Terminology. J. Warmington Page 1 of 8

Transcription

1 I am writing this consultation response as a private individual radio listener, with no connections to the industry. I picked up the summary consultation leaflet in the local library and welcome Ofcom s commitment to public consultation. Consultation In the particular case of Radio in the UK, I must first comment that the content is hardly written in language designed to attract a large response from the general public. The terminology used is very largely that used in the industry, not that used by consumers, and much of the consultation involves matters of which the public, rightly, have little or no knowledge. Having read the 14-page summary leaflet, I then found the full documentation on Ofcom s Web site; following a link to Plain English version I found the text of the same leaflet. This is a travesty of the term plain English. To the extent that this consultation is about broadcast content, the public should be encouraged to have their say. But the amount of technical detail in this consultation will probably deter ordinary people from replying. On detailed matters surrounding the licensing régime, or technical aspects of digital transmission or bundling of contracts/licences, it would have been better to mount a separate consultation directed at stakeholders in the industry, with a reference to this in the public document for those especially interested. Terminology Much of the terminology used is not in use by the public, although probably commonplace in the industry. They most notable example is the irritatingly frequent use of the term analogue radio. The word analogue if often used to mean any technology that is not digital, mostly by people who have no idea what the scientific term analogue means. It may well be that engineers can agree that there is indeed a justification for using the word to describe conventional radio transmission. But the fact is that all conventional transmission is either amplitude modulated or frequency modulated. Unusually for such technical terms, the phrases AM and FM are in general use, and perfectly describe the technology being talked about without the introduction of this new concept of analogue radio. Ofcom should cease the use of the term analogue radio to refer to AM/FM radio. Use of the well known terms will enhance public understanding of the issues, but a further advantage will be that report writers will be carefully considering real concepts in radio rather than abstract ones (who ever heard of a station called Classic analogue? ) The term cloak radio in Figure 62 baffled me but I deduced it should be clock radio. Boomboxes are presumably ghetto-blasters, but what are receivers? There are other examples of internal jargon as various points. (a) the descriptions of styles of station ( chart-based etc and the patronizing 35+/Gold ); (b) the appalling (and unspecific) term drive time (it is noticeable that MORI s questions to the public did not use that term, so it is accepted as not being in popular use); even the seeming contradiction weekend drive time appears at one point: is this even used by the industry? Variations of the insulting phrase heritage ILR stations appear several times with apparently inconsistent meanings. J. Warmington Page 1 of 8

2 Background information It would have been helpful to see more information on the following: a) Where people listen to radio at different times of day at home, work, in the car, other transport, in shops etc. This has a bearing on the likelihood of particular sorts of listening migrating to digital. b) Public satisfaction with local radio, distinguishing BBC from commercial speech and commercial music stations. It may be that the levels of satisfaction differ between the types of stations. c) There is no mention of the long wave band and the broadcasters currently using it. The public should be reassured that this band will continue in use. Further, although a forthcoming Europe-wide conference in use of frequencies is mentioned, there is no indication to the public as to what implications may arise from this. The statement that there will be no switch-off of existing frequencies is welcome though it could be made stringer and more prominent. The paper is inconsistent in its predictions for digital radio. In some places it foresees that digital will eventually be the usual platform for listening to radio, while Regulating local commercial radio Answers to Questions 1-7 of the consultation 1 Do you agree that our main method of regulating radio stations should be the programme formats set out in their licences? On the basis that what works well should not be changed, YES. 2 How can we make sure that listeners get a high standard of local and national news? A full answer to this question requires consideration of BBC as well as ILR stations. The Ofcom document seems to envisage moving to smaller licensed areas for new commercial stations, even smaller than a typical county-sized area; while the BBC, particularly in the South-East, provides local radio that is actually regional rather than local. In my own area of Sussex, the original station, BBC Radio Brighton, was supplanted by BBC Radio Sussex, covering the two counties of East and West Sussex. Some time later this was merged with the struggling BBC Radio Surrey eventually to be renamed Southern Counties Radio. The station now has an editorial area of three and a half counties. Elsewhere in South-East England similar conditions apply. I would hope that the review of BBC services will pay attention to this failure and urge Ofcom to use whatever influence it has to get a better service from the BBC. While the BBC station is not resourced to provide a high quality of news service, it is difficult to insist that the commercial sector should fulfil its responsibility to a high level. Most BBC local stations have a remit that encourages speech rather than music based broadcasts; so one would naturally expect BBC stations to be better but this not always the case. The consultation, rightly and importantly, refers to local and national (and by implication international) news. Listeners do not listen to their local station for one bulletin then switch to Radio 4 for the national news. It is unlikely that local newsrooms will be well qualified to give national and worldwide news, and there is a risk that local journalists will reinterpret national news introducing inaccuracy. It will be a positive enhancement to allow, if not encourage, local radio outlets to share resources on the IRN principle. So sharing of newsrooms provides a positive benefit. J. Warmington Page 2 of 8

3 Should we allow news hubs? It does not matter to the listener where the newsreader is physically located, or whether the bulletin is heard live, or was recorded 25 minutes ago. So a newsgathering centre staffed by proper journalists may provide a better service than a number of small offices each containing a DJ who doubles as a newsreader. But the public do want to hear local stories in local news, so a news hub must maintain awareness of the issues affecting the public throughout the licensed area. A possible regulatory mechanism might be to require the broadcaster to cover at least a specified number of stories per month from each main town/community located in the station s area and listed in the license documentation. A further issue arises where a local news story concerns more than one locality. For example the decisions of a County Council will affect residents living anywhere in that county who will live in perhaps five different radio station areas. For one reporter to serve all those residents with reports from their local authority will improve the current position where local authorities frequently complain that no local media report their activities. Should stations have to provide full-time, professional journalists, based in their local area, during all local programming hours? The term full-time is not needed in a question that specifies the hours being considered. A better condition would be that a substantial proportion of news content should be the product of journalists who are familiar with the coverage area. The physical location of their office/studio is less important than their competence in dealing with local issues. Is there a better way of protecting the quality of news that focuses on the actual programmes, rather than how they re made? I do not agree with the assertion of the document that to specify local journalists is an input rather than output based criterion. A satisfactory news operation is one that covers the events that are important to the public, and if major developments in the local community are ignored by the local radio station, people will want to know why. 3 Should stations decide for themselves how much automation they use? Yes. There is no need for state regulation of how a broadcast station delivers its content. Listeners do not care whether music and chat is being played live: the content itself is the important matter. With regard to news bulletins, listeners should not be misled into thinking that they are listening to news, weather or travel information that is up to the minute when in reality it is pre-recorded some hours earlier. Either such occurrences should be disallowed in the licence -- for example, a maximum delay of 90 minutes between recording and transmission -- or at least there should be a requirement to make it clear to the listener that the bulletin was recorded ( Here is the news for the Sussex area, updated at 9 o clock this morning. ) 4 Should we relax the rule about a station s studios being based within the measured coverage area, and allow the licensed area instead? Yes. The arguments are similar to those about recording. The public service obligation is that listeners feel they have a local station that belongs to them. If I live in Brighton and the announcer or DJ is constantly talking about happenings in Crawley, I will stop listening, and so will many others. The J. Warmington Page 3 of 8

4 market will tell the broadcaster to do better. However with existing licences, a variation along these lines should be the subject of consultation with the public in the area. 5 Do you agree that, outside local programming hours, a station should be free to share network material as it likes? This question is unclear, as it would seem that the definition of outside local programming hours means that this should in any case be allowed. As with the previous question, the question of honesty is raised. When listening to a station for example that has a late-night phone-in, it becomes apparent that callers are phoning in from a much wider area than the radio station s own area. But the station continues to insert its own jingles/idents to fool listeners into thinking the broadcast is local. This should be disallowed and it must be transparently stated when editorial content (ie not music) is from a station elsewhere, perhaps by broadcasting an identification that names the stations being networked. 6 Should stations have to publish a file, both at their premises and on their website, to show how they re meeting their responsibilities? This is an acceptable proposal though, referring to your report, it is never advisable to quote current practice from a single foreign country and propose adopting it, especially when that country is the USA. It would have been better to describe what is done by our European neighbours and seek good examples from there. There is a risk that a licensee will tell the public that it is abiding by its obligations by publishing the file even when it may not be meeting the actual content commitments. 7 Do you agree with our revised local guidelines that tell stations what to take into account when making local programming? Yes. The reference to give listeners a feeling of ownership is particularly appropriate. The firm statements of what does not qualify are also welcome. The final point (studios within the station s area) could be made clearer and perhaps relaxed perhaps by referring to principal studios therefore allowing a subsidiary studio in the neighbouring area, eg where that is where the local council, football team or other centre of activity is located. As I have stated above, a problem arises with the patchy quality of BBC local coverage due to the large multi-county coverage areas of some BBC local stations. Ofcom should therefore not be drawn towards accepting a commercial station s argument that its quality is demonstrated by the fact that it was exceeding the BBC s amount of local coverage of a given area. Helping digital radio to grow This heading is unfortunate. It is well known that Ofcom has a specific Government mandate to facilitate moves towards the switch-off of UHF analogue TV transmissions. There is no such mandate in relation to radio and Ofcom should remain neutral and not see its rôle as helping digital radio. The following questions 8 to 14 are highly technical and it is impossible for anyone outside the industry to answer them. However as a consumer I would answer as follows. Ofcom seems to be asking for a hands-off approach to digital radio. Almost all of the content of the consultation paper relates to licenses given to multiplex operators not licenses for the individual channels to be broadcast on those frequencies. If digital radio is to be a success, the general public will regard stations they listen to on their radio as being in the same class, whether the transmission is AM, FM or DAB. There is no case for a different level of regulation of content for one technology over another just because the licensing régime is different. So national/local digital only stations should be regulated alongside existing J. Warmington Page 4 of 8

5 national/local FM and AM broadcasters. Also in relation to the promotion of digital radio, and its development in the next few years, the following points should be considered: Ofcom recognizes in its paper that existing AM/FM broadcasts will continue, and indeed it is unlikely that local/community radio will migrate to the new technology since FM or AM will be more suitable. In the quoted research, citizens were asked about their awareness of digital radio and the perceived advantages. In general people know in the case of TV that a digital set can receive BBC and ITV channels as well as Sky etc. It is probable that many people are unaware the same is not true of radio and that there will continue to be stations that broadcast only on AM or only on FM. Ofcom s wish to develop community broadcasting relies on this fact. Therefore to help these community broadcasters, Ofcom should encourage manufacturers to produce digital radio sets that also receive VHF/FM, MW and LW. Otherwise there is a risk that those who switch to digital radios will be lost as potential clients of new as well as existing local radio. This would work against Ofcom s wish to encourage community radio. The document contains the phrase "those currently restricted to an analogue radio service". If digital-only radios become widely sold, there will develop a class of people restricted to digital stations. This would be detrimental to stations and their advertising revenues as well as to the choice being provided to the public. The document helpfully describes the situation with digital radio in neighbouring countries. It states the advantages of a Europe-wide development. The manufacturing industry will need to be able to convince purchasers that the sets being sold will cover any channels allocated to digital radio in future years, in this country or elsewhere. Ofcom and its European partners could assist here. Ofcom s paper states that radio transmitted via digital TV channels is not regulated. Surely this can t be true. Although there is no question of regulating local content as digital TV is basically nationwide, the stations must still be subject to requirements of decency, impartiality, accuracy etc and can be challenged in the same way as any ILR or ITV broadcaster. This should be made clear to the public. The public expects radio to be regulated for content, for example, that news will be local, timely and accurate, and all coverage will be impartial (especially politically) and decent. While internet radio can not be controlled, Ofcom can require that where a licensed broadcaster replicates its transmission on another medium (eg an FM radio station offering a real-time Webcast, or being retransmitted on digital satellite), the programming being transmitted is the same. (There might be exceptions for technical adjustments eg where adverts are replaced). At all events no content should be included in a transmission via Internet, cable etc, purporting or appearing to be a duplicate of the broadcast content, that would not be allowed over the airwaves. With regard to the allocation of new bands, it is not clear from the discussion paper whether a frequency block must either be defined as national or local for technical reasons, or if this is a proposed regulatory decision. As the demand for slots is not yet known, it should be possible to provide a mixture of local and national stations on one multiplex if that is what the demand dictates. A further use of the digital spectrum could be the retransmission of major overseas broadcasters. A good example of the demand for this service is the popularity in Britain of the French music channel FiP, which can be received over the web as well as on air in the southern part of the country. Further J. Warmington Page 5 of 8

6 demand will be provided from the many European citizens living in the UK. The United Kingdom is renowned for the minute number of non-british TV channels available even on satellite, compared with the equivalent provision in most of our neighbouring countries. The very poor appreciation of other languages in the UK has been noted many times, and this would provide a public policy reason for facilitating the inclusion of non-uk channels on digital radio. Our overall strategy for radio 17 Do you agree with our basic aims for regulating radio? To encourage more choice, variety and new ideas for consumers in the UK? nationally, regionally, locally and in small communities. To look after the interests of all citizens through radio that is designed for the public good. To achieve our aims with as little interference in the market as possible, and in a way that s as consistent as possible across all media and platforms. In general, YES. My comments above ask that the regulation continues to apply where radio stations use new technology rather than, or in addition to, traditional AM or FM channels. In the case of new local radio stations, it would be helpful to know if Ofcom intends to create smaller local licences, or larger licences to compete with existing stations. The comments above, about the need for suppliers to make joint-use DAB/FM/AM radios rather than DAB only sets, will help the aims of regulation especially improving the viability of community radio. Where decency/accuracy/impartiality are concerned, there is no case for giving any UK broadcaster more leeway than currently applies to the BBC and commercial television. The public expects that all broadcasting adheres at least to these standards. 18 How important is it that radio should have a set of public purposes, and what should they be? Can we take a lead from the public purposes already developed for television? (See the Public Service Broadcasting (PSB) section on our website.) It is not possible to discover what portion of the web site is referred to. No doubt Ofcom has developed a set of public purposes, perhaps in generally vague language. As with television, it is likely the BBC is the major vehicle for achievement of public purposes. In the case of local stations, the matters considered in the consultation are sufficient. What else should be added, or taken away? Which public purposes are more important than others? The requirements for decency, accuracy and impartiality should not be subject to review. It is probable that most of the public are unaware of the public service purposes in general as applied to commercial radio, but I would guess that people are aware that all broadcasters must abide by these requirements. It is surprising that there is almost no mention of decency, or of accuracy and impartiality (political and otherwise) in the 100-plus-page consultation paper. As stated elsewhere, these rules should apply equally to AM/FM radio or digital radio whether delivered by DAB, digital television or otherwise. And where a radio station provides service across all platforms, its licence should require the same J. Warmington Page 6 of 8

7 content to be delivered in all cases, so that a broadcaster is not able to go beyond the regulations perhaps in content delivered by the Internet. Is radio better at some things than other media? Radio is the most natural medium for the dissemination of local news and community information. Obviously radio is also the natural medium for broadcasting of music. Live events such as the traditional test match coverage are well covered by radio. Since there is no local television in this country, local radio is the only outlet for information to the public in times of crisis or emergency: many people will tune in when there is bad weather, a major road incident, or other big news item. This applies equally to BBC and mainstream commercial radio. 19 What do you think is the best way to deliver these public purposes? How important is it for there to be more than one broadcaster providing radio services that have public purposes? At national level, it has long since been considered desirable to have competition to the five BBC national networks. National commercial radio, consisting of a variety of speech and music stations, contributes to the service to the public and since this situation serves the country well, no change would be a good proposal. The Government and BBC should be urged to rectify the under-resourcing of local BBC stations especially in South East England. However good is a local commercial station, its main activity will probably be as a music station rather than a news and information provider. By contrast BBC local radio tends to be predominantly speech-based. So it is particularly disappointing that the BBC has not been able to give the best service to communities because of the large editorial areas to be catered for. In the case of local radio, there must be a decision whether to increase the number of stations serving the same area rather than servicing new local areas. Where commercial local stations compete for the same audience, the quality of news and other local content is likely to suffer. How much of what commercial radio does could be described as meeting public purposes? Most ILR stations are predominantly music radio. From the listener s point of view the content could be generated from studios anywhere in the world as long as the music delivered is that expected from the station concerned. From the station s point of view, the most important local feature is the market for local advertisements. Although Ofcom is not principally concerned with advertising, it is local advertising that drives the viability of any given station it certainly is not the nature of local news. How well does the current structure of radio help meet public purposes? From the point of view of programme content, there is very little in common between national and local commercial radio. The present consultation seems to concentrate on independent local radio so this response does the same. Local commercial radio stations provide an additional public service not recognized by Ofcom s consultation. It is one of the main ways in which local businesses can advertise their products or services. This is in the public interest as it assists local businesses to compete for customers with national and multinational competitors. There is a temptation for radio station owners to recruit listeners outside their official coverage area which may happen more if digital coverage areas are wider than the AM or FM transmitter reach. J. Warmington Page 7 of 8

8 Ideally a way could be found to restrict the ability of a commercially large station to poach listeners (and advertisers) from a neighbouring small station thus threatening the viability of the latter. Should commercial stations have access to the BBC s radio archive, so that they can provide more varied services? NO. I have not found anything in the consultation document discussing this question so I can not deal with any arguments put forward by Ofcom. However, in general, commercial stations are not interested in occupying the BBC s place, they compete for advertisers and popular audiences. The BBC is distinctive partly because of its history, and the archive is part of that history. The BBC should have the right to pass on any archive content it sees fit, but this should not be a matter for the regulator. J. Warmington Page 8 of 8