<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Donald et al,<br>
<br>
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. <br>
<br>
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.<br>
<br>
The same process could be applied to < 150,000 areas.<br>
<br>
Regards, Tony Bailey<br>
<br>
<br>
On 13/02/14 23:35, Ian Hickling wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:DUB125-W2266A831232825DF5F2475AD9D0@phx.gbl"
type="cite">
<style><!--
.hmmessage P
{
margin:0px;
padding:0px
}
body.hmmessage
{
font-size: 12pt;
font-family:Calibri
}
--></style>
<div dir="ltr">Donald<br>
1 - It's not "degeneration" - it's genuine concern against
blatant injustice.<br>
2 - 'all' they need to do is increase their level of grant aid
to balance their income?<br>
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?<br>
<br>
<br>
<div>
<hr id="stopSpelling">
To: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:cma-l@mailman.commedia.org.uk">cma-l@mailman.commedia.org.uk</a><br>
From: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:donald@donaldmack.co.uk">donald@donaldmack.co.uk</a><br>
Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2014 20:35:08 +0000<br>
Subject: Re: [cma-l] Closure of Stroud FM and the Consultation<br>
<br>
Hi All<br>
<br>
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.<br>
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.<br>
<br>
First and foremost my condolences go to the staff,
volunteeers, listeners and other stakeholders that are/were
involved in Stroud FM.<br>
Secondly, it seems highly ironic that the day after Stroud FM
announces its closure that Ofcom finally publishes the
Consultation document. <br>
<br>
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? <br>
<br>
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. <br>
<br>
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. <br>
<br>
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.<br>
<br>
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!!<br>
<br>
Best Regards<br>
<br>
Donald<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
<br>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
Local Reports 24/7 at <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.ravensoundradio.co.uk">http://www.ravensoundradio.co.uk</a>
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.
</pre>
</body>
</html>