Promoting social cohesion: the role of community media - amarc

The opinions expressed in this publication should not be regarded as placing upon the legal instruments mentionedin it any official interpretation capable of binding the governments of member states, the Council of Europe’s statutoryorgans or any other organ set up by virtue of the European Convention on Human Rights.Media and Information Society DivisionDirectorate General of Human Rights and Legal AffairsCouncil of EuropeF-67075 Strasbourg Cedex© Council of Europe, 2008Cover photos: © Joseph Helfenberger - Fotolia.com/VisionsofAmerica – Joe SohmPrinted at the Council of Europe

ContentsExecutive summary, page 51. Introduction, page 7The brief, page 7 Methodology, page 72. Academic studies, conceptual frameworks, page 9Media and social cohesion,page 9Identity, page 10Community and citizenship,page 10Theoretical perspectives,page 103. Definitions, page 11The three sectors, page 11Operational definitions ofthird sector media, page 11International organisations,page 12“Community, local,minority, non-profit andsocial media…”, page 124. Characteristics of third sector media, page 15Enabling legislation,regulation and policies,page 15Ownership, page 18Content, page 20Funding, page 22Audience, page 23Public profile of the sector,page 24Training and lifelonglearning, page 24Multiplatform, page 255. Do third sector media contribute to social cohesion or threaten it?, page 276. Measures to support third sector media, page 31AMARC, page 31The Community Forum forEurope (CMFE), page 31Report commissioned by theCulture and EducationCommittee of the EuropeanParliament, page 32Conclusions, page 32Bibliography, page 35Annex 1, page 39The Community RadioCharter for Europe, page 39Annex 2, page 41Policy Guidelines for settingup Community RadioStations in India, page 413

Executive summary1. The report was commissioned bythe Group of Specialists onMedia Diversity (MC-S-MD) to:• identify the most importantissues concerning the relationshipbetween media and socialcohesion;• summarise existing definitionsof “third sector media” and classifythe sector according toaspects such as ownership,structure, funding, content/programming,audience involvementand different platforms,including new media;• discuss the positive and negativeeffects of third sector media withregard to social cohesion;• describe existing measures tosupport third sector media.2. The report draws on academicstudies and reports fromUNESCO, AMARC (the WorldAssociation of Community RadioBroadcasters) and other NGOsand begins with a summary ofsome of the relevant theoreticalconcepts that relate to socialcohesion, such as identity, communityand citizenship.3. Citing a claim that Europe is currently,as a result of migration,witnessing “a change in thenature of national cultures andtheir capacity to sustain traditionalboundaries and identities”,the report argues that the inability,for various reasons, of publicservice and commercial broadcastingto meet the needs ofmarginalised and disadvantagedsocial groups means that thirdsector media are becoming thefocus of official attention.4. The report opts to use “communityradio” and “communitymedia” as terms in use byUNESCO and AMARC, while discussingthe connotations ofother descriptive labels.AMARC’s Community RadioCharter for Europe is provided asAnnex 1, and the organisation’ssummary definition of communityradio is cited. Communityradio:should not be run for profit but forsocial gain and community benefit;it should be owned by and accountableto the community that it seeksto serve; and it should provide forparticipation by the community inprogramme making and in management.5. Characteristics of communitymedia are discussed in turn, themost important being enablinglegislation, regulation and policies.A table of 22 Europeancountries shows the size of thesector, its legal status, whetherthere is funding and the presenceor not of a national associationrepresentative of the sector.There follow sections on ownership,content, funding sourcesfor local projects, audienceinvolvement and audienceresearch, the public profile of thesector, training, and some examplesof multiplatform initiatives.Examples are drawn mainlyfrom Europe but also from India(whose policy guidelines for settingup community radio stationsconstitutes Annex 2), theUSA, Canada and, in particular,from Australia, where recentresearch into community audiencesprovides a model ofmethod and some findings relevantto the European context.6. On the question of whether thirdsector media contribute to socialcohesion or threaten it, the evidencepoints to the sector beingan important factor in socialcohesion and citizenship, particularlyfor minority ethnic communitiesand refugee andmigrant communities. The discussiondraws on examples ofmulticultural programming bythe Intermedia project and practicein Europe and Australia andunderlines the importance ofmusic and news in connectingnewly arrived communities totheir original cultural capital aswell as drawing in the nativecommunities.7. Measures to support third sectormedia suggested by AMARC,the Community Forum for Europe(CMFE) and the Culture andEducation Committee of theEuropean Parliament are summarisedand it is suggested thatthe Council of Europe shouldencourage member states to:• create legislative infrastructure,without which communitymedia cannot develop;• preserve analogue frequenciesthat may in some countries continueto be needed after the digitalswitchover, and to ensurethat community media are notdisadvantaged in the digitalenvironment;• recognise the social value ofcommunity media and its role asa form of local public service byExecutive summary 5

committing funds to support thesector, both directly, withschemes such as the French levyon the commercial audiovisualsector (FSER), the allocation of aportion of the licence fee (Ireland,some German Länder) orby lowering the cost of licences,and indirectly, through fundingprojects as part of governmentprogrammes directed towardshealth, community development,education, social inclusion,support for minority ethniccommunities, etc.More specifically, the Council ofEurope should consider:• commissioning studies of bestpractice in community media,surveys of emerging needs suchas multicultural programmingand audience research on theAustralian model;• supporting a trans-Europeannetwork to monitor policy, acommunity media observatory;• encouraging training schemes aspart of lifelong learning andmedia literacy;• supporting programmeexchange within the Europeancommunity media sector andbeyond, with regions which arethe “homelands” of diasporiccommunities;• supporting the exchange of staffand volunteers for short periodsbetween community mediaprojects;• facilitating workshops to studyfunding opportunities;• inviting representatives ofAMARC and the CMFE to attendrelevant committees as observersand to participate in meetingsand conferences.6 Promoting social cohesion: the role of community media

2. Academic studies, conceptual frameworksA brief survey of the academic literature on areas relevant to the report will help to put the subsequentdiscussion into context.Media and social cohesionMcQuail (1994), summarisingacademic debates, identifies a “dualperspective” on the relationshipbetween media and social order:media are seen, in conflicting interpretations,as either “centripetal”,contributing to social integrationand control, or “centrifugal”,encouraging disorder or diversity.Both these tendencies can be viewedin an “optimistic” or “pessimistic”light, according to the politicalstance of the observer or, moreimportantly, of the regime in power.Figure 1 illustrates these positions.Figure 1Centrifu galeffect1Freedom ,diversity3Norm lessness,loss of iden tityO ptim istic visionPessim istic vision2Integration,solidarity4D om inance,u niform ityCentripeta leffect(taken from McQuail 1994:72)Thus, media can be seen ashaving a positive effect, unitingscattered individuals, integratingnewcomers, providing common values,ideas and information, andhelping to form identities. On thenegative side, media might beviewed as provoking social dislocation,encouraging individualistic oranomic behaviour, lowering levels ofsocial control or weakening the holdof traditional values.Table 1: Broadcasting and social cohesionBroadcasting as cohesion Reith’s BBC had as its mission the extension of broadcasting as a public service to the whole of the UK’spopulation. The original handful of local radio stations became unified in a national service, a monopoly under central control whosecoverage of national events created a shared public life - “the central agent of the national culture” (Scannell & Cardiff: 278).Broadcast dissent becomes legal Radio Vert Fessenheim began, in 1977, as the voice of protest against a nuclear power station southof Strasbourg, broadcasting (illegally) in French, German and Alsatian. Quite soon it became the focus of a wide range of social andpolitical issues and, after the legalisation of French radios libres in 1981, it changed its name to Radio Dreyekland (“three-corneredland”) and continued operations from the German side of the Rhine, ultimately gaining legal recognition from the Baden-Würrtenberggovernment (Lewis & Booth: 151).Radio Venceremos in El Salvador made a similar journey from being the voice of the FMLN’s guerrilla campaign for over 10 years ofthe civil war, surviving bombing and jamming, to legal status. When the war ended in 1992 and the FMLN formed a government, theradio received a licence and has since become largely commercial (Lopez Vigil).Broadcast dissent crushed Radio Coeur d’Acier (“Heart of steel”) in Longwy, at the centre of the steel industry in Lorraine, maintainedillegal broadcasting for 17 months during 1978/79, in support of the trade union CGT’s resistance to massive redundanciesamong the workforce. The station had strong local support, the studio being housed in the town hall and the local priest allowing theantenna to be fixed to the church tower. Finally, the French Government ordered in helicopters to jam the station’s signal and police tobreak up protesters (Lewis & Booth: 151).2. Academic studies, conceptual frameworks 9

IdentityIdentity, in individuals and communities,is constituted as much bydifference as by similarity. “Identityis as much about exclusion as inclusion[…] the critical factor for defininga group becomes the socialboundary” (Schlesinger, cited inMorley & Robins: 46). Maintenanceof the boundary is a continuous taskfor both individuals and communities,and this “identity work” is asmuch a response to recognitionfrom outside as to any inherententity. Thus, analytically, identity isa dynamic system of relationships,but its definition in practice isdecided by the relative power ofsocial, political or religious groupsto control symbolic meaning. Sometimes,political expediency will playon the latent fear of “the other”,encouraging racism, xenophobicattitudes or aggressive nationalism(Ivanov; Morley & Robins 1995:46).Community and citizenshipCommunities are both imaginedas well as experienced in face-to-facecontact. The nostalgic connotationsof “community”, harking back to apre-industrial age, are often mobilisedto lend respectability to particularpolicies or projects.Contemporary experience of communityis, for most individuals, atleast in European cultures, ofbelonging to multiple communities,most of them reaching beyond theconfines of geographical locality(“communities of interest”) and,with Internet use, extending globally.Membership of one community,that of the nation, has become, inthe form of rights and obligations ofcitizenship, a major concern in contemporaryEurope. One scholar haswritten of migration representing“a perceptible if not yet a conclusivechange in the nature of national culturesand their capacity to sustaintraditional boundaries and identities[…] the struggles for community,identity and a place in the culture ofregion, nation and continent arebecoming the central ones in thepresent century.”(Silverstone 2006: 83)Another commentator refers to“the ’Janus-face’ of citizenship”“These population movements havehighlighted the uncomfortabledichotomy that lies at the heart ofcitizenship, that if some of us arecitizens, then others are not, andthis exclusion is lived out in policiesaffecting refugees and asylum seekers.”(Coare 2003: 48)Theoretical perspectivesGrowing academic interest in situating“third sector media” withintheoretical perspectives has been evidentin recent years (Atton 2001,2004; Cammaerts & Carpentier2007; Couldry & Curran 2003;Downing 2001; Howley 2005;Jankowski with Prehn 2002; Rennie2006; Rodriguez 2001;). Publicsphere theory (including modificationsof Habermas so as to recognisealternative or counter-publicspheres) is the area most drawnupon by commentators (e.g. Rodriguez2001), but other theoreticalsources include hegemony (Gramsci),social capital (Putnam, followingBourdieu) and Paolo Freire’spedagogical writings, in particularhis notion of conscientisation which,whether consciously acknowledgedor not, underlay much of the practicethroughout the 1970s.The earliest publications in thisfield were reports of projects commissionedby UNESCO (Berrigan1977; Bordenave 1977; Lewis 1984,1993), and the Council of Europe(Beaud 1980); histories and casestudies (Downing 1984; GumucioDagron 2001; Janowski et al 1992;Lewis & Booth 1989; Mitchell2000); handbooks of good practice(Fraser & Restrepo Estrada 2001);and international policy comparisons(Price-Davies & Tacchi 2001;CM Solutions 2005a & b).10 Promoting social cohesion: the role of community media

ecome a significant feature in thebroadcasting landscapes of Portugal,Italy, France and Belgium. “Free”connoted freedom from regulationand from the monopolies of centralisedstate broadcasting organisations,but as the French radios libresbegan to be taken over by commercialnetworks, radios associativesbecame the official label in thatcountry for radios in the non-profitsector, while communautaire wasapplied to the general field of mediaprojects.In Latin America, “radio schools”continued, but “people’s radio” and“participatory media” were widelyused. In the repressive political climatethat lasted until the 1990s inmuch of the region, many projectslearned from bitter experience thatparticipatory development involvingas it does “the strengthening ofthe democratic processes at the communitylevel and the redistributionof power, […] directly threatensthose whose position [...] depends onpower and its control over others”(Servaes 1999: 93).International organisationsThe summary of AMARC’s presidentat the 1990 Dublin conferencehas been much quoted:“Our movement encompasses a widerange of practices. In Latin Americawe speak of popular radio, educationalradio, miners’ radio [Bolivia]or peasants’ radio. In Africa, wespeak of local rural radio. In Europeof associative radio, free radio, ofneighbourhood radio [Sweden] andof community radio. In Asia wespeak of radio for development andof community radio. In Oceania ofaboriginal radio, public radio [Australia]2 and of community radio. Allthese types of radio reflect a largediversity. The diversity of this participatoryradio movement is largeand very rich. In this we find ourstrength.”(Delorme, 1990: 5)Reference to the AMARC site today(weblink) will show, under“What is community radio”, a varietyof definitions coming from differentregions of the world, whileunder “AMARC principles”, variouscharters and declarations showslight but not significant variations.The history and context of politicalstruggle and cultural marginalisationat different times and in differentplaces determine the particularemphasis and terminology. It is inAMARC’s interest to be inclusive, soit is not concerned with formulatinga precise label.UNESCO’s interest in communitymedia goes back to the 1970s. Originallydrawing on experience fromthe industrialised countries, it hasdeveloped an approach to communitymedia appropriate to developingcountries where this form ofmedia must be seen as part of ademocratic media system as awhole. In the words of the MacBrideReport, “communication is a matterof human rights”, so UNESCO’sconcern is with structures whichfoster democratic debate at nationallevel as well as encouraging localparticipation and cultural expression.Thus, for example, UNESCO’sprogramme in Mozambiqueincluded an extensive journalisttraining programme, support to theemerging independent press outsideMaputo and assistance to RadioMozambique in its transition from astate-controlled system to a publicservice organisation as well as theestablishment of and support for acommunity radio sector.This approach, which in effectsees community media as a localform of public service, is relevant inthe European context, with implicationsboth for newly independentstates and for countries whose governmentshave yet to recognise theneed for public support for communitymedia. The UNESCO developmentof Community MultimediaCentres (CMCs) is also worth studyingfrom a European point of view,exploiting as it does the convergenceof new technologies, support from arange of stakeholders and sustainabilitybased on a combination of freeor subsidised services alongsideservices provided at a charge. 3“Community, local, minority, non-profit and social media…”Some brief comments on thedescriptive terms mentioned in theMC-S-MD guidelines will drawattention to particular features.“Community” is widely used andhas the imprimatur of AMARC andUNESCO. “Local” could include thelocal services of commercial andpublic service broadcasting. Whilethe majority of community mediaprojects are locally based, with theInternet dimension many can besaid to be both local and global.Services for minority ethnic andminority language communities arecertainly an important elementwithin the third sector but are alsoto be found in the public and commercialsectors. Non-profit is adefining feature in relation to commercialprojects – sources of revenuemight include advertising, for example,but profit is ploughed back intothe project. The term is sometimesnecessary in a context where the useof “independent” does not sufficientlydistinguish between commercialand community.Among the academic studieslisted on page 10, “radical” (Downing)and “alternative” (Atton) havebeen canvassed, but perhaps “citizen’smedia” (Rodriguez), with itsreference to the public sphere, bestcaptures the spirit of the genre.“Civil society media”, with similarconnotations, has recently made anappearance.With regard to “social media”, itis worth recalling the categorisationby the former UK regulator, theIndependent Television Commission2. “Community media” and “community radio” are now the official Australian terms, and “indigenous media” is used instead of “aboriginal”.3. “A CMC combines some form of local radio with telecentre facilities, under some form of community ownership with the aim to serve as acommunication and information platform for the community’s development needs.” p.10 in UNESCO How to Get Started (weblink)12 Promoting social cohesion: the role of community media

(ITC), of certain programmes as“social action broadcasting”. The1990 Broadcasting Act referred to“programmes which reflect socialneeds and give the viewer the opportunityto carry out individual orcommunity action.” BBC local radiocurrently also uses the term in referenceto programming which “provide[s]listeners with support andfree information packs on a wholerange of subjects such as health,housing, education and environmentalissues. Each week […]dozens of Public Service Announcements[are broadcast] on behalf oflocal community groups and charities”.4 Beyond this specific category,many mainstream programmesdealing with matters of socialimportance are accompanied by referencesto sources and materials tohelp viewers and listeners gain furtherinformation and advice. Hence,the term has too broad an applicationto be useful here.A comment on the word “media”.In many contexts this word sendsthe wrong signal, especially inattempts to engage the interest ofcentral and local governmentdepartments not concerned withmedia. Zane Ibrahim, pioneeringfounder of Bush Radio in SouthAfrica, coined the much-quotedphrase that community radio is“10% radio, 90% community”. It is acase of the community moving intobroadcasting rather than broadcastingmoving into the community.Finally, then, although “thirdsector media” is a useful umbrellaterm for defining the present task,“community media” (CM) and“community radio” (CR) will be usedin the remainder of this report. Tosummarise the meaning of theseterms a list of “shared interests andcommon principles”, taken from theCouncil of Europe’s summary ofNGO submissions to the Kyiv MinisterialConference, is useful:• freedom of speech and mediaplurality• public and gender-balancedaccess• cultural diversity• not-for-profit• self-determination• transparency• promotion of media literacy. 5AMARC-Europe’s “CommunityRadio Charter for Europe” can beseen in full as Annex 1. Of its 10principles, the most relevant forpresent purposes are those that statethat CR stations:• promote the right to communicate;• seek to have their ownershiprepresentative of local geographicallyrecognisable communitiesor of communities of commoninterest;• are editorially independent ofgovernment, commercial andreligious institutions and politicalparties;• provide a right of access tominority and marginalisedgroups and promote and protectcultural and linguistic diversity;• are established as organisationswhich are not run with a view toprofit and ensure their independenceby being financed from avariety of sources.A more recent summary fromAMARC’s Community Radio SocialImpact Assessment states that communityradio:“[…] should not be run for profitbut for social gain and communitybenefit; it should be owned by andaccountable to the community thatit seeks to serve; and it should providefor participation by the communityin programme making andin management.”(AMARC 2007:63)4. See weblink5. Comments submitted by NGOs following the consultation launched by the CDMM for the preparation of the Kyiv Ministerial Conference,CDMM (2004) 011, Strasbourg, 1 October 20043. Definitions 13

4. Characteristics of third sector mediaEnabling legislation, regulation and policiesA supportive legislative andpolicy infrastructure is the criticalcondition for sustainable CM. A furthercondition is the existence of anorganisation which is representativeof the sector and is at least partiallysupported by the state.The European Parliamentresearch collected data from 22 EUmember states, resulting in a categorisationof their CM sectors as“very active with well establishedregulations”, or as “very active withrecent development of the sector”,or with “high”, “moderate to high”,or “limited” levels of activity (EuropeanParliament 2007:11-18). Thefollowing table summarises thisdata and includes additional information.1Table 2: Community media sectors in 22 countriesA. Very active CM sectorsTHE NETHERLANDSGERMANYFRANCESize of sectorLegal statusSector fundingNational associationSize of sectorLegal statusSector fundingNational associationSize of sector264 community radios, 123 community television stations.CM recognised by the authorities as local public service media. Community television services area “must carry obligation” on cable operators.Local authorities receive a share of government resources allocated to public service broadcastingequal to approximately ?7.5 million per year, although many authorities do not pass this on toCM stations.OLON which employs 10 staff. “Nearly half its income comes from the state in recognition of thekey infrastructural services it provides for the sector”. The rest comes from membership fees(some 300 radio and TV stations), services charged to members and project income (CM Solutions2005a & b).304 (2003 figure), includes open channels (TV) in a number of cities, and 15 university stations(weblink).Broadcasting policy and regulation devolved to Länder (federal states) hence status of CM varies.CM projects qualify for support from share of licence fee distributed by federal government tostate regulators.None, but several at state level, e.g. in Baden-Würrtemberg and North Rhine Westphalia.570 (CM Solutions 2005b).Legal status Recognition since 1982.Sector fundingNational associationThe Support Fund for Radiophonic Expression (FSER) is “drawn from a levy on the advertisingrevenue of the mainstream broadcast media. Support is provided by the FSER on the basis ofmatching funding from other sources and the quality and effectiveness of the service provided.The fund provides support for start-up costs, equipment upgrades and core functioning” (CMSolutions 2005b). However, there is no core funding for community television. The FSER totalled?29.2 million in 2005 (see here).Syndicat National de Radios Libres (SNRL) and the Conseil National des Radios Associatives(CNRA).1. The table follows the selection of countries contacted by the European Parliament researchers, adapting and summarising the information andfor some countries supplementing the description with data from other sources. Except where indicated, quotations are from the EuropeanParliament report. The latter’s categories A and B have been amalgamated and the succeeding categories re-labelled accordingly.4. Characteristics of third sector media 15

HUNGARY UNITED KINGDOM DENMARK IRELANDSize of sectorLegal statusSector fundingNational associationSize of sectorLegal statusSector fundingNational association21 community radio and three community television stations.Community broadcasting recognised as a separate sector.The sector is indirectly supported by the regulator, the Broadcasting Commission of Ireland (BCI)whose Sound and Vision Fund makes grants for innovative programmes reflecting Irish culture.The funding comes from a portion of the licence fee (CM Solutions 2005b:47).CRAOL is the recognised representative body and receives some of its funding from the BCI.159 community radio stations, 110 community television stations.“Must carry obligation” for commercial television to broadcast three hours of CM each morning.DKR 4 million (?536 000) per year from central fund.None?Size of sector 144 community radio licences so far awarded, with further licensing continuing. Some 500temporary licences (Restricted Service Licences) awarded each year for radio and television. A smallbut growing number of permanent community television projects use broadcast, cable andInternet transmission.Legal statusSector fundingNational associationSize of sectorLegal statusSector fundingNational association ?A separate sector was recognised in 2004. Legislation requires the regulator, Ofcom, to awardlicences on the basis of delivery of “social gain”. (For further discussion see page 20).A Community Radio Fund of £0.5 million (?0.75 million), originally intended to support the first15 licensees, is intended for core funding, but is regarded by the CMA (see below) as inadequatenow that the sector has grown.The Community Media Association (CMA) has more than 600 members, including establishedorganisations, aspirant groups and individuals within the sector(weblink).Approximately 100 CR stations.Recognition under the 1996 Media Law.Fund available to support the sector, but there are fears that it may be inadequate in transition todigital broadcasting.B. High CM activityNo specific public funding but legal recognition of CM’s positive contributions leads to project funding for social and civilsociety causes.POLAND SPAIN aITALY SWEDENSize of sectorLegal statusSector fundingNational associationSize of sectorLegal statusSector fundingNational associationSize of sectorLegal statusSector fundingNational associationSize of sectorLegal statusSector fundingNational association700 local organisations produce radio programming via 165 local low-power transmitters,concentrated mostly in the three largest cities; cable networks carry 30 local community televisionchannels. Approximately 10 web-based CM initiatives.Recognition as “neighbourhood radio” (nærradio). Nærradio Authority issues permits (Hedman1992).None; local civil society support.None.100 community stations, three quarters with connections to Catholic Church.Recognition under 1990 Mammi legislation.None; advertising allowed up to three minutes per hour.None, but Radio Popolare, Milan, operates a loose network of affiliate stations in northern Italy(weblink).714 municipal radios, about 100 unlicensed “free radios”. b1991 law recognises municipal radio, licensing is the responsibility of the autonomous regions.No central funding; some regional and local municipal support.None, but regional associations in Andalusia, Catalonia and Galicia.“[...] some community radio stations operating in small towns or districts” among the 180 localstations; nine student radio stations; 44 licences to dioceses of the Catholic Church.(weblink).No provision.None.None.a. Data relating to Spain are taken from Chaparro Escudero 2004 whose account is to be preferred rather than, in this instance, the European Parliamentreport.b. Over half the municipal radios are found in Andalusia and Catalonia.16 Promoting social cohesion: the role of community media

C. Moderate to active CM sectorAUSTRIAPORTUGAL aBELGIUM bSize of sectorLegal statusSector fundingNational associationSize of sectorLegal statusSector fundingNational associationSize of sectorLegal statusSector fundingNational association12 long-term community radio initiatives, three community radio projects, one operatingcommunity television channel and one television project.No specific status, community media categorised as private.Support from some regional governments.Austrian Federation of Community Radio Stations.Community media are not defined as a separate category in Portugal: “national”, “regional” and“local” describing the radio landscape. There are some 350 local radio stations, the majoritycommercial, of which three are owned by universities, and one is a student radio station.Although these may be community-orientated, they do not fall within the AMARC definition ofcommunity radio and there is no organisation representing or lobbying for community radio.None.None.None.Six CR or university stations in Francophone south and Brussels; five in Flemish region.Recognition since 1987 law in Francophone region; in Flemish region, community initiativesconflated with commercial.In Francophone region, a Fund to Assist Radio Creation (FARC); none in Flemish region.Francophone Association pour la Liberation des Ondes (ALO); Flemish ORCA.a. Updated information on Portugal can be found hereb. Sources: Weblink and Cammaerts 2007.D. Only limited CM activityFINLAND SLOVAKIA ROMANIA CZECH REPUBLIC SLOVENIASize of sectorLegal statusSector fundingNational associationSize of sectorLegal statusSector fundingNational associationSize of sectorLegal statusSector fundingNational associationSize of sectorLegal statusSector fundingNational associationSize of sectorLegal statusSector fundingNational associationThree community radio stations.“A form of CM is recognised: stations are categorised as special-purpose initiatives along with anylocal, regional, student or not-for-profit media”.Some support exists, but independent initiatives find it difficult to access the fund.None.Three community radio stations, none licensed, broadcasting over the Internet.The Council for Radio and Television Broadcasting has not shown any interest in supporting theCM sector.None.None.Some small licensed local radios, not affiliated to networks, provide some communityprogramming; others either webcast or broadcast illegally; no television.Definition of “community broadcasting” currently under consideration.None.National Association of Local Radio Stations in Romania.Two CM initiatives using the Internet.None.None, “but individuals and entities receive a tax rebate for up to 2% of their tax if they makeallocations to NGOs. This is also applicable for contributions to CM.”None.Three community stations, two student radio stations.No recognition.None.None.4. Characteristics of third sector media 17

GREECEMALTAESTONIASize of sectorLegal statusSector fundingNational associationSize of sectorLegal statusSector fundingNational associationSize of sectorLegal statusSector fundingNational associationAfter the deregulation of 1987, municipal radios appeared and in the early 1990s numbered over100 (weblink)“Now data on licences is difficult to gather as the licence system set up in 1989 has never beencompletely implemented.”None.None.None.38 CR stations.Reference to “community media” in 1991 law, but definition allows commercial activity and doesnot require community participation.None.None.Four Internet-based CM initiatives.No recognition.None.None.India’s recent decision 2 to developa CR sector is of interest as an initiativeby a major democracy with astrong tradition of freedom ofOwnershipA defining characteristic is ownershipby the local community. Howownership status is achieveddepends on the legal requirements ofthe country, including the regulatoryconditions mentioned above forexpression yet, until the announcementof December 2006, a reluctanceto devolve a centralisedbroadcasting system. The publishedbroadcast CM. A board of directorsor governors will often constitutethe legal entity, whose exact form isusually determined by the need to beeligible for the main potentialsources of funding. Registration as aguidelines for CR development inIndia can be found in Annex 2(page 41).charity is common in the UK.Another form is for a licensedbroadcaster to be a subsidiaryproject of a company or an NGO.2. See weblink18 Promoting social cohesion: the role of community media

Table 3: Some models of ownership and structureFranceFréquence Paris Plurielle(FPP)GermanyRadio Dreyekland(RDL)ItalyRadio PopolareUKBradford CommunityBroadcasting (BCB)UKThe BookplacePeckham, LondonUSAPaper Tiger TelevisionNew YorkDescription: A “radio associative” which aims to give a voice to groups not regularly heard inmainstream media, particularly community and cultural organisations and ethnic minorities.Ownership: FPP is categorised as an association under the 1901 law.Structure: Membership of 300 people, who pay a small annual fee. Board of directors elected bymembers and a small executive committee which oversees the activity of the station. FPP alsohas over 25 patrons – politicians, writers, singers, philosophers, academics and journalists(CM Solutions 2005b).Description: The oldest CR station in Germany: its principles are independence, plurality, leftorientatedpolitics, free access, basic democratic radio. Schedule includes programmes byimmigrant groups in 15 languages(weblink).Ownership: Friend of RDL, a non-profit company, is the licence holder and raises membershipsubscriptions. Company owned 10% by staff, 90% by listeners, voting weighted 50:50.2 600 members.Structure: A general assembly, meeting fortnightly, decides on policy. Editorial/productiongroups meeting weekly are co-ordinated by a working group; two other working groups handlePR and subscriptions, and administration and finance (Lewis 1993).Description: The station has a commercial licence but from its beginning in 1976 itscommitment has been socialist. A strong news offering is combined with coverage of culturaland music events and imaginative and humorous commentaries on cultural and sporting life.Ownership: Errepi Spa, a public company is the licence holder, 50% of whose shares are ownedby 13 000 shareholders; 35% by the original co-operative including staff and volunteers; 15% bypolitical and trade union sponsors.Structure: no information available on internal structure. A network of some 20 affiliatestations has been in existence since 1992 (Downing 2001).Description: BCB is a very active and successful station which started in 1992 with short-termbroadcasts. It serves the diverse inner-city communities of the Bradford district, including a widerange of black and minority ethnic communities, diverse age groups, geographic communitiesand specialist interest groups.Ownership: Registered as a charity.Structure: Management committee, elected from the BCB membership at the AGM and meetingmonthly, forms the board of directors for the company. Programme development, volunteersupport, outreach work, and community access to training and resources is overseen by asteering group on which production teams and community organisations are represented(CM Solutions 2005b).Description: A bookshop, literacy centre and publishing project.Ownership: Charitable status.Structure: A management committee, elected annually, appoints staff – six full time, one parttime. They work collectively, meeting weekly, but user groups of the three main functions makeoperational decisions (Lewis 1984).Description: from 1981 produced weekly programme criticising mainstream media and ranmedia production workshops. From Paper Tiger in mid-1980s, the satellite TV network DeepDish TV Network developed and created a national register of community TV on cable. Its GulfCrisis TV Project collated five hours of coverage of anti-war protest that was shown on US publicaccess channels and overseas.Ownership: Collective of 10 core and 15 occasional members.Structure: Delegation to committees overseeing distribution, fund-raising, office support whichreport to weekly meetings of the collective. One paid part-time distribution co-ordinator(Downing 2001; Engelman 1996).To look beyond Europe, themajority of owners of CMCs listed inUNESCO’s global directory aredescribed as non-profit, civil societyor community associations ortrusts, or are NGOs. A few areowned by co-operatives or by privatecultural organisations, while inSouth Asia very often the regionalor local government owns theproject (UNESCO 2005). In SriLanka, the prototypical CMC, KothmaleCommunity Radio and InternetProject, is owned by the SriLankan Broadcasting Corporationwith which relations are marked bytensions often found when a centrallybased public broadcaster dealswith local stations in the periphery.India’s rules concerning ownershiprecognise as eligible: civil society,voluntary organisations andeducational institutions, and as noteligible: individuals, political partiesand affiliate organisations (e.g. studentor women’s groups, tradeunions, wings), organisations operatingfor profit and organisationsbanned by the union and state governments.The UNESCO global directorymakes an interesting commentabout private ownership:“In practice, there are cases where aprivate FM station, telecentre orCMC is fulfilling a community role,meeting community developmentneeds and involving communitymembers. There are interestingexamples of good practice in the privatemodel that can be transferredto the community-owned CMC. InSouth Eastern Europe, for example,community radio is virtually nonexistent,but private FM stationshave flourished in the post-conflictperiod and often filled important4. Characteristics of third sector media 19

community functions, such as helpingto link or network refugees anddisplaced communities. FM stationsare now opening telecentres withbroader goals than those of thecyber café model formed by mosttelecentres.”(UNESCO 2005:13)While there is no denying thecommunity contribution that can incertain conditions be made by thecommercial sector, the fact shouldnot be allowed to confuse the casefor regulatory demarcation.ContentTable 4: Delivering social gainThe UK definition, in the CommunityRadio Order 2004, of thecharacteristics of community radioprovides a useful starting point. 3The key characteristic is the abilityto deliver “social gain”.In the first instance, “social gain”is defined as (a) reaching audiencesunderserved by existing radio, (b)facilitating discussion and theexpression of opinion, (c) providingeducation and training to membersof the public [this implicitly recognisesthe importance of volunteers]and (d) understanding the particularcommunity and the strengtheningof links within it.A further set of “objectives of asocial nature” are:(e) delivering, and/or disseminatingknowledge about services providedby local authorities or other organisations;(f) the promotion of economic developmentand of social enterprises;(g) the promotion of employment;(h) the provision of opportunitiesfor the gaining of work experience;(i) the promotion of social inclusion;(j) the promotion of cultural and linguisticdiversity;(k) the promotion of civic participationand volunteering.Community media experience ofover three decades provides manyexamples of the fulfilment of suchobjectives.Reaching audiences underservedby existing radioUKAngel Radio, HavantFacilitating discussion and theexpression of opinionFinlandRadio Robin Hood, TurkuProviding education…UKForest of Dean Radio, Gloucester… and trainingIrelandCRAOL’s Training FéileStrengthening community linksIndiaNamma Dwani MultimediaNetwork, near BangaloreDelivering, and/or disseminatingknowledge about servicesprovided by local authorities orother organisationsAustralia3ZZZ community radio,Melbourne“Angel Radio, based in Havant, a small town on the south coast of England with a large retiredpopulation, broadcasts a strong mix of music aimed at its target audience – the over-60s(station policy is no music will be played recorded after 1959). Angel FM is much loved byboth listeners and volunteers – and is clearly delivering real social benefits to many vulnerableolder people. Community leaders also rated Angel very highly and saw tangible social gainsarising from its work.” (Ofcom 2004).Radio Robin Hood was founded in 1990 by NGOs representing cultural, educational and tradeunion associations. The station arranges community radio training for NGOs, grassrootsorganisations and trade unions, offers local radio workshops for young people, and hasdeveloped an international employment project for migrants. The training attempts toovercome “low self-esteem, the underestimation of abilities and skills, passivity and shortsightednessbrought on by hard times, a lifetime of being taught to keep quiet.” (Lewis &Jones 2006:216).FODR “has a remarkable record of establishing partnerships with schools. It runs after-schoolclubs for the pupils of six primary schools [...] Each week the children are taught variousaspects of radio production [...] an introduction to CR; how to use radio equipment andinterviewing techniques; research and programme planning; editing techniques and makinga programme. The project focuses on community awareness and encourages school childrento participate in researching their local area… collecting historical information andinterviewing past pupils and members of the parish.” (Everitt 2003b:14).CRAOL runs an annual training event, the Training Féile (Festival), a unique two-day event inIrish broadcasting with usually over 100 participants. It includes workshops on all aspects ofcommunity radio, from fundraising to Cool Edit, and is an important opportunity fornetworking. Travel and accommodation expenses for participants are covered by the BCI’sCommunity Radio Support Scheme, usually allowing between 4-7 people from each stationto attend. (CM Solutions 2005b:53).The project combines and community cable FM station with a telecentre in a localinformation network that reaches 5 000 people in five villages. Its focus on skills and “voice”(Namma Dwani means “our voice” in the local language, Kannada) aims to empower poorwomen and youth to use new and traditional (e.g. loudspeakers) ICTs (UNESCO 2004). Theproject “has succeeded in its goal of raising community awareness through local contentproduction and the use of localised, adapted media.” (UNESCO 2005).A member of the Turkish focus group further clarified the importance of ethnic-languageprogramming in providing essential Centrelink a and government information:“As we’re living here, we’re able to hear what our responsibilities are and also what our rightsare here, like for example, when you hear information about Centrelink, or about taxationoffice, traffic infringement notices to be aware of those and what to do and what not to do.Legal, family matters, divorces, domestic violence, those kinds of things, to get thatinformation in Turkish. To understand these matters wrongly or understand them a little bitdoes not, will not help you.” (Meadows et al 2007:83).3. The full text of the UK’s community Radio Order 2004 can be found here on p. 24 of Ofcom’s Notes of Guidance for Community Radio LicenceApplicants and Licensees20 Promoting social cohesion: the role of community media

The promotion of economicdevelopment and of socialenterprisesUSAScribe Video Center, PhiladelphiaThe promotion of employmentUKRadio Regen, ManchesterThe provision of opportunities forthe gaining of work experienceUKDesi Radio, SouthallThe promotion of social inclusionNorthern IrelandDown FMThe promotion of cultural andlinguistic diversityCanadaRadio Centreville, MontrealThe promotion of civicparticipation and volunteeringCubaCocodrilo, Southern Cuba“In the politically conservative climate of the early 1990s [...] founders became increasinglywary of supporting art that might prove controversial […] Although media artsorganisations now place more emphasis on earned income and diverse funding sources, theycontinue to be vital cultural centres providing communities access to both media facilities anda full range of media cultural experiences […] The Scribe Video Center reaches out tocommunities, including people of colour, women, senior citizens, and teens, that traditionallyhave not had access to video training or production facilities, and provides them with tools forstorytelling. In addition to production and scriptwriting workshops, Scribe offers artists’services such as fiscal sponsorship, equipment rental, and editing facilities. Ongoingprograms include Community Visions, a video production program for communityorganisations; Street Movies, a free outdoor neighbourhood-based screening series; and theProducers’ Forum screening and lecture series of visiting artists and media activists.Additionally, Scribe produces the Documentary History Project for Youth, an annualproduction workshop for middle and high school students.” (Johnson & Menichelli 2007:8).“Three previous volunteers are now in work experience with the BBC; one has paidemployment with a local commercial station; two have paid employment with a local artcentre; one has obtained a place on a fast-track training course for Black and Asian artsadministrators; six, previously unemployed for more than a year, have unskilled jobs; onehas enrolled on an Access course leading to a degree. Apart from ’volunteer progression’ […]most volunteers ’feel more part of their community as a result of their work with us.’”(Everitt 2003b: 71).Desi Radio is a radio for the Punjabi community of west London […] aiming to encourage,promote and develop a sense of community among Punjabi people and to raise awareness ofPunjabi language and culture […] Around 75 people volunteer per year.Desi also offers about 12 work experience placements a year to young people who are atschool or college. The station finds that the involvement of young people is very beneficial tothe station and feels that offering work experience in the media to young people is part of thestation’s remit..[and] reports that volunteering can have a very powerful effect on individualswho get involved. It has had life-changing consequences for some people, as their confidenceand self-esteem has dramatically increased. For some volunteers, getting out of the house andlearning English are big steps that may lead to paid employment. Desi has had some successin assisting people into work in the media sector. Six volunteers have gone on to jobs incommercial radio stations and one now works at ITV (CM Solutions (2005b:22).The station “is situated within a College of Further and Higher Education which drawstogether a group of 14-15 year olds from local schools each Friday […] referred to the Collegebecause they are regarded as presenting challenging attitudes or behavioural patterns whichare nevertheless thought likely to respond to learning opportunities outside the normalschool environment. The students are from mixed religious backgrounds and quite often theCollege sessions represent the first occasion on which they have been required to work closelywith people with differing religious beliefs. ..[they] work in groups to script, produce anddeliver 10 minute audio cassettes within the radio studio. Quite often the youngsters will beso impressed with this taster session that they subsequently enrol for full and part-time BTECcourses at the College” (Department for Culture, Media and Sport 2006:12).“Programming […] reflects the cultural mosaic of the city [...] It is made up of broadcastsproduced and hosted by members of the cultural communities using their own languages.They participate in the social life of Quebec by communicating their own culture, and at thesame time help their compatriots become more aware of Quebec and Canadian current eventsand culture. Listeners benefit from information in their own languages about the new socialenvironment to which they must adapt, and they conserve their cultural origins.Communication between newly arrived ethnic groups and long-established cultural groupspromotes, in many ways, a mutual understanding of habits, moral values, and social andphilosophical currents of thought. And it clearly allows a more harmonious coexistence ofindividuals, despite their differences.” (Girard 1992:52).“Owned and operated by the local community, the Cocodrilo CMC was established as a way toconnect this remote rural community, to the mainland of Cuba and beyond. The radio was setup in 2002 with support from UNESCO; telecentre facilities were added a year later. The CMCfocuses primarily on social issues and produces radio programmes on general health, HIV/AIDS, and education. There is also a strong focus on the environment [...] The CMC hasbecome an important local medium for community forums, discussion and debate. Ingeneral, the centre has been a major boost to participatory community organising anddevelopment. Computer facilities are used primarily for training and for computer-assistedlearning in the local school. Before the establishment of the CMC, residents felt disconnectedfrom the activities of Cuba and the region. Though a small community, forums were difficultto coordinate. The multimedia centre brought a greater sense of social inclusion andparticipation to the residents.” (UNESCO 2005:96).a. Centrelink is the federal government’s statutory agency assisting people to become self-sufficient and supporting those in need.Important for the delivery ofsocial gain are the collaborativepartnerships which stations andprojects form with organisations ofcivil society. These may range fromthe basic use of airtime by an organisationto publicise its activities,through programme slots takenover by a local organisation, to the4. Characteristics of third sector media 21

kinds of training schemes, known astandem training, in which radiotrainers and community organisers“fuse” their mutual expertise toshare joint responsibility for trainingvolunteers to create a sustainableeditorial and production team(Lewis & Jones 2006:90).Music is a large part of content incommunity radio and tends to beoverlooked in discussion of socialgain. Community media can providethe “nursery slopes” on which localmusic talent can try out their skillsand gain performance experience. Agood example is the the Soundcheckproject, based in a youth centre inFreiburg, Germany, which providesyoung musicians and bands withthe opportunity to record, uploadand present their music on a website(see here). The urban radio FunX isanother example and is from theNetherlands. It is made by youngpeople for young people andbroadcasts on FM in Amsterdam,Rotterdam, The Hague and Utrecht,and nationally on cable. In France,BeurFM streams music, news andchat for young people of Maghreborigin.A number of official reports havetestified to the contribution communitymedia make to communitydevelopment and social cohesion.A report to the representativeorganisation for community radioin Ireland (now known as CRAOL) in2003 concluded that “there is a highlevel of collaborative work betweencommunity radio and communitybodies. This is especially true ofcommunity-based groups that havea focus on social inclusion issues”(Unique Perspectives 2003:41).The identification of delivery of“social gain” is a central focus inboth reports assessing the UK’s pilotAccess Radio projects (Everitt2003a & b), and the UK Governmentreport on the established sector afew years later confirms the continuingsuccess in social gain delivery(DCMS 2006:12).A report commissioned by theCommunity Media Association inScotland found that “communitymedia provides a platform for thosewho are often voiceless in society.Radio, moving image and internetare all powerful campaigning toolsto bring attention to inequality andinjustice in communities […] [and]to present their perspectives andchallenge negative images of themselves.”(Paul Zealey 2007:5).Not least, the Committee of Ministersof the Council of Europe, in itsRecommendation on media pluralismand diversity of media content,included a reference to “othermedia”:“3.2 Other media contributing to pluralismand diversityMember states should encourage thedevelopment of other media capableof making a contribution to pluralismand diversity and providing aspace for dialogue. These mediacould, for example, take the form ofcommunity, local, minority or socialmedia. The content of such mediacan be created mainly, but notexclusively, by and for certaingroups in society, can provide aresponse to their specific needs ordemands, and can serve as a factorof social cohesion and integration.” 4The Griffith University report onAustralian community media isworth quoting at length:“We suggest that ’empowerment’ isthe single, recurring themethroughout our encounter with theAustralian community broadcastingsector, expressed in a number ofways […] (a) in audiences’ positiveresponses to the ways in which localstations enable a sense of belongingand identity […] where communityvoices can be heard - and for manymarginalised communities, it is theonly place their voices can be heard[…] (b) Empowerment comes, too,through access to, and participationin, the broadcasting process itself[…] the process is not confined toprogram production […] the vastmajority of activity across the sectortakes place off-air, beyond the studios,where community connectionsare being created, maintained, andreinforced by the processes thatdefine the unique nature of communitybroadcasting. (c) Empowermentat another level comesthrough […] an awareness of themonolithic nature of mainstreammedia and [audiences’] frustrationat its increasing inability to takeaccount of cultural difference. Thisis especially evident in the voices ofIndigenous and ethnic communities[…] but it extends to many other’sub-cultures’ within Australiansociety, marginalised by dominantglobal media agendas.It is clear […] that the communitybroadcasting sector is playing a significantrole in revitalising the ideaof active citizenship. In doing so, thesector is making a significant contributionto the public sphere and thusthe broader notion of Australiandemocracy.”(Meadows et al 2007:102-3)FundingFunding of the third sector as awhole has been covered in the sectionon enabling legislation, regulationand policies (from page 15).This section offers examples of thedifferent types of funding on whichcommunity media projects candraw. Collective experience agreesthat diversity of sources of fundingis desirable in order to avoid dependencyon any one source.• European Union: in recentyears some CR stations havereceived support from the EuropeanRegional Development Fund(ERDF) and the European SocialFund (ESF)Bradford Community Broadcasting(DCMS 2006:24, CM Solutions2005b:18)• Central government: apartfrom any specific funding for thethird sector from departments ofmedia or culture, individual stationshave received funding fromcentral government departmentsconcerned with employment,health, migrants, youth,etc.Connemara Community Radio, Ireland:Department of Social andFamily Affairs funds the stationmanager and volunteer developmentworker. Other members ofstaff are supported by FAS, Ireland’snational training andemployment authority, througha scheme helping people tobecome more employable. (CM4. Recommendation Rec (2007) 2 of the Committee of Ministers to member states, adopted on 31 January 200722 Promoting social cohesion: the role of community media

Solutions 2005b:51)Fréquence Paris Plurielle: governmentemployment scheme. (CMSolutions 2005b:65)Radio Gazelle, Marseille: fund tosupport immigrant workers andfamilies. (Girard 1992:167)Radio Salaam Shalom, BristolUK: Department of Communitiesand Local Government’s FaithCommunity Capacity BuildingFund. (Airflash 2007:23)• Regional government: theWelsh Assembly has created aCommunity Radio Fund of£0.5 million to support communityradio over the next threeyears.• Local municipalities: GTFM,Pontypridd, Wales: proportion offunding from local council.(Everitt 2003b:34)• Universities & educationalinstitutions: some student radiostations involve the “extramuralcommunity” in their productionsand most transmit tothe locality surrounding thecampus. There are some examplesof direct support for CR.GTFM, Pontypridd, Wales: supportfrom University of Glamorgan.(Everitt 2003b:34)Radio Tide 96.0 FM, Hamburg:studio, training and supportwithin Hamburg media School.(weblink)Radio Echo of Moscow, Universityof Moscow Faculty of Journalism.(Girard 1992:85)• National cultural organisationsand other NGOs:ResonanceFM, London, owned bythe London Musicians Collective,currently receives £86 000from the Arts Council of England.• Advertising: some stationsreject advertising on principle(e.g. Radio Dreyekland,Freiburg), others obtain revenuefrom advertising, although revenuethat results is often littlemore than the staff salaryneeded to obtain the advertising.In the UK, current rules set alimit of 50% of total revenueallowed from advertising, andno advertising at all is permittedif a CR station overlaps by 50%or more with an existing commercialradio with a potentialaudience of 50 000-150 000 persons.• A station’s own fund-raisingevents: e.g. concerts, sponsoredwalks, “radiothons” (continuouson-air appeals for funding over aperiod of a day or weekend), saleof t-shirts, etc.Audience• Audience involvement: The useof volunteers by communitymedia, the regular collaborationwith civil society organisationsin the community and the representationof community individualsand groups on the bodiesthat own and control communitymedia projects (boards ofdirectors, etc.) mean that audiencesare involved in definingneeds, researching, producingand presenting programmes andparticipating in policy and fundraising.• Audience research: This is aproblem for the sector. For communitybroadcasting, conventionalaudience measurement isuseless: its cost is more thanmost projects can afford, and theaudience size is too small to yieldsufficiently reliable samples,especially having regard to thefact that many programmes aredirected at specially targetedgroups within a community.OLON, the Dutch communitymedia association, is probably theonly European organisation to haveconducted research into the audiencesfor third sector media, includingcommunity radio, television andInternet, in 2005. Significantly, theresearch was funded by the Ministryof Culture. Based on responses froma sample of 5 000 users, theresearch found that communityradio’s weekly reach was 12%. Thiscompares with the most popularradio station, a commercial one,which scored 27%. The least popularstation measured 2% – nationalpublic radio on AM. Local communityradio’s audience of abouttwo million people a week is significantcompared to many so-calledprofessional radio stations. Amongreasons for listening, local newsprogrammes are mentioned secondafter local music programmes. Localtelevision figures are even clearer:weekly reach is about 34% and localinformation is mentioned as themost important reason to watch. 5Beyond Europe, ALER, the organisationrepresenting community/educational radios in Latin America,is one of the few organisations tohave carried out research. Its surveyin 2000 (ALER 2000) on the performanceof community radio in theregion was able to make a generalassessment, but found that few ofthe radio stations studied had conductedsystematic audience researchof their own – a situation likely to besimilar in many parts of the world,with two exceptions.One is the increasing use byUNESCO among its projects in southAsia and Africa of a method knownas “ethnographic action research”, aform of participatory actionresearch which trains project staff inself-evaluation and aims to instil a“research culture” within projectsthemselves so that research becomesa part of the everyday operation.(Tacchi et al 2003). A “barefoot” setof research tools was used inUNESCO’s Mozambique project.(Jallov 2005) 6 .The other exception is the studyon Australian community media byresearchers at Griffith University(Meadows et al 2007). The research,carried out over a two-year period,is of major importance for two mainreasons:1. Its methodology is a model forwork elsewhere. Following anearlier production study of the5. English summary from information supplied by OLON. The complete report is published (in Dutch only) on OLON’s website:6. See also Jallov, B. “Assessing Social Impact in Community Radio” in Community Radio for Development E-Discussion Briefing Paper, weblink4. Characteristics of third sector media 23

sector by the same Griffith Universityresearch group (Forde etal 2002), it complements andtests the findings of quantitativeaudience research, the McNairIngenuity questionnaire study,using focus groups and qualitativemethods.2. Both the 2002 and 2007 studieswere financed by an impressivecollaboration of academic, government,sector and user organisations.Support came from theAustralian Research Council, theCommunity Broadcasting Foundation(the body which distributesfederal funding to thesector), the Federal Departmentof Communication, InformationTechnology and the Arts, and therepresentative associations of thethird sector, the CommunityBroadcasting Association of Australiaand its indigenous and ethniccounterparts.Public profile of the sectorAt a recent international colloquiumin London, 7there was generalagreement that more accessiblesummaries of research into theimpact of community media neededto be made available, that the successesof community media,whether confirmed by formalresearch or not, should be morewidely publicised, and that the caseshould be made for recognisingcommunity media as a form ofpublic service.AMARC’s recent Community RadioSocial Impact Assessment agrees:“Community radio achievementsare not properly highlighted and/ordisseminated […] in spite of a largebody of evidence on communityradio social impact, CR practitionersand stakeholders have not taken thetime and the efforts needed topresent systematically the achievementsof community radio worldwide.”(AMARC 2007: 38)The point about the need for ahigher profile for the sector is confirmedby several of the recommendationsof the European Parliamentstudy which identified:• The need for increased networkingand knowledge exchangebetween CM organisations andassociations.• The need for more continuousrepresentation at EU level inorder to develop a public profileof the sector.(European Parliament 2007:52)Training and lifelong learningAn important contribution to lifelonglearning is made by the thirdsector media. The chance to workwith media attracts people in the roleof volunteers who are often notreached by formal educational systems,or whose original educationalexperience was a disappointment.The presence of volunteers workingin community media is part ofthe raison d’être of the sector: itensures that the community is representedat the heart of the project.Training is, then, an integral part ofthe operation. A survey conductedfor AMARC-Europe in the mid-1990s estimated that between40 000 to 50 000 people were workingin the community radio sector incountries of the EU, and commentedthat “the significance [of training] isincreasing as the effects of freemarket competition weaken thetraining provision which has been atraditional feature of the [mainstream]industry” (Lewis 1994). Insupplying the mainstream withtrained recruits, the sector couldjustifiably claim to be a “gateway toemployment”.But the sector’s contribution tothe mainstream in this area is notnearly as significant as the widerand longer-term effects of communitymedia training which should beconsidered as coming under the categoryof lifelong learning. As arecent publication on the empoweringeffect of community mediatraining puts it:“Those whose opinions are rarelygiven a hearing may have forgotten,or never learned, how to expressthem. If technical training is combinedwith research, production andpresentation skills, which communityradio routinely offers, the experiencecan also equip people with a self-confidencethat is motivating. It can leadto employment – not necessarily inthe media – and a fuller participationin today’s information society.”(Lewis & Jones 2006:6)More specific skills, whose acquisitioncan lead to further educationalexperience or to formalemployment opportunities, havebeen summarised 8 as:• Skills for the knowledgesocietyWorking in the media isattractive to all ages, so theprospect of training in mediaskills brings in many people whohave had limited education and/or a poor experience of it. Digitalskills are a necessary part ofproduction and use of the webfor programme researchintroduces and improvesresearch skills. Neither can beexploited without social andcommunicative skills.Acquisition of all these skillsbrings self-confidence and all aretransferable to social andemployment settings in aknowledge society.7. See here where a link will be provided to the report of the colloquium when it is available.8. By META-Europe, a media training consortium with partners in seven European countries and experience in education and training, broadcastingand academic media research. See here where there is a link to previous projects funded under the EU’s adult education programmeSocrates - “Creating Community Voices” and “Digital Dialogues” (weblink), the projects whose experience is reported in Lewis & Jones 2006,cited above.24 Promoting social cohesion: the role of community media

• Making learning moreattractiveThe training includes and leadsto work in community media –which is unpaid, voluntarywork, but can lead to paidemployment in mainstreammedia or elsewhere – one of thereasons training is so attractive.The other is that the work iscreative, takes place alongsideinteresting workmates ofdifferent ages and cultures, andoften involves research andinterviewing that “turns thetables” on normal powerhierarchies, e.g. a young personwith limited formal education isassigned to record an interviewwith a local politician andafterwards edit and broadcastthe interview, or a woman,trained by women, becomes anexpert in technical areas.• Learning to learnBoth in the training and in thesubsequent experience in communitymedia, the incentive tolearn will be strong, driven bythe desire to tell a story, find outabout oneself or others, or learna technique necessary to fulfilthose desires. A momentum isestablished which can be transformingand lead along newpathways to entry into furthereducation.• Interpersonal, interculturaland social competences andcivic competenceMedia work involves teamworkand community media projectsare committed to a democraticprocess of decision making andaccountability which forms everydaywork as well as longertermpolicy. Civic competence islearned through the negotiationsa community radio station mustmake in dealing with local civilsociety and local authorities.• Media literacyWork in community mediaraises the level of awareness ofthe status and power of mainstreammedia in society and atthe same time provides skills increative expression through useof media. 9• EntrepreneurshipStories must be “sold” as well astold. Negotiation (entrepreneurship)comes into the business ofpersuading colleagues andproject manager about length,scheduling, budget, etc. Fundraisingis part of the process andwhen collaboration is involvedwith, e.g. a local NGO, furthernegotiating and administrativeskills are required.An example of best practice intraining is the work of Radio Regenin Manchester, UK, to which theEuropean Parliament report rightlydraws attention. The organisationprovides accredited training andoffers the online Community RadioTool-Kit which offers advice on runningand funding community mediaprojects (European Parliament2007: 6;weblink)MultiplatformThe arrival of technologies whichfacilitate social networking (e.g.MySpace, YouTube) and make it possiblefor individuals to record events(with phones and cameras) and contributeimages, sounds and opinionsthrough blogging software has createda new context for what mightbe described as traditional communitymedia. On the one hand, mainstreammedia are urgently trying toadapt and co-opt the intrusion of“citizen journalism” and “usergeneratedcontent”; on the otherhand, community media projectsare beginning to use a wide range ofweb applications to complementtheir local activity.The simulcasting of web and FMtransmissions is increasinglycommon among licensed CR stations,and webcasting itself is astand-alone alternative for stationsunable to obtain a licence. Theglobal reach of the Internet makeswebcasting particularly importantfor diasporic and migrant communities,keeping them in contact withtheir homelands.Livestreaming of events has enabledconnection and collaborationbetween CR stations from differentcontinents. Radio Orange 94.0 inVienna effected a live exchange withRadio Número Crítico in Santiago,Chile, on International Woman’sDay, 2003, each making use ofsimultaneous translation intoGerman and Spanish (Mitchell &Jones 2006:140).Not surprisingly, the moresophisticated developments can befound in the USA. The authors of arecent report for the Benton Foundation,What’s Going on in CommunityMedia?, comment that “increasingly,community media development ishappening through networks oflocal non-profit media organisations,rather than within singleorganisations” (Johnson, F. & Menichelli2007:21). Such organisations,they note, attract and train a talentedworkforce, contribute to economicdevelopment and promotecommunity dialogue especiallyamong marginalised voices while“allowing the community to undertakeits own development democratically”(ibid.p.22).9. The detail of what is involved in media literacy was spelled out by OLON in a comment on an early version of this report: “In the last 25 yearsin the Netherlands alone, more than 150 000 people have learned how radio and television works by participating in local media: producingprogrammes, writing scenarios, presenting news programmes, interviewing council members, building local websites, participating in localrepresentative media boards, building radio studios from scratch, handling cameras. That alone is already an invaluable contribution to society:letting hundreds of thousand of citizens take media into their own hands!”4. Characteristics of third sector media 25

USA, North Carolina“The Mountain Area Information Network (MAIN). In the tradition of the rural cooperatives that helped spread the reach of electricityin the 1930s, MAIN is a non-profit Internet service provider offering reliable, low-cost Internet service both in western North Carolinaand nationwide. It is a unique community network with a broad vision of its role in the community that encompasses media literacy,economic development strategies, community low-power radio, a community-based web portal, and the provision of Internetconnectivity to rural western North Carolina. MAIN is largely responsible for the remarkable expansion of Internet accessibility inwestern North Carolina, allowing thousands of people to spend their Internet access dollars with a locally controlled and accountableorganisation. MAIN demonstrates the value of the community networking concept to areas that are lagging in connectivity due tofailures of the market. MAIN has taken a leadership role in building a community media culture in Asheville that demonstrates the easewith which digital media leaps organisational boundaries. Its community network runs the Blue Ridge Web Market, which provides afree, customisable Internet presence to hundreds of small businesses throughout western North Carolina. Its Latino Digital LiteracyProject offers training to help the area’s growing Latino populations access the Internet. MAIN has been one of the key partners inbringing a cable access centre to Asheville and has been the driving force behind WPVM, WNC’s low-power FM radio stationbroadcasting local news, views, and music over-the-air in the Asheville region (and the world via webcast)”(Johnson, F. & Menichelli 2007:21).In Sri Lanka, the established communityradio and Internet project atKothmale has branched out usingSri Lanka, Korthmalethe three-wheeled motorcycle,known as tuktuk, the mostcommon form of transport on theisland. 10“Kothmale Community Radio (KCR) has devised a new innovative approach of content delivery and radio production, in line with thestation’s commitment to increasing access and participation to new and traditional ICTs and providing voice and expression to thecommunity it serves.The eTUKTUK is a self-contained mobile telecentre and radio broadcasting unit which travels into remote villages in the Kothmaleregion and provide communities the opportunity to participate in the KCR’s programming as well as have access to new digitaltechnologies and internet.The eTUKTUK contains a laptop computer, battery operated printer, camera, telephone and scanner. Internet is provided via a CDMAenabled wireless connection and electricity is provided via a generator. A roof rack allows the vehicle to carry other equipment such asthe Kothmale Community Radio Station’s mobile broadcasting unit. Narrowcasting of radio programs is done using the two loudspeakers mounted to the roof rack. This system is used to announce the telecentre’s presence when it arrives in a village or designatedlocation. The weekly route of the eTUKTUK is broadcast over the radio to inform the listeners about the location and time that it willarrive in their community.”10.See weblinks 1 and 226 Promoting social cohesion: the role of community media

5. Do third sector media contribute to socialcohesion or threaten it?The political aspect of the questionfirst has to be answered by thegovernment of a country, and thisgoes back to McQuail’s summarycited on page 9. What view is takenby the authorities of initiativeswhich, if not exactly centrifugal,represent diverse or minority opinions?India’s decision to licencethousands of community radio stationsis significant because for solong this important democracy haddecided against such a devolution ofpower. Across the world, communitymedia are widely used for theexpression of marginalised or disadvantagedgroups who define themselvesby gender, age, sexualpreference or geographical isolation,to name the most common examples,but in the contemporary Europeancontext the question is mainlyconcerned with minority ethnicgroups and this, together withbroadcasting in minority languages,will be the focus of the discussionthat follows.Within that focus, a distinctionhas to be made between (1) languagecommunities that pre-datethe nations within which they findthemselves, such as Basque, Occitan,Gaelic and Welsh, and (2) those thathave arrived in Europe as a consequenceof colonial and post-colonialconnections or as refugees from persecutionsuch as the Jewishdiaspora. One might describe theselatter groups as older minority communitiesin comparison with themore recent arrivals.In many of the western Europeancountries, the older minority communitieshave had to wait a longtime before seeing some concessionsin mainstream media that begin torepresent their views and cultures.Still less do more recent arrivals feelsatisfied:“Audience research shows thatmigrants and refugee communitiesdo not feel they are equally andfairly represented in the nationalmainstream and that they are notseen as equal citizens of the countryof settlement.”(OL/MCM 2002)Recent shifts in patterns ofmigration, and the creation of newdemocracies since the demise ofSoviet- or Yugoslav-style socialism,have meant the arrival of newminority language communities,without previous experience of thehost countries – let us categorise thisgroup as (3).Again, to focus the discussion, itis the relation of groups (2) and (3)to community media that will beaddressed here. Community mediawill be understood to include“minority ethnic media” in the thirdsector, recognising that broadcastmedia may take the form either ofslots assigned to a minority ethnicgroup within the schedule of a stationowned by a broader group – themore usual situation, or might insome cases be a station whollyowned by a minority ethnic group.Assuming that there is politicalwill to deal fairly with migrants,refugees and asylum seekers on thebasis of their human rights, thequestion is: to what extent do communitymedia assist in the dual roleof according space for the expressionof minority cultures and languages,and of assisting minority communitiesto settle in their new home? 1A handbook on InterculturalMedia Training in Europe, the outcomeof a two-year EU Socratesproject, distinguishes between“polylingualism” in communitymedia – the existence of many programmes,each of them in a differentlanguage, and “multilingualism”– the use of different languages inone programme.It is common to find, across Europe,the polylingual approach inwhich different languages are usedin separate programmes in theschedule. There is an increasing tendency,however, within the programmes,for the local majoritylanguage to be used as well. “Thesemultilingual programmes seek tomake the concerns of their languagecommunity understandable for amuch broader audience – a crucialstep in the direction of genuineexchange between majority andminorities” (Intermedia 2006:52). 21. For a discussion of “dual role” see Riggins 1992 p.4.2. In many cases of broadcasting by established minorities the broader audience is likely include not only the native speakers of the majority languagebut the younger generation of the minority group who have less proficiency in their parent’s mother tongue.5. Do third sector media contribute to social cohesion or threaten it? 27

An example of this was the Hispanicprogramming of VancouverCo-op Radio, Canada. 3 The two copresentersunderstood that theywere addressing three languagegroups, two monolingual and athird, the bilingual listeners. Toretain the interest of each group, thepresenters maintained a lively interchangewhich avoided exact translatedrepetition of each other’scontributions, so that monolingualswere never left too long “on theirown” and the bilinguals were notbored. A third, important strand inthe programme was music whichappealed to all three groups.In fact the Intermedia handbooksees an advantage in those momentsof incomprehension for members ofthe language majority:“[…] listening to a multilingual programme,[they] are confronted witha situation that usually onlymigrants experience: finding it difficultor even impossible to understandparts of the programme, notbeing able to join in the discussion,being ‘outsiders’. Through the alternationof languages, however, theyare repeatedly ‘drawn back in’. Thismakes it easier to accept a foreignlanguage, both for non-migrantsand for migrants.”(ibid)A further opportunity forstrengthening multicultural relations,the Handbook adds, is in “themutual production of programmesby migrants and non-migrants,working together, can be a means ofestablishing situations based on anequal footing.” The point is confirmedby the experience of RadioSalaam Shalom, in Bristol, UK,where the two founding producer/presenters agree that the benefits forthe two communities are more significantand far-reaching in theresearch and planning that go into aprogramme than the resulting onairbroadcast, important thoughthat may be for listeners. 4The contact between differentcommunity groups contributing toa community media project as theynegotiate the allocation of airtimeand/or resources underlines theimportance of the co-presencenecessitated by community broadcastingof this kind. That differentmembers of the local public spherecome together facilitates social cohesion.As the Intermedia handbook says,“most community radios take forgranted the idea of giving migrantsa platform.” Some examples fromacross Europe:• OOG Radio, Groningen, theNetherlands, provides a crossmediaservice of radio, TV, teletextand an interactive websitethat is updated several times aday with news. Five hours ofnon-Dutch programming arescheduled on Sunday evenings inlanguages that include Farsi,Somali, and Russian. (CM Solutions2005b:35).• Indvandrer TV, Aarhus, Denmarkwas the first multiculturalTV-station in Denmark. It wasfounded in 1997 by several ethnicorganisations to give ethnicminorities a chance to speak upand become more visible in theDanish media landscape, whileat the same time building bridgesbetween ethnic minority groupsand Danish society and showingthe positive contribution ethnicminorities can make.• Radio Droit de Cité (RDC) hasbeen broadcasting since 1991from the Val Fourré quarter ofMantes-la-Jolie, a suburb ofParis. Originally a radio broadcastingworkshop in a secondaryschool, it is now a communitystation, with programmes byand for young people. RDC seesitself as an instrument for socialdevelopment. It continuouslyuses radio to promote the philosophyof “living together” withoutdistinctions of age, colour,origin or gender. 5• Radio Dreyeckland, Freiburg,Germany, broadcasts in Italian,Portugese, Persian, Kurdish, Russian,Spanish, Korean and Polish.• The Cross Radio project is an initiativefor rebuilding bridges ofcommunication and cooperationin radio and culturalfields. In February 2001 a groupof radio activists from RadioB92/Belgrade, Radio Student/Zagreb and Radio Student/Ljubljana came up with an ideaof radio programme exchange ona regular weekly basis. Eachradio produced a 20-minute featureabout current activities andhappenings in the local culturalscene (the focus was on new,young, independent culturalproduction) and shipped materialon recorded mini-discs toother two stations with the helpof public transport operators.Each radio station then broadcastall three productions in aone-hour Cross Radio programme.After a few months ofpositive experience in thisproject, new radio stations wereinvited to join the project – theidea was to cover all ex-Yugoslavregions – and the Internetbecame a media for exchangingprogramme files. At the moment[2005] the Cross Radio projectinvolves 12 radio stations - fivefrom Serbia, two from Bosniaand Herzegovina, two fromSlovenia, one from Kosovo, onefrom Macedonia and one fromSwitzerland (produced by membersof Bosnian community inZurich). Cross Radio has celebratedfour years of continuousaction and 186 programmeshave been produced and broadcastso far.One of the most importantaspects of Cross Radio is its multilingualprinciple. Each radiocrew produces their part in theirown language (except the Pristinacrew who use English), solisteners are challenged to renew(or learn for the first time) theirknowledge of similarities anddifferences between the Serbian,Croatian, Macedonian and Slovenianlanguages. In some partsthis is still quite a problematicissue, as in Kosovo for example,where the Serbian language ispractically banned from everydaylife. Even though this prac-3. Visited by the consultant in 1986, reported in Lewis & Booth 1989:129.4. The on-air dialogue between Jews and Muslims is, however, conducted in English. BBC Radio 4, August 2007,available here.5. Mediadiv news, April 2007, which includes other examples of minority ethnic media.28 Promoting social cohesion: the role of community media

tice faces some problemsregarding understanding of certainparts of radio show in certainareas, Cross Radio membersstate that the multilingual principleis of extreme importancefor promoting the cultural andlingual diversity in ex-Yugoslavregions – especially amongyounger listeners. 6No overall survey of the Europeanthird sector’s contribution inthe area of multicultural programmingexists, and for general principlesAustralia provides the bestexample. The Griffith Universitystudy already mentioned, is the beststate-of the-art example of audienceresearch into community media. Itexamined minority ethnic programmingas a quite separate categoryfrom the important indigenousmedia sector. Community radioreaches about 28% of people whospeak a language other than English(LOTE). LOTE speakers make upnearly 20% of Australians and mostof these live in metropolitan areas.Among the reasons for listeningto ethnic programming, maintainingculture and language was foundto be important. Focus group participantsspoke of the “need to heartheir own language and to engagewith their own culture”. At the sametime, the maintenance of communityconnections and networkswithin their new home was importantto the new citizens.“The radio, this radio station is notseparating us from Australia […] it’sintegrating us to Australia. It’s veryimportant. Our children are growingup Australians anyway, maybethey’re having difficulty adaptingculturally, but through the radio,they will be able to get some help oradapt anyway. And also we see ourdifferences as richness, in Turkeytoo, where we come from differentbackgrounds […] we’re living thesame thing here too and we’rehappy about that. Everyone’s gottheir own different folklore, folkloreand songs and everything else so wehave that here too and we’re happywith that.”(Turkish focus group, listeners to 3ZZZ communityradio, Melbourne. Meadows et al 2007:79)Music programming is important.It “is not just a source of entertainment[…]. Put simply, music isconsidered by ethnic communityradio audiences to be a central componentof creating and maintainingcultural and community connections”(ibid. p.82).News for minority ethnic communitiescomes from two mainsources. The news from their countryof origin is valued but, equally,information about their new homeis vital. The National Ethnic andMulticultural Broadcasters’ Council(NEMBC) recommended to theHouse of Representatives StandingCommittee inquiry into communitybroadcasting that locally producednews services for ethnic communities“are an essential part of smoothingthe migrant settlementexperience and assist with cohesionamong ethnic communities in Australia”(ibid. p.84).The experience of the UK communityradio sector, brief as it is incomparison with Australia’s, maybe judged particularly relevantwhere Muslim communities areconcerned now that, since 9/11,they are being subjected to socialand political pressures. What kindsof discussion are taking place within“minority language” programmes,and to what extent is non-Muslimopinion involved? Does “multilingualprogramming” in the senseused by the Intermedia project, featurein a strategy for social inclusion?Additional research for this reporthas provided some answers whichmust be regarded as provisionalgiven the current fluid state of UKpublic opinion.Although short-term licences(RSLs = restricted service licences)had been on offer by the regulatorfor some years and many had beentaken up by religious groups includingMuslim communities, and byminority language groups, regularcommunity radio broadcasting onlybegan in 2001. The Radio Authorityissued licences for 15 groups for apilot period under the title of AccessRadio. The evaluation of this pilotexercise comments favourably onthe record, under the headings ofsocial inclusion, linguistic impactand cultural diversity, of those ofthe stations which were wholly or inpart serving Muslim communities.Awaz FM in Glasgow, for example,was recognised as an importantdelivery platform for informationby many agencies, while at the sametime, in the other direction, having a“beneficial influence on the developmentof Asian languages in Glasgow”(Everitt 2003b:52). Evaluationreports can be read in full online(Everitt 2003a & 2003b).The Community Radio Order of2004 (see page 20) opened the wayfor full-scale development of thesector with licence conditions basedclosely on recommendations of theEveritt reports. Some 150 licenceshave now been awarded and abouthalf the stations are now on air.From the beginning of the Accesspilot, the regulation has been reactive,that is to say, complaints areinvestigated but there is no monitoringof the daily output. Thus, theregulator is unaware of the contentof minority language programmesbeing broadcast daily. The attitude isthat freedom of expression is moreimportant than repression, whichinvites piracy. In some areas there iscompetition for the licence andwhere the winner is awarded alicence on the basis of serving aminority ethnic community, there issome merit in the arguments of thedisappointed that the winner shouldbe required to accommodate or recognisethe interests of those wholost out. This might be as simple asa requirement to include a certainproportion of English language inthe programming.In fact, most community radiostations that broadcast in a minoritylanguage also include English.Crescent Radio in Rochdale, northeast of Manchester, uses mainlyUrdu but runs an evening talkbasedprogramme in English. When,recently, its female presenter commentedthat, though she was awoman, she felt women were not assuited as men to be prime ministers,there was a large number of protestsfrom Asian women callers to the6. Regional media and transfrontier co-operation, Explanatory memorandum of the 12th Session of the Chamber of Regions, Council of Europe’sCongress of Local and Regional Authorities, Strasbourg, 31 May-2 June 2005, p.13 (the text has been slightly edited by the present writer).5. Do third sector media contribute to social cohesion or threaten it? 29

programme. All FM in Manchesterruns an evening chat show in English,Islamic Hour, open to callers,whose debates range from the finestpoints of theology to the more lighthearteddiscussion like how toshorten for texting purposes theMuslim greeting As-Salamu `Alaykum.7 Crescent Radio’s use of a interpreterin the studio to assist theEnglish-speaking health care officialto deal with calls is a commonarrangement in these stations. SimilarlyCrescent’s bilingual drive-timepresenter translates as he goes, andthis too is common practice.• Bradford Community Broadcasting(BCB), UK, schedules programmesin Arabic, Punjabi andSpanish within an overall stationpolicy of using programmes andprojects to open up communicationbetween host and minoritycommunities.• The University of Sunderland, itsstudent radio station Utopia FM,(also a webcaster), and the SunderlandRefugee and AsylumSeekers Support Network(SRASSN) undertook a project toassist refugees and asylum seekersto develop digital and webskills in order to improve contactwith other refugees in the UKand with their homelands(weblink; Mitchell & Jones 2006:147).Community radio is not going tosolve the UK’s difficult domesticproblems which have been exacerbated,as it is now officially admitted,by foreign policy decisions inthe Middle East, but that communicationlines are kept open is animportant contribution to socialcohesion and community development.7. An atmospheric account of the programme can be found here30 Promoting social cohesion: the role of community media

6. Measures to support third sector mediaAMARCIn 2006, AMARC conducted aCommunity Radio Social ImpactAssessment – “a long-range participatoryaction research seeking toidentify the barriers that limit thepotential positive impact of communityradio and explore ways toincrease the effectiveness of communityradio in achieving povertyreduction, development objectives,inclusiveness and democracy buildingin local Communities” (AMARC2007:5). AMARC concluded that“the lack of proper enabling legislationis the single principal barrier toCR social impact” and emphasisedthe importance of advocacy:• Increasing lobbying and advocacyfor CR. More generally,AMARC should use its links withinternational forums to supportlobbying and advocacy in theregion in defence of freedom ofexpression, in encouraging theparticipatory nature of communityradio and support femaleempowerment.• Advising governments on CRlegislation: AMARC should alsouse its global experience andserve as a consultation body toadvise governments on how tointroduce further legislationfavourable to community radio.Lowering the licence fees forcommunity radios to ensureequitable access to frequenciesby communities is a key aspectof specific pressure put on governments.• Making the voices of CR heard ininternational forums. The participationof CR practitioners andstakeholders in internationalforums and multilateral institutions’gathering will improvepolicy level understanding andsupport of CR.(AMARC 2007:89)The Community Forum for Europe (CMFE)The CMFE has been an active inrepresenting the third sector atEuropean level. Some of its proposalshave appeared in Council ofEurope documentation as the CMFEwas present at the Council of Europe’sMinisterial Conference in Kievin 2005. The CMFE’s main demandscan be summarised as follows:Full recognition of CommunityMedia as the third audiovisualsector alongside public serviceand private commercial broadcasters,including:• involvement in all consultationand decision-making processesin all issues related to the sectorat European level;• access to frequencies and the reservationof a sufficient numberof frequencies for communitymedia, both analogue and digital;• public funding for communitymedia at national level includingproject-orientated funding toprovide start-up and continuingfunding on a structural basis;• a European Community MediaFund;• funding of community mediarelatedresearch and monitoring;• recognition of the role communitymedia can play in crossborderco-operation;• support for the formation of acommunity media network ofcorrespondents in Brussels andStrasbourg.Report commissioned by the Culture and Education Committee of the EuropeanParliament(European Parliament 2007)Understandably, the report looksclosely at EU funding and its relevanceto the CM sector. It notes that“the awareness of and the ability tobenefit from European fundingvaries greatly among the sector.6. Measures to support third sector media 31

While some organisations run severalEU-funded projects in parallel,others believe there is no EU fundingavailable to CM at all” (ibid. p.47). Itis therefore helpful that the reportoffers a brief “tutorial” on the subject– a summary of the two mainstructural funds, the EuropeanSocial Fund and the EuropeanRegional Development Fund, as wellas the various directorates generaland relevant calls for proposals. Thereport suggests that the sectorwould be better advised to looktowards programmes that have a“social or civil society component”rather than the EU’s Media Programme,even though elsewhere(4.2.3) it suggests that the Cultureand Education Committee should“sound out whether communitymedia could play a greater role inEurope’s communications strategywith DG Communications.”Under the heading, “The sector’sneeds: an interface with EU policy”(4.1.2), there is a useful summarywhich coincides with AMARC andCMFE demands. There is, the reportsuggests:• need for legal recognition ofcommunity media in media law;• need for regulations pertainingto radio spectrum licensing anddigital switchover that takeaccount of community media;• need for public support to enablethe sector to develop the capacitiesneeded to operate in a morecontinuous and sustainable fashion;• need for increased networkingand knowledge exchangebetween community mediaorganisations and associations;• need for more continuous representationat EU level in order todevelop a public profile of thesector.The report’s formal recommendationsinclude suggestions thatthere should be encouragement, andin some cases “support” for:• exchanges of best practice;• the creation of a pan-EuropeanCommunity Media association;• networking and presence of thesector at European level;• increasing awareness of the sector’spotential to connect Europewith local communities;• the inclusion of communitymedia as part of future calls forproposals under the 7th FrameworkProgramme.(European Parliament 2007:53)ConclusionsThe various proposals apply atthree levels: European, national andindividual community mediaprojects.The Council of Europe could lendweight to the proposals by encouragingmember states to:• create legislative infrastructurewithout which communitymedia cannot develop;• preserve analogue frequenciesthat may, in some countries,continue to be needed after thedigital switchover, and to ensurethat community media are notdisadvantaged in the digitalenvironment;• recognise the social value ofcommunity media and its role asa form of local public service bycommitting funds to support thesector, both directly, withschemes such as the French levyon the commercial audiovisualsector (FSER), the allocation of aportion of the licence fee (Ireland,some German Länder) orby lowering the cost of licences,and indirectly, through fundingprojects as part of governmentprogrammes directed towardshealth, community development,education, social inclusion,support for minority ethniccommunities, etc.There are also areas in which theCouncil of Europe could play a moreactive role. The sector needs supportat European level to understand andidentify relevant polices and potentiallysupportive programmes, tolobby and organise events that raisethe profile of the sector, for networkingand knowledge exchange.Some specific opportunities:• commissioning studies of bestpractice in community media,surveys of emerging needs suchas multicultural programming,and audience research on theAustralian model;• supporting a trans-Europeannetwork to monitor policy, ineffect a community mediaobservatory;• encouraging training schemes aspart of lifelong learning andmedia literacy;• supporting programmeexchange within the Europeancommunity media sector – andbeyond, with regions which arethe “homelands” of diasporiccommunities;• supporting exchange of staff andvolunteers for short periodsbetween community mediaprojects;• facilitating workshops to studyfunding opportunities;• inviting representatives ofAMARC and the CMFE to attendrelevant Council of Europe committeesas observers and to participatein meetings andconferences.Paul Beaud’s 1980 report CommunityMedia?, whose interrogativetitle is perhaps appropriate (Beaud1980), summarised nearly a decadeof studies commissioned by theCouncil of Europe to report on aphenomenon which was only beginningto emerge and whose significancewas not apparent to policymakersat the time. In its series ofmeetings and colloquia, the Councilplayed a part in bringing together aloose and informal network of academicsand practitioners.The present moment is far moresignificant. In a hugely changedmedia landscape, community mediahave an important role to play. Theperceived need to communicate asense of and participation in theEuropean project at local andregional level, and the challengesposed by the presence of migrantcommunities – as well as the benefitsthey bring to their host communities– are issues that can beaddressed most effectively at locallevel. The sector is already making asubstantial contribution to social32 Promoting social cohesion: the role of community media

cohesion, community engagementand regeneration. It is time to give itthe support it deserves.6. Measures to support third sector media 33

BibliographyALER (2000) Estudio Vigencia e Incidencia de la Radio Popular. Presentación del Informe General.Accessible hereAMARC (2007) Community Radio Social Impact Assessment - Removing Barriers, Increasing Effectiveness: Challenges,Findings, Reflections, Experiences, Lines of Action for Community Radio stakeholders. AMARC Global EvaluationAvailable hereAtton, C. (2001) Alternative Media. London, Thousand Oaks, Ca., New Delhi: SageAtton, C. (2004). An Alternative Internet: radical media, politics and creativity.Edinburgh: Edinburgh University PressBeaud, Paul (1980) Community Media? Council of Europe Education and Culture, StrasbourgBerrigan, F. (Ed.) (1977). Access: Some Western models of community media. Paris: UNESCOBordenave, J.D. (1977). Communication and rural development. Paris: UNESCOBroadcasting Research Unit (no date) The Public Service Idea in British Broadcasting - Main Principles. LondonCammaerts, B. (2007) “Community Radios in the West: a legacy of struggle for survival in acapitalist consumer-oriented media context”.Paper presented at the 50th Anniversary Conference of the IAMCR, Paris, France, 23-25 July 2007Chaparro Escudero, M. (2004) “Third Sector Radio in Spain”, The Radio Journal Vol 1 No. 3CM Solutions (2005a) Trade Bodies for Community Media in the Netherlands, Ireland and France.Report for Community Media Association. Sheffield: CMA, July 2005CM Solutions (2005b) Making it work: Learning from successful Community Radio stations.A report for the Community Media AssociationCoare, P. (2003) “Shaping the Good Citizen: Politics and Policy” in Coare, P. & Johnston, R. (2003) (eds)Adult Learning, citizenship and community voices. Leicester: NIACECommunity Media Association (CMA) (2007) Airflash: Community Media Review No. 95, Summer 2007Community Media Association (CMA) & Radio Regen (2005) Community Radio Toolkit.Available hereCouldry, N. & Curran, J. (eds) (2003) Contesting Media Power: Alternative Media in a Networked World.Lanham, USA: Rowman & LittlefieldDCMS (UK Department for Culture, Media and Sport) (2006) The Community Radio Sector: Looking to the Future.NovemberDelorme, Michel (1990). AMARC: a Plan for Action. AMARC 4 Report (pp. 5-7).Dublin: 4th World Conference of Community Radio Broadcasters “The Right to Communicate”Downing, J. (1984) Radical Media: the political organisation of alternative communication. Boston: South End PressDowning, J. (2001) Radical Media: Rebellious Communication and Social Movements. London: Sage PublicationsEngelman, R. (1996) Public Radio and Television in America: a Political History.Thousand Oaks, London, New Delhi: SageEuropean Parliament (2007) The State of Community Media in the European Union, report by Kern EuropeanAffairs (KEA) for Culture and Education. IP/B/CULT/FWC/2006-169/Lot03/C01 27/09/2007Available hereBibliography 35

Everitt, A. (2003a) New Voices: an Evaluation of 15 Access Radio Projects. London: Radio AuthorityAccessible hereEveritt, A.(2003b) New Voices: an Update. London: Radio AuthorityAccessible hereForde, S., Meadow, M. & Foxwell, K. (2002) Culture Commitment Community: the Australian community radio sector.Brisbane: Griffith UniversityFraser, C. & Restrepo Estrada, S. (2001) Community Radio Handbook. Paris: UNESCOGumucio Dagron, A. (2001) Making Waves: Stories of Participatory Communication for Social Change.A Report to the Rockefeller Foundation. New YorkHedman, L. (1992) “Sweden: Neighbourhood Radio”, in Jankowski, N., Prehn, O. & Stappers, J. (eds)The People’s Voice: Local Radio and Television in Europe. London: John LibbeyHowley, K. (2005) Community Media: People, Places, and Communication Technologies. Cambridge University PressInter.Media/Bildungszentrum BürgerMedien (ed.) (2006) Intercultural Media Training in Europe: Handbook for communitymedia trainers and editors.Available hereIvanov, S. (2006) “Intercultural Dialogue in Cosmopolitan Europe” in Democracy, Technology and Freedom of Expression,SofiaJallov, B. (2005) “Assessing community change: development of a ’barefoot’ impact assessment methodology”,The Radio Journal Vol 3 No. 1Jankowski, N., Prehn, O. & Stappers, J. (1992) (eds) The People’s Voice: Local Radio and Television in Europe.London: John LibbeyJankowski, N. with Prehn, O. (2002) Community Media in the Information Age: perspectives and prospects.Cresskill, N.J.: Hampton PressJohnson, F. & Menichelli, K. (2007) What’s Going on in Community Media.University of Massachusetts & Benton FoundationAvailable here, accessed 30/08/07Lewis, P. M. (ed) (1984) Media for People in Cities: a study of community media in the urban context.Paris: UNESCO, Division of Development of Communication SystemsLewis, P. M. & Booth, J (1989) The Invisible Medium: Public, Commercial and Community Radio, London: MacmillanLewis, P.M. (1993) “Neither the Market nor the State: Community Radio - a Third Way?”in Manaev,O & Pryliuk,Y (eds) Media in Transition: From Totalitarianism to Democracy. Kiev, 1993Lewis, P.M. (1994) Community Radio - a gateway to employment. UK report of a transnational survey of employmenttrends and training needs in the community radio sector. Sheffield; AMARC-Europe Training Partnership.Available hereLewis, P.M. & Jones, S. (2006) (eds) From the Margins to the Cutting Edge - Community Media and Empowerment.Catskill, NJ: Hampton PressLopez Vigil, José Ignacio (1991) Rebel Radio: Story of El Salvador’s Radio Venceremos. London: Latin American BureauMcQuail, D. (1994, 3rd edn) Mass Communication Theory: an introduction.London: Sage Publications LtdMeadows, M., Forde, S., Ewart, J., Foxwell, K. (2007) Community Media Matters: an audience study of the Australiancommunity broadcasting sector. Brisbane: Griffith UniversityMitchell, C. (2000) Women and Radio: Airing Differences. London & New York: RoutledgeMitchell, C. & Jones, S. (2006) “Networking Community Media” in Lewis, P.M. & Jones, S.(2006) (eds)From the Margins to the Cutting Edge - Community Media and Empowerment. Catskill, NJ: Hampton PressMorley, D. & Robins, K. (1995) Spaces of Identity: Global media, electronic landscapes and Cultural boundaries.London & New York: RoutledgeOfcom (2004) Community Radio: Final report. London: Research Works LtdOnline/More Colour in the Media (OLMCM) (2002) Tuning in to Diversity: immigrants and ethnic minorities in massmedia: representations and policies. European Conference on media and minorities, Rome 2002Available herePaul Zealey Associates (2007) Community Media: Strengthening Cultural Life in ScotlandPrice-Davies, E. & Tacchi, J. (2001) Community Radio in a global context: an overview of Community Radio in Australia,Canada, France, Holland, Ireland and South Africa. Sheffield: Community Media AssociationPutnam, Robert D. (2000) Bowling alone: the collapse and revival of American community.New York: Simon & Schuster, 200036 Promoting social cohesion: the role of community media

Rennie, E. (2006) Community media: a global introduction. Lanham, Md.: Rowman & LittlefieldRiggins, S.H. (1992) Ethnic Minority Media: an international perspective. Newbury Park, CA: Sage PublicationsRodriguez, C. (2001) Fissures in the Mediascape. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton PressScannell, P. & Cardiff, D. (1991) A Social History of British Broadcasting. Vol One 1922-1939: Serving the Nation.Oxford: BlackwellServaes, J. (1999). Communication for development. One world, multiple cultures. Cresskill NJ: HamptonSilverstone, R. (2007) Media and Morality: on the rise of the mediapolis. Cambridge: PolityTacchi, J., Slater, D. & Hearn, G. (2003) Ethnographic Action Research. Paris & New Delhi: UNESCOUNESCO (2004) Profiles and experiences in ICT Innovation for Poverty Reduction. ParisUNESCO (2005) Community Multimedia Centres around the World: a global directory.Available hereUnique Perspectives (2003) Community Radio in Ireland: Its contribution to community development. Research Reportfor the Community Radio Forum. DublinAvailable hereBibliography 37

Annex 1The Community Radio Charter for EuropeRecognising that communityradio is an ideal means of fosteringfreedom of expression and information,the development of culture, thefreedom of form and confront opinionsand active participation in locallife; noting that different culturesand traditions lead to diversity offorms of community radio; thisCharter identifies objectives whichcommunity radio stations share andshould strive to achieve.Community radio stations:1. promote the right to communicate,assist the free flow of informationand opinions, encouragecreative expression and contributeto the democratic processand a pluralist society;2. provide access to training, productionand distribution facilities;encourage local creativetalent and foster local traditions;and provide programmes for thebenefit, entertainment, educationand development of theirlisteners;3. seek to have their ownershiprepresentative of local geographicallyrecognisable communitiesor of communities of commoninterest;4. are editorially independent ofgovernment, commercial andreligious institutions and politicalparties in determining theirprogramme policy;5. provide a right of access tominority and marginalisedgroups and promote and protectcultural and linguistic diversity;6. seek to honestly inform their listenerson the basis of informationdrawn from a diversity ofsources and provide a right ofreply to any person or organisationsubject to serious misrepresentation;7. are established as organisationswhich are not run with a view toprofit and ensure their independenceby being financed from avariety of sources;8. recognise and respect the contributionof volunteers, recognisethe right of paid workers to jointrade unions and provide satisfactoryworking conditions forboth;9. operate management, programmingand employment practiceswhich oppose discriminationsand which are open andaccountable to all supporters,staff and volunteers;10.foster exchange between communityradio broadcasters usingcommunications to developgreater understanding in supportof peace, tolerance, democracyand development.Adopted on 18 September 1994 in Ljubljana, Slovenia at the first AMARC Pan-European Conference of CommunityRadio Broadcasters.Community Radio Charter weblink (accessed 12/10/07).Annex 1 39

Annex 2Policy Guidelines for setting up Community Radio Stations in Indiapublished on 4 December 2006WeblinkForewordIn December 2002, the Governmentof India approved a policy forthe grant of licences for setting up ofcommunity radio stations to wellestablishededucational institutionsincluding IITs/IIMs.1. Basic principlesAn organisation desirous of operatinga community radio station(CRS) must be able to satisfy andadhere to the following principles:a) it should be explicitly constitutedas a “non-profit” organisationand should have a proven recordof at least three years of serviceto the local community.2. Eligibility criteriaThe matter has been reconsideredand the government has nowdecided to broadbase the policy bybringing “Non-profit” organisationslike civil society and voluntaryorganisations, etc. under its ambitb) The CRS to be operated by itshould be designed to serve aspecific well-defined local community.c) It should have an ownership andmanagement structure that isreflective of the community thatthe CRS seeks to serve.(i) The following types of organisationsshall be eligible to apply forcommunity radio licences:a) Community-based organisations,which satisfy the basicprinciples listed at paragraph 1above. These would include civilsociety and voluntary organisations,state agriculture universities(SAUs), ICAR institutions,Krishi Vigyan Kendras, registeredsocieties and autonomous bodiesand public trusts registeredunder the Societies Act or anyother such act relevant for thepurpose. Registration at the timeof application should at least bethree years old.b) Educational institutions.(ii) The following shall not be eligibleto run a CRS:a) Individuals;in order to allow greater participationby the civil society on issuesrelating to development & socialchange. Detailed policy guidelines inthis regard are given below:d) Programmes for broadcastshould be relevant to the educational,developmental, social andcultural needs of the community.e) It must be a legal entity, i.e. itshould be registered (under theRegistration of Societies Act orany other such act relevant tothe purpose).b) Political parties and their affiliateorganisations; [including studentand women’s groups, tradeunions and such other wingsaffiliated to these parties].c) Organisations operating with amotive to earn profit;d) Organisations expressly bannedby the Union and State Governments.3. Selection process & processing of the applications(a) Applications shall be invited bythe Ministry of I&B once everyyear through a national advertisementfor establishment ofcommunity radio stations. However,eligible organisations andAnnex 2 41

educational institutions canapply during the interveningperiod between the two advertisements.The applicants shallbe required to apply using theprescribed application formalong with a processing fee ofRs.2 500 and the applicationsshall be processed in the followingmanner:i) Universities, deemed universitiesand government-run educationalinstitutions will have a singlewindow clearance by putting upcases before an inter-ministerialcommittee chaired by the secretary(I&B) for approval. No separateclearance from MHA & MHRD shallbe necessary. Once the WPC Wing ofthe Ministry of Communication &IT earmarks a frequency at the placerequested by the institution, a letterof intent (LOI) shall be issued.ii) In case of all other applicants,including private educational institutions,an LOI shall be issued subjectto receiving clearance from theMinistries of Home Affairs, Defence& HRD (in the case of private educationalinstitutions) and frequencyallocation by the WPC wing of theMinistry of Communication & IT.(b) A time schedule for obtainingclearances as below shall be prescribed:i) Within one month of receipt ofthe application in the prescribedform, the Ministry of I&B shallprocess the application and eithercommunicate to the applicant deficiencies,if any, or will send thecopies of the application to the otherministries for clearance as prescribedin para 3(a)(i) and 3(a)(ii) above, asthe case may be.ii) The ministries concerned shallcommunicate their clearance withinthree months of receipt of the application.However, in the event of thefailure of the concerned ministry togrant the clearance within the stipulatedperiod of three months, thecase shall be referred to the Committeeconstituted under the Chairmanshipof Secretary (I&B) for a decisionfor issue of an LOI.iii) In the event of more than oneapplicant for a single frequency at agiven place, the successful applicantwill be selected for issue of an LOIfrom amongst the applicants by theCommittee constituted under theChairmanship of Secretary (I&B) onthe basis of their standing in thecommunity, the commitmentshown, the objectives enunciatedand resources likely to be mobilisedby the applicant organisation aswell as its credentials and number ofyears of community service renderedby the organisation.iv) Within one month of the issueof the LOI the eligible applicant willbe required to apply, in the prescribedformat and with the requisitefee, to the WPC Wing of theMinistry of Communication & IT,Sanchar Bhawan, New Delhi for frequencyallocation & SACFA clearance.v) A time frame of six monthsfrom the date of application is prescribedfor issue of SACFA clearance.In the event of non-receipt of suchclearance from the Ministry of Communication& IT within the stipulatedperiod of six months, the casewill be referred to the Committeeconstituted under the Chairmanshipof Secretary (I&B) for a decision.vi) On receipt of SACFA clearance(a copy of which shall be submittedby the applicant), the LOI holdershall furnish a bank guarantee inthe prescribed format for a sum ofRs.25 000. Thereupon, the LOIholder will be invited to sign a grantof permission agreement (GOPA) byMinistry of I&B, which will enablehim to seek Wireless OperatingLicense (WOL) from the WPC Wingof the Ministry of Communication &IT. The Community Radio Stationcan be made operational only afterthe receipt of WOL from the Ministryof Communication & IT.vii) Within three months ofreceipt of all clearances, i.e the signingof GOPA, the permission holdershall set up the community radiostation and shall intimate the date ofcommissioning of the communityradio station to the Ministry of I&B.viii) Failure to comply with thetime schedule prescribed above shallmake the LOI/GOPA holder liable forcancellation of its LOI/GOPA andforfeiture of the bank guarantee.4. Grant of permission agreement conditionsi) The grant of permission agreementperiod shall be for five years.ii) The grant of permission agreementand the permission letter willbe non-transferable.iii) No permission fee shall belevied on the permission holder.However, the permission holder willbe required to pay the spectrumusage fee to the WPC wing of theMinistry of Communication & IT.iv) In case the permission holderdoes not commence his broadcastingoperations within three months ofthe receipt of all clearances or shutsdown broadcasting activity for morethan three months after commencementof operation, its permission isliable to be cancelled and the frequencyallotted to the next eligibleapplicant.v) An applicant/organisationshall not be granted more than onepermission for CRS operation at oneor more places.vi) The LOI holder shall furnish abank guarantee for a sum ofRs.25 000 only to ensure timelyperformance of the permissionagreement.vii) If the permission holder failsto commission service within thestipulated period, he shall forfeit theamount of bank guarantee to thegovernment and the governmentwould be free to cancel the permissionissued to him5. Content regulation & monitoringi) The programmes should be ofimmediate relevance to the community.The emphasis should be ondevelopmental, agricultural, health,educational, environmental, socialwelfare, community developmentand cultural programmes. The programmingshould reflect the special42 Promoting social cohesion: the role of community media

interests and needs of the local community.ii) At least 50% of content shall begenerated with the participation ofthe local community, for which thestation has been set up.iii) Programmes should preferablybe in the local language and dialect(s).iv) The permission holder shallhave to adhere to the provisions ofthe Programme and AdvertisingCode, as prescribed for All IndiaRadio.v) The permission holder shallpreserve all programmes broadcastby the CRS for three months fromthe date of broadcast.vi) The permission holder shallnot broadcast any programmes,which relate to news and currentaffairs and are otherwise political innature.vii) The permission holder shallensure that nothing is included inthe programmes broadcast which:a. Offends good taste or decency;b. Contains criticism of friendlycountries;c. Contains attack on religions orcommunities or visuals or wordscontemptuous of religiousgroups or which either promoteor result in promoting communaldiscontent or disharmony;d. Contains anything obscene,defamatory, deliberate, false andsuggestive innuendoes or halftruths;e. Is likely to encourage or inciteviolence or contains anythingagainst the maintenance of lawand order or which promoteanti-national attitudes;f. Contains anything amounting tocontempt of court or anythingaffecting the integrity of thenation;g. Contains aspersions against thedignity of the president/vicepresident and the judiciary;h. Criticises, maligns or slandersany individual in person or certaingroups, segments of social,public and moral life of thecountry;i. Encourages superstition or blindbelief;j. Denigrates women;k. Denigrates children; andl. May present/depict/suggest asdesirable the use of drugs includingalcohol, narcotics andtobacco or may stereotype,incite, vilify or perpetuate hatredagainst or attempt to demeanany person or group on the basisof ethnicity, nationality, race,gender, sexual preference, religion,age or physical or mentaldisability.viii) The permission holder shallensure that due care is taken withrespect to religious programmeswith a view to avoid:a) Exploitation of religious susceptibilities;andb) Committing offence to the religiousviews and beliefs of thosebelonging to a particular religionor religious denomination.6. Imposition of penalty/revocation of permission agreement(i) In case there is any violation ofconditions cited in 5(i) to 5(viii),Government may, suo motto or onthe basis of complaints, take cognisanceand place the matter beforethe Inter-ministerial Committees onProgramme and Advertising Codesfor recommending appropriate penalties.On the recommendation ofthe committee, a decision to imposepenalties shall be taken. However,before the imposition of a penaltythe permission holder shall be givenan opportunity to present its case.(ii) The penalty shall comprise of:(a) Temporary suspension of permissionfor operating the CRS7. Transmitter power and rangei) The CRS shall be expected tocover a range of 5-10 km. For this, atransmitter having maximum effectiveradiated power (ERP) of100 watts would be adequate. However,in case of a proven need wherethe applicant organisation is able toestablish that it needs to serve alarger area or the terrain so warrants,higher transmitter wattagewith maximum ERP up tofor a period up to one month inthe case of the first violation;(b) Temporary suspension of permissionfor operating the CRSfor a period up to three monthsin the case of the second violationdepending on the gravity ofviolation;(c) Revocation of the permission forany subsequent violation.Besides, the permission holderand its principal members shallbe liable for all actions underIPC, CrPC and other laws.(iii) In case of revocation of permission,the permission holder will250 watts can be considered on acase-to-case basis, subject to availabilityof frequency and such otherclearances as necessary from theMinistry of Communication & IT.Requests for higher transmitterpower above 100 watts and up to250 watts shall also be subject toapproval by the Committee constitutedunder the Chairmanship ofnot be eligible to apply directly orindirectly for a fresh permission infuture for a period of five years.“Provided the penalty imposed asper above provision shall be withoutprejudice to any penal action underapplicable laws including the IndianTelegraph Act 1885 and IndianWireless Telegraphy Act 1933, asmodified from time to time.”(iv) In the event of suspension ofpermission as mentioned in paragraph6 (ii) (a) & (b), the permissionholder will continue to discharge itsobligations under the Grant of PermissionAgreement during the suspensionperiod.Secretary, Ministry of Information& Broadcasting.ii) The maximum height ofantennae permitted above theground for the CRS shall not exceed30 metres. However, minimumheight of antennae above groundshould be at least 15 metres to preventpossibility of biological hazardsof RF radiation.Annex 2 43

iii) Universities, deemed universitiesand other educational institutionsshall be permitted to locatetheir transmitters and antennaeonly within their main campuses.iv) For NGOs and others, thetransmitter and antenna shall belocated within the geographical areaof the community they seek toserve. The geographical area(including the names of villages/institution, etc.) should be clearlyspelt out along with the location ofthe transmitter and antenna in theapplication form.8. Funding & sustenancei) Applicants will be eligible toseek funding from multilateral aidagencies. Applicants seeking foreignfunds for setting up the CRS willhave to obtain FCRA clearance underForeign Contribution RegulationAct, 1976.ii) Transmission of sponsoredprogrammes shall not be permittedexcept programmes sponsored bycentral & state governments andother organisations to broadcastpublic interest information. In addition,limited advertising andannouncements relating to localevents, local businesses and servicesand employment opportunities shallbe allowed. The maximum durationof such limited advertising will berestricted to 5 (five) minutes perhour of broadcast.iii) Revenue generated fromadvertisement and announcementsas per paragraph 8 (ii) shall be utilisedonly for the operationalexpenses and capital expenditure ofthe CRS. After meeting the fullfinancial needs of the CRS, surplusmay, with prior written permissionof the Ministry of Information &Broadcasting, be ploughed into theprimary activity of the organisation,i.e. for education in the case ofeducational institutions and for furtheringthe primary objectives forwhich the NGO concerned wasestablished.9. Other terms & conditionsi) The basic objective of the communityradio broadcasting would beto serve the cause of the communityin the service area of the permissionholder by involving members of thecommunity in the broadcast of theirprogrammes. For this purpose,“community” shall mean peopleliving in the zone of the coverage ofthe broadcasting service of the permissionholder. Each applicant willhave to specify the geographicalcommunity or the community ofinterest it wants to cover.The permission holder shall providethe services of his CRS on a freeto-airbasis.ii) Though the permission holderwill operate the service under theseguidelines and as per the terms andconditions of the grant of permissionagreement signed, the permissionshall be subject to the conditionthat as and when any regulatoryauthority to regulate and monitorthe broadcast services in the countryis constituted, the permission holderwill adhere to the norms, rules andregulations prescribed by suchauthority from time to time.iii) The permission holder shallprovide such information to thegovernment on such intervals, asmay be required. In this connection,the permission holder is required topreserve recording of programmesbroadcast during the previous threemonths, failing which, permissionagreement is liable to be revoked.iv) The government or its authorisedrepresentative shall have theright to inspect the broadcast facilitiesof the permission holder andcollect such information as considerednecessary in public and communityinterest.v) The government reserves theright to take over the entire servicesand networks of the permissionholder or revoke/terminate/suspendthe permission in the interest ofnational security or in the event ofnational emergency/war or lowintensityconflict or under similartype of situations.vi) All foreign personnel likely tobe deployed by way of appointment,contract, consultancy, etc. by thepermission holder for installation,maintenance and operation of thepermission holder’s services shall berequired to obtain prior securityclearance from Government ofIndia.vii) The government reserves theright to modify, at any time, theterms and conditions if it is necessaryto do so, in public interest orfor the proper conduct of broadcastingor for security considerations.viii) Notwithstanding anythingcontained anywhere else in thegrant of permission agreement, thegovernment shall have the power todirect the permission holder tobroadcast any special message asmay be considered desirable to meetany contingency arising out of naturalemergency, or public interest ornatural disaster and the like, and thepermission holder shall be obliged tocomply with such directions.ix) The permission holder shall berequired to submit their auditedannual accounts to the governmentin respect of the organisation/divisionrunning the CRS. The accountsshall clearly show the income andexpenditure incurred and the assetsand liabilities in respect of the CRS.x) A permission agreement will besubject to such other conditions asmay be determined by the government.xi) The government shall makespecial arrangements for monitoringand enforcement of the ceilingon advertisements, particularly inthose areas where private FM radiostations have been granted licences.44 Promoting social cohesion: the role of community media

iii) Universities, deemed universitiesand other educational institutionsshall be permitted to locatetheir transmitters and antennaeonly within their main campuses.iv) For NGOs and others, thetransmitter and antenna shall belocated within the geographical areaof the community they seek toserve. The geographical area(including the names of villages/institution, etc.) should be clearlyspelt out along with the location ofthe transmitter and antenna in theapplication form.8. Funding & sustenancei) Applicants will be eligible toseek funding from multilateral aidagencies. Applicants seeking foreignfunds for setting up the CRS willhave to obtain FCRA clearance underForeign Contribution RegulationAct, 1976.ii) Transmission of sponsoredprogrammes shall not be permittedexcept programmes sponsored bycentral & state governments andother organisations to broadcastpublic interest information. In addition,limited advertising andannouncements relating to localevents, local businesses and servicesand employment opportunities shallbe allowed. The maximum durationof such limited advertising will berestricted to 5 (five) minutes perhour of broadcast.iii) Revenue generated fromadvertisement and announcementsas per paragraph 8 (ii) shall be utilisedonly for the operationalexpenses and capital expenditure ofthe CRS. After meeting the fullfinancial needs of the CRS, surplusmay, with prior written permissionof the Ministry of Information &Broadcasting, be ploughed into theprimary activity of the organisation,i.e. for education in the case ofeducational institutions and for furtheringthe primary objectives forwhich the NGO concerned wasestablished.9. Other terms & conditionsi) The basic objective of the communityradio broadcasting would beto serve the cause of the communityin the service area of the permissionholder by involving members of thecommunity in the broadcast of theirprogrammes. For this purpose,“community” shall mean peopleliving in the zone of the coverage ofthe broadcasting service of the permissionholder. Each applicant willhave to specify the geographicalcommunity or the community ofinterest it wants to cover.The permission holder shall providethe services of his CRS on a freeto-airbasis.ii) Though the permission holderwill operate the service under theseguidelines and as per the terms andconditions of the grant of permissionagreement signed, the permissionshall be subject to the conditionthat as and when any regulatoryauthority to regulate and monitorthe broadcast services in the countryis constituted, the permission holderwill adhere to the norms, rules andregulations prescribed by suchauthority from time to time.iii) The permission holder shallprovide such information to thegovernment on such intervals, asmay be required. In this connection,the permission holder is required topreserve recording of programmesbroadcast during the previous threemonths, failing which, permissionagreement is liable to be revoked.iv) The government or its authorisedrepresentative shall have theright to inspect the broadcast facilitiesof the permission holder andcollect such information as considerednecessary in public and communityinterest.v) The government reserves theright to take over the entire servicesand networks of the permissionholder or revoke/terminate/suspendthe permission in the interest ofnational security or in the event ofnational emergency/war or lowintensityconflict or under similartype of situations.vi) All foreign personnel likely tobe deployed by way of appointment,contract, consultancy, etc. by thepermission holder for installation,maintenance and operation of thepermission holder’s services shall berequired to obtain prior securityclearance from Government ofIndia.vii) The government reserves theright to modify, at any time, theterms and conditions if it is necessaryto do so, in public interest orfor the proper conduct of broadcastingor for security considerations.viii) Notwithstanding anythingcontained anywhere else in thegrant of permission agreement, thegovernment shall have the power todirect the permission holder tobroadcast any special message asmay be considered desirable to meetany contingency arising out of naturalemergency, or public interest ornatural disaster and the like, and thepermission holder shall be obliged tocomply with such directions.ix) The permission holder shall berequired to submit their auditedannual accounts to the governmentin respect of the organisation/divisionrunning the CRS. The accountsshall clearly show the income andexpenditure incurred and the assetsand liabilities in respect of the CRS.x) A permission agreement will besubject to such other conditions asmay be determined by the government.xi) The government shall makespecial arrangements for monitoringand enforcement of the ceilingon advertisements, particularly inthose areas where private FM radiostations have been granted licences.44 Promoting social cohesion: the role of community media

Directorate Generalof Human Rights and Legal AffairsCouncil of EuropeF-67075 Strasbourg Cedexwww.coe.int/justice