<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content="text/html; charset=windows-1252" http-equiv=Content-Type>
<STYLE>.hmmessage P {
PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; MARGIN: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 0px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-TOP: 0px
}
BODY.hmmessage {
FONT-FAMILY: Tahoma; FONT-SIZE: 10pt
}
</STYLE>
<META name=GENERATOR content="MSHTML 8.00.6001.19154"></HEAD>
<BODY class=hmmessage bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV>Time to de-lurk!</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I understand what you're saying Ian, but I think your final salvo about
encouraging community segregation etc opens up some huge contradictions that
would lead potentially to the conclusion that community radio is in itself
encouraging segregation and discrimination, and it really is not a sustainable
argument.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Communtiy Radio licences are issued to enable a group to serve a community,
be that a geographically defined community, or a community of interest. If your
argument is taken to its logical conclusion, surely these purposes, particularly
the community of interest one, would be inherently capable of being
seen as divisive and encouraging segregation and discrimination. For example, a
station established to serve an Afro-Caribbean community is by its nature
somewhat exclusive of other ethnic groups. Almost every other station by seeking
to particularly serve a group of people with a common interest runs the risk of
discriminating and encouraging segregation.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Or, such a station can strive to make its remit include
fostering better understanding of and relations between its core audience
and other communities, and thereby aim to diminish discrimination and
barriers.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Surely a station with an essentially broad audience (eg a geographic one)
that programmes less mainstream musical tastes 'out of hours' may be attempting
just the same thing for its listeners' musical awareness and tastes - ie
exposing them in a limited manner to a wider range of artistic and cultural
material and standards than they might automatically come across, rather
than segmenting and isolating them in their niches?</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>So I guess I am with Lol on this.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I also wonder why it is that the concept of scheduling more narrowly
acceptable material in off-peak hours and preceding/accompanying programmes with
warnings is seen as totally unacceptable for radio when it is such a widely
accepted and deployed procedure for TV? </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I accept that radio may be a bit more pervasive, but surely its audience at
any particular time of day is known just as innaccurately as TV's is? It's not a
black-and-white game in which we must programme to the lowest common
denominator of every single listener - instead meeting the
expectations, sensibilities and needs of the vast majority of an audience
seems to be a valid concept. While the bar may need to be set higher owing
to radio's greater ubiquity, I don't see why the general concept of raising
and lowering the bar with time of day and using listener warnings shouldn't
apply at least to some degree.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Alex</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT: 10pt arial; BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; font-color: black"><B>From:</B>
<A title=transplanfm@hotmail.com href="mailto:transplanfm@hotmail.com">Ian
Hickling</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A title=lolgellor@yahoo.co.uk
href="mailto:lolgellor@yahoo.co.uk">lolgellor@yahoo.co.uk</A> ; <A
title=cma-l@mailman.commedia.org.uk
href="mailto:cma-l@mailman.commedia.org.uk">cma-l@mailman.commedia.org.uk</A>
</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Wednesday, November 02, 2011 1:09
PM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> [cma-l] Avoiding
sexually-explicit songs</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr>
<DIV dir=ltr> Lol<BR>I know you said don't bother to comment - but I'm
going to.<BR>The obvious problem with your proposed disclaimer is
that it may not be heard.<BR>In any case, watersheds and disclaimers and
assertions of ethnic or social parity are simply excuses for not doing the job
properly.<BR>I'm no prude - I swear quite well when it's appropriate
- and I enjoy and relay Billy Conolly-type humour.<BR>But I moderate my
outgoings to suit my known audience.<BR>You can't do that with
broadcasting because you cannot possibly know your audience.<BR>If you want to
broadcast what you describe as "programmes with language, lyrics and views
outside of mainstream sensibilities" then you must logically be sure
that listeners in that category will accept them, but those outside that
category are excluded to protect yourself.<BR>I submit that it is impossible
to effect that exclusion, therefore exposing the latter to that programming is
irresponsible and places you at risk of action or prosecution.<BR>In any
case, why do you feel there is a need to offer programming in that
vein?<BR>Surely by doing so you are encouraging community segregation and
thereby discrimination? <BR>Is that Social Gain?<BR>I don't think
so.<BR>Quite the opposite in fact.<BR>
<P class=ecxMsoNormal><SPAN>------------------------------------</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN-BOTTOM: 12pt" class=ecxMsoNormal><B><SPAN
style="COLOR: rgb(38,38,38)">Ian
Hickling<BR></SPAN></B><B><SPAN>Partner<BR>transplan
UK<BR></SPAN></B></P><BR></DIV></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>