The British government, as part of the Digital Britain review, has proposed to protect local news pluralism by supporting 'Independently Funded News Consortia' (IFNCs). In the old days the pattern, across most of Britain's local media landscape, was a daily local newspaper, a 30 minute regional news programme on the television, and perhaps a couple of local stories on the hour, on the radio. But today, we also have a growing range of social and community media carrying user generated content produced by citizen reporters and community correspondents. Central to any public policy or investment in the future of local news media, must be the question: “What balance is to be found between preserving what’s best of the traditional media and supporting the emergence and growth of new approaches?”
One of the new approaches is community radio, made possible by the Community Radio Order 2004. It has already been widely applauded as a successful additional to the local media landscape but it rests on very precarious foundations because a policy package that the government endorsed at the time has in practice only been partially implemented. Community radio stations were set up under a legal framework that prevents them taking more than 50 per cent revenue from advertising, and in some locations, to protect small commercial stations, they are precluded from taking any advertising at all. This was to be complemented by a modest government-backed Community Radio Fund that at today’s prices should provide around £35,000 per annum per station. In other words, just enough for stations like Sheffield Live to break even.
It all seemed to start off OK. The Fund was set up. Some initial money was put in it. But in the last Comprehensive Spending Review, there was no increase. Meanwhile the number of community radio stations licensed has grown from a handful to over 200. At the ludicrously low level of just half a million pounds per annum in total, the average amount available per station is now just £2500. Its impact is verging on the insignificant.
Now the paradox of the current debate on local news, is that all of this seems to be below the policy makers’ radar, probably because it is so local and grassroots. Instead the debate has been about how what are essentially national news and media providers can be persuaded not to give up on local news entirely. In the Digital Britain consultation paper on the funding of local and regional news, community media didn’t even get a mention. This is a gross oversight. If the public policy objective really is to develop and diversify local news content, then community media would probably be the most efficient place to make the investment.
It has been suggested that community media might benefit from IFNC produced content. I don’t think that’s the right model. What community broadcasters need is investment to raise the quality and capacity of their own content production.
The first thing we need is to sustain the basic infrastructure for production and broadcast – rent, transmission costs, technical maintenance and general administration. The second thing we need is resources for training volunteer producers, presenters and reporters – additional space and equipment, wages for training staff, accreditation fees. The third thing we need, and right now this would be a luxury, is the means to employ at least one full time journalist to act as chief editor and mentor for our citizen reporters. To deliver all three of these things would be a fraction of the cost of ITV regional news.
Edited version of a presentation at the Westminster Media Forum, London 14 October 2009
