[Community Television] Discussion model for local community television

[Dave Rushton]

Diane and The List,

First reaction - good see some some CMA dialogue on TV. But none of 
what's presented has any link with conceptions of community radio - 
unless it's the funding model? As suggested yesterday in responding to 
Bill's email on The List  - the difference between TV and radio is that 
the TV goal as PSB is universal access, a local/community TV frequency 
for every area - not individual services springing up here and there 
struggling to find and fund a frequency (and requiring several 
transmitters to cover an identifiable area). The confusion of radio 
with TV was made by the ITC with the TV RSLs - but it was a fundamental 
damaging mistake - TV has to become more organised than community radio 
or it will suffer adversely from commercial cherry-picking and 
frequency exclusion - bigger areas will dominate and deny smaller 
prospects. So TV and radio - chalk and cheese: begin to think of them 
as very different. The issues really are more about scale and equality 
of access than character at this stage.

Some caveats - 'social gain' should not be considered the sole purpose 
of community TV, its far too narrow and would exclude a communitarian 
approach made in wealthier areas from offering not-for profit services. 
Social gain is not the only alternative ambition to 'commercial gain' - 
for example community TV for cultural development; community TV for 
fun; for minority access; for representation and freedom of speech; for 
local education; for minority languages; for religious understanding????

Further on, the 'not profit seeking' element needs clarification: 
certainly profit arising out of trading etc should be returned to 
support the service - but here it seems to be profit arrived at only by 
accident not by design - but making a profit or surplus might well need 
to be part of an acceptable business plan for funders - a plan which 
shows how to do more than cover the outgoings by generating a surplus 
to stand on your own after funding? Surely the issue is how the 
profit's used - not profit per se, or accidental profits - so then 'not 
profit distributing' is the aim?

If the community TV channel has charitable status its A&M will 
determine how it deals with profit and surplus in ways you've described 
- it may not be possible to distribute profit to 'target communities' 
unless the purpose of the community TV channel as a charity is to raise 
money for that target community.

In fact - the only distinguishing characteristic that it is necessary 
to make on this at all is that the community TV station should be 
constituted as a not for profit company or as a charity - the rest will 
either form parts of the A&M or founder on the tide of circumstance, 
because ....

Funding cannot be divided up in this way - its far too specific, as if 
it is being suggested as implicit that community TV is targeted at a 
'down-trodden open to grant inner-city' conception of community - but 
the founding principle should is that local TV as PSB as universal will 
(in the most appropriate form) be available for all areas, that poor or 
wealthy, big or small communities might opt for a mutual ownership 
community or public model rather than for commercial ownership.

The target geographical communities are initially (in planning for DTT) 
likely to be areas described by local authority boundaries - because 
this is where local news is generated and where civic involvement can 
best be represented.

If it were a local authority owned local TV - the service would be 
accountable through the ballot box, even as local authority owned or 
part-owned the service still might be a community service if it were 
set-up as a company limited by guarantee or as a charity.

Why does this CMA proposal exclude advertising revenue - it's a hostage 
to fortune? What about premium rate dial-up requests? It is silly to 
establish share of revenue for services at this stage - individually 
let alone as a template defining 'community': the only definition is 
that its not commercial - a charity or a company limited by guarantee.

Don't suggest any alliance with the BBC - ask your members who run or 
have run local and community TV the terms on which they would want to 
see links with the BBC - the third tier of local PSB TV needs to be 
created separately from the BBC to maintain plurality and diversity. 
The news role for the local/community TV service is to replace with a 
finer grain the fading away regional ITV services - so remove any 
suggestion of an alliance with the BBC as part of a community TV 
template - let local conditions establish alliances from positions of 
strength. Let's see alternative news on local/community TV - new 
agendas, new faces, alternative points of view ....

Dave Rushton

PS: Please put out mailings to the CMA etc lists in the order they 
arrive - otherwise readers won't know who is answering who in the 
debate - my response to Bill from yesterday has been delayed almost 24 
hours. This one's timed at 19.00 Thursday May 19th.


On Thursday, May 19, 2005, at 05:46 PM, Diane Reid wrote:

> Dear TV list member,
>
> I've attached a discussion model for community television and would be
> interested in constructive ideas and comment. It is not intended to be
> definitive or overly prescriptive but to form a basis for discussion 
> around
> content and funding.
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> A MODEL FOR NOT-FOR-PROFIT LOCAL COMMUNITY TELEVISION
>
> Summary
>
> This not-for-profit model* is suggested by the Community Media 
> Association
> for discussion, also for an investigation of its sustainability. The
> underlying aim is to arrive at a model or models of local television
> provision which will enrich the future digital broadcasting landscape 
> and
> ensure that diverse and community voices are included.
>
> 1. Characteristics
>
> The characteristics of this model are based on those required of 
> community
> radio stations as described in the Community Radio Order 2004. 
> Community
> Television stations should
>
> · Be primarily for the good of members of the public and be operated in
> order to deliver social gain, rather than for commercial reasons
> · Serve one or more communities (a neighbourhood or group of people 
> who have
> one or more interests and characteristics in common)
> · Not be provided in order to make a financial profit, and use any 
> profit
> produced to support the service or for the social gain of the public 
> or the
> target community
> · Offer members of the target community opportunities to participate 
> in the
> operation and management of the service
> · Be accountable to the target community
>
> 2. Content and Funding
>
> Content and funding would be delivered from four sources (percentages 
> relate
> to proposed funding proportion and could be varied)
>
> A. 30% content from social regeneration, arts and culture, community
> cohesion, social inclusion imperatives, community originated, grants 
> funded,
> to deliver the particular requirements of public and other funders with
> objectives compatible with the social gain requirements of the stations
>
> B. 40% content PSP funded, created, swapped, exchanged and shared as
> required by a network of (not necessarily exclusively?) community 
> providers:
> this would be an appropriate and creative use of PSP money
>
> C. 20% content news and topical local affairs provided by a local
> community-BBC partnership, involving a mixture of commissioning, 
> content
> sharing and possible extensions to web or other platforms
>
> D. 10% core funding, for example, from a Community Media Fund (an 
> extended
> version of the Community Radio Fund)
>
> This model excludes advertising revenue.
>
> Community Media Association March 2005
>
> *Based on an idea by Professor Sylvia Harvey of Lincoln University
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Some initial comments have been that A. could include funding from 
> other
> areas of the voluntary sector to raise awareness of issues and 
> disseminate
> information about their work and that C. could include university news
> provision,  I look forward to receiving your comments.
>
> Best wishes,
> Diane
>
> Diane Reid
> Director
> Community Media Association
> Access to the media for people and communities
> http://www.commedia.org.uk/
>
> BOOK NOW FOR EARLY BIRD RATES!
> Festival of Community Media!
> 3rd & 4th June 2005, The Showroom, Sheffield
> http://www.commedia.org.uk/festival2005
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> comtv-l mailing list
> comtv-l at commedia.org.uk
> http://mailman-new.greennet.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/comtv-l
>