[NUJ Bristol] Communications bill and the South West

Friends,

This piece on how the communications bill will effect the South West was
published in The Big Issue South West a few weeks ago.

I'm also writing to let you know that I resigned as chairman of the Britsol
branch tonight, for personal reasons. Tony and Simon will be in touch abaou=
t
dates for the next meetings and the Branch's activities at ADM.

Best wishes,

Rich Cookson

//starts//
You probably haven=B9t heard of Clear Channel before, but you soon will. It=B9s
the world=B9s biggest radio broadcasting company, running more than 1,200
radio stations in the USA. It also runs 36 TV stations, owns 800,000
billboards and organises tens of thousands of live events across the world.
Soon, when you tune in to your local radio station, the chances are you=B9ll
be listening to Clear Channel DJs. The company is poised to buy up radio
stations across the South West if the highly controversial communications
bill gets through parliament.
Clear Channel=B9s founder and chairman Lowry Mays has strong ideas about what
radio is for. =B3The job of all employees of Clear Channel is to use [our]
assets to help advertisers promote their goods and services,=B2 he told the
Radio Academy last year. =B3This means that indirectly Clear Channel is
selling Fords, burgers and toothpastes.=B2 Selling junk food and cars =AD
welcome to the future of broadcasting in the UK.
The communications bill is bad news for the UK. Until now, strict ownership
laws have stopped companies like Clear Channel buying terrestrial TV and
radio companies here. But the bill lifts many of those restrictions and
allows foreign firms to own a large number of TV and radio stations, under
the guise of opening up media to increased competition. It opens the door t=
o
media giants such as AOL-Time-Warner, Vivendi and Viacom.
Critics of the bill, which is currently being discussed by a commitee of
MPs, say that the quality of programmes will suffer under these new owners,
particularly if they come from countries with no history of public service
broadcasting. =B3For 80 years, we=B9ve had a tradition of public service
broadcasting in Britain, with its requirements of fairness, accuracy and
impartiality,=B2 says Tim Gopsill from the National Union Of Journalists. =B3Bu=
t
the bill puts all our commercial media at the mercy of global companies.
Opening up access to the highest bidder, whoever they are, will lead to a
distortion of the news. It will be like in Russia, where TV companies are
owned by oil firms.=B2
Tom O=B9Malley from the Campaign For Press And Broadcasting Freedom agrees.
=B3There will be fewer companies commissioning programmes, and probably fewer
independent film companies around to make them,=B2 he says. =B3There=B9s a big
risk of political bias creeping in, as we=B9ve already seen in Italy and the
US.=B2
Even senior MPs are predicting serious consequences. =B3We are worried that
the government is allowing US companies to own radio and TV stations,=B2 says
Lib Dem spokesman for Culture, Media And Sport Nick Harvey. =B3They might buy
ITV or Channel 5 =AD we are worried about US culture becoming the universal
culture.=B2
Mike Jempson, director of media charity Presswise, also has concerns. =B3Ther=
e
will be just one measure of value: commercial success. Broadcasters that ca=
n
attract large audiences will be able to attract advertisers =AD but what will
happen to public service broadcasting, or the idea that broadcasters have a
duty to serve different pats of the community? Those people who rule the
market will determine the political and cultural output of stations =AD and t=
o
some extent the mindset of the public.=B2
But aren=B9t there laws and regulations to protect us against that kind of
thing? Er, no =AD well, not after the bill is passed, anyway. It does away
with a raft of regulators such as the Independent Television Commission, th=
e
Radio Authority, and Office Of Telecommunications and the Broadcasting
Standards Commission, replacing them with a highly-centralised and totally
undemocratic super-regulator called OFCOM.
A spokesman for the Department For Culture Media and Sport insists that
OFCOM will be up to the job: =B3The bill sets out clear duties for OFCOM: to
protect the interests of consumers in terms of choice, price quality of
service and value for money, through promoting open and competitive markets=
;
to maintain high quality content and to protect the interest of citizens by
maintaining acceptable standards in content.=B2
But this only reinforces the critics=B9 suspicion that OFCOM=B9s primary role i=
s
to =8Cpromote competition=B9 =AD and that over-ride everything else. The bill
states that OFCOM should avoid =B3the imposition of burdens which are
unnecessary or the maintenance of burdens which have become unnecessary=B2 =AD
parliament-speak for doing away with as much regulation as possible.
OFCOM will be headed by a board of four, part-time members, appointed by th=
e
government and led by Lord David Currie, Dean Of The City Of London Busines=
s
School, who has =B3no discernible experience of broadcasting or cultural
policy=B2 according to O=B9Malley. The government has refused to make room on
the board for representatives from Wales, Scotland or the English regions.
=B3We want to ensure that public service broadcasting continues to reflect UK
cultural traditions and to meet the needs of diverse social and linguistic
communities,=B2 says the DCMS spokesman.
But O=B9Malley disagrees: =B3OFCOM is designed to promote competition rather
than the public interest. And there=B9s a serious democratic deficit here,
particularly because it=B9s not representative of particular communities or
parts of the country.=B2
Critics also argue that the bill puts both the quality and quantity of loca=
l
programming under threat. Regional programmes are already being cut back =AD
last year three and a half hours of local programming was cut from HTV
West=B9s schedule, meaning that it now produces just eight and a half hours o=
f
local programmes a week. =B3Within one year of the bill being passed, it=B9s
likely that there will be one company controlling commercial TV
broadcasting. To be most efficient, it is likely to have a centralised
system for making news and current affairs, with very few concessions to
regional content,=B2 says Jempson.
=B3The ITV network was established as a group of 14 separate companies and
licenses =AD we are going to end up with just one. Even if it=B9s a British
company, we are going to lose local programmes. It=B9s inevitable that
programmes will be cut and studios closed down,=B2 says Gopsill. O=B9Malley=B9s
warning is stark: =B3There will simply be no incentive for companies to
provide local news, so it will almost disappear.=B2
Bristol has already seen what happens when small, community-based
broadcasters are taken over by larger companies. In the 1990s, a radical,
black pirate radio station set up in St Paul=B9s, Bristol. For The People had
mostly black presenters and broadcast to a largely black audience. After
several months it went legit and got a license from the government. But it
was quickly bought by Galaxy, and within a year most of the black presenter=
s
had disappeared =AD it turned into just another commercial radio station,
broadcasting mainstream music to central Bristol.
The DCMS insists that ITV won=B9t face a similar fate. =B3The bill will tighten
the definition of original production. There will also be additional
obligations for independent production and for regional production, and
regional programming on ITV,=B2 the spokesman says. But, in fact, the bill
only requires OFCOM to =B3include what appears to be an appropriate range and
proportion of programmes made outside the M25 area=B2 =AD hardly watertight
protection for the regions.
So is there anything good about the bill? Jempson says that the bill=B9s
original purpose =AD to ensure that standards of new broadcast technology are
harmonised and regulated =AD is laudable. Lib Dem Nick Harvey also broadly
welcomes it. =B3We are happy with its overall purpose,=B2 he says. =B3But I just
don=B9t understand why they=B9ve added on all these changes on ownership,=B2 he
says.
The battle over what commercial TV and radio is for =AD local news or burger
ads =AD is set to be a firece one.

For more information visit www.cpbf.org.uk
You can read the bill at
http://www.parliament.the-stationery-office.co.uk/pa/cm200203/cmbills/006/2=
0
03006.htm
//ends//
--=20
Rich Cookson
Freelance journalist and editor
m: 07736 069794