A report by Anthony Everitt that evaluates the Radio Authority's pilot access radio projects for a new community radio station licensing scheme in the UK, edited by Grant Goddard in 2003 for The Radio Authority.

1. NEW VOICES AN EVALUATION OF 15 ACCESS RADIO PROJECTS
NEW VOICES
Access Radio, or community-based broadcasting where local people produce
and present their own programmes, promises to be the most important new
cultural development in the United Kingdom for many years. This is the claim
made by New Voices, an independent report which evaluates a pilot scheme,
established by the Radio Authority, to test Access Radio’s viability. It concludes
that the Government should introduce Access Radio as a third tier of broadcasting
alongside the BBC and commercial radio.
NEW VOICES
AN EVALUATION OF 1 ACCESS RADIO PROJECTS
5
BY ANTHONY EVERITT

2. FOREWORD
2
PREFACE
3
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
5
INTRODUCTION
9
WHAT IS ACCESS RADIO?
23
THE FIFTEEN PROJECTS
020 7405 7062
info@radioauthority.org.uk
www.radioauthority.org.uk
93
APPENDICES
FACSIMILE
85
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
TELEPHONE 020 7430 2724
79
REGULATORY ISSUES
14 GREAT QUEEN STREET
LONDON WC2B 5DG
49
OUTCOMES
HOLBROOK HOUSE
29
PROMISES OF DELIVERY
The Radio Authority licenses
and regulates independent
radio in accordance with the
statutory requirements of
the Broadcasting Acts 1990
and 1996. It plans frequencies,
awards licences, regulates
programming and advertising
and plays an active role in the
discussion and formulation
of policies which affect the
independent radio industry
and its listeners.
97
ANTHONY EVERITT is a writer, teacher and cultural
consultant. He is Visiting Professor of Visual and Performing
Arts at Nottingham Trent University. His publications include
Joining In, an investigation into participatory music in the
United Kingdom and The Governance of Culture, a study of
integrated cultural planning and policies commissioned by
the Council of Europe. He advises arts councils and
ministries of culture on cultural planning and management.
He has written a life of Cicero and is working on a
biography of the emperor Augustus. He was SecretaryGeneral of the Arts Council of Great Britain.
The Foundation’s UK Branch
gives grants across four
programmes – arts, education,
social welfare and AngloPortuguese cultural relations –
to charitable organisations in
the UK and Ireland, and has a
reputation for recognising and
initiating innovative ideas.
98 PORTLAND PLACE
LONDON W1B 1ET
TELEPHONE 020 7636 5313
FACSIMILE
020 7908 7580
info@gulbenkian.org.uk
www.gulbenkian.org.uk
DESIGNED AND PRODUCED BY WPA LONDON
PRINTED BY EMPRESS LITHO
PUBLISHED BY THE RADIO AUTHORITY

3. NEW VOICES
AN EVALUATION OF 1 RADIO PROJECTS
5
BY ANTHONY EVERITT
FOREWORD
PREFACE
3
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
2
4
INTRODUCTION
1
2
WHAT IS ACCESS RADIO?
28
THE FIFTEEN PROJECTS
36
PROMISES OF DELIVERY
54
OUTCOMES
1
08
REGULATORY ISSUES
1
36
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
1
50
APPENDICES
1
56
PUBLISHED BY THE RADIO AUTHORITY
© RADIO AUTHORITY 2003 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

4. FOREWORD
Radio has many enduring talents. Foremost
among those is its ability to re-invent itself in
every age, responding to whatever new media
or technical challenges arise, whilst still
remaining of the highest relevance to listeners
and to society as a whole. The present age is
no exception. Radio is once again rising to
the technical challenges presented by the new
media in a response which harnesses digital
radio and the internet. At a social level, despite
the consolidation of the traditional radio industry,
new challenging forms are arising to offer an
innovative, meaningful, and at times creditably
subversive, response to new directions in
our communities.
Over the past dozen years, the Radio Authority
has facilitated this new social relevance by
licensing small-scale commercial radio stations,
issuing short-term licences for trial services and
events, and substantially expanding longer-term
special licences for individual institutions. But in
2000, with the likelihood of new Communications
legislation, we were seized with the vision that
more could be done.
Building upon the experience and enthusiasm
of genuinely local commercial radio, and the
community media sector, and evidence from
other countries, and in the awareness that this
might be the crucial time to innovate, we
proposed that Government should make
possible a new third tier of radio in the UK.
This would provide social radio for specific
communities, mostly geographically defined,
on a non profit-distributing basis. It would build
on the achievements of short-term licences
in getting ordinary people involved in large
numbers in making radio, by offering an entire
2
new sector within the medium where access
would be the raison d’être. Thus the sound
broadcasting spectrum would be deployed
for specific social gain, especially in areas of
particular deprivation whether economic, ethnic,
cultural or social.
To test the validity of that vision, we persuaded
Government to allow us to license a batch of
experimental stations on a pilot basis. To ensure
that the pilot could be properly assessed, and
with the extensive help, support and
encouragement of the Gulbenkian Foundation,
we commissioned Professor Anthony Everitt to
undertake an independent evaluation, at arm’s
length from the Authority and from Government.
This is his report.
Anthony Everitt has plunged into Access Radio
with energy, enthusiasm, keen perception and
wise judgement. On behalf of the Radio
Authority, I thank him warmly for being our
Evaluator. Particular thanks are due to the
Gulbenkian Foundation for supporting and
guiding this work, and also to all those who have
been so generous with their time and views.
PREFACE
This report is my evaluation of the Radio
Authority’s Access Radio pilot scheme. While
noting in Chapter 6 the need for long-term,
multi-year research into the impact of Access
Radio on local communities, I have found more
than enough evidence of its capacity to attract
numerous volunteers, often from disadvantaged
backgrounds, and train them in broadcasting
and other transferable skills and have been
favourably impressed by the active engagement
with Access Radio of many kinds of local
institution and agency. I hope that my
conclusions will encourage the government to
pursue its plan to introduce Access Radio as
a permanent addition to the radio scene. In my
judgement, it promises to be the most important
cultural development to take place in this country
for many years.
I would like to thank all those who have
facilitated my work. They include, first and
foremost, the Access Radio projects themselves,
whose members have been extraordinarily
co-operative and tolerant of my demands. I am
grateful too to Tony Stoller, the Radio Authority’s
Chief Executive, and his colleagues for their
unstinting support; I owe a special debt to
Soo Williams, my assiduous official point of
contact with the Authority. The Access Radio
Steering Group, which Mark Adair chaired until
September 2002 and Thomas Prag thereafter,
has provided wise and authoritative guidance.
Others who have provided useful information
and advice include Steve Buckley and Nicky
Edmonds of the Community Media Association;
Laurie Hallett; and Liam McCarthy of BBC Radio
Leicester, who interviewed me during his
research into Access Radio for the BBC.
The Radio Authority is grateful to the Calouste
Gulbenkian Foundation for its financial support.
The Radio Authority made clear that it expected
me to act independently of it – an injunction I
have been happy to obey. I alone am responsible
for the opinions expressed and recommendations
proposed in the pages that follow.
Anthony Everitt
Wivenhoe
January 2003
Legislative provision for Access Radio, and for
a Fund to support its introduction, now stands
poised to be enacted within the Communications
Bill. We hope that this report will help the new
regulator, Ofcom, to understand how to make
the most of the stunning opportunity which now
presents itself.
Tony Stoller
Chief Executive
The Radio Authority
March 2003
3

5. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
THE ACCESS RADIO
EXPERIMENT
In 2001 the Radio Authority launched an
experiment into Access Radio, designed to test
the sustainability of a separate tier of small-scale
community radio services. Fifteen not-for-profit
projects, aiming to deliver social gain to specific
neighbourhoods or communities of interest, were
offered one-year licences. An Evaluation was
commissioned to assess the extent to which
projects delivered promised benefits and
involved local participation; to examine costs
and funding models; to test their impact on the
local radio ecologies; to provide a differential
analysis of AM and FM broadcasting; to propose
an appropriate licensing regime for Access
Radio; and to assess the experiment’s linguistic
impact so far as those taking part in the projects
were concerned.
The Evaluation methodology has been based
on consultation with the Access Radio projects,
which set development targets before going on
air and have now measured their outcomes. An
interim report was produced in September 2002.
HISTORY OF
COMMUNITY RADIO
The development of community radio in the
United Kingdom can be traced back to the
1960s, a decade that witnessed a radical new
approach to culture and creative expression,
based on the principles of community
empowerment and individual participation.
Competitive pressures and the impact of
legislation led BBC local radio and independent
local radio stations to re-think their original
community-oriented policies. But after 1990 the
establishment of Restricted Service Licences led
to a growing engagement with radio by
community groups.
4
The Report describes the inception of the
Access Radio experiment. The process by which
the Radio Authority appointed the fifteen Access
Radio projects is assessed in detail. The legislative
timetable enforced very short deadlines within
which the Authority had to make all the
necessary arrangements. Nevertheless, despite
over-optimism about the speed with which it
would be able to allocate frequencies, the Radio
Authority acted reasonably and the selected
projects represent an adequately balanced
cross-section of community radio groups.
WHAT IS ACCESS RADIO?
The most usual definition of ‘community radio’
emphasises the importance of participation by
local people; however, it can also refer to radio
provided to communities as distinct from by them.
This elision of meanings could make it more
difficult for the proposed new tier of radio to
distinguish itself convincingly from what the BBC
and ILR offers. So the Radio Authority coined the
term Access Radio, although the decision to do
so has been criticised by the community radio sector.
Some argue that Access Radio licences should
be restricted to groups offering a general or
inclusive neighbourhood service and that those
catering exclusively for ‘communities of interest’
(for example, children or old people) should be
ineligible. This is because of what they see as
the over-riding claim of disadvantaged areas of
the country. According to another, more
convincing view, the Radio Authority has a duty
to ensure that all kinds of people, not simply
those living in such areas, have access to radio.
However, in the event of severe spectrum
scarcity, it may be necessary to encourage
different interest groups in a ‘community of
place’ to join forces, offering a service to all
which includes ‘community of interest’
programme strands.
Because of technical convergence, Access
Radio should be considered in a wider
community media context. The pace of
technological change should also be taken into
account: Access Radio may turn out to be a
transitional medium-term phenomenon and the
Government and Ofcom should be aware of the
possible need to respond to new circumstances
as they arise.
THE FIFTEEN PROJECTS
The fifteen Access Radio projects – their aims
and the motives of some of those who work for
them – are briefly described. New Style Radio
in Birmingham regards broadcasting as a
valuable social tool for the development of
African-Caribbean people. Bradford Community
Broadcasting aims to serve all those living in
a complex multi-cultural city. Radio Regen in
Manchester created ALL FM and Wythenshawe
FM, both of which target disadvantaged
communities in the city. Sound Radio in Hackney
sees itself as a ‘local world service’. Forest of
Dean Radio promotes community development
in a rural area. Takeover Radio in Leicester
enables children to run their own radio station,
with minimum adult supervision. Cross Rhythms
began by focusing on the Christian community
of Stoke-on-Trent with a diet of community
information and contemporary Christian music,
but the Access Radio experience has led it to
widen its approach; it now defines itself as a
station serving the whole community with a
Christian motivation. This is similar to the policy
of Shine FM in Banbridge, County Down,
another Christian radio project, which speaks
to the community at large and promotes social
reconciliation. Angel Radio in Havant broadcasts
to people over sixty: as a matter of policy it
refuses to play any music recorded after 1959.
Awaz FM in Glasgow sees itself as a much-
needed channel of communication between
Glasgow’s Asian community and the public and
voluntary sectors. Desi Radio wishes to reconcile
the different religious and social strands of
Panjabi culture in Southall. Northern Visions
places the arts and creative expression at the
service of all communities in Belfast. Resonance
FM on London’s South Bank defines its
community as artists and broadcasts contemporary
music and radio art. Two projects are alliances
between different interest groups; first, the Asian
Women’s Project and the Karimia Institute which
came together to run Radio Faza in Nottingham
and, secondly, GTFM, a partnership between the
residents’ association of a housing estate in
Pontypridd and the University of Glamorgan.
The Access Radio projects have different
approaches to governance, with varying
degrees of transparency. No single model will
suit everybody, but best practice may suggest
a graduated progression to fully democratic
constitutions. Most projects are recruiting large
numbers of volunteers and providing them with
training in specialist radio and transferable skills.
There is a wide variety of fund-raising practice
and financial philosophies differ. Some projects
attract large amounts of public sector subsidy
and employ full-time paid staff; others fear that
complete professionalisation may damage their
voluntaristic ideals.
PROMISES OF DELIVERY
Each Access Radio project’s quantitative targets
for the delivery of social gain – under the
headings of training opportunities, work
experience opportunities, contribution to tackling
social exclusion, contribution to local education,
service to neighbourhood or interest groups,
5

6. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
access to the project by local people – and its
qualitative targets for linguistic impact are recorded.
These targets are accompanied by reported
outcomes, which in many cases exceed
projects’ original intentions. The pilot scheme
shows that Access Radio will provide a valuable
complement to existing provision.
ENROLLING THE COMMUNITY
The Access Radio projects have recruited many
hundreds of volunteers and provided training for
most of them in radio and ICT skills. This
capacity to attract participation by members
of local communities makes Access Radio
attractive to regeneration and development
agencies. There has been a growing tendency
towards individual training or mentoring.
Work experience targets have often not been
met because of insufficient experienced
personnel at the projects.
Public sector agencies and voluntary sector
organisations are enthusiastic about Access
Radio’s power to communicate information to
local communities and are co-operating with the
pilot projects. Some excellent radio training and
programming have been produced with schools
and colleges.
LINGUISTIC IMPACT
Large numbers of people are disempowered
and disheartened by an inability to use words
fluently and confidently. Many languages,
especially from the Middle East and the Asian
sub-continent, which are seldom heard on radio
in the United Kingdom, have been accorded
substantial air-time.
6
A study of selected recordings of broadcast
output and reports by station managers suggest
that volunteers with low self-esteem and educational
attainments have profited from training in radio
skills and the experience of broadcasting. They
have often been able to transfer what they have
learned to real-life situations in the form of
greater expressive assertiveness.
Most of the projects make a point of
encouraging presenters to reflect local patterns
of speech and dialects and to avoid the
stereotypes of conventional broadcasting.
STAFFING NEEDS
The human resources required to run an Access
Radio service were under-estimated by many
of the pilot projects, especially in fund-raising
(whether in the form of grants or advertising
sales), external liaison with local groups,
financial and general administration and
management and training of volunteers. Most
of the pilot projects did not have the money
to pay for all these skills.
FINANCIAL REQUIREMENTS
The financial performance of the pilot projects
varies widely (with a few of them in some
difficulty). It demonstrates a financial need for
projects with no paid staff of about £50,000
per annum and for those with a salaries bill
of between £140,000 and £210,000.
The fact that most of the projects have
succeeded in raising the necessary funding for
their licence period suggests that in principle
Access Radio promises to be a financially
sustainable medium.
LOCAL ALLIANCES
SPECTRUM
Partnerships between different groups in a
community to operate an Access Radio station
may be a necessary feature of the community
broadcasting ecology. Experience during the
pilot scheme suggests that they can be difficult
to manage. Thorough advance negotiation,
administrative transparency and clear decisionmaking procedures are necessary for such
alliances to succeed.
Although the availability of FM frequencies will
be patchy, it will be sufficient to justify
proceeding with Access Radio as a new radio
tier, especially if unused BBC spectrum is taken
into account. AM frequencies are more plentiful
in supply, but they have the disadvantages of
being much more costly to run and of offering
poorer reception.
SURVEYS
LOCAL RADIO ECOLOGY
The Access Radio experiment had little or no
negative financial impact on commercial radio
stations in the pilot projects’ areas. However,
the effects of an Access Radio station that
sells advertising could be serious for small ILR
stations with similar catchments and advertising
markets, few of which make large profits. In the
case of very small communities, there will not
be enough listeners to sustain two stations.
Most of those pilot projects which depend on
commercial earnings have found it more difficult
to attract advertising and sponsorship than they
had anticipated, although this may change in
the future.
There is a strong case for allowing Access Radio
stations to access plural funding sources, including
advertising and sponsorship, provided that
some protection is put in place for small
commercial stations.
There is much to be said for limited, practical
co-operation between local BBC stations and
Access Radio, with the former offering training
and technical support and the latter local news
information and facilities as well as a talent pool
for future staff recruitment.
A number of the pilot projects conducted
audience surveys, but on small samples.
Although of limited value they reinforce
numerous anecdotal reports of Access
Radio’s popularity.
FUTURE FUNDING
The need for an Access Radio Fund and the
kinds of activity that might be eligible for
support are described. The fund should be
managed by Ofcom.
LICENSING METHODOLOGY
AND EVALUATION
A methodology for awarding and evaluating
Access Radio stations is proposed, which
would be administratively lean but robust,
especially so far as the measurement of social
gain is concerned. Lessons can be learned
from the current Evaluation of the pilot scheme.
It is argued that weight should be placed on an
applicant’s track record of RSLs when judging
programming ability, managerial competence
and fund-raising potential, that self-evaluation
should be a component of the process and
that the local community should participate
in evaluations.
7

7. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The constitutional arrangements for Access
Radio stations should reflect a commitment to
transparency, community empowerment and
responsiveness to local demand. The question of
ownership and its possible transfer should be
carefully controlled. Access Radio licences
should last for five years.
CONCLUSION AND
RECOMMENDATIONS
The major conclusion of the Evaluation is that
Access Radio promises to be a positive
cultural and social development and should
be introduced as a third tier of radio
broadcasting in the United Kingdom.
It is further recommended that
1. Access Radio stations should have
access to professional expertise in
administration, fund-raising and
community liaison (Chapter 5.4 and 5.5)
2. Ofcom should satisfy itself that, in the
case of a partnership-based Access
Radio applicant, decision-making
processes are clearly defined, transparent
and robust (Chapter 5.6)
3. an Access Radio station should normally
be permitted to receive up to half its
income from advertising sales and
sponsorship. In exceptional cases, Ofcom
should be empowered to vary this rule in
the event of a special case being made
(Chapter 5.7)
4. where a small commercial radio station
shares a comparable coverage area with
an Access Radio station that sells
advertising, an Access Radio licence
8
could be offered only if the applicant can
show that it will present little or no
advertising sales and sponsorship
competition (Chapter 5.7)
5. Access Radio licences should usually not
be granted in areas where a commercial
radio station’s measured coverage area
(MCA) falls below 40,000 adults (except in
the case of ‘micro’ MCAs). However, at the
time of ILR licence renewal, commercial
and Access Radio applicants should be
allowed to compete in such an area and
Ofcom should either award a commercial
or an Access Radio licence (Chapter 5.7)
6. The BBC should take an early opportunity
to set out consultative proposals for
collaboration with, and support for,
Access Radio (Chapter 5.8)
7. Ofcom should conduct research into
overall FM capacity across the entire
spectrum and, in the light of its findings,
determine allocations for Access Radio
provision (Chapter 5.9)
8. Ofcom should determine whether
spectrum presently administered by the
BBC could be made available for Access
Radio (Chapter 5.9)
9. Ofcom should commission a major
research project with a view to assessing
over a period of years the social and
personal outcomes, both quantitative and
qualitative, of Access Radio (Chapter
5.10)
10. the Government should establish an
Access Radio Fund, which would support
the fund-raising capacity of Access Radio
stations and the employment of a station
manager at a level of £30,000 per annum
for three years to be equally matched
from other sources (Chapter 6.1)
11. the possible creation of a Community
Media Fund should be allowable in the
new communications legislation after
evaluation of the effectiveness of the
Access Radio Fund (Chapter 6.1)
12. Ofcom should administer the Access
Radio Fund (Chapter 6.1)
13. the evaluation of Access Radio licensees
should be as follows:
• an Evaluation Questionnaire (as in the
present Evaluation – see Appendix 1) to
be completed by an Access Radio
station applicant as a licence
submission and a promise of delivery
• an annual published report by the
station of achieved outputs and outcomes
• two open facilitated workshops of local
stakeholders and residents, once halfway through the licence period and
once in the last year of the licence, to
be convened by the station, which
would comment on the station’s
progress against its plan
14. Ofcom should not award licences with
large coverage areas. As was the norm
for the pilot scheme, MCAs should
usually be up to a 5km radius.
15. Ofcom should not award Access Radio
licences to stations that belong to chains
(Chapter 6.2)
16. Access Radio licence applicants should
be required to produce a viable fund-raising plan (Chapter 6.2)
17. Restricted Service Licences (RSLs)
should be maintained as evidence of
Access radio licence applicants’
• commitment to social gain objectives
• programming competence
• closeness to its local community (6.2)
18. If more than 50% of an Access Radio station’s board, including the chairman,
resign or are replaced at a general meeting, Ofcom should review the licence and
either confirm or revoke it (Chapter 6.2)
19. Access Radio licences should last for five
years (Chapter 6.2)
• the regulator only to intervene on
complaint (as now), regarding serious
failures to meet targets and on
unsatisfactory outcomes of the mid-term
open meeting: the end of licence open
meeting to be taken into account in the
event of a re-application (Chapter 6.2)
9

8. 1
.0
INTRODUCTION

9. THE EVALUATION BRIEF
AND METHODOLOGY
In 2001 the Radio Authority launched
some experiments into Access Radio, a separate
tier of small-scale community radio services.
Fifteen groups were licensed to operate pilot
services at various locations in the United
Kingdom. The aim was to inform the future
regulator, Ofcom, whether this small-scale
kind of radio service is a tenable and viable
concept and, if it is to be introduced in future,
how it might be licensed, regulated, funded
and organised.
1
.1
1
.0
INTRODUCTION
In 2001 the Radio Authority launched some
experiments into Access Radio, a separate
tier of small-scale community radio services.
This chapter reviews the Evaluation brief and
methodology, assesses the Radio Authority’s
introduction of the pilot scheme and describes
the process of Evaluation during the past year.
The criteria for considering projects for
the pilot scheme include
• evidence of social gain and/or public service
aims
• variety of funding models, excluding purely
commercial funding
• ring-fencing from Independent Local Radio
• a focus on specific neighbourhoods or
communities of interest
• widest possible access for those within the
target group to the operation of the service
• not-for-profit status
1
.2
To assess the outcome, the Radio Authority
appointed the author of this Report as Evaluator
of the Access Radio Pilot Scheme. He was
guided by an Access Radio Steering Group,
whose members were Mark Adair (until
September 2002), Sheila Hewitt, Thomas Prag,
Geraint Talfan Davies (from September 2002),
Tony Stoller and Soo Williams from the Radio
Authority, Stuart Brand from the Department for
Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) and Sian Ede
from The Calouste Gulbenkian Foundation.
1
.3
The Evaluation Brief requires a review of
the adequacy of the above criteria in the light of
1
.4
12
the experience afforded by the pilots and an
appropriate definition for Access Radio, if it is to
be introduced. A range of measurable outcomes
is expected, which include
• social gain
• benefits which might have been generated
if the projects had not taken place
• delivery as promised
• costs and funding models
• impact on the radio ecology
• quality and range of local service (social
inclusion etc.)
• success in attracting the operational
involvement of local people
• differential analysis of AM and FM
broadcasting
• best duration and appropriate licensing
regime for Access Radio projects
• impact in terms of speech output and
language used
The methodology adopted for the
Evaluation was to set in place a simple
and easy-to-manage planning regime, by
which much of the gathering of information
was undertaken by those running the
projects themselves.
1
.5
The process fell into four stages. First,
before any of the projects had gone on air, two
Evaluation Workshops were held in early 2002,
at which an Evaluation Questionnaire (see
Appendix 1) was discussed with the projects
and tested for its practicality.
1
.6
The Evaluation Questionnaire sought
information from the projects concerning the
outcomes which the Radio Authority expected
them to deliver, following the structure of a basic
planning ‘narrative’: namely,
• vision – the project’s overall aim
1
.7
13

10. 1.0 INTRODUCTION
• needs assessment – to enable the projects
to test their assumptions of viability and also
to provide useful baseline information against
which eventual results can be measured
• ‘promise of delivery’ – namely, intended
programme of activity
• output targets – did the project take the
actions which it promised?
(as distinct from an over use of the linguistic
conventions of radio broadcasting).
Projects submitted regular recordings of
broadcast outputs; programmes in Asian
languages were assessed by the School of
Oriental and African Studies. A linguistic impact
assessment questionnaire appears
in Appendix 3.
The projects completed and submitted the
Questionnaires to the Evaluator. They revisited
them later towards the end of the pilot period to
demonstrate the extent to which they had achieved
the programme of activity and met their targets.
1
.8
The Calouste Gulbenkian Foundation,
which part-funded the evaluation, is interested in
whether Access Radio will empower individuals
by enabling them to develop their powers of
verbal expression. The linguistic impact on those
members of local communities who participated
in the pilot projects was measured according to
the following criteria
1
.9
1. the range of languages used relative to
the language make-up of the constituency
which the Access Radio station is serving
2. fluency in the use of language by participants
when broadcasting
3. confident expression ‘on air’ of the richness
and variety of language or dialect and, in
particular of that variety of language
considered to be good by its native speakers
of the National Cultural Heritage exploits the
authority of art to glorify the present social
system and its priorities.’2
A brief history of the development of
community radio will throw light on fundamental
characteristics that distinguish it from other
approaches to broadcasting. Its earliest origins
can be traced back to the 1940s. However, it did
not develop in any significant way in the United
Kingdom until the 1960s – a decade that
witnessed the arrival of a radical new approach
to culture and creative expression.
1
.18
110
.
In the second phase, the Evaluator visited
each project during the spring of 2002, to gain a
first-hand impression of them and meet workers
and volunteers. He also interviewed members
and officers of the Commercial Radio Companies
Association and other leading figures from the
commercial radio sector.
11
.1
• outcome targets – did the project deliver the
objectives required by the Radio Authority?
COMMUNITY RADIO IN
THE UNITED KINGDOM –
A HISTORICAL SKETCH
Thirdly, an Interim Report was prepared,
to discuss progress, offer preliminary findings
and identify key issues that had arisen to date.
Copies were given to interested parties. The
Executive Summary was posted on the Radio
Authority’s website, and the full document was
available to those who requested it. Comments
were invited.
11
.2
Fourthly, the Evaluator re-visited each
project during the late autumn of 2002 and
convened a final Evaluation Workshop, at which
the projects were able to share experiences and
identify common issues and themes.
11
.3
Fifthly, this final report was completed
at the end of January 2003.
11
.4
11
.5
Public institutions such as the BBC and
the Arts Council of Great Britain had long been
concerned to promote ‘high culture’ – that is, in
Matthew Arnold’s phrase, ‘acquainting ourselves
with the best that has been known and said in
the world, and thus with the history of the human
spirit’1; like money it was widely seen to be the
preserve of the better off and the better educated
and, like money, it was the duty of the state or its
agencies to redistribute it to every citizen.
11
.6
Contradicting this view, a generation of
cultural activists now emerged who believed that
everyone owned his or her own culture, which
various forms of disadvantage and exclusion
prevented them from expressing and enjoying.
They rested their views on a socialist critique
of capitalism. The proposition was that art had
been expropriated by the ruling classes and was
a means of bolstering their authority. The critic
and writer, John Berger, spoke of the ‘illusion’
that ‘… art, with its unique, undiminished authority,
justifies most other forms of authority, that art
makes inequality seem noble and hierarchies
seem thrilling. For example, the whole concept
11
.7
Community artists, working in music,
drama and the visual arts, placed their skills
at the disposal of disadvantaged local
communities, hoping to empower people
politically as well as individually, through the
unlocking of their innate creativity and the ability
to express themselves effectively. Over time
the sharp political flavour of the community
movement was diluted, but its concern for
disadvantaged individuals in local communities
or neighbourhoods remained. In the following
decades its principles have gradually become
an inherent tenet of public policy in the cultural
sector, first among local authorities and later at
the level of national government and its agencies.
Very similar concerns about social need,
civic participation and community development
stimulated the rapid expansion of the not-forprofit social and voluntary sector. Over time,
agencies without a primary interest in creative
expression came to recognise the contribution
which culture could make to the achievement
of their objectives. Many are now enthusiastic
collaborators with the cultural sector.
119
.
In sharp opposition to the BBC’s
Reithian vision, those engaged in community
development saw that television, video and radio
had the potential to play an important part in this
far-reaching cultural revolution. However, the
exploitation of these media as a means of civic
enfranchisement was hampered by the lack of
broadcasting platforms, although from the 1970s
there were attempts to provide community
1
.20
1 Arnold, Matthew, Literature and Dogma, preface to the 1883 edition
2 Berger, John, Ways of Seeing, BBC and Penguin Books, London 1972
14
15

11. 1.0 INTRODUCTION
broadcasting through cable networks. These
years also saw the rise of pirate pop music
stations, which, while no supporters of
community ideals, demonstrated the powerful
relationship radio was capable of forging with
interest groups and neighbourhoods.
Internationally, community broadcasting
took root more rapidly than in the United Kingdom.
Community radio in Australia, originally called
Public Radio, has been a licensed tier of radio
broadcasting since the mid 1970s and has been
recognised in Canada for much the same length
of time. In France the community radio sector
has developed since the late 1960s and early
1970s, inspired by the pirate ships based in the
Channel and the Italian ‘Free Radio Stations’: for
a decade or more it operated illegally, until
licences began to be issued from the mid 1980s.
1
.21
which introduced commercial radio. Despite a
delay caused by the Annan Committee’s review
of UK broadcasting, whose proposal for a local
broadcasting authority was not accepted, 26
Independent Local Radio (ILR) stations were on
air by the end of the decade. Initially, they placed
considerable emphasis on their community
obligations and many of them were in effect
community-led operations (for example,
Plymouth Sound). A couple of franchises were
awarded to community groups in Cardiff and
Moray Firth. However, more commercial
imperatives soon became dominant. Faced
with their success, the BBC also pulled away
from its original commitment to community
development and its local programming policies
began to converge competitively with those of
the ILR stations.
The 1980s saw little progress for
community radio. It did not receive consideration
in the 1980 Broadcasting Act, which ushered
in an expansion of commercial radio. Shortly
afterwards, the Community Radio Association
(later to become the Community Media
Association) was set up to campaign for a
‘third sector’ of broadcasting alongside the
BBC and commercial services. In the middle
of the decade the Home Office announced
a community radio experiment, but then
abruptly abandoned it.
1
.24
Despite a promising start, the BBC,
as the country’s publicly-funded public service
broadcaster, has not played a leading role in the
development of community radio and, today, it
has fallen to the regulator for commercial radio
to promote its cause. In 1967 the Corporation
established its FM local radio service. At the
beginning its policies were community-oriented,
despite the fact that its stations usually had large
county-wide (or in the case of Scotland nationwide) catchments. Frank Gillard, its founder,
described the new service in terms strikingly
similar to the later aspirations of Access Radio:
‘Local radio will provide a running serial of local
life in all its aspects, involving a multitude of local
voices; what one might call the people’s radio’.3
1
.22
The situation began to change with the
widespread consumer take-up of FM radios and
the passage of the Broadcasting Act of 1972,
1
.23
In 1988 licences for 21 ‘incremental’
radio stations were granted: these were
designed to allow new community, ethnic and
special interest stations to be established in ILR
areas. But the aim was to enhance diversity of
provision rather than to promote participation
in broadcasting by citizens.
1
.25
3 Connecting England, Local Radio: Local television: Local Online, BBC English Regions, 2001. p23
16
The 1990 Broadcasting Act enabled the
further growth of commercial radio and did away
with many of its public service obligations. The
regulator, the Independent Broadcasting Authority,
was broken up into three separate bodies, the
Independent Television Commission (ITC), NTL
and the Radio Authority. The most important
consequence for community radio (although not
explicitly mentioned in the legislation) was the
establishment of Restricted Service Licences
(RSLs). Short-term licences were issued for
special events (for example, religious festivals)
and as trial runs for applicants for permanent
licences. Long-term RSLs were awarded to
hospital, student and military radio stations.
1
.26
Community groups have energetically
grasped this unexpected opportunity. RSLs have
severe limitations: although there have been a
few exceptions, licences only last for a maximum
of 28 days; individual groups may only receive
up to two licences a year (one only in London);
licences cannot be awarded in the same
catchment as other RSL-holders and are limited
by frequency availability. Nevertheless, they have
provided an invaluable ‘nursery slope’ for those
unfamiliar with broadcasting and helped to
demonstrate the potential of community radio
for local people. As well as building skills and
experience, RSLs have enabled the sector
to develop its thinking and refine its policies.
1
.27
Recently, the BBC has adopted a
different approach to community broadcasting.
To address local neighbourhood needs and to
foster individual participation, its BBC Online
service offers opportunities for interactive
involvement by local people and its local stations
are seeking to make direct contact with listeners
by various means (including the use of special
BBC buses which tour local areas). However,
the wide extent of its catchments remains an
obstacle to close engagement with small
communities or neighbourhoods, the central
feature of community broadcasting.
1
.28
The Radio Authority was a
comparatively recent convert to the cause of
community radio, at least so far as any action
it might itself take. As late as October 1999,
the Radio Authority rejected a request from the
Community Media Association, which had been
campaigning for a third community media tier,
that a number of ‘experimental community
radio services on FM’ should be given long-term
licences with a view to testing demand and
practicality, primarily on the grounds that this
would breach the terms of the 1990
Broadcasting Act.
1
.29
In fact, behind the scenes the Authority,
influenced by an incoming chairman, was giving
serious consideration to the future potential of
community radio. During the same month it held
a strategy conference for members and senior
staff at which the idea of a ‘third tier’ of
community broadcasting was privately mooted.
It was becoming clear that the Government
intended a root-and-branch review of
broadcasting and communications and,
consequently, that the constraints of existing
legislation might no longer exert the same force
as they had in the past. The CMA continued to
make effective representations.
1
.30
The Radio Authority now saw a once-forall opportunity to fill a gap in the country’s radio
services and in June 2000 submitted a paper to
its sponsoring government department, the
Department for Culture, Media and Sport
(DCMS), putting the case for an Access Radio
experiment. It proposed that ‘once the direction
of Government policy becomes more clearly
known the Authority would propose to initiate a
range of pilot experiments to cover as many
aspects as possible of the proposed Access
Radio sector.’
1 1
.3
17

12. 1.0 INTRODUCTION
In December 2000 the Government
published a Communications White Paper.
The Foreword indicated that, in a rapidly
changing broadcasting environment, it wished
to see a broad range of services which would
engage the community at large: ‘We want to
ensure the widest possible access to a choice
of diverse communications services of the
highest quality. All of us can benefit from new
services – as citizens, as parents, as workers,
as students, and as consumers. We want to
include every section of our society in the
benefits of these services, and use to the full
the opportunities now available for enhancing
their diversity and quality.’
1
.32
The White Paper noted the success with
which Restricted Service Licences had allowed
the promotion of ‘very local and very niche
services’, but recognised that the difficulty of
raising non-commercial funding had inhibited
the growth of community broadcasting.
1
.33
locality, ethnic or cultural background or
other common interests.’
In response to the Radio Authority’s
proposal for an Access Radio experiment, the
DCMS indicated that it would appreciate further
evidence of its desirability. Accordingly,
the Authority convened an Access Radio
Seminar in February 2001, attended by a
wide representation from all parts of the UK
radio sector. According to a summary in the
conference report4, ‘there was a general
1
.35
consensus among delegates that a new tier
of radio services is desirable, and widespread
agreement that these services should be nonprofit distributing, with a remit to encourage
social inclusion and regeneration and facilitate
greater public participation in broadcasting…
The issue of funding was… the one which
achieved the least degree of consensus’,
especially as regards advertising and sponsorship.
In March 2001, the Government gave
the Radio Authority permission to conduct a
pilot scheme to test the viability of Access Radio.
A number of appropriate projects would be
selected and given licences for up to twelve
months; an evaluation would be conducted.
1
.36
It, therefore, sought ‘views on whether
the benefits of community radio would justify
greater public intervention. Some possible
benefits are that:
1
.34
• very local community based radio can help
increase active community involvement, and
local educational and social inclusion
projects;
• small radio stations can provide a nursery for
the next generation of broadcasters –
providing hands-on training and experience;
• such stations can also satisfy the demand
for access to broadcasting resources from
specific communities, whether based on
In April 2001, Tony Stoller, the Radio
Authority’s Chief Executive, set out nine
principles by which the experimental projects
should be selected. They were
1
.38
a. Structural Arrangements: ‘the pilots need to
replicate as far as possible the approach,
patterns and structure which we presently
anticipate will govern permanent Access
Radio. They should be operated as not-forprofit services, in defined neighbourhoods,
with clear public service content remits.’
b. Social Gain: they should ‘contain examples
of the types of socially-regenerative and
educational links, which offer so much
potential, and of training and development
of local community capacity.’
c. Variety: they should ‘cover as wide a range as
is practical of the different types of locality –
urban and rural, socially successful and socially
disadvantaged and reflecting the diversity of
the Home Countries.’
d. Communities of Interest: in acknowledgement
of the needs of minorities, ‘at least some of
the services should be aimed at communities
of interest’.
the pilot scheme
Because concerns have been voiced
about the way the Radio Authority set up the
Access Radio pilot scheme and the possibility
that this might affect the experiment’s eventual
outcome, the Evaluator was invited to review the
selection process. This section gives a detailed
description of what took place and assesses
the validity of the anxieties raised.
1
.37
e. Funding Models: the pilots should ‘experiment
with a range of funding models’, with
particular reference to the need to ‘protect
existing small-scale services from
unsustainable levels of competition’.
f. Regulation: ‘the regulations and administrative
regime should be modelled upon what we
anticipate will be the eventual Ofcom
arrangements’.
g. Fixed Term Licences: ‘the licences for the
pilots will have to be for a fixed term’.
Mr Stoller recognised that that ‘will pose
problems when they near their end, because
they will hopefully have attracted support
from listeners’.
h. RSLs: the licensing of the pilots should not
interfere with the existing and well-established
RSL system.
i. Evaluation: the pilots should be carefully
monitored and evaluated to inform proposals
for permanent arrangements.
The Radio Authority faced a tight
timetable if evaluation of the Access Radio pilot
scheme was to fit in with the timing of the
forthcoming communications legislation and the
proposed establishment of the new regulatory
body, Ofcom. The consequence was a series of
short deadlines for those wishing to take part.
1
.39
The decision to adopt the pilot scheme
could not reasonably have preceded the
publication of the Communications White Paper
in December 2000 and, as has been seen,
emerged from subsequent discussions between
the Radio Authority and DCMS. It was expected
that the Communications Bill itself might be
before Parliament as early as the start of 2002;
at the latest, the findings from the experiment
needed be available to Ofcom from its own
inception, perhaps during the spring or summer
of 2003. This meant that the selected Access
Radio projects, with their twelve-month licences,
should be on air by the end of 2001. Although in
the event this provisional timetable slipped, the
Radio Authority was obliged to move fast. It had
only a few months within which to consult,
investigate, design the administration of the
1
.40
4 Access Radio Seminar 12 February 2001, Radio Authority. London, 2001. ‘Summary’. Unpaginated
18
19

13. 1.0 INTRODUCTION
scheme, agree the evaluation processes and
license the services.
In May 2001, the Radio Authority
announced the Access Radio Pilot Scheme
and sought Letters of Intent by late June from
interested groups, from which about twelve
would be selected for licence. This invitation
was announced in a nationally distributed Press
Release; it was also sent to groups that had
held RSL licences in the previous year and had
expressed Access Radio-style community
objectives. The Community Media Association
held a seminar on Access Radio which was
attended by 70 organisations.
1
.41
193 groups responded from across
the United Kingdom. Almost all of them had
practical knowledge of broadcasting, having
operated RSLs; some were experienced hospital,
student or military radio stations. Although they
covered a wide range of interests, there were
unexpected gaps in the range of submissions.
pirate stations may have reduced the pool of
those interested in the Access Radio experiment.
Also, black-led groups do not necessarily define
themselves as serving the African-Caribbean
community since their programming can have
about them. It is worth pointing out that, in
consequence, the Evaluation has been unable
to consider their work; however, some of their
policies, as expressed in their Letters of Intent,
indicate a growing and potentially constructive
a high degree of cross-over to white audiences.
trend to extend their coverage to engage with
the surrounding communities in which they
are located. It is possible that some of these
stations could be future candidates for Access
Radio licences.
Of the thirteen groups whose central
motivation was religious, three were Sikh, one
Jewish and another Islamic, the remainder being
Christian (mostly from an evangelist background).
1
.44
1
.42
Geographical coverage was somewhat
uneven: only four responses came from Wales,
lower than might have been expected in relation
to its population. The explanation for this
disparity probably derives from the fact that the
RSL tradition is weaker in this part of the UK.
Thus in 2001, out of a national total of 423 RSLs,
only 13 were in Wales.
1
.42
Among communities of interest, those
concerned with non-European communities were
best represented, with 34 applicants. Interestingly,
of these only one wished to provide an exclusive
service to an African-Caribbean community as
compared with 27 to an Asian community (the
remaining six offered a broad culturally diverse
policy). The reason for this imbalance is unclear,
but the existence of numerous African-Caribbean
1
.43
20
The selection process consisted of two
stages; first, a long-list was prepared and this
was then distilled into a short-list, from which the
final selection of fifteen groups was made. This
slightly higher number than the planned twelve
was agreed, partly on the grounds that they
represented a comprehensive range of intentions
and partly as an insurance policy against any
drop-outs (an eventuality which has not yet arisen).
1
.49
21 applicants wished to serve particular
age groups, the majority of them with children or
young people. Seven were student radio stations
and three were concerned with older people.
1
.45
One group offered a science-based
service and another avant-garde music and
radio art.
1
.46
The majority of submissions, more than
100, came from groups offering a comprehensive
service to a geographically defined and usually
socially and economically disadvantaged
community. Of these about a quarter
represented rural areas or small towns.
1
.47
The task of choosing the successful
candidates for the pilot scheme was given to the
Radio Authority’s Access Radio Sub-Committee
(which had approved the design of the scheme
and agreed its criteria). It met three times for the
purpose. The Letters of Intent were divided into
batches for detailed consideration by individual
committee members. A number of applicants
were rejected for ‘technical’ reasons. It was
considered unnecessary to include hospital,
student or military radio stations on the grounds
that, through the Long-term RSLs awarded to
broadcasters in these categories, the Radio
Authority was already well enough informed
1
.48
Once chosen the fifteen groups were
invited to submit full submissions, which were
received in September, analysed and, with
three exceptions, endorsed in November. The
exceptions were Shine FM (because of its later
start date and the lack of a transmitter site at
that stage), FODR (again because of the lack of
an agreed transmitter site) and Awaz FM (because
it was not yet a formally constituted company).
1
.50
The successful candidates were not
selected for their known or perceived merit,
although applicants with insufficient experience
or whose Letters of Intent were thin on content
were quickly eliminated. It is acknowledged that
there may well be groups with a stronger
broadcasting track-record than those eventually
chosen. Judgements were made according to
the criteria in the Access Radio brief, especially
those relating to promised social gain, and to
the need to ensure a variety of funding and
1
.51
administrative structures and geographical
spread across the United Kingdom. The large
number of factors to be taken into account
meant that the decision-making process was
inevitably complex and to some extent subjective.
Questions have been raised about the
final project list from different parts of the radio
industry. Some voices in the commercial radio
sector regret that none of the stations operates
in an area already served by a small-scale
commercial station (arguably more likely to be
affected by competition from an Access Radio
broadcaster, both so far as community-based
programme content and advertising sales are
concerned, than the larger commercial stations).
This is a good point, although it is worth noting
that a few small-to-medium ILRs do overlap
some pilot projects (for example, Sunrise
Bradford, The Quay in Portsmouth and Sunrise
in London). The Radio Authority’s not unreasonable
response is that it did not wish to run the risk
of damaging such stations by using them as
guinea-pigs. The issue discussed further in the
section is on Access Radio’s impact on the radio
ecology below (see Chapter 5.7).
1
.52
Surprise has been expressed that as
many as three Access Radio projects serve Asian
communities in large conurbations (Awaz FM in
Glasgow, Desi Radio in Southall and Radio
Faza in Nottingham). However, a study of their
objectives reveals significant differences of
approach: the first seeks, complementing a diet
of Asian entertainment, to give ‘local, national
and government groups access to deliver their
information’ to Glasgow’s geographically and
culturally self-contained Asian community,
whereas Desi Radio aims to encourage the
coming together of the discrete strands of
Panjabi culture by serving the ‘needs of all
Panjabi Sikhs, Hindus, Moslems, Buddhists
1
.53
21

14. 1.0 INTRODUCTION
TABLE 1: ACCESS RADIO PROJECTS
and Christians’. Radio Faza is an alliance of
two Asian groups with dissimilar objectives and
philosophies, which run separate programme
schedules at different times of the week; it
was felt to be important to assess partnership
models because, in the event of spectrum
scarcity, Access Radio groups may have to
come together to operate stations jointly (see
Chapter 3.61-3.71).
It has also been claimed that undue
preference has been given to city or town
dwellers as against those who live in the
countryside. It is true that only one Access Radio
station, Forest of Dean Radio, serves an
exclusively rural area. However, it can be
countered that cultural and social variety is
largely to be found in cities or large towns and
that, while there are important local variations,
the main issues confronting rural communities
are nationally generic. Some Letters of Intent
were received from Scottish rurally-based
groups; however, it was felt that the Radio
Authority’s experience of small-scale commercial
radio with community-based policies in Scotland
(for example, Heartland FM serving Pitlochry and
Aberfeldy) meant that it would be more profitable
to select a rurally-based group in England. A
reading of the Letters of Intent suggests that the
addition of further rural projects to the Access
Radio list would probably have generated little
more evidence of value to the Radio Authority.
1
.54
By the same token, the two Christian
groups (Cross Rhythms and Shine FM) are
working in dissimilar community contexts (a
market town in Northern Ireland and a city in
England) and began broadcasting with discrete
ends in mind. The former has a strong
‘contemporary Christian music’ basis and sees
potential in the United Kingdom for commercial
growth in this sector, linked to radio programming.
In the United States contemporary Christian
1
.55
22
music, linked to 1,600 Christian radio stations,
has become a $3 billion industry. However,
Cross Rhythms does not subscribe to the same
ethos of niche Christian ‘market’ broadcasting
as the majority of US stations. Although it
In all the circumstances, the Radio
Authority acted reasonably during the selection
process. It is possible that the shortness of the
deadline for the Letters of Intent deterred some
potentially aspirant groups, but it seems unlikely
that many well-qualified radio projects failed to
learn of the scheme. A substantial number sent
in Letters of Intent and they covered a wide
range of community interests. The Access Radio
Sub-Committee conducted its business thoughtfully
and, in the fifteen projects it chose, arrived at an
adequately balanced cross-section of the
community radio sector and in this way avoided
the danger of distorting the experiment.
LOCATION
COMMUNITY
SERVED
ALL FM
(RADIO REGEN)
MANCHESTER
ARDWICK, ARDWICK,
LEVENSHULME
ANGEL RADIO
HAVANT, HANTS
OLDER PEOPLE
AWAZ FM
GLASGOW
ASIAN COMMUNITY
BCB
BRADFORD
INNER CITY
CROSS RHYTHMS
CITY RADIO
STOKE-ON-TRENT
CHRISTIAN COMMUNITY
DESI RADIO
SOUTHALL, LONDON
PANJABI COMMUNITY
GTFM
PONTYPRIDD
PONTYPRIDD
NEW STYLE RADIO
BIRMINGHAM
AFRICAN- CARIBBEAN
COMMUNITY
FOREST OF DEAN
COMMUNITY RADIO
FOREST OF DEAN
FOREST OF DEAN
NORTHERN VISIONS
RADIO
BELFAST
BELFAST
RADIO FAZA
originally intended to ‘address the needs of the
Christian community’, it has also developed a
focus of programming that engages with the
wider community from a Christian world view
(see Chapter 3.27-39). On the other hand,
Shine FM, serving a market town in Northern
Ireland, sees itself as a broadcaster ‘with a
Christian ethos’ rather than as purveying an
exclusive Christian message: it seeks to speak
to the community at large and to be a ‘catalyst
for reconciliation’. Also it was the only project
seeking a licence for less than one year (three
months); this could be useful, it was felt, in the
context of the evaluation of the Access Radio
experiment, for in future it is possible that some
groups will seek licences for relatively short periods.
PROJECT
NOTTINGHAM
ASIAN COMMUNITY
RESONANCE FM
LONDON (SOUTH BANK
AND BANKSIDE)
MUSICIANS AND
RADIO ARTISTS
SHINE FM
BANBRIDGE,
BANBRIDGE
COUNTY DOWN
SOUND RADIO
LONDON
HACKNEY AND
EAST LONDON
TAKEOVER RADIO
LEICESTER
CHILDREN
WYTHENSHAWE FM
(RADIO REGEN)
MANCHESTER
WYTHENSHAWE
ON AIR 2002
5 JUNE
1 MARCH
29 APRIL
1 MARCH
28 FEBRUARY
10 MAY
27 APRIL
14 AUGUST
19 JULY
9 MARCH
25 MARCH
1
.56
1 MAY
21 SEPTEMBER
26 JULY
23 MARCH
6 MAY
Two further issues have arisen, both of
them affecting the Evaluation process, which
merit comment. First, the Radio Authority had
hoped to identify appropriate frequencies for all
fifteen projects by January 2002. This turned out
to be over-optimistic. After the projects’ full
1
.57
23

15. 1.0 INTRODUCTION
applications had been received in September,
the Radio Authority gave notice to the BBC from
whom it would be seeking some space on its
frequencies and the Radiocommunications
Agency (RA), the body in charge of frequency
allocations, that it would be approaching them
for frequency clearances.
A complex process then ensued to
identify possible frequencies for each project:
this had three stages – a general review of a
database comprising current and planned FM
transmissions; a second more refined analysis
testing identified frequencies for acceptability
(for example, taking terrain into account); and a
third ‘pass’ to correlate findings with the
projects’ specific wishes for coverage. Particular
difficulties were encountered in Nottingham,
Glasgow and London. Finally, a choice was
made between options where more than one
frequency was available. Informal discussions
were held with the BBC.
1
.58
A number of stations were not ready to
go on air for some time thereafter, because of
particular technical or planning difficulties (see
Table 1 for a list of start dates).
1
.60
Although there are grounds for saying
that, for temporary administrative reasons, the
Radio Authority was a little slow in expediting
the frequency search in autumn 2001, the main
reasons for the length of time taken in finding
frequencies were, first, complexities of process,
secondly, the lack of a dedicated staff resource
and, thirdly, the intervals which the BBC and the
RA required for consideration of the Radio
Authority’s proposals. There is no evidence of
dilatoriness. What is clear, though, is that the
Radio Authority could have set itself a more
realistic deadline than it did. That it failed to do
so can be attributed to the pressure of the
legislative timetable, which tempted the Authority
to rely on hope at the expense of experience.”
1
.61
A subsidiary reason for renouncing
listener surveys was their expense: if two fully
professional surveys (to demonstrate trends)
were to be assumed per Access Radio project
at a cost of approximately £5,000 per survey, the
total financial requirement could have been as
high as £150,000. The Radio Authority does
not possess unallocated monies on this scale.
The DCMS was invited to make a financial
contribution, but it too did not have the
necessary resources.
1
.63
Some Access Radio projects have
arranged their own volunteer-led listener surveys
and advice has been made available to them
in the form of a model listener questionnaire
prepared for the Radio Authority by Hallett
Arendt, a market research company with a
media specialty. The outcomes, which are of
some, if necessarily limited, value, are described
in Appendix 4.
1
.64
Secondly, no funds have been made
available for listener surveys. This may seem
a significant omission. However, as the central
purpose of Access Radio is to contribute
to community development and individual
empowerment, ratings are not the most
appropriate primary measurement. In the Radio
Authority’s view, the key issues for evaluation
are to demonstrate (or not) social gain and
organisational and funding sustainability. If these
are convincingly delivered, an adequate listener
base can be assumed without having to be
specifically measured.
1
.62
By early December the Radio Authority
was ready to submit formal proposals to the
BBC and the RA. Agreement was reached with
the BBC by the end of January (although further
revisions turned out to be necessary, for
example in the case of ALL FM in Manchester).
The RA (acting on an accelerated time-scale)
began to issue clearances from the end of
February and, apart from Forest of Dean Radio
and Shine FM (which last was not due to start
broadcasting till the early autumn), all were
completed by April.
1
.59
24
25

16. 2.0
WHAT IS ACCESS RADIO?

17. A QUESTION OF TERMINOLOGY
The title ‘Access Radio’ raises some
awkward questions of meaning. Is it the same
as ‘community radio’, a term that has long been
in use? And if so, why the replacement? More
broadly, is there general agreement about what
the word ‘community’ signifies?
2.
1
A review of international definitions of
community radio suggests a consensus on its
constituent elements. For example, the Canadian
Radio-Television and Telecommunications
Commission states: ‘A community radio station
is owned and controlled by a not-for-profit
organisation, the structure of which provides
for membership, management, operation and
programming primarily by members of the
community at large. Programming should reflect
the diversity of the market that the station is to
serve.’5 The Broadcasting Commission of Ireland
(formerly Independent Radio and Television
Commission) applies a very similar definition,
as does the Broadcasting Services Act 1992
in Australia.
2.2
2.0
WHAT IS ACCESS RADIO?
This chapter defines community radio and sets
out the reasons why the Radio Authority
adopted the term, Access Radio. It discusses
different notions of ‘community’ in relation to
Access Radio and notes the rapidly changing
technological environment.
These principles are reflected in the
Radio Authority’s criteria for the Access Radio
Pilot Scheme (see Chapter 1.38). As with
community arts, the main emphasis is placed
on community ownership and participation.
2.3
Seeing this to be the case, some have
questioned the need for a new term. Ralph
Bernard, (formerly Chief Executive, Chairman
since July 2001) of the GWR Group, who spoke
2.4
in favour of community radio at the February
2001 Access Radio Seminar, said: ‘I’ll tell you
what I think Access Radio is. I think it’s a title
dreamed up by someone who hasn’t the first
idea of how radio stations, any radio station,
operate. Someone who doesn’t like the term
community radio.’6 The suspicion in some
quarters is presumably that the Radio Authority
wishes to sanitise a possible third radio tier from
the long-standing political and campaigning
associations attributed to ‘community’ – and, in
others, that it seeks a precision that will exclude
a broader notion of radio’s contribution to
community life.
It is further objected that ‘access radio’
is already a term of art, signifying a station with
a ‘share-space’ policy; namely, one that offers
slots to outside groups rather than produces
programmes itself.
2.5
These criticisms might be decisive
were the consensus about the meaning of
‘community radio’ watertight. This turns
out not to be the case. Also speaking at the
Access Radio Seminar, Phil Riley gave
Chrysalis Radio’s definition of the term: it was
‘radio whose output provides a service uniquely
tailored for a particular audience within a single
geographical community and whose purpose
is therefore to meet the information and
entertainment needs of that community.’7
The emphasis here is on provision rather
participation and many commercial radio
stations would rightly claim to operate a
community radio policy in this sense.
2.6
5 Cited in Price-Davies, Eryl, and Tacchi, Jo, Community Radio in a Global Context: A Comparative Analysis in Six
Countries, Community Media Association, 2001. p 20.
6 Bernard, Ralph, A Vision for Access Radio, speech to Radio Authority Access Radio Seminar, February 12, 2001.
7 Access Radio Seminar op. cit. ‘III Seminar Report’.
28
29

18. 2.0 WHAT IS ACCESS RADIO?
Just as in the performing and visual arts,
there is often a confusion – and sometimes an
elision – between ‘community arts’ (local people
making the art) and ‘arts in the community’ (local
people being supplied with the art), so in local
radio there is a danger of overlapping meanings
between radio which serves a community and
that which belongs to a community. Broadly
speaking, the former is what commercial radio
does at its best and the latter is what Access
Radio aims to provide.
COMMUNITIES OF INTEREST
V COMMUNITIES OF PLACE
.
The Radio Authority takes the view that it
would be unhelpful to give a third radio tier a title
which embodied any ambiguity and, in particular,
which failed to draw the clearest of distinctions
between its offering and that of commercial radio.
The term ‘Access Radio’ avoids this danger. This
is a rational argument and the current report will
refer to ‘community radio’ when discussing
general principles and practice and ‘Access
Radio’ when referring to the pilot scheme.
2.11
2.7
2.8
In the 1960s and 1970s the pioneers
of community development were quite clear that
a community could be defined by the physical
space that it occupied. A loose working
definition of the time was: ‘… a variety of social
contexts in which groups of people recognise a
relationship between each other and a defined
geographical area or administrative structure.’8
2.10
However, while it is true that everyone is
in the nature of things geographically based,
where people live is no longer how many people
define their social or individual identities. For an
increasing number, place is where they happen
to be at a given time, as traditional family
structures weaken and social and job mobility
becomes increasingly common. ‘The growth
of individualisation and “active consumption”
means that we tend to make opportunistic use
of multiple communities to construct a confident,
customised sense of ourselves, as distinct from
defining ourselves in terms of a fixed community
of which we are fully paid-up members.’9
These two approaches to community
are reflected in the Access Radio criteria (which
speak of ‘communities of interest’ as well as
of defined neighbourhoods) and in the range of
selected projects. Obviously, any radio station
is only able to broadcast in a given place to a
given population; however, Wythenshawe FM’s
purpose is to serve all the residents of a clearly
2.12
defined part of Greater Manchester, while
Takeover Radio in Leicester and Angel
Community Radio in Havant are concerned,
respectively and exclusively, with children and
older people.
While the latter inflect their programming
with coverage of local concerns, there is a sense
in which they could just as well operate on a
national basis or, through their web-sites, globally.
Indeed, it is Takeover’s explicit ambition to found
a national channel for children. Cross Rhythms,
the Christian radio project in Stoke-on-Trent, is
broadcasting its Access Radio output, not only
on FM for local people, but as a replacement for
its original international service on its web-site; it
is doing so because of financial constraints, but
reports that, despite local content, it appears to
be maintaining international listener interest.
2.13
2.1 It has been proposed that the remit of
4
Access Radio should be restricted to geographical
communities and that ‘communities of interest’
be handled in some other way. The primary
justification for this is the over-riding social need
of disadvantaged areas of the country, to the
alleviation of which community radio can make
a unique contribution.
society which are to a greater or lesser extent
excluded from access to radio – for example,
older people or children – to which the Radio
Authority properly owes a duty. The reason for
promoting Asian or African-Caribbean
broadcasting is partly because of economic
disadvantage, but also to counter cultural and
social exclusion (although the issues are interrelated). If it did not acknowledge the claims of
communities of interest, the Radio Authority
could reasonably be charged with a failure to
fulfil its obligations.
2.1 Accordingly, in the Evaluator’s
6
judgement, it is appropriate for the Radio
Authority to include communities both of interest
and of place in its criteria for eligibility for Access
Radio status. That said, there is one circumstance
where it could be right to prioritise communities
of place. In the event of severe spectrum scarcity,
the regulator may wish to encourage different
interest groups in a given place to join forces,
offering a service to the whole community, but,
within that, enabling ‘community of interest’
programme strands (on project alliances see
Chapter 5.6).
2.1 However, the Radio Authority is not a
5
social services agency. Its primary remit relates
to radio and to the assurance of maximum
access to the medium. In that light, targeting
social deprivation cannot be the only purpose
of Access Radio. There are other groupings in
8 Artists and People, op. cit. p 107.
9 Everitt, Anthony, Joining In, Calouste Gulbenkian Foundation, London 1997. p 86.
30
31

19. 2.0 WHAT IS ACCESS RADIO?
THE TECHNOLOGICAL/
MEDIA CONTEXT
2.
19 An increasing number of radio stations
(among them some of the Access Radio
projects) broadcast on the Internet. Web
technology allows for the possibility of text,
audio and video to interact in a new form of
programming in which the consumer could have
an active role, although, at present, web radio
tends to be offered in traditional formats.
2.1 Community radio in general, and the
7
Access Radio pilot scheme in particular, should
not be seen in isolation from other media
developments. The notion of a ‘third tier’ for
television is current. Proposals to establish a
decentralised Channel 5 to be included in the
1990 Broadcasting Act failed, but, with the
growing success of radio RSLs, campaigners
began to put the case for a regime of television
RSLs. This was eventually introduced in the 1996
Broadcasting Act and by the end of 2000 eight
TV stations were on air. In December 2000 the
Local Broadcasting Group (LBG), backed by two
media groups, was formed and announced that,
with approval from the Independent Television
Commission and the Department for Culture,
Media and Sport, it intended to raise funding to
launch up to 40 TV RSL stations, bringing forward
the prospect of commercially oriented as well as
not-for-profit local television. Later the LBG went
into administration and for the time being
progress has been halted, but it can be assumed
that the further development of community
television will be resumed in due course.
2.20 In 1999 the Information and
Communications Technology (ICT) Learning
Centres initiative was launched by the
Government (through a Capital Modernisation
Fund) and the New Opportunities Fund. The aim
is to support the creation of 1,200 ICT Learning
Centres (now called On-Line Centres). The CMA
has successfully argued for an integrated
approach to ICT learning, incorporating wider
cultural practice as well as business skills. As a
result a growing number of community media
centres is emerging, equipped with multimedia
computers, digital editing software and
permanent high speed Internet access, digital
radio studios for production and broadcast, a
digital video editing suite and television studio,
broadcast transmission facilities and links to
local cable and ADSL networks.
2.
18 Digitisation and the growth of computer
processing power are contributing to a
converging technological media environment.
As Steve Buckley, Director of the CMA, noted:
‘Convergence is taking place at the level of
production between sound-based media and
visual and moving image media and also at the
level of distribution between broadcasting systems,
radio and television, and telecommunications
systems, which are developing from one-to-one
systems to one-to-many.’10
able to respond flexibly to changing needs as
technologies become more sophisticated and
interdependent.
2.23 It is difficult to predict the rate at which
consumers will invest in these technologies and
in the current economic climate a conservative
estimate may be appropriate. It may be that
within the next ten years or less the situation
will be transformed; in any event it would be
sensible to plan for the eventuality. This would
mean recognising that a largely FM-based
system of Access Radio may be a transitional
medium-term phenomenon. (A further possibility
could be that mainstream broadcasters will
abandon analogue frequencies, creating room
for the future expansion of Access Radio). As
the Community Media Association argues in its
response to the draft Communications Bill,11
2.2 It follows that an overall, cross-media
1
approach would make better sense than treating
media delivery systems separately, in order to
reflect the ways in which communications media
are developing in the electronic marketplace.
As will be discussed below (see Chapter 6.1.8),
it may be appropriate to consider the funding
of the community media sector in an integrated
manner; so in place of the proposed Access
Radio Fund there is an arguable case for the
creation of a Cross-Media Fund, which would be
10 Buckley, Steve, ‘Community Media Centres’, Airflash 2-2000. p 12.
32
2.22 The speed of technical change should
be taken into account when planning for Access
Radio. Digital multiplexes are being established
and (as already noted) web-casting, free from
regulation, is a cheap and effective means of
broadcasting. Where does that leave locallybased FM services? So far as consumers are
concerned, the digital revolution is yet to take
place and, until the penetration of digital radio
sets approaches universality, offers little to a tier
of broadcasting aimed at disadvantaged and
socially excluded communities whose members
will be the last purchasers of new receiving
equipment (and a significant number of whom
do not even rent telephone land lines). Again, for
all its advantages the Internet will be of little use
to community broadcasters until access to it has
also become nearly universal, for the present a
distant prospect.
the Government and Ofcom will need to keep
consumer and technical developments under
review and to respond flexibly to changed
circumstances as they arise.
11 Response to the Draft Communications Bill, Community Media Association, August 2002. Paragraph 16
33

20. 3.0
THE FIFTEEN PROJECTS

21. The reasons for engagement with
community broadcasting are as various as the
number of those taking part. But three broad
strands of originating motivation can be discerned.
First, there are those whose involvement sprang
from delight in the medium. Tony Smith, one of
the founders of Angel Radio, built his first
transmitter at school: he went home during lunch
and broadcast records to his fellow students.
Later, during the late 1980s, he and his wife,
Lorna Adlam, lived in a country area where there
was no local radio service and set themselves
up as pirate broadcasters (although never taken
to court). ‘Everyone knew we were pirates. The
Department of Trade and Industry people only
raided us on complaint. We used to leave a key
in the front door for them.’ With the availability
of RSLs they went legitimate in the mid-1990s.
3.
1
3.0
THE FIFTEEN PROJECTS
A married man with three children,
Graham Coley works for the Midland
Co-operative Society. Radio has been a longstanding interest. His involvement with the
medium began in 1978 when he prepared
features and presented for BBC Radio Leicester.
In 1986 he was one of the founders of a hospital
radio station, with which he is still involved. He
and Phil Solo collaborated on a number of RSLs
in Leicestershire before they founded Takeover
Radio in 1997 and launched the first full-time UK
children’s radio network on the world-wide web.
3.2
This chapter is descriptive, rather than
analytical. It seeks to give an impression of the
fifteen Access Radio projects and the people
involved, their motives and their aims. The
approach is selective and, although each
project is described (its name is printed in bold
at its main entry), relevant examples, rather than
comprehensive accounts, illustrate key themes.
36
There are others who stumbled on radio
more or less by chance and found it a means
of promoting larger causes. Nathan Asiimwe
and his wife, Annmarie Asiimwe, of Shine FM
in Banbridge, Northern Ireland, are Christian
activists, he with a background in theology
and she in computing. They worked in Northern
Ireland for a multi-denominational project, Youth
with a Mission. ‘We prayed about our future
ministry and we felt that God wanted us working
3.3
here in the media.’ Some training soon convinced
them that radio was ideal for communicating
with young people and applying Christian
values to community development and
social reconciliation.
Lol Gellor of Sound Radio in Hackney
was a song-writer, producer and musician, who
later became interested in film and video. In the
mid-1990s he worked for the multicultural arts
promotion agency, Cultural Partnerships, for
whom he produced his first RSL for the Clapton
Park estate in Hackney in 1995. ‘Not coming
from a radio background, I discovered what
radio can be – a catalyst for the community.
The skills needed for radio are the skills needed
for life – an ability to communicate, to take
criticism, to meet deadlines, to put up with
disappointments. To turn up on time. There
is no medium like it.’
3.4
The third strand is the growing number
of local volunteers who gained experience
through RSLs and have seized on community
radio as a means of self-empowerment and
personal development. One of these is Jason
Kenyon: originally a manual worker with few
educational qualifications, he became involved
in a cross-media project run by a media training
agency, Radio Regen, because he wanted to ‘do
something different.’ He now works full-time for
Wythenshawe FM in Manchester as manager,
producer and presenter.
3.5
COMMUNITIES OF PLACE
Some of the Access Radio projects have
greater institutional security than others and,
in a few cases, are merely one element in a
larger enterprise. New Style Radio (NSR) is
a promotion of the Afro-Caribbean Resources
Centre (ACRC) in Winson Green, Birmingham
3.6
37

22. 3.0 THE FIFTEEN PROJECTS
(one of the most deprived areas in the country).
This organisation began as a co-operative of
young black people in the late 1970s, which
aimed to empower ‘Caribbean people’ by
addressing inequality, unemployment and
economic, social and cultural exclusion. It acts
as a social welfare organisation and in 1995 it
formed an Employment Resource Centre (as
a friendlier alternative to Job Centres). It is
supported by the city council (and two of its
staff have become local councillors).
The centre is a member of a collaborative
group of local black cultural organisations,
including the Drum performing arts and media
centre, Black Voices and Kajun as well as the
black reggae star, Pato Banton.
3.7
ACRC’s involvement with radio began
more than twenty years ago when, with support
from the Cadbury Trust, it was invited to work
with a pirate station PCRL, which wished to enter
mainstream broadcasting, and help manage its
development as a licensed commercial radio
station. Training courses were arranged and a
major conference was convened in association
with the BBC. The plan came to nothing when
PCRL failed to win an ILR licence. PCRL reverted
to piracy, but ACRC maintained its interest in
radio and has subsequently been awarded a
number of RSLs.
3.8
The centre strongly believes in the social
power of radio. Martin Blissett, its chair, said: ‘It
is essential to have a black-led station. Black
people’s image is to do with crime, drugs and
poor educational attainment. We need a medium
with which to dispel myths.’ Although its mission
is primarily directed at the African-Caribbean
community, it welcomes all-comers and a
3.9
38
number of its radio volunteers are white or Asian.
Many young black people are ‘brought up’ on
pirate radio, sometimes without being aware of
their non-legal status, and the centre suspects
that New Style Radio will have the beneficial
to participate directly in community radio: they
are offered in outreach settings as well as at
BCB’s studios. The project has conducted
17 RSLs for communities both of place and
of interest. It has broadcast on cable and the
effect of introducing them to legitimate
broadcasting. Broadcasting is round the clock
and the programming aims to keep the AfricanCaribbean community informed on civic matters,
health, education, regeneration initiatives and
environmental issues. The project provides both
local and international news – in the latter case
with an emphasis on the homelands of target
listeners. Radio drama, story telling and comedy
sketches are produced. NSR’s music policy
focuses on Black music – Reggae, Soul, Soca,
Calypso, Zouk, jazz, Latin, African, Gospel, HipHop and World. The project played a major part
in last year’s Black History Month in Birmingham
and sourced information and comment for
national broadcasters about the much-publicised
murder of two young black women in Handsworth.
Internet for several years.
The centre is now engaged on a major
capital development, with support from the
Millennium Commission, the Arts Council of
England and the city council; it expects to move
into new, purpose-built premises within two years.
Wanting to avoid overstretch, BCB
has initially restricted itself to 6 live hours
broadcasting a day, with six hours speech-led
and two hours of music. Programming is mainly
locally produced (although the project has
entered into partnerships in the past with other
community radio stations in England and is
cautiously interested in broadcasting shared
programmes) and focuses on community issues.
An emphasis is placed on news, information,
discussion and debate, with programming in
various languages (including Urdu, and Panjabi),
and strands reflecting the needs of young
people, older people and minority communities.
Cultural issues are addressed and there is arts
and specialist music programming.
3. 2
1
3.
10
Bradford Community Broadcasting
(BCB) came into being as a direct result of the
3. 1
1
Broadcasting Act 1990, from which the system
of RSLs emerged. Three people, among them
Mary Dowson, now BCB’s full-time Project
Director, asked themselves: ‘Why can’t we get
into this?’ They set themselves up as Bradford
Festival Radio in 1992 (becoming Bradford
Community Broadcasting in 1994). Since then
the organisation has run accredited training
courses giving local people the skills they need
Two aspects of BCB deserve special
attention. First, it operates a ‘hub and spokes’
policy in order to bring broadcasting facilities
as close to local communities as possible.
It occupies a shop in Bradford’s city centre,
although with only two studios it is finding
it difficult to maintain pre-recording, live
broadcasting and training, while running the
Access Radio project. A search is on for new
premises. At the same time the project maintains
an outlying studio at a centre for disabled people
in Manningham and also wishes to establish a
permanent base at Shipley.
3. 3
1
Secondly, BCB has scored a remarkable
success in its sports coverage. Its sports RSLs,
offering live commentaries on local fixtures, have
attracted audiences of between 10,000 and
12,000 listeners. It filled a gap left by a local ILR
station, The Pulse, when it abandoned sports
programming for a time. There may be a lesson
here for Access Radio projects which are
looking for ways of fostering a broadly-based
and loyal listenership.
3. 4
1
Sound Radio conducted four RSLs
before being selected as an Access Radio
project. It is based in a large housing estate
in Hackney and serves a wide swathe of East
London (with an AM transmitter it can reach a
10 kilometre radius). Its catchment is multicultural
not only in the sense of including settled AfricanCaribbean communities, but expatriates (some
now UK citizens) from many parts of the world.
Lol Gellor, the chief executive of its promoting
body, Sound Vision Trust, aware that much of
this constituency has a continuing connection
with, or interest in, distant countries and cultures
of origin, sees Sound Radio as ‘a local world
service’. Examples of programming with a global
dimension include a commentary in Spanish on
World Cup matches in Japan for the area’s large
Spanish-speaking community and a weekly linkup with 173 community stations in Latin America
as part of the “voices of the kidnapped” – a
project dealing with people kidnapped in Colombia.
3. 5
1
The project is committed to drawing
the boundaries of free speech as broadly as
possible, but invariably with a right to reply. As an
illustration of the point, Sound Radio juxtaposed
two programmes in a recent RSL with the selfexplanatory titles of Yids with Attitude and
Talk Black (which featured a spokesman for
the Nation of Islam).
3. 6
1
39

23. 3.0 THE FIFTEEN PROJECTS
The programming schedule includes
discussions of topics such as education, health,
environment, housing and employment and a
daily news and sports round-up. National and
international news sources is being developed
as part of non-English language programming.
Music in the day-time covers a wide range of
genres and focuses on urban music at nights,
with more specialised material at the weekends
(for example blues, jazz and rock). Sound Radio
aims to offer a round-the-clock schedule,
broadcasting 24 hours a day, mainly live
between 7am and 3am; also simulcasts
on the web 24 hours a day.
3. 7
1
COMMUNITIES OF INTEREST
KIDS
Solo criticises the BBC approach to
children’s radio programming, which he sees
as diametrically opposite to his own. ‘Go For It is
an adult venture aimed at kids, not something
they take part in. Also, it’s on Radio 4. It’s too
uncool for kids even to be seen listening to it.’
3.21
Takeover Radio is not alone in its field.
There are a number of schools radio stations,
running RSLs, and a Radio in Schools group
has been formed. KidsFM in Reading is a noncommercial RSL-based station offering a service
to schools and production and other training
opportunities for children. The Disney Corporation
intends to establish a national Disney channel in
association with Capital Radio.
3.22
Takeover Radio’s core target audience
is children between 8 and 15 years old. Its
underpinning principle is that ‘kids take over
the airwaves and do their own thing.’ In practice,
this means that all the management positions
are held by adults, who deal with overall policy,
strategic development, institutional issues and
fund-raising. Two adults are always present
when children are broadcasting. All Takeover’s
activities, including the Access Radio project,
are controlled by the Children’s Media Trust.
Recruitment, induction and training are carefully
managed and parents are kept closely involved
from the outset. There is a Child Protection
Policy. Children who become members of
Takeover Radio Kidz Crew are taught the ‘basic
rules’ of radio. All music is listened to in advance
by an adult and checked by Graham Coley, the
station manager.
3.23
Phil Solo and Graham Coley, the
founders of Takeover Radio, discovered the
excitement of children’s radio by chance; during
an RSL two children in their early teens were
allowed, at their mother’s suggestion, to produce
a programme. Its success suggested to him the
potential of radio for and by children. Solo and
Coley were also influenced by the work of Susan
Stranks of the Children 2000 campaign, which
argues for a UK-wide children’s radio station.
3.
18
Takeover Radio has staked out a claim
for it to be such a station by offering a broadcasting
service on the Internet. The aim is to demonstrate
that a national station is a practical proposition
and believes that, by its track record, Takeover
Radio deserves to run it.
3.
19
DRG, a London digital radio multiplex,
is including among its channels Abracadabra,
aimed at under-10s, which it will seek to offer
other multiplexes: Takeover has been invited to
provide programme content.
3.20
40
However, production and (except
during school hours) presentation are exclusively
handled by children, who are expected to
develop programme ideas and to work them
up into written proposals with content briefs.
In addition to entertainment programmes, they
address serious subjects, including drugs,
3.24
alcohol and (handled by older children) sexual
questions – or what the station calls ‘personal
relations’. They present programmes and are
responsible for the day-to-day running of the
studio. They provide Takeover’s news service
and scan local, national and international news
for items of interest to children. In effect, the
more experienced children run Takeover Radio
with light-touch supervision by adults. Solo
recognises that ‘what we do is inherently risky’.
Young adults present day-time
programmes during school terms. Children
volunteers were involved in the process of recruiting
them, from planning newspaper advertisements
to attending appointment interviews. They also
contribute to the development of merchandising
and outside events.
3.25
Takeover Radio has been broadcasting
on a 24-hour uninterrupted basis since March
2002. The project believes that the socioeconomic and ethnic composition of Takeover’s
membership reflects that of the local population
in Leicester and hopes to be able to produce
evidence of this by the end of the Access Radio
Pilot Scheme.
3.26
CHRISTIANS
As already noted, Cross Rhythms
in Stoke-on-Trent and Shine FM share the same
fundamental, cross-denominational Christian
principles, but at the outset their broadcasting
policies differ in emphasis. The former was
essentially concerned to reach a Christian
audience and the latter the local community
as a whole, but representing a Christian ethos.
3.27
Cross Rhythms aims to communicate
‘eternal faith in 20th century cultural terms’.
It wishes to reverse the disaffection of many
young people from Christianity, which it traces
3.28
back to the attitudinal revolution of the 1960s.
It is influenced by the Jesus Movement, which
began in California at that time and pioneered
‘Jesus Music’, now called Contemporary
Christian Music. This kind of music is the staple
diet of the 1,600 Christian radio stations in the
United States, which make up a multi-million
dollar industry. Cross Rhythms believes that the
churches’ traditional music culture has become
inaccessible to younger generations and needs
to be replaced by genres more in keeping with
young people’s tastes.
Until the 1990 Broadcasting Act, there
were serious obstacles to the creation of
Christian radio stations. Even today there
are few in existence. They include Premier in
London, with two stations, Trans World Radio on
Sky Digital, United Christian Broadcasters (UCB)
with four stations on Sky Digital and the Internet
and Cross Rhythms itself with one web-based
station, one Sky Digital channel and the Access
Radio project.
3.29
Cross Rhythms began 19 years
ago when Chris Cole, now its chief executive,
launched a one-hour weekly programme for
Plymouth Sound ILR. In 1991 he joined forces
with a Christian music magazine, Cross
Rhythms, which Cole bought for a nominal sum.
Cole also took over the running of a Christian
festival. In addition, Cross Rhythms provided
Christian programming for other ILR stations.
3.30
United Christian Broadcasters, based
in Stoke-on-Trent and with a £5 million annual
turnover, funded Cross Rhythms at £120,000 per
annum to provide a full-time youth radio station
on satellite and the Internet. In October 2000 the
two organisations decided to disengage and
since then UCB’s funding has gradually been
reduced: it came to an end in December 2002.
3.3
1
41