony Bailey]

Donald et al,

I have always believed that the name was changed (from "access radio" to 
"community radio") but little else, which may account for the current 
difficulties.  Having said that, it is not only community radio stations 
that run out of cash.

According to the regulator the 50% funding rule is in the legislation 
for two reasons: to reduce the degree of competition for such income 
between community and commercial radio services, and to ensure that 
community radio stations have a number of different funding sources and 
are therefore less likely to be driven by the need to maximise audiences 
to satisfy advertisers, which may conflict with the requirement for 
community radio services to deliver social gain.  It may come as a 
surprise to some operators, but this implies that an "ILR approach" to 
programming is not expected.  Building on this and in order to remove 
what is often a blunt instrument, perhaps it could be proposed that the 
percentage allowed could be based on the inverse of actual audience 
share (e.g. % reach in Rajar terms).  Some additional survey work may be 
necessary but that could be done online or by street/phone interviews.

The same process could be applied to < 150,000 areas.

Regards,  Tony Bailey


On 13/02/14 23:35, Ian Hickling wrote:
> Donald
> 1 - It's not "degeneration" - it's genuine concern against blatant 
> injustice.
> 2 - 'all' they need to do is increase their level of grant aid to 
> balance their income?
> Do you really have the faintest idea how hard these people have to 
> work to keep their businesses afloat - with all the unnecessary hoops 
> they have to jump through?
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> To: cma-l at mailman.commedia.org.uk
> From: donald at donaldmack.co.uk
> Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2014 20:35:08 +0000
> Subject: Re: [cma-l] Closure of Stroud FM and the Consultation
>
> Hi All
>
> It's interesting to note how this Strand about the closure of Stroud 
> FM has degenerated into the usual barrage of complaints about the 50% 
> rule.
> I've added my tuppence worth to the overall debate by responding to 
> Richard Hilton's accurate post (below) which comes with facts about 
> the sector as a whole.
>
> First and foremost my condolences go to the staff, volunteeers, 
> listeners and other stakeholders that are/were involved in Stroud FM.
> Secondly, it seems highly ironic that the day after Stroud FM 
> announces its closure that Ofcom finally publishes the Consultation 
> document.
>
> The closure of any community station must be desperately traumatic for 
> all those involved and so it should be for the entire sector. The BBC 
> makes cuts, the commercial stations generally merge, but we close 
> down. The reasons for 95% of the closure are the same: Financial. No 
> other radio sector runs on the shoestring and goodwill (of volunteers) 
> levels that we have to endure. And yet, this aspect is not part of the 
> Consultation or part of the debate on this Forum. I acknowledge that 
> the financing of the Community Radio sector is not on the Agenda at 
> this time, however who's fault is that?
>
> Community Radio has a rich history of providing Added Value to some of 
> the most underserved, deprived and ignored sections of society. I am 
> unaware of any other Community Enterprise or voluntary organisation, 
> for that matter, that is capable of generating so many general and 
> specific positive outcomes. But here we are struggling for survival 
> and the only way that I can see we will eventually overcome these 
> problems is the expansion of the Community Radio fund along the line 
> of some of the European models.
>
> Surely after decades of campaigning and broadcasting we are 
> collectively both strong and influential enough to attain meaningful 
> change on a National level. We need to strengthen the CMA and continue 
> to build the sector as a whole. Individual stations bemoaning their 
> luck at being geographically close to a Commercial station is an 
> historical problem that does not effect every station. But if most 
> stations remain myopic and only pushes its own individual agenda I can 
> guarantee that one by one almost every station will shut down.
>
> Our  focus should not be upon these rather minor changes (I 
> acknowledge that it is not minor to those directly effected) but upon 
> targeting Government and the rest of the Radio and broadcasting 
> sectors to establish a more workable model for Community Radio and TV 
> funding. A genuine partnership with the BBC, Channel 4 and other 
> Public Service Broadcaster should be sufficient to open up the License 
> Fee to all those providing genuine social gain. But first we need to 
> work more effectively together.
>
> For the record, I am generally in favour of the 50% rule simply 
> because I believe that genuine Community Radio stations should have a 
> mixed income and not be reliant on any one sector. I worry when I hear 
> stations complain about missed advertising revenue opportunities when 
> 'all' they need to do is increase their level of grant aid to balance 
> their income. Simples!!
>
> Best Regards
>
> Donald
>
>
>
>
>
>


-- 

Local Reports 24/7 at http://www.ravensoundradio.co.uk

Raven Sound

Call or Text: 0775 896 2392
Int: +44 775 896 2392

Skype: ravensoundradio

Raven Sound is a voluntary sector community media project

This email is for the addressee(s) only and may be confidential. If you are not the intended recipient please notify the sender by reply email and immediately delete this email. No guarantee is provided that this email or any attachments are free of viruses.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.commedia.org.uk/pipermail/cma-l/attachments/20140214/72e136f9/attachment.html>