I feel that a lot of points here may mirror those in the discussion of the closure of XS Wales not too long ago.

Community radio stations do stand a chance, but only if they’re not relying on investors that will only dedicate their resources to such projects in the right economic climate. Unfortunately for many, their reliance is on such parties.

James we discussed this a few weeks ago, the model is wrong and needs to be reviewed as a matter of urgency.
How does a station win a business award, be held in breach for business practice and then fall silent because of debt?
Commubity stations of course sometimes don’t help themselves but many could do better if funding was reviewed, I have thoughts on this which are too numerous to quote her but this can be resolved so that no one loses.
There are a number of things in particular in the way stations are set up that would help their finances for the long term.

Community Radio Stations do stand a chance, it depends on how they are run. I draw your attention to Gateway 97.8 who at the end of last year gained a Big Society Award for their work with young people and all the training they do.

I’ve no doubt they’re good for training. So’s hospital radio and student radio.

Awards for training say little about the quality of output and nothing in terms of their long-term future.

The ‘anonymous’ nature of the above poster? News to me. I’ll go bugfix that.

Training-based stations stand a better chance, I feel, as there’s often an income stream from that in terms of funding, and for some even those that will pay the station to train them to use radio equipment.

Of course, how people view such stations is all down to the philosophy of community radio. A lot of it comes down to my previous post on the subject:

... there appears to be a disparity in philosophy as to what community radio should be, besides from local. Should it be a popular music, commercial-style format, but with local presenters and truly local content, or should it offer an alternative to commercial stations in every way, including broadcasting specialist music and content ignored by commercial broadcasters?

When you add whether there should be a training and facilitation focus in to the mix too, it’s easy to see how it’s not as simple as whether community radio can survive. It’s whether certain types of community radio station can survive.

It does seem that most of the prominent community radio stations that are closing are those that have put a lot in to an almost commercial format, have relied on advertising revenue, and have done only the minimum needed with regard to training and letting local people have a go at making radio.

Some would say that the above is a shame. Others with a more community service mindset about it all might say that it serves them right.

Awards for training say little about the quality of output and nothing in terms of their long-term future.

In a way though, James, it may be that sacrificing the quality of output in favour of training is one means by which to secure locally-available funding to allow a station to have a long-term future.

It might not make excellent radio, but I doubt that some community broadcasters that are set for 3 or 4 years already (no, I don’t know of any examples) would care when they see those that have relied on advertising revenue and paid ex-commercial presenters to come in and do elaborate daily shows falling by the wayside.

Michael Hill, of Radioplayer, recently spoke about our community station, Soundart Radio. ‘It’s output is really unique, not like anything you’ve ever heard’. That’s what he says. I say it too but then I would, because I present a show on it.
Whether I’m right or wrong to believe in Soundart so much, here is a transcript of Michael and links to the Radio Academy podcast he was speaking on

As for funding, we’re working on it.