[cma-l] Community Radio Order

Thu Jan 22 09:07:24 GMT 2015

I *think* I know what you're getting at Nick, and I agree with you. Audience size is just one measure of success for our sector. We could also talk about the number of people trained, diversity of content, or the voices that would have otherwise been excluded. If we are to use RAJAR terminology, the 'reach' is important to some of us. A community station aimed at the whole community should aim to reach everyone at some point in the year, or at least the 5 year licence. To an extent we are like the local library, not everyone comes, but they know where it is and that somewhere buried in the shelves there will be something for them there. But better than that, if there isn't they can put it there with our support. When it comes to clients I think there is a different conversation to be had. For example, is there benefit in being associated with a community station? And does that station reach people who are not being reached by other local media? In most cases the answers and 'yes' and 'yes'. Which brings us back to Pippa's point. I think there are multiple types of community stations, and multiple approaches to running them. Some of us come from radio backgrounds, some places like community arts and volunteering, and others directly into community radio as helpers and presenters. Some stations want to sound like good local radio stations (the way they used to be), for some it's a place of training, and others run diverse services where pop music is all but banned. That is our core strength, we are different, we'll all probably not agree on what's right, but we should support each other and build one sector.

Whatever today's order says there's bound to be disappointment, but then what one station dislikes about it, another may well celebrate as being the one thing they were hoping for. As I say, we're all different....

And with that, back to work

Richard Berry
Senior Lecturer in Radio / Spark FM Station Manager
Room 101B, David Puttnam Media Centre,
University of Sunderland, SR6 0DD
(+44) 0191 515 2239

[cid:image001.png at 01CF83D7.DCFA9250]<https://www.facebook.com/sunderlanduniversityFADM>    [cid:image002.png at 01CF83D7.DCFA9250] <http://www.twitter.com/richardberryuk>      [cid:image003.jpg at 01CF83D7.DCFA9250] <http://www.sunderland.ac.uk/faculties/adm/>     [spark_logo_masterbrand] <http://www.sparksunderland.com/>

From: cma-l-bounces at mailman.commedia.org.uk [mailto:cma-l-bounces at mailman.commedia.org.uk] On Behalf Of Canalside's The Thread
Sent: 21 January 2015 19:36
To: 'The Community Media Association Discussion List'
Subject: Re: [cma-l] Community Radio Order

You see guys, sorry to appear to be looking for an argument, but all of this ought to be irrelevant under the original launch of Community Radio. It is the fact that we have less or more listeners or the same that causes the problems. If we are going around saying we have more listeners than whoever ?   then the restrictions kinda come into play. I know they shouldn't and I know that if we have more listeners (or don't) it shouldn't matter. It ought to have no bearing on it. Sadly it has had a bearing and my point weeks ago, was that the message being sent out there now is all gobbledy gook.

Are we competing, are we not competing, if we are not ought we be, if we are should we not be  ??   it's a shambles .I believe Community Radio should be simplistic, it should be Que sera sera and restrictions should be no where in sight. Whatever will be will be and we all deal with it.

I don't care if we have more or less listeners than Silk ..why ?  because if Community Radio was running how it is meant to be, we would have enough funding from the Community Fund Pot, to pay for the essentials and core costs. In otherwords, if we were 100% voluntary, with folk wandering in willy nilly, we could still function in some way shape or form. This is with or without a Station manager and/or someone on sales etc                 I think this is how many saw Community Radio. Right or wrong, poor image or good image, it shouldn't matter as we ought to be able to function even if we are rag tag and bobtail.

Does everyone know where I am coming from here or am I waffling again ?    I feel that we have lost our way, but it isn't exactly our fault. What the restrictions have done, along with the lack of financial support in the Pot has distorted the whole Venture, hence why I was saying there is confusion. It isn't confusion in the true sense of the word but I think a few shots in own feet have taken place.

Keep it simple has been my message. I don't expect everyone to agree ..... but ???                  Rajar shouldn't even be on the Radar, if that makes sense. The moment we start asking to be placed on Rajar, I think we are going away from our values. We're not here to compete, even though in a roundabout way we are. We have to compete because the financial support has been woeful ..... so is it a wonder why I reach for the defensive stick ??

If I'm wrong here, please say so, that's fine by me    no probs.

Nick

________________________________
From: cma-l-bounces at mailman.commedia.org.uk<mailto:cma-l-bounces at mailman.commedia.org.uk> [mailto:cma-l-bounces at mailman.commedia.org.uk] On Behalf Of Two Lochs Radio
Sent: 21 January 2015 18:39
To: The Community Media Association Discussion List
Subject: Re: [cma-l] Community Radio Order

Well done Paul!

>From RAJAR's latest available quarter that reach would put your listener numbers ahead of at least 20 of the commercial stations that are RAJAR subscribers, including Smooth Radio Essex, and ahead of many more that don't pay RAJAR!

Alex

RAJAR quarter ending Sep 2014
Station

Reach

Eagle Extra

3,000

Fire Radio South Coast

4,000

Connect DAB

7,000

Radio Ceredigion

16,000

107.8 Arrow FM for Hastings

17,000

107 JACK fm (Reading 107FM)

18,000

The Breeze (Cheltenham)

18,000

107.6 Banbury Sound

18,000

Free Radio 80s (Shropshire)

19,000

Rugby FM

20,000

Lakeland Radio

20,000

107.5 Sovereign Radio

21,000

96.2 Touch FM - Coventry

22,000

Time FM 106.6

23,000

North Norfolk Radio

23,000

Radio Exe

24,000

Pulse 2

26,000

3FM

26,000

Smooth Radio Essex

28,000

Oak FM

28,000

Smooth Radio Devon

29,000

Cheshire's Silk 106.9

29,000

----- Original Message -----
From: Paul Golder<mailto:paul at pvg.co.uk>
To: The Community Media Association Discussion List<mailto:cma-l at mailman.commedia.org.uk>
Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2015 6:01 PM
Subject: Re: [cma-l] Community Radio Order

I've contracted with a private market research firm a few times since we took to the airwaves full time in 2007.

We're currently getting a 20% weekly reach which implies about 30,000 listeners a week.  Our website visitor figures (over 200,000 per month, with 12,000 a month viewing the schedule and local events pages) seem to make sense in this context.

I wasn't aware that RAJAR was skewed towards its members' areas, which would make any extrapolation of the "other radio listening" figure quite meaningless.

It's natural for CR to be defensive with the suggestion that CR has half a million listeners - but I'm just not buying it.  That's only an average of 2,000 per station - I could probably NAME at least 3,000 people who engage with us regularly!

Cheers
Paul
Phoenix FM
www.phoenixfm.com<http://www.phoenixfm.com>

________________________________
[http://static.avast.com/emails/avast-mail-stamp.png]<http://www.avast.com/>

This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus<http://www.avast.com/> protection is active.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.commedia.org.uk/pipermail/cma-l/attachments/20150122/18337ae2/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/png
Size: 4877 bytes
Desc: image001.png
URL: <http://mailman.commedia.org.uk/pipermail/cma-l/attachments/20150122/18337ae2/attachment.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image002.png
Type: image/png
Size: 5125 bytes
Desc: image002.png
URL: <http://mailman.commedia.org.uk/pipermail/cma-l/attachments/20150122/18337ae2/attachment-0001.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image003.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 2685 bytes
Desc: image003.jpg
URL: <http://mailman.commedia.org.uk/pipermail/cma-l/attachments/20150122/18337ae2/attachment.jpg>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image006.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 1622 bytes
Desc: image006.jpg
URL: <http://mailman.commedia.org.uk/pipermail/cma-l/attachments/20150122/18337ae2/attachment-0001.jpg>