The Music Business Forum (MBF) (see note 1) welcomes the opportunity to respond to the radio review both in respect of the immediate priorities (localness of analogue commercial radio and the development of digital radio) and the broader strategic framework for the future. Music is fundamental to the future success of the radio sector. This is demonstrated by the findings in OFCOM's radio review indicating that:

• Music is the single most important reason for choosing a radio station, above news, weather, traffic and chat.
• Music is important to 94 per cent of those aged 16-34 (see note 2).
• A combined net score of +54% of respondents indicated that local music/bands and live music are important to them (see note 3).
• A combined net score of +66% of respondents indicating satisfaction with coverage of local music/bands and live music (see note 4).

As stated in the radio review - "investment in content will be key to the future success and growth of radio, across all platforms and sectors" (see note 5). The investment cost of this content is primarily borne by the music industry.

The UK has a rich and diverse music culture. Radio should reflect the vibrancy and breadth of that culture and meet the demands from listeners for a broad range of musical genres. Broadly, we believe that commercial radio broadcasters could present opportunities for new music, the exposure of innovative talent, the broadcast of live (musical) performances, the delivery of local content, as well as a broad support for British music.

This corresponds to OFCOM's broad objectives, namely:

• 'to enhance choice, diversity and innovation for consumers in the UK, national, regional, local and community levels'
• 'to secure citizens' interests through the provision of radio designed to meet public proposals'

This needs to be reflected in the range of local commercial station styles. At present, the Radio Review highlights a somewhat narrow range of choice that in terms of analogue stations (by style - based on the number of licences):

• The airwaves are currently dominated by mainstream music with 52 per cent of local analogue radio stations (by style) broadcast 'adult mainstream' and 19 per cent 'chart mainstream', respectively (see note 6);
• There is only a small selection of analogue radio specialist services as reflected by figure 29. Specialist music services, covering niche and specialist music genres (such as Jazz and Country), represent only 1 per cent of analogue stations (by style). Specialist youth orientated services (such as R & B and dance music) represent only 5 per cent of analogue stations (by style) (see note 7).

The review has mentioned that many participants in the workshops held by OFCOM indicated that "there is a strong perception, particularly amongst young respondents, that many local radio stations essentially play the same sort of music constantly, and there is little variety (see note 8)" which is an issue of concern for both listeners and many in the music-making community.

We are also aware that because of spectrum scarcity and the needs of advertisers, an unregulated radio market is unlikely to provide all the programmes that consumers want. OFCOM should use the available analogue, and particularly the increased range provided by digital spectrum, to ensure listeners have a choice from a range of stations offering a broad range of music.

We strongly believe the proposed reduction of regulatory responsibilities by OFCOM to be inconsistent with the broad objectives outlined in the Communications Act and OFCOM's own regulatory principles, as stated in the review. We really do emphasise that there are paradoxical objectives with respect to "enhance choice, diversity and innovation for consumers at all levels" and OFCOM having as little intervention in the market as possible.

Following OFCOM's consumer rationale analysis we recognise that there is still a case for regulatory intervention rather than a residual, minimalist role for OFCOM to play.

We would welcome OFCOM facilitating further dialogue between commercial radio and the music industry in order to explore further how the development of the sector as a whole can benefit the consumer.

Given the broad approach and overview of the radio sector in the review, we have also outlined some additional considerations with respect to Digital Audio Broadcasting (DAB) and Community Radio below.

Digital Audio Broadcasting (DAB)

To the extent that digital broadcasting offers consumers a wider selection of recorded music delivered as high quality audio, the music industry welcomes this development. However, the combination of digital broadcasting with cheap mass digital storage and intelligent, programmable digital recorders now effectively offers consumers a free song-downloading service that risks seriously undermining the market for paid internet downloads and the market for physical sound carriers.

We are currently examining the serious risks posed to rights holders and considering elements that may potentially form a potential solution. Any solution may require a combination of DRM applications, enforcement, commercial arrangements, consumer awareness and, possibly, additional legislation. We would welcome OFCOM taking a leading role in bringing together all stakeholders from Government, the radio industry, Public Service Broadcasters and Commercial Broadcasters, the music industry and advertisers, amongst others.

We feel that in the excitement about the increasing popularity of digital radio (and the growth in UK penetration of DAB digital radios to around 1.4 million), the question of content has been somewhat neglected.

We believe that the proliferation of channels in the digital radio market currently offers a unique opportunity for many stations to operate without the same pressure to secure high ratings. As a result of this, digital radio stations should have the ability to experiment more than terrestrial channels. The BBC has had some success in doing this by exploring specific genres and offering original output via its range of digital stations. The commercial sector should also be encouraged to take the current opportunity to offer a platform for more original talent in this new and exciting environment.

We welcome the delivery of multimedia services via DAB as another distribution channel and revenue generating opportunity for the music industry, with the proviso that musical content is paid for. However, beyond this, we do not intend to address the specific technical aspects outlined in relation to spectrum availability and usage or DAB digital radio multiplexes.

Community Radio

The aspirations of community radio - to serve a community for 'social gain' and not for profit - are certainly valuable as potential platforms for the expression of cultural and musical diversity. We hope that this will be both different from, and complementary to, existing (commercial and public service) independent local radio.

We hope that there are opportunities for local educational, cultural and social inclusion projects to develop from community radio stations and those stations will indeed provide platforms for broad local and community interests to participate. Small stations have the ability to provide training and education to young and aspiring broadcasters and contributors, and we very much look forward to seeing the role that community radio will play in developing such experiences.

We trust the development of community radio will not dilute the responsibilities of commercial radio operators with respect to providing diversity and local content. Naturally, we expect that broadcasters will not consider such interests 'already accounted for' by virtue of the provision of community radio. Where stated in their licenses, commercial operators must deliver upon their obligations in this area.

We welcome OFCOM including copyright information in the application pack for prospective stations.

Executive Summary:

• OFCOM should retain radio formats as the main mechanism of ensuring local commercial radio stations are compliant with their licensing commitments: Given that successful applicants for new stations are able to write their own character of service it becomes more imperative that radio formats are lucid, respected, and compliance is enforced beyond self regulatory conformity.
• Extreme caution should be exercised by OFCOM in terms of the proposed removal of input regulation: We strongly believe that the proposed reduction of regulatory responsibilities by OFCOM to be inconsistent with the broad objectives outlined in the Communications Act and OFCOM's own regulatory principles, as stated in the review. There are paradoxical objectives with respect to "enhance choice, diversity and innovation for consumers at all levels" and OFCOM having as little intervention in the market as possible. We believe that as an evidence based regulator, OFCOM should pay close attention to its (public) research findings. More specifically:
  - We see no justification for a complete relaxation of automation restrictions at a time when consolidation of ownership has the potential to undermine the distinctive character of local radio.
  - We welcome OFCOM's objective "to ensure the provision of locally-made programming and local material on radio stations" but fail to see how the proposal to allow stations to "network as they wish" will assist in achieving this objective. We believe OFCOM should pay attention to its own audience research which clearly places a great value on a local base.
• The mechanism which ensures commercial stations require permission to change a format during a mid licence term needs to works well. It is vital for the broad objectives for the radio sector that the consultation process is administered in a transparent and balanced manner which reflects the development of the growing commercial radio sector as well as the interest of the listener and music-making in the UK in order to promote the diversity of the outputs from radio station programming.
• Music is more than a de minimis component and Parliament has legislated for OFCOM giving music appropriate consideration. The significance of music is paramount as indicated by OFCOM's research findings which demonstrate that music is the single most important factor to listeners when deciding which station to tune in to, particularly for young adults. Parliament has recognised the importance of music in the Communications Act and imposed an obligation on OFCOM in terms of "local material" relating to a local sound broadcasting service including 'music'.
• There is still an essential requirement for analogue local commercial radio station to deliver in the short to medium term given the previously slow growth of the digital radio market to date and the clear absence of a date for analogue (radio) switch off
• Commercial radio could present wide opportunities for music. This includes a platform for new talent, live performances and local content. Furthermore, we would like commercial radio stations to be supportive as possible to British music.
• Community radio has an important role to play at a local, community level. Naturally, we expect that commercial broadcasters will not consider such interests 'already accounted for' by virtue of the provision of community radio.
• Multimedia services via DAB are another distribution channel and revenue generating opportunity for the music industry. With the proviso that musical content is paid for.
• We would not oppose making the BBC's radio archive available more widely to commercial players. While we welcome this development in principle, it is under the implicit proviso that OFCOM and commercial entities are aware of and guarantee the remuneration of rights holder works for future use at a market rate. We look forward to being informed by the BBC's own response to this proposition later in March and would like to engage in any formal or informal consultative programme in this area.
• We recommend OFCOM works with all stakeholders to develop solutions to the threats presented by Digital Audio Broadcasting (DAB): We would welcome OFCOM taking a leading and pivotal role in bringing together all stakeholders from Government, the radio industry, Public Service Broadcasters and Commercial Broadcasters, the music industry and advertisers, amongst other parties.
• We recommend that OFCOM ensure ongoing consultation with the music industry: Given the close relationship between music and radio it is important for OFCOM to thoroughly consult with the music industry on this review. Whilst we are disappointed that representatives from the music industry were not included in the recent roundtable lunch seminars held by OFCOM, we expect to be included in any future seminars in this area. Accordingly, we recommend that the Music Business Forum meets with OFCOM prior to the Phase 2 report being issued, as well as being involved with any related seminars.

Response to the Radio Review Consultation Questions:

1. Do you agree with our proposals to use formats as the primary tool of regulation for analogue commercial local radio?

We recognise that the use of formats and the format description contained in each licence, as required of OFCOM under section 106(1) of the Broadcasting Act 1990 is a potentially effective means of regulating the output of analogue commercial radio, together with OFCOM's programme codes.

OFCOM should maintain radio formats as the main mechanism by which the character of station's programming, as defined in their applications, is reflected in their licences for local commercial analogue stations.

We strongly believe that the format description contained in each licence should be tightly enforced in order to retain the identity of stations in the manner in which they are established and awarded their licences. This is one key mechanism to help preserve musical diversity.

With respect to the provision and broadcast of local material on commercial radio - and the future development of commercial radio as a whole -there is a need for greater diversity of programming than provided currently.

Ambiguous formats / character of service

We believe that the maintenance of services which applicants propose is crucial to prevent any criticism of 'format creep', whereby the given service applied for erodes over time.

We are aware through previous experiences that there is an intrinsic danger with stations having somewhat ambiguous formats. As previously indicated to OFCOM, we believe that there are threats relating to formats being potentially widened in scope through indefinite prose. Our concern pertains to formats becoming effectively redundant and meaningless at the expense of music diversity and choice for the listener. Given radio stations are able to write their own character of service it becomes more imperative that radio formats are lucid, respected and preserved.

For example, the latest local commercial radio licensing award granted by OFCOM was Ashford with Lark FM being the successful bidder. Its application suggests that it would provide a music-based radio station and that its character of service would be as follows:

"The local radio station for Ashford Borough, with a full service of music and speech for adults of all ages in the area, playing a wide variety of contemporary and classic tracks accompanied by locally-focused news, comprehensive local and practical information and other speech features relevant to listeners in the Ashford area".

Looking through the 'detail' section of the application suggests:

"The music will reflect a spread of hits from across the years. Records less than 2 years old will not comprise more than 35 per cent of music output and records more than 15 years old should not comprise less than 35 per cent".

OFCOM made it clear in the Ashford licence award decision that Lark's mix of contemporary and classic hits would extend listener choice by occupying a gap in the local radio market between the two existing commercial radio services available throughout the new licence area, Invicta FM and Capital Gold. However, this should be made clearer enough in the ensuing character of service promise. As drafted, the format seems exceedingly wide in its scope and vague in relation to music, especially in comparison to the stations very detailed commitment to news programming.

Because of the increasing onus on radio formats as regulatory instruments and the direction of self compliance being taken by OFCOM through the proposed emphasis on each station's format and localness file, we believe that potentially, such an indistinguishable commitment in terms of music provision may ultimately be difficult to police effectively. We remain concerned that the key issue of accountability could be jeopardised through potential equivocation.

We would also seek clarification from OFCOM as to whether it is OFCOM's intention that once a license has been awarded based on a format which the applicant has written, whether or not they will then be in a position to apply to OFCOM to have that format changed and / or redrafted post license award.

Format change

The mechanism which ensures commercial stations require permission to change a format during a mid licence term needs to works well. It is vital for the broad objectives for the radio sector that the consultation process is administered in a transparent and balanced manner which reflects the development of the growing commercial radio sector as well as the interest of all stakeholders so as to promote the diversity of output from radio station programming.

We would be grateful for further clarification and indicative guidance in terms of what is deemed to be a 'substantial' departure from a licence beyond the statement that "it is likely that OFCOM would consider a significant change to the amount of locally made programmes as a substantial alteration to the character of a service (see note 9)".

We also seek regulatory consistency from OFCOM on providing information on their decision making process. For example, when the Radio Licensing Committee approved the change of format for Kerrang!, Kismat Asian Talk Radio, and TalkSPORT, a notice was issued. However, we are confused that this was not the case when a format change was awarded to Jazz FM. We ask that the decision making process is both transparent and consistent.

We would also seek clarity in terms of whether there is any appeals procedure against a decision made by OFCOM in this area, beyond judicial review.

We recommend that caution is exercised in terms of the proposed removal of input regulation.

Given the slow growth to date of the digital radio market and the absence of a date for analogue (radio) switch off, there is still the requirement for analogue local commercial radio station to deliver.

We recommend that extreme caution is exercised in terms of the proposed removal of regulation. The statutory and regulatory duties established by the Communications Act (2003) and the Broadcasting Acts (1990 and 1996) and OFCOM's own regulatory principles should ensure a wide range of services, choice, diversity and innovation in the commercial sector at various levels and the provision of local material (including music). The intentions of Parliament must not be prevaricated.

Because of the significant loosening of ownership controls in the Communications Act, we believe that input regulations (i.e. regulation of how stations achieve their programme output) should not be reduced to the extent proposed in the consultation document.

OFCOM's role should be to provide an appropriate balance to the commercial concentration of radio ownership and operations in order to maximise diversity of content and some degree of local character, where appropriate.

Accordingly, we strongly believe that the proposed reduction of regulatory responsibilities by OFCOM to be inconsistent with the broad objectives outlined in the Communications Act and OFCOM's regulatory principles, as outlined in response to question 17.

2. How do you think the objective of ensuring the provision on commercial local radio of a high quality news service, including local and national news, is best achieved?

Should stations be allowed to use news hubs to allow them to operate in the most operationally effective way?

Do you agree that we should include a statement in the localness guidelines to the effect that, in order to provide a comprehensive local news service, each station must provide direct and accountable editorial responsibility, based within the licensed area, for the provision of a news service equivalent at least to full time professional journalist cover for all of the hours during which its licensed format specifies that it will provide local news programmes?

Is there a better way to achieve the objective that focuses more on output rather than input regulation?

We do not believe that is applicable to comment on this question beyond suggesting that news and information is vitally important contribution to local material.

Beyond the valuable democratic and citizenship duties that news material can provide, the definition of news - its broadest sense - includes sources of important local information pertaining to local events, musical listings and live performances - all of which can be counted as ways of supporting music in a local area.

3. Should stations be allowed to decide for themselves how much programming they automate?

The Radio Authority considered that automation had the capacity to impact negatively on the quality of a radio station's output. OFCOM hasn't made a convincing case to suggest otherwise, apart from the reference to the fact that the sophistication of automation has improved significantly and that restrictions on the amount of automation will necessarily guarantee quality. We would expect this information from an evidence based regulator.

OFCOM's own research of listeners states that:

• 52 per cent thought that there should be some limit on how much programming should be allowed to automate;
• 10 per cent thought stations though stations shouldn't automate at all;
• Only 35 per cent thought that they should be allowed to automate as much as they like (see note 10).

This underlines the public's desire to retain some restrictions on programme automation. Furthermore, OFCOM's commissioned research - the iPod generation - states that there is "a belief in too much repetition in terms of music played and that, if listening to radio for long periods, it is possible to hear the same song several times".

It has been argued that larger commercial groups have centralised play lists so there is a great overlap in the music which is being played and listened to by the public. The consequences are that smaller independent record companies in particular find it difficult to get airplay for new artists and bands. There are potentially negative implications for musical diversity.

We see no justification for completely relaxing the automation restrictions at a time when a consolidation of ownership is potentially undermining the distinctive character of local radio. We also query whether a complete withdrawal of automation regulation and consideration of potentially re-introducing restrictions in the event that this proves detrimental is in the best interests of the listener. Specifically, we would ask what test OFCOM may apply to assess or arbitrate the negative implications following the removal of regulation. Our knowledge of previous experiences in radio broadcasting suggests that it would be more difficult for stations to comply with re-introduced limits once restrictions have been taken away and to fully redress the detrimental impact on choice and quality for the listener.

Removing all specific limits on the use of automation is more likely to undermine the link between local radio and the type of local talent and entertainment that may otherwise be broadcast. The experience in the US of diminishing range in programme provision bears this out.

Furthermore, OFCOM has itself outlined in the accompanying Regulatory Impact Assessment that "continuing with the current automation rules would satisfy OFCOM's duty to ensure the availability of a wide range of radio services which (taken as a whole) are of high quality, and would satisfy OFCOM's duties in respect of localness".

Against this background, we question the rationale for OFCOM's proposals in this area.

4. Should the requirement for a station's studios to be based within the measured coverage area be relaxed to require the station to be based within the licensed area?

We believe that local commercial radio has a key role in creating opportunities and providing exposure for local talent and other forms of entertainment that may also include a regional dimension. For this reason we believe that studio location remains an extremely important factor.

We believe OFCOM should pay attention to its own audience research which clearly places a great value on a local base. Given that 71 per cent believed it was either very important or important where a local radio station is based, OFCOM should be cautious in relaxing the current rules (see note 11).

Without the relevant background data that underpins the rationale for proposition we believe that it is impossible to make a balanced or reasoned judgement on this issue. We would be grateful for OFCOM to delay any decision regarding extending the MCA until all interested parties have been provided with models or a statistical analysis that support any potential decision in this area.

For practical purposes, we believe that OFCOM could occasionally expand the MCA to cover the licensed area. For example, this requirement could be relaxed in situations where a local commercial radio station does not have adequate facilities to record live bands or groups and ensembles. In such instances, we would hope that OFCOM would allow the recording of live music to take place outside the licensed area.

5. Do you agree that a station's local hours, as defined by its format, should include local material, but that, outside of these hours, stations should be free to share material with other stations on a network basis as they see fit?

Whilst we welcome OFCOM's objective "to ensure the provision of locally-made programming and local material on radio stations" we fail to see how the proposal to allow stations to "network as they wish" will assist in achieving this objective.

We believe that rather than explicitly allowing stations to 'be free to network as they wish' outside of format commitments, OFCOM should closely monitor the development of networking and reserve the right to intervene when this adversely affects the character of local radio. Without such regulatory guidance there is a concern that 'local' radio could largely cease to be local.

6. Do you agree that each station should be required to maintain a format and localness file, available both at its premises and online, which demonstrates how it is meeting its obligations?

We agree with the proposed requirement that each station should maintain a format and localness file, available for inspection by the public at its premises and online, demonstrating how it is meeting its obligations.

We believe, however, this must be supplemented by an active programme of spot checks by the regulator. It is imperative that radio format compliance is enforced beyond self regulatory conformity.

OFCOM should continuously engage with audiences through undertaking research. Such findings should be made public.

7. Do you agree with our revised localness guidance, which sets out the factors stations should take into account in providing local programming?

We fully support the statutory duties imposed on OFCOM by the Communications Act 2003 with respect to the inclusion of 'localness' and the explicit consideration of music within the legislation. Section 314 of the Communications Act takes into account the local content and character of local sound broadcasting services. We reiterate that Parliament has specifically legislated for the fact that 'local material' explicitly includes 'music' in subsection (7)(c).

We refer to British Music Rights previous response to OFCOM's consultation on the draft guidance (available on request).

For ease of reference, our key points were:

• Localness is important as it allows for an increase of diversity and culture, reflecting the interests of local listeners within a geographical area or community.
• Localness is an important issue for the listener as well.
• We concur that localness is easily identifiable by its absence.

We agree strongly with the DCMS Live Music Forum that "localness is about genuinely reflecting the cultures and interest of local listeners, not simply about providing the minimum level, which a broadcaster feels, might be acceptable to OFCOM" (see note 12).

8. Do you agree with our proposals to allocate more spectrum in VHF Band III for DAB-compatible use (subject to spectrum clearance and international agreement) in the following way:

- Three blocks to provide local multiplexes to those areas which currently do not have their own local multiplex and some areas which already have local multiplexes?

- One or two blocks for national coverage (depending upon whether four or five blocks of spectrum are available in total)?

We welcome OFCOM's commitment to work with the radio industry to find ways for smaller commercial and community stations to go digital.

9. Do you agree that the proposed local DAB digital radio multiplexes should be awarded as Broadcasting Act licences?

10. Do you agree that the frequency blocks proposed to be allocated to national coverage should be awarded under the terms of the Wireless Telegraphy Act only (i.e. without the need for a Broadcasting Act licence)?

We note that the Regulatory Impact Assessment states that:

In the case of a national radio multiplex licence, OFCOM must not vary the licence if the proposed variation would unacceptably diminish the capacity of the digital sound programme services broadcast under the licence to appeal to a variety of tastes and interests.

A Wireless Telegraphy Act licence is not subject to any of the above statutory constraints. The WT Act 1949 (as amended by section 165 of the Communications Act) confers powers on OFCOM to impose conditions as to the services carried on a Wireless Telegraphy Act licence. Under these powers OFCOM may prohibit, or require, the transmission or broadcasting of particular matters by the licensee. OFCOM could, therefore, require a minimum number of radio services, or even stipulate certain types of radio service.

We would welcome clarification from OFCOM whether a licensed awarded under the Wireless Telegraphy Act would allow the multiplex operator to use the capacity for any purpose at all, for example, 100% data provision with no radio services whatsoever.

12. Do you think the limit on non-programme related data carried on each commercial DAB digital radio multiplex should be raised from the current limit of 20%? If so, what should the limit be raised to? What do you envisage extra capacity would be used for?

13. Do you think the limit on non-programme related data (including radio) carried on each commercial digital terrestrial television multiplex should be raised from the current limit of 10%? If so, what should the limit be raised to?

We welcome the delivery of multimedia services via DAB as another distribution channel and revenue generating opportunity for the music industry, with the proviso that musical content is paid for.

OFCOM's qualitative research has suggested that "the idea of music downloads was particularly popular and people said that they would be happy to pay for this service (see note 13)"…especially if there was a click-to-buy option available.

We would urge further consultation with the royalty collecting societies, both MCPS-PRS and PPL, in order to explore the possibilities of increasing the limit of 20 per cent of total capacity for non-programme related data services.

17. Do you agree with the proposed strategic framework for the future regulation of radio, which aims:

To enhance choice, diversity and innovation for consumers at the UK, national, regional, local and community levels.

To secure citizens' interests through the provision of radio designed to meet public purposes.

To do this with as little intervention in the market as possible, consistent with meeting our objectives, in a way that is as consistent as possible across media and across platforms.

Following the passage of the Communications Act it seems sensible for OFCOM to now propose a strategic framework for the future regulation of radio. We strongly agree with the first two proposed strategic aims:

1. 'to enhance choice, diversity and innovation for consumers in the UK, national, regional, local and community levels'

2. 'to secure citizens' interests through the provision of radio designed to meet public proposals'

However, we are both confused and alarmed about how this can be consistent with the third proposed aim:

3. 'to do this with as little intervention in the market as possible, consistent with meeting our objectives'

This does not follow from OFCOM's own compelling analysis of the underlying rationale for regulatory intervention - specifically including the problem of market failure.

We would prefer to see wording that emphasised the need for a robust regulatory framework, capable of making necessary interventions to meet and promote public interest objectives which is consistent with the Communications Act 2003.

We deduce that there are continuing grounds for regulatory intervention in radio by OFCOM and urge this to be recognised and enforced.

18. How important do you think it is to develop a set of public purposes for radio and what should those public purposes be?

• Is the set of public purposes already developed for television a useful starting point?
• What else should be added or what should be taken away?
• What is the relative importance of the different elements?
• Are there things that are better delivered by radio than other media?

We believe that a set of public purposes for radio are important and we look forward to working with OFCOM on developing considerations in this area for the Phase 2 review.

We note the arguments in OFCOM's consumer rationale (also those contained within the Regulatory Impact Assessment) - that there may be a case for intervention to ensure that the radio market works more effectively to deliver what consumers want. The suggestion that "there could be an inefficient outcome if the preference of listeners and those of advertisers were not perfectly aligned and hence the range of programmes offered would be too limited. In this case, there might be a justification for intervening to ensure that a sufficient range of programmes is supplied".

We agree that there is still a case for regulatory intervention rather than a residual, minimalist role for OFCOM.

19. To the extent that it is possible to comment at this stage, how do you think those public purposes are best delivered?

• How important is plurality of provision of the public purposes for radio?
• How much of what commercial radio currently does could be classified as meeting public purposes?
• How well does the current market structure help fulfil public purposes in radio?
• Should the BBC's radio archive be made available more widely to commercial players to provide alternative radio services?

The Commercial Radio Companies Association report on public service offers a helpful overview of the contribution from commercial radio in terms of public service information (news, weather, travel, 'What's On', community information, charitable work, off-air community support and fundraising) but this doesn't actually extend to public service broadcasting in any real cultural sense through actual programming.

The recently issued DCMS Green Paper on the Review of the BBC's Royal Charter rightly identifies the crux as because of spectrum scarcity and the need of advertisers, an unregulated radio market is unlikely to provide all the programmes that consumers want. The document goes on to explain that whilst commercial radio may provide many social and democratic benefits, it is not clear whether it can do so to the extent desired.

Given the Government is awaiting the conclusions of OFCOM phase 2 radio review before finalising its own proposals for (the public purposes of) radio we strongly recommend that OFCOM engages as widely and thoroughly as possible with all stakeholders at various levels (local, regional, national) and in more detail with the music industry.

We would not oppose making the BBC's radio archive available more widely to commercial players. While we welcome this development in principle, it is under the implicit proviso that OFCOM and commercial entities are aware of and respect the remuneration of rights holder works for future use at a market rate. We look forward to being informed by the BBC's own response to this proposition later in March.

In line with OFCOM's duty to promote media literacy and the ongoing work of the media literacy forum, copyright awareness should be included as an important strand which accompanies any work in this area.

It should also be noted that this archive is a resource that is used widely across the BBC's own network of digital radio and other channels (e.g. BBC 7).

Notes

1. The MBF is an informal group of music business organisations that, since its inception in the spring of 2002, has gained a reputation as an effective representation of the interests of the music business in its widest sense to Government
2. OFCOM Radio Review: Page 43
3. OFCOM Radio Review: Figure 39
4. OFCOM Radio Review: Figure 39
5. OFCOM Radio Review: Page 45
6. OFCOM Radio Review: Figure 29
7. OFCOM Radio Review: Figure 29
8. OFCOM Radio Review: Page 69
9. OFCOM: Radio Review, page 77
10. OFCOM Radio Review: page 78
11. OFCOM Radio Review: Page 75
12. DCMS Live Music Forum (LMF) submission to OFCOM's consultation on localness, April 2004
13. OFCOM radio review: page 123