[cr-india] A small report on the Bangalore workshop

[Ramnath Bhat]

Dear All,

As you would know, a Consultation on Technology for Community Radio was
organised in Bangalore on the 3rd and 4th of February. 
This is a small recap and summary of that workshop. For those who had
attended the workshop, please feel free to send in your comments and
feedback as well.

Report (read below)

More than 100 participants from across the country participated in
technology consultation organised by VOICES, a media advocacy group,
with support from UNESCO, UNDP and the World Association of Community
Radio Broadcasters (AMARC) on February 3rd and 4th 2008 at the United
Theological College, Bangalore.

The high turn out of participation underscored the need to demystify
relevant technology for community radio: what is the appropriate
technology and how much does it cost?


The consultation had presentations on a range of technologies, from Doko
Radio in Nepal to indigenous transmitters by Nomad India. While
community radio technology took centre stage on the first day, day two
showcased showcase mixed media models like the Village Information
Center by DHAN Foundation and the Story Bank project in Namma Dhwani ,
Budikote.


The participants, who had come from all over India, showed a keen
interest in the consultation, and there was a fair amount of debates,
conversations and discussions during the two day event. While the
consultation was fairly successful in addressing the hardware issues in
detail, we did not have enough time to address the software issues.
However, we did manage to distribute some Free and Open Source (FOSS)
CDs containing the complete audio-video, publishing, and office
material, but it needs to be addressed in more detail for practitioners
to feel the need to switch to FOSS. 


The consultation was preceded by a one day Community Radio Forum (CRF)
meeting, held at the same venue. More than a 100 people participated ,
and a range of issues about CRF was discussed at this event.


At the end of the three days a range of issues emerged from the
stakeholders. . These include: 


      * While discussions on the scope and potential of CRS is growing
        in quality and quantity, the fact remains that a single grass
        root community radio station remains to get on air yet. The
        process of getting on air needs to be simplified, and
        accelerated 
        
      * There is no such thing as a “turn key” solution to setting up a
        Community Radio Station. Just as the community needs to
        participate in the content, management etc, the community also
        needs to be involved in deciding the appropriate technology and
        they need to be trained in these technologies, so it can be a
        participatory process from the beginning. 
        
      * The lowest cost for a CRS given by WEBEL Mediatronics is Rs. 5
        lakhs, but the overall cost of a CRS can be substantially lower
        than this amount as well.
        
      * The community radio fraternity needs to speak out now, re: the
        spectrum availability and the issues surrounding it. For
        example: The government of India is citing unavailability of
        spectrum for CRS in urban areas, and this is restricting freedom
        of speech and information for marginalized urban communities. We
        need to ask for a free and fair spectrum allocation plan wherein
        CRS gets some frequencies reserved for itself. Further, we also
        need to relook at the present 800 KHz separation as it restricts
        the number of stations which can be set up in any given
        area/city. It is possible to set up stations with even 200 KHz
        separation as is shown by the spectrum allocation in the United
        States. This would mean more stations and more airspace for the
        communities.
        
      * Sustainability is going to be an important issue for all the
        radio stations involved, and all of us need to start looking at
        how each CRS can begin to move away from a donor driven model
        and start looking at independently generating revenue from
        within the country. A possibility of setting up a consortium of
        radio stations, which approaches large advertising revenues, and
        subsequently distributes revenues in proportion has been
        discussed, and further research on this model is needed. 
        
      * The policy documents and guidelines from MIB, the SACFA and
        other documents from WPC etc all need to be made available in
        regional languages. In addition, the recently released Technical
        Manual, also needs to be made available in regional languages.
        As a first step, the Commissioner of the Dept of Information,
        Govt of Karnataka, has offered to bear 50% of the costs for
        translating the manual in Kannada. 
        
      * The Technical Manual is a useful publication for community radio
        practitioners, and interested organisations. However, technology
        evolves almost on a daily basis, and it would be critical for
        the manual also to be updated as regularly. To achieve this,
        SPACE, a group from Kerala, has offered to set up a wiki which
        would contain the soft copy of the manual, and the CR fraternity
        would take responsibility of updating the technology options
        regularly.
        
      * A need for research on CRS has emerged. The movement for opening
        up the airwaves has just started in India, and this is the best
        time to track the CR movement, and assessing its impact on
        communities. However, at the same time, a fresh look at the
        methodologies of research, approach to development and approach
        towards the role of communications in development is needed. CRS
        demands a more ethnographic way of research, to ensure that
        impact is looked at in a holistic way.
        
      * There is a strong need for capacity building for community radio
        stations, in the area of production, reporting, editing, and
        other field based work. However, it is even more critical that
        some kind of best practices, or some kind of model be made
        available for communities to manage their own radio station, so
        as to move away from the NGO radio model. This would mean that
        we need to map out what exactly management involves, what are
        the key factors involved in sustaining a radio station, crisis
        management techniques etc. However, we have to be careful not to
        impose a certain way of thinking on our communities. There needs
        to be a fine balance between skill transfer and imposition of so
        called “knowledge”.
        
      * In terms of hardware for Community Radio station, there is a
        possibility of overload of information for practitioners, and
        potential applicants. In this confusing situation, the
        fraternity needs to take the onus upon itself and provide the
        best two three options, which can then be adapted and changed to
        suit the local conditions and needs. However, it must be kept in
        mind that these two or three options must be addressed not to
        NGOs (who have access to funding agencies etc) but to community
        based groups, who will or might be looking to raise the funds
        from the community. For example, if an option for 2 lakhs
        (complete set up) is offered by the CRF, then a community based
        group with a community of 5000 people can raise this money by
        donations of Rs. 40 from each person. This way, when communities
        pitch in with funds from within, it also will go a long way in
        ensuring community ownership and sustainability. 
        
      * To take the previous point forward, we must have people and
        resources ready so that supply can meet demand. At present,
        Nomad India can supply a 100 watt transmitter at roughly Rs. 70,
        000. However, if a CRS is looking at 1+1 transmitter set up,
        plus tower, and other production equipment, then it is almost
        impossible to keep the total cost below Rs. 200,000. Therefore,
        we are faced with two three options to improve this situation.
        a) Get a large amount of funds from a big donor, which will
        enable the manufacturer to buy components in bulk, manufacture
        transmitters in bulk, to push down costs, or the donor could
        subsidize the first 100 transmitters, so the manufacturer is not
        taking a massive risk by investing. b) We encourage further R&D,
        and other manufacturers to come up with still lower cost models
        for a transmitter. c) We network with every agency which applies
        or will apply for a CRS license, and request them to purchase a
        transmitter from the same manufacturer so as to push the costs
        down d) Wherever, there is more than one CRS present in a given
        area, the stations must coordinate between themselves to share
        the tower costs. Everything else can be separate and
        independent, except the tower. e) This point should be taken up
        irrespective of everything else, and that is to have a country
        fund (either from taxation structure or from existing schemes
        and programs), for supporting CRS across the country. 
        
      * There is a strong need to address software, particularly Free
        and Open Source Software for community radio stations. This is
        particularly relevant as all community radio stations are just
        on the verge of starting their work, and this is the best time
        to start using FOSS. It will be much tougher to switch to other
        Operating systems at a later stage.
        
      * Schemes like the Namma Banuli subsidy announced by the
        Government of Karnataka and similar efforts by the other state
        governments need to take cognizance of community radio
        fundamentals. While independent community radio should not be
        compromised , community management and ownership are key
        principles that need to be ensured.
        
      * A cross media and multiple platform approach to community radio
        needs to be nurtured to ensure the collective voice of
        community.
        
        
Apologies for the long email

Best wishes,

Divya Wesley, Ashish Sen, Ram.