[CMA TV] Discussion model for local community television

[Alan Fransman]

Forwarded on behalf of Marilyn Hyndman from Northern Visions

Subject: [Community Television] Discussion model for local community 
television
From: "Marilyn Hyndman" <marilyn at northernvisions.org>
Date: Thu, 2 Jun 2005 13:54:47 +0100

Dear Diane, Sylvia and the list,

Thanks for presenting the discussion model.

My initial impression was a sense of being asked to reinvent the wheel,
we've moved very far beyond the contents of your email... perhaps the 
problem is that there has not been detail in the communications between 
local TV groups, ACTO and CMA.

As a media arts centre which was also one of the Access Pilot Radio 
stations and is now a local community television broadcaster, we have a 
wide range of experience and information on community television and 
radio.  Also, with regard to television, much work - developmental, in 
the field, research etc - has been completed by other community/local 
television broadcasters, (whether or not they are still on the air), and 
it is hugely important that we take cognisance of this.  We agree with 
Dave Rushton that the TV goal as PSB is universal access. Certainly 
community radio has experiences to consider but policies and lessons 
developed so far by radio are often inappropriate when applied to 
television.

Community television is long overdue in the UK, which is one of the last
European countries to acknowledge its value. The belief that the omni
present BBC has been the community's television has somewhat excluded
discussion that there are many models for community television. At 
Northern Visions, we are at a point where we can assist and advance the 
ethos of community television for those coming behind us - looking back 
on our figures, realistically, it takes a minimum £1 million  to set up 
as a community television station - for this reason alone, we must be 
assured that discussions and research on the future of community 
television have a base in experience to date.

As we stated in Chris Hewson's research, whilst we are extremely 
pro-active in working with marginalised and vulnerable groups and 
communities of interest and have a number of supportive and structural 
programmes, it concerns us that the community radio emphasis upon 
'social inclusion' (and applying this to building a community television 
station on that basis), will 'exclude' some members of the community - 
ironically those who are not seen as excluded. This emphasis, often 
funder driven and currently 'fashionable', should not be allowed to 
happen with community television! We believe access and participation 
should be maintained for all the community.

eg: The ethos of NVTV is one of 'equality', all citizens are equal, and
therefore have a right to put their views across to their peers. At 
times this might require positive discrimination in order to allow 
marginalised communities 'their voice'. This is in line with a 
'communications for social change' model, which seeks to decentralise 
communication, making it accessible and affordable, allowing a free 
horizontal flow of information from the many to the many, and 
facilitating communities in finding their own communications solutions - 
via the development of tailored communications strategies.

Community Television stations need to be founded along the the principle 
of being non-profit distributing. This ethos should prevent the problems 
that have arisen in the past with commercial operators gaining TV 
licences i.e. diminishing of public service content due to the 
commercial imperative; mergers and takeovers etc. Generating income from 
advertising and sales must be a part of the funding model. Small 
businesses are part of the community and should be supported. The 
prohibitive costs of current TV advertising exclude small businesses 
from advertising regionally and nationally.

Embracing all the possibilities of creating a sound financial 
infrastructure are important and we believe this was recognised by the 
ITC in its original RSL brief. Many of the financial problems faced by 
community broadcasters are a result of inappropriate frequency 
allocation and consequently the public not being able to receive a 
picture with ease. We take Dave's point over charities, this is 
something which can be decided locally anyway, similarly with funding 
and financing, there needs to be fluidity for sure and it is not 
appropriate to lay down hard and fast rules/percentages which cannot be 
met some time in the future.

Community television MUST be independent of other broadcasters and SEEN 
to be independent. Community television is about extending PSB. This is 
not to say that there cannot be links .....in fulfilling a station's 
remit successfully there will be links with many organisations, 
individuals and groups as a matter of course, (to be frank I think it is 
far too problematic for other broadcasters to be involved in running 
another broadcaster's station anyway, just think of the legal implications).

A few other comments:

1. Funding - a concerted effort should be made to educate the Film 
Council Lottery and associated film lotteries (UK wide) to finance
projects/programmes with regard to local television. (Currently they are
tied to traditional and Hollywood type models/funding criteria)
2. Research & Models - discuss this with the local non profit television
stations/sector. (those still in existence, especially).
3. Discussion - respectfully....suggest a formal mechanism in which CMA 
can tie in with ACTO and its associated constituency to avoid 
duplication and allow for consensus.

Best wishes,
Marilyn
Northern Visions/NvTv
www.northernvisions.org/nvtv