Will digital kill the community radio star?
What does it take to get a sensible response out of Government for community broadcasting?
A mixture of stone-walling and high hurdles is threatening the ability of Australia’s most diverse broadcasting sector to make the leap into the digital age.
Yesterday was a nail biter for community radio stations around the country because it was the deadline for signing up to joint venture companies to help run the infrastructure for digital radio.
Without signing, community radio risks being locked out of the discussions that will guide the future of digital radio. Yet signing meant making major financial commitments to companies effectively managed by the commercial radio stations, without any clarity on the potential liabilities in the future.
Around the country community radio has been scraping the bottom of the till to find the money to sign up. Some stations simply haven’t been able to pay their share, and are either locked out or else being subsidised by others.
All this is because Communications Minister Stephen Conroy has failed to respond to repeated requests to bring forward funding to help community radio stations take the steps into the digital world.
The last budget of the Howard Government committed $10.1 million over several years to help community radio make the transition to digital. The Community Broadcasting Association of Australia has requested $2.4 of this to be brought forward into this year to help with the sign up and the funding of technical infrastructure. It is a modest enough request, but by the deadline for joint venture sign-up yesterday there had been no response from Conroy.
By midnight last night, and amid great financial strain, community radio groups in Melbourne, Adelaide, Perth and Sydney had all signed up and paid $22,000 each to the joint venture companies, conditional on receiving government funding.
But Hobart and Brisbane had shied at the jump – not surprising considering legal advice to the effect that the joint venture agreements are far from satisfactory. Hobart and Brisbane stations have asked for an extension to the deadline for sign-up, but it is unclear whether the commercial stations will grant this. After all, why would they?
The issues involved in all this are complex, but the result is a stressed and burdened community radio sector - and an uncertain future.
The process for digital radio roll-out is described here. Community radio has to satisfy a two layer process to be part of the digital radio world. First, they have to form representative companies in each capital city. This is a challenge in itself, with community stations spanning the range of interests from student media organisations such as the cash-strapped but innovative SYN to religious radio and radio for the print handicapped.
Then the representative companies have to sign up and pay their money to get a seat at the table in the joint venture companies that will run the digital radio infrastructure. These JVCs will, of course, be dominated by commercial radio. The process, conducted to punishing deadlines, has been a very high hurdle.
Even those groups that have managed to get to sign-up will get less spectrum than the commercial sector. Commercial stations get 128kbps each, while community stations get just 2/9ths of the capacity to share between them all. In Melbourne and Sydney that works out to just 512 kbps to be shared between nine community stations..
The result is the possibility of a fragmented community radio sector in the future, with some able to use digital radio, and others locked into analogue.
On the other hand, the future of the technology is uncertain. Many in the industry believe that Digital Radio will be stillborn, overtaken by wireless internet technology. Nevertheless the community sector is having to make commitments now, in order to have a seat at the table in the future.
At the same time as community radio is bending under the strain, the Government has yet to come up with a digital solution for community television, which is presently condemned to a slow fade out as more Australians take up digital televisions, and lose the ability to get the community television analogue signal.
Does Government actually want community broadcasting to survive? At the moment it seems that technology that is meant to bring more diversity is actually presenting as a threat to the most diverse, if least polished, broadcasting sector in Australia.
Senator Conroy’s office did not respond to Crikey’s questions on this issue by deadline today.
Dear Niche Community Broadcaster – My opinions are never driven by money and least not from the CBAA. I do possess an extensive academic background and have over 30 years real experience in the television industry. I also base my opinions on industry knowledge and experience with particular interest in the operations of community broadcasters and their doggedness in wanting federal government funding in further pursuit of their commercial interests. Media enthusiasts pursued a license without much thought to public support and station viability. The difficulties community broadcasters find themselves in is not the fault or responsibility of the government. Try this: consolidate efforts, make logical choices and conform to the principles of what community broadcasting should be it is possible to gain the government’s interest. By the way, self sufficiency does not mean to exclude the public or government.
I have been studying this media sector since 2004 (Doctorate) and I have had trouble getting the government to answer questions. The problem is Helen Coonan had a plan and was ready to implement it, but everyone wanted a change of government. This new government is affraid of commitment, while not fully understanding what community broadcasting can provide to society and the industry, they would rather cut budgets, complicate processes and hold useless summits. Yes, the sky is falling for the community broadcasting sector, but no one is throwoing out any life-lines. Should the commercial and public media sector care either? No, they don’t and don’t expect them to care, along with the government.
Your comments are well made Media Researcher, and many of them I agree with. CBs MUST involve the community in their programming and decision-making to be (1) relevant (2) compliant and (3) attract public support. Pre-planning and business sense are critical to this. But without ANY seed funding, is this realistically accessible to all CBs? The ABC spend huge $ on research identifying trends and developing content to keep up with the communities demands. CB do not have access to this type of research or community consultation, nor the resourcing to do so. Sure, there are some things that can be achieved off a shoe-string with great volunteer support, but getting it right is a real stretch - particularly if you’re operating in a community of 25,000 people or less (60% of CBs are outside the big cities). In such a town, attracting massive public support - say 1 in 10 people give $10 each - will still only give you $25,000 -a pretty meagre budget. Yes, CBs must do more. But it’s not easy.
Dear Community Broadcaster – I do know what I am talking about and if you did initially submit a proper financial and business plan prior to obtaining a license, then what went wrong? Or was your application like so many others I have reviewed are full of bogus speculations? You and other stations fail to see what has been created by special interest groups who propose are working in the public’s interest, but yet have little involvement, interest or relevance with the public. Simply because you hold the reins of being a broadcaster does little in the way of properly operating a business. If these were “real” commercial operations they would have failed a long time ago, but you and others are so blind to maintain ownership you can’t see the writing on the wall. This comment is happily sponsored by a prosperous funded government position whose job it is to throw stones. What’s your story?
This dialogue took an early turn for the despicable and pointless. Researcher obviously has an axe to grind and a thesis to submit. From the bizarre fashion in which s/he leaps from gripe to gripe - from the 2007 election to community radio’s Philosophy (“damn beatniks!”) to their lack of public funding to their lack of private sector nous - I bet it’ll be fascinating (though perhaps not very illuminating) reading. Nobody’s looking for handouts here, and nobody’s claiming CBs are perfectly governed companies. If there’s gonna be a Gov’t-motivated change in media platform, the Gov’t needs to grease the wheels to ensure that the new model is as good and democratic a platform as the old. This whole digital radio shemozzle is looking more and more like some weird-looking, PPP-built piece of infrastructure of dubious functionality built on public land.
Hear hear?
Second part - talking with the public to obtain their interest and concerns were never addressed with this new service. I would also suspect that even discussing with local government to ascertain their possible support for the station, or even proposing a station’s intent with local business to gain their financial support were never conducted prior to pursuing a license. But yet the industry faults the government for not being supportive. Well, the industry is not being supportive of the public for which it campaigned to provide as well. Unity is missing within this industry, localism, public participation and relevance are also gone, and you feel that the government should be supportive of an industry that is un-organized and non-compliant to its mandate? The community broadcasting sector needs to get more involved in the community and stop playing the same game as the commercial and public media sector. They were established to do what they do and do it very well, with the ex
When you go for a community broadcasting license, you are required to submit details that demonstrate adequate pre-planning, including a comprehensive financial and business plan. You seriously don’t know what you are talking about. And who said we expect the government to bail us out? All I am suggesting is that there needs to be seed funding to do these things properly, and currently this is near impossible to find. And tell me, which stations run similar to commercial stations? There may be some, but I’m not aware of any. In Melbourne there are stations like SYN, Triple R, PBS, ZZZ, 3CR, RPH to name but a few - all of which have massive community support and involvement and none of which even vaguely resemble commercial entities. All of whom’s future is incredibly bright. Seriously, you sit there in a government funded career and throw stones at a supposed “failing industry” that you have shown complete ignorance on. What’s your story?
Yes Ed admittedly, this dialogue did take an interesting turn, but it was my intent to purposely spark controversy on this matter and it worked beautifully. There will always be a difference of opinion of this industry, which you feel is an “axe to grind”, so accept it. However, I do wish there were more participants, but it appears community broadcasters do little in monitoring public opinion. The public should not be expected to openly accept or support any service simply because it was created, the service must have value for the intended customer/client/audience. Inventor Thomas Edison said “In order for a business to be successful, it must create value”. So what is the value of the type of community broadcasting service created when it does little to include or is relevant to its public? By the way, illumination only exists for those who are capable of accepting a difference of opinion and are able to change.
Dear Community Broadcaster - I admire your whimper to justify community broadcaster’s strife, but public dollars can follow, it just takes proper planning and direct community involvement. Establishing a media service, may it be radio, newspaper or television requires proper pre-planning. It is not the responsibility of the government, may it be state or federal to fund businesses of any type and it should not be a primary consideration. However, it appears that from the financial problems encountered by the community broadcasting sector is largely a result of either a lack of or non-preplanning before pursuing a broadcasting license. This industry or any other business should never be established on the principle of “build it and they will come” strategy, but from the result of proper pre-planning and good business sense. For the problems encountered by the community broadcasting sector, with their lack of public focus and financial contribution, I would suspect items like talkin
Community Broadcaster – I don’t think so on the miss, but my fundamental point is station managers feel they need paid staff or even volunteers to do the job of establishing relationships with the community, business and government. Managers should put their systems on auto-pilot and get off their high-horse and do the work themselves or get their board of directors to organize the work if you really want your station to work properly or give up the license to someone who can make the station work. Again, the fundamental truth is that struggling station owners failed to preplan properly prior to obtaining their licenses and now require a bailout. Why? If it happens again, then who will you turn to? Conform to the Community Broadcasting Philosophy and see what happens.
Well, well, well. I think I’ve struck a nerve. If you don’t have station managers, what do you call yourselves? Regardless of who owns, manages or is associated with the station, you still have created a situation where preplanning was never considered to how the station would operate. You still operate similar to commercial stations. There was no prior consideration to how financing would be achieved, but yet you want the federal government to bail you out? That will never happen, so suck it up and give the license to someone who knows how to operate a business properly. And as far as attacking my credibility, at least I’m not in a failing industry of what you and others have created; I have a very prosperous future, do you?
With respect I believe that the media researcher is living in the estoric world of academia and probably being funded by CBAA monies that could be better spent on the community sectors that do offer real diversity. There are lots of niche broadcasters that are facing just the same costs as the CRA stations and they receive little or no funding except for some transmission costs alleviation. To blindly think that the “tax dollars” will flow is simplistic and ignores the premise of self sufficiency. Other than the SBS,RPH and NIRS, no other CB’s get the yearly seed capital to actively safeguard the bottom line. they have to raise the profile to attract advertisers, sorry sponsors, or go broke. ergo no diversity is what follows.
No. You’re still missing the point. 40% of stations have no paid employees. How can a manager “get off their high-horse” (which I’ve seen/heard no evidence of to date anyway) when there isn’t a manager? “Struggling station owners”? What owners? All community stations are required by legislation to be owned by an Incorporated Association (well, all that have been licensed since 1984), thereby having open access for community involvement. For a “Media Researcher” you seem to know very little about the reality faced by most community stations …
Media Researcher - you seem to be missing a fundamental point. No-one is suggesting that it’s about “Me” and that CBs should exclude the community. But to do all the things you suggest: involve the community, approach the local council/arts body, proper planning, establish “a strong management and financial base” requires resources. One cannot do any of these things off volunteer labour alone. CBs need seed funding. Getting seed funding from councils also requires time, effort and proper pre-planning - which requires seed funding. It’s a chicken and egg scenario. At present, there is no mechanism for CBs to get seed funding, and therefore no way to break the chicken-egg cycle.
Media Researcher - while it is true to say that some community stations might provide a degree of commercialism in their content, it is a massive over simplication to assume that public tax dollars will follow community broadcasters if they uphold the principles of localism, public interest and participation. The vast majority of community stations have been doing this for years, yet the Government contribution per station has fallen significantly and steadily for the past 15 years. The reality is, the Government has not shown a real willingness to invest in community broadcasting.
So, when half of all community radio stations operate on a budget of less than $70,000 pa, often with little or no paid staff, there is a constant fight just to keep the service going. If, at times, they are forced to go with slightly more commercially attractive content just to survive, who can blame them? The ABC do it, and they have an budget nearing $1 billion…
Just to add to my previous comment. Although community radio might provide niche programming such as, SYN (youth), religious and handicapped services, there is still the issue of commercialism existing within their services (popular music and advertisements). However, this is also prevelant within the community television sector where they too broadcast popular American and other international programs and use commercial advertisements that are disquised as sponsorship spots. What happened to Australian content, localism and the public interest?
Community Broadcasters - If you operate similar to the commercial and public broadcasters, don’t expect their support. It is time to refocus your direction back to providing a public service that concerns Australia, programming that is locally focused, allowance of public participation and non-reflective of commercialism.
Public tax dollars will follow.
Well Community Broadcaster, difficult though it may be, but not impossible, consider these concepts. Do you have a city council in your area or maybe a nonprofit organization with interest in the arts? Either one of these groups or both would probably have interest in supporting such a venture if they were approached with a supporting proposal that showed the public benefits or was the establishment of a community broadcasting station only a self-absorbed interest? If providing for the community was the intent of establishing a CB station then a cooperative effort should have been sought. Even with a small population of 25,000, there could have been a smaller operation established that would have sufficed for the area. Any aspect to the media industry is an expensive venture and taking on such a project without proper planning or establishing a strong management and financial base is destined to fail or work off the fumes of an old smelly rag. There is no “Me” in Community.