BBC plans will hijack and homogenise local radio
Shutting down LGBT, Irish and Jewish community radio programmes in Manchester won't even save any money.
By Nichi Hodgson Published 19 June 2012 8:36
The BBC is a broadcasting bastion of equality and diversity, willing to put community needs before commercial success – or so it self-deceives. Not so long ago, the Asian Network and BBC6Music radio channels were saved from cost-cutting measures by campaigners who accused the ‘corporate media barons’ of betraying their audiences. Now the Beeb has come up with another such scheme that completely undermines its ethics and lets down local licence fee-payers. Only this time, there’s actually no money to be saved.
In 2006, three Greater Manchester MPs called on parliament to protect three community radio programmes hosted on BBC Manchester (then known as GMR- Greater Manchester Radio) that were facing the chop. The programmes in question were Gay Talk, It’s Kosher, and The Parlour - dedicated respectively to the local LGBT, Jewish and Irish communities. The then Lib Dem MP for Rochdale, Paul Rowen, who tabled an early day motion, and fellow yellows John Leech and Mark Hunter, joined a cohort of campaigners and the shows were saved.
Six years later and the programmes have different names but are once again under threat. As part of a cost-saving, streamlining measure, LGBT Citizen Manchester, Jewish Citizen Manchester and Irish Citizen Manchester are to be replaced with a three-hour syndicated show called All Around England. Despite LGBT Citizen and Jewish Citizen Manchester being the only dedicated representations of either minority across BBC Radio, and Citizen Irish now the longest-running Irish-specific show (at 27 years, no less) on BBC radio, the programmes will not be rescheduled for broadcast anywhere else on either BBC Manchester or the national network.
Earlier in the year, the BBC Trust, which must approve all of the corporation’s spending, rejected proposed cuts of more than £15 million to local radio submitted by the Executive as part of its ‘Delivery Quality First’ (DQF) savings strategy. A report on local radio, authored by an independent media consultant John Myers, concluded that the maximum savings that could be made without affecting quality were around just £9 million. The Executive revised its plans and the Trust then approved them. But Delivering Quality First, cited as the reason for the change to Monday evening scheduling hardly applies in the case of these community programmes where the presenters and programme makers are all volunteers, working with a budget of less than £70 a week. How then can the long-established, expertly informed and almost entirely cost-free LGBT, Jewish and Irish Citizen programmes be anything other than excellent value?
John Leech is back on the campaign trail and, on behalf of his constituents, has written to Director General Mark Thompson requesting that the BBC justify the decision. Thompson’s response, says Leech, is "frankly ridiculous". Citing cost savings as a core reason for the decision, Thompson also apparently asserts that mainstream BBC radio programmes will be able to absorb the content of the community shows in question.
There is an argument within the organisation that dedicated hours marginalise rather than incorporate minorities. But the BBC does not apply this logic to the Asian network, which is to receive a £1 million reinvestment as part of the same DQS strategy. Surely a combination of both more mainstream and dedicated coverage is what is needed. Debates within the LGBT, Irish or Jewish communities are unlikely to be the focus of a Today programme debate, and it’s hard to believe that issues such as lesbian health, or how to negotiate Shabbat in 21st-century Britain will be covered elsewhere at all.
What’s more, there is a sense that some minorities deserve more coverage than others. The gay, Irish and Jewish communities have played an integral part in local Manchester life since the 1800s, as have the Chinese, Asian and Black communities. Yet only the programmes dedicated to the first three minorities have been deemed extraneous. Back in March, Broadcast magazine reported that the BBC planned to plough the £4 million it saved in reduced retransmission fees from BskyB back into local radio. But these much-loved community programmes are clearly not deserving candidates for the freed-up funds.
When barely a week goes by without a media debate on gay marriage, and in the year that London hosts World Pride, the axing of Citizen LGBT seems a particularly bizarre move, if only in terms of topicality. The success of commercial LGBT radio stations such as Gaydar may act as a disincentive to launch a programme on the national network (the last such show, Out this Week, which won a Gold Sony Award in 1995, was axed four years later and has not been replaced since). But the audience demographics of commercial and local LGBT radio are quite different, with local listeners tending to be over the age of 45. Considering that Myers’s report on local radio concluded that, currently ‘the biggest loser is the older demographic’, this only seems to support the case for protecting Citizen LGBT.
Elsewhere, the BBC seems overly anxious to the point of obsessed with its gay-friendly credentials. In 2010, it commissioned both an internal report and a public consultation into LGB representation. And its current diversity strategy makes 24 references to ‘gay’, another 24 to ‘trans’, while just three to ‘Jewish’ and none at all to ‘Irish’.
The BBC’s plans say as much about the hijacking and homogenising of local radio as they do about the BBC’s inconsistent approach to diversity. "It’s completely oppositional to the government’s idea of localism", says Leech, who has been approached in particular by many of this Jewish constituents, now demanding a meeting with the corporation. The LGBT and Irish communities have yet to similarly assemble. In the meantime, Leech is preparing to table another early day motion.
If the BBC is determined to streamline Monday night local programming with its syndicated Radio England swap-in, it should at the very least honour its commitment to diversity by offering each of the specialist community shows a DAB or online-only radio slot, or moving them to the weekend where Indus and Chinatown (the programmes dedicated to the local Asian and Chinese communities) remain unscathed. This is an organisation that prides itself on representing its licence fee payers. It is danger of forgetting thousands of them exist at all.
Latest tweets
More from New Statesman
- Online writers:
- Steven Baxter
- Rowenna Davis
- David Allen Green
- Mehdi Hasan
- Nelson Jones
- Gavin Kelly
- Helen Lewis
- Laurie Penny
- The V Spot
- Alex Hern
- Martha Gill
- Alan White
- Samira Shackle
- Alex Andreou
- Nicky Woolf in America
- Bim Adewunmi
- Glosswitch
- Kate Mossman on pop
- Ryan Gilbey on Film
- Martin Robbins
- Rafael Behr
- Eleanor Margolis
- Tools and services:
- Polls
- Predictions
- Archive
- Magazine
- PDF edition
- RSS feeds
- Advertising
- Subscribe
- Special supplements
- Stockists





















7 comments
Surely the BBC's raison d'etre is to deliver programming that other broadcasters don't - not solely for profit or ratings.
The BBC's been beating itself up for a decade, reinventing formats and appeasing those with their own commercial and political agendas in order to preserve its own place. In the process it's lost a part of its soul. Programming is blander, less cutting and less interesting.
A BBC that sticks two fingers up to its detractors and brings fresh surprises, more niche programming, more unique delights is what we deserve.
Refer to the One Show for the kind of unified "all things to all men" slots that, in attempting to appease all comers and, ever-fearful of causing the slightest of offence, delivers the direst, most insulting programming.
These radio stations are worth fighting for! They give a voice to the communities they represent. Last year LGBT Citizen radio gave our group, the Lesbian Immigration Support Group a platform to talk about the issues faced by lesbian and bisexual women asylum seekers. There aren't many places that offer a chance to counter all the misinformation and bile of the mainstream press!
I think it's a shame that the Beeb is thinking of getting rid of these three programmes - and also illogical. If their argument is correct, why not also get rid of the Asian and Chinese programmes?
Minorities need a voice, and local radio is one of the ways that voice can be heard - and once a voice has been silenced, it will be very difficult to get it back.
For several years I posted to BBC's site, Religious Forums. I was censored, cut off, hounded and eventually banned because I speak (always) to behavior and not to ideology.
My experience is, BBC doesn't play fair; they have AN AGENDA that is not in accord with the traditional values of nation-hood, regional interests, community security, family integrity and spiritual, meta-physical harmony. Straight out of Tavistock, the twisted-thinking people. (And I could go on from there, but I'll be quiet now.)
BBC has no concept of what Diversity is, because for them it's Ideological and for the rest of us humans, it's EXPERIENTIAL.
EEWC
Why not just nationalise these shows, since they are actually the only representation these groups get (specifically) across the BBC? Asians have an entire network.
Manchester has large Jewish and LGBT populations, so it makes sense that the programmes come from there. It would also help tick their 'regional production' box, and make more sense than moving Question Time to Glasgow.
Cities other than Manchester have large Chinese, Irish, Jewish, GLBT etc. Not just Manchester. Liverpool possible an even more diverse City the Manchester has non groups catered for. If these leads to National coverage rather then just coverage in one location, the surely that is good.
The other question is how did BBC Manchester manage to afford it in the first place? What does it say about the uneven distribution of BBC services across the country?
Currently we are being given courtesy of the BBC a massive PR binge centred on London. Every aspect of the city seems to have it's own series. From BBC Manchester we get similar PR bias towards Manchester, in the North West.
I once asked the BBC "how it monitored the degree of local bias" in it regional stations and the answer was "we trust the professionalism of our staff", the BBC with it's distribution of resources has always been a club where the Cities with the greatest number of employee got the greatest coverage. The BBC is an organisation which has long needed proper monitoring of it special interest groups broadcasting. I would suggest that the existence of these progs is more an example of the over provisioning of Manchester and would be better addressed by a regional DAB solution, rather than a one city solution.
I'm gay, and I have never felt the need in my life to listen to "a gay radio programme". Admittedly I don't live in Manchester so perhaps I'm missing out and would be an avid listener if I was there, but somehow I don't think so.
I just prefer not to be patronised and told that a half-hour once a week is the specific time to tune in for "people like you" or "your community" or "your sort" to tune in. I am a paid up member of the human race - and furthermore, one not obsessed with his sexuality as if it were the defining point of my whole existence - and I am capable of listening to radio even if not all the presenters are gay. I'm sure the Mancunian Chinese community are capable of listening to a Jewish radio presenter and the Irish community able to listen to a gay presenter, and vice versa, so long as none of them are banging on about themselves and their cultural differences to the exclusion of everything else. Everyone, at least, would be united in finding Chris Moyles and 'Comedy' [sic] Dave objectionable and unlistenable.
Diversity, not that the left would understand, means more than putting everyone in a particular pigeonhole and making sure each pigeonholed group has their allocated quota of radio shows, characters on Eastenders, and central government funding for support groups. It means us all getting into the melting pot together and overcoming the differences between us, not emphasising them at every bloody turn.