Radio For the Few or the Many? Experiences from the Political History of Local Radio in Norway1

ELI SKOGERBØ

Commercialisation and internationalisation impotent and to what degree has local ra- are common denominators for trends in dio lost its potential as grassroots media? media developments in the past ten to fif- It is of course impossible to answer teen years. It is commonly argued that in these questions generally, but I will use the the countries in western Europe, political political history of the independent local authorities no longer control the instru- radio stations in Norway to illustrate a ments to secure that the media operate in somewhat different version of the story. I the public interest, but have lost most of argue, first, that the current dominance of their power to market forces and global business interests in the local radio sector, media actors (see e.g. Keane, 1991). Thus, is not so much a result of globalisation of the question posed in the title: Radio for the the media economy, but that this develop- few or the many? has been at the heart of the ment to a large extent is a natural result of conflict about the introduction, the regula- political compromise formation in the tion and the evaluation of the perform- Norwegian parliament. The development ance of local radio stations in Norway. In of local radio illustrates a number of con- 1996, 15 years after the first experimental flicts and problems, among them commer- stations were opened, descriptions of con- cialisation and concentration of ownership, centration, commercialism and chain-buil- which are unintended and, to some extent, ding have replaced former arguments of unexpected consequences of the political decentralisation, democratisation and ac- framework that was drawn up for local ra- cess as standard references when these dio and television in the late 1980s. Se- types of media are discussed (Jauert & cond, I contend that, considering these cir- Prehn, 1995; Høyer et al., 1995). As a con- cumstances, the presence of semi- or non- sequence, the argument continues, citizens commercial interests in local radio has re- are left with media that operate as busi- mained remarkably high for a long period nesses only, oriented towards maximisation of time, and that it is this stability that of profits at the expense of orientation to- needs explanation, not the entrance of wards citizens’ need for information and commercial actors seeking to exploit the access to channels open to discourse and profits in a new market. expression. But how true is this story? To In the following, I comment on and dis- which extent are national political actors cuss these developments. My argument is

107 that the political history of local radio in Background and Theoretical Norway can be analysed as a process in Starting Point which two central conflicts have structured the political debate on regulation of local As businesses, the media operate on two broadcasting. The compromises reached markets: the consumers’ markets and the on these issues partly explain some of the advertising market. Success on the first is a current problems in the sector. The first is- prerequisite for success on the latter: for sue regards the cultural content, that is, the local radio, this means that the higher the questions of what interests local radio rate of listeners, the higher the attraction should serve. The second issue concerns of advertisers. As cultural and political in- control and ownership of local media, that stitutions, the media have their most essen- is, the question of which interests that tial roles tied to the public sphere: they should be allowed onto the airwaves, the provide information and access to commu- major conflict in the short history of local nicative resources for citizens; are outlets broadcasting. The question of what inter- and channels for debate, discourse and cul- ests and to which degree business actors tural expressions and representations; and should be allowed into the sector was es- they work as intermediaries between the sential in the long and heated debate on state and civil society. Media policy thus is advertising as a source of financing in lo- both regulation of markets, and cultural cal radio and television. The two conflicts policy. Concerning local radio, the latter cannot be totally separated but for the sake also concerns the possibilities for citizens of clarity they will be kept apart in the fol- to exercise their constitutional and cultural lowing discussion. The political compro- rights. mises that were outcomes of these con- Problems occur when the regulatory in- flicts partly explain some of the current struments do not adequately account for political problems of regulating the sector. both the commercial and the cultural as- There are many characteristics of the pects. In Norway, the lack of recognition structure of independent local radio in for the duality is present in most areas of Norway that suggest that these media still media policy. One example of the discre- are geographically decentralised and cul- pancy can be seen in the regulation of the turally diverse. By summing up the con- commercial radio and television stations flict-ridden history of local radio, I seek to P4 and TV2 as ’public service broadcast- evaluate the development according to ers’, which is the same label as the one ap- both the ’original intentions’ of the re- plied to NRK, the publicly owned and li- forms and the first legislation that regu- cense fee-financed broadcasting corpora- lated the sector. More than anything, the tion. Following Syvertsen’s (1992) defini- evolution of the sector illustrates the dou- tion of public service as a regulatory prin- ble logic of media institutions; they are at ciple that are based on a system of privi- the same time business enterprises and cul- leges and obligations, the two private com- tural and political institutions, and these mercial channels in Norway were provided properties have to be reflected and dealt with a monopoly on nation-wide, terrestrial with by the regulators. commercial broadcasting in return for hav-

108 ing certain obligations towards the public. tions into attractive investment objects The new concept of ’commercial public started immediately after advertising was service’ radio and television was the out- allowed in local radio in 1988 and in- come of a debate in the Norwegian parlia- creased in the early 1990s. The commo- ment between parties arguing for, on the dification and commercialisation that fol- one hand, privatisation of broadcasting lowed from these developments intensified and, on the other, that the public should be the debate on how to regulate the sector. offered a broad menu of programmes sa- Since the beginning of the 1990s, the Dan- tisfying minority as well as majority inter- ish-owned media conglomerate the Aller ests (Skogerbø, 1991; see also Syvertsen, Group, has been the largest shareholder in 1992). However, as the stations were given local radio. The Aller group was, from the total control of their income generation, time it entered the sector, establishing a there are very few instruments left to sanc- chain of commercial radio stations that tion the stations if they do not perform ac- were combined with network news and ad- cording to the obligations, a point that the vertising sales and which were in contra- two companies are well aware of. The un- vention of the intentions and sometimes intended consequences of the decision of the actual legislation on local broadcast- were, therefore, to water down the public ing (see e.g. Høyer & Tønder, 1992). Al- service concept. though being very controversial, most po- The development of local radio in Nor- litical compromises concerning the regula- way may serve as another example of the tion of independent local radio and televi- problems of regulating media that operate sion have resulted in formulations that as both businesses and cultural and politi- these media should be maintained as de- cal institutions, as many of the problems centralised, non-commercial media. The and challenges raised in the area of local regulation has, however, partially and radio are common to the media sector as a gradually, been undermined by the en- whole. trance of business actors and multinational First, the difficulties of reaching major- corporations seeking to exploit the adver- ity decisions in the Norwegian parliament tising markets to its full potentials. concerning legislation that solved both the problems of funding, and maintained local The Political History broadcasting as locally owned and locally operated media. The conflicts shows the of Local Radio in Norway contested nature of the concepts that were In the spring of 1995, reregulation of the used to justify the proposals of the differ- independent local radio sector was debated ent parties. by the Norwegian parliament, as it has Second, the history of local radio illus- been more or less continuously since inde- trates the effects on national regulations of pendent local radio was allowed in the increased liberalisation and internationali- early 1980s. As in the other Scandinavian sation of the media economy. Although countries, one of the reasons for the con- Norwegian media are not generally domi- stant political conflicts concerning the nated by multinational investors, large regulation of these media is the fact that shares of the local radio market, in terms independent local radio has increasingly of advertising revenues and listeners, are. been drawn into the international media The turn of independent local radio sta- economy, which is a development that the

109 first legislation on local radio set out to to describe the opening for independent prevent. local radio as decisions that originated less Independent local radio stations were in the claims of grassroots’ movements for introduced as competitors and alternatives access to the airwaves, than in the will of to the Norwegian Broadcasting Corpora- Conservative and Non-Socialist govern- tion (NRK) in the beginning of the 1980s. ments to liberalise the media sector (see Between 1933 and 1982, NRK had a full e.g. De Bens & Petersen, 1992; Skogerbø, legal monopoly on broadcasting in Nor- 1996). The Conservative Party’s turn to the way, a policy that until 1980 attracted the right in 1979-80, and its subsequent for- support of all the major political parties. mation of government in 1981, had signifi- Independent local radio was permitted on cant influence on Norwegian politics in the an experimental basis from 1982, as part following decade. The liberalisation of of the liberal reform programme carried broadcasting was only one of several re- out by the Conservative Government that forms of the public sector. took power after the general election in As justification and motivation for the 1981. It was made quite clear by their argu- local radio reforms (which were followed ments that one of the major goals was to by local television experiments from 1983), remove broadcast media from the control the Norwegian Conservative Party com- of the state and open the sector for private bined straight-forward neo-libertarian ar- interests, and as such, it was a move made guments with arguments that originated in by the Conservative Cabinet alone. The a more radical interpretation of democracy decision was carried out without prior par- and which attracted support from different liamentary consultation and consent al- parts of the political spectrum. According though it achieved support from a couple to the party’s justifications of its reforms, of other parties (see e.g. Syvertsen, 1987; the ’new’ local media would extend the 1992; Gramstad, 1988). From its start, right to liberty of expression in society by then, local radio was politically controver- providing more outlets and easier access to sial. The issue of what interests that should the media for an increased number of indi- be allowed to control the airwaves entered viduals, communities and interest groups. the political agenda immediately and has Thus, the reform would contribute to the stayed on it since then (Skogerbø, 1996). decentralisation of the means of commu- The opening for experimental local ra- nication by providing minority groups and dio in 1982 was one of the first steps to- the public living in the regional peripheries wards the privatisation of broadcasting in with their own channels, thereby decreas- Norway, and the conflicts following the de- ing the dominance of centrally placed and cision should be interpreted as such. By governed media. Further, local broadcast- privatisation I refer to the gradual process ing in general was expected to contribute of removing control over broadcasting to the local and national economy by creat- from the public sector to private interests, ing a new business sector of programme and as such broadcasting is one among production for radio and television all over several other public sectors that were to- the country. The increased Norwegian pro- tally or partly privatised during the 1980s, gramme production that would follow in Norway as elsewhere in Europe. In Nor- from the local radio activities, would also way, as in Denmark and Sweden, it is fair work as a protection of Norwegian lan-

110 guage and culture against the flow of for- sation and deregulation of markets. Almost eign programmes that were expected from contradictory conclusions were drawn by international satellite channels. the opposition, who used the objectives These objectives, formulated and pre- stating that the local radio should further sented by the Conservative Government in democratisation and decentralisation to ar- a white paper discussing the reforms after gue for strict public control of independ- they were carried out (St.meld. 88 1981- ent local broadcasting in order to prevent 82), have later served as arguments for commercialisation and commodification both the reformers and the opposition in of local radio. Local radio had to be pro- the following years of debate on the per- tected from the entrance of capitalist inter- manent regulation. As I have argued else- ests that would turn them into purely where (Skogerbø, 1996), since the main profit-making businesses, and thereby re- concepts used to defend and justify the re- move or weaken their roles as cultural in- forms all could be classified a ’essentially stitutions in local communities. contested’, that is, concepts that take on their meaning according to the normative position of those using them (Connolly, Financing Independent Broadcasting 1983), they could be redefined and applied In Norway, as in Sweden and Denmark, by adherents as well as opponents of fur- the conflicts over power and control sur- ther privatisation of the broadcast media. ged on the issue of how to finance inde- The arguments that the removal of the pendent local radio and television stations broadcasting monopoly by the introduc- in the middle of the 1980s. Funding was tion of independent local radio and televi- definitely the most controversial political sions stations would decentralise and de- issue in the process of developing a per- mocratise communication structures and manent regulatory regime for local broad- contribute to extended liberty of expres- casting, and for several years this conflict sion, access and participation were for in- blocked the entire political process on pri- stance used by every party to the debate, vatisation of national broadcasting, too. irrespective of their political loyalties. In- Until 1987, no solution that would perma- terpreted as political objectives, they were nently solve the problem could attract a more or less beyond discussion: no party political majority. Neither public support to the debate would or could argue against nor advertising were sources of income extension of liberty of expression or par- that were acceptable to an adequate ticipation. Instead, the conflicts concern- number of parties in parliament. Thus, the ing regulation centred on funding and complicated parliamentary situation had other regulations, that is, on which means direct consequences for the final legisla- and instruments that would adequately tion on local broadcasting, and for the serve the objectives. In Norway, as a result regulation of broadcasting as a whole, in of the parliamentary situation, all solutions the sense that it came to consist of a to these conflicts were carefully worked number of broad compromises supported out compromises that often proved to have by shifting parliamentary majorities. As other effects than expected. By the Con- such, the Local Broadcasting Act2 that was servative party and its supporters, the ref- adopted by parliament in 1987 contained erences to decentralisation and freedom of provisions designed to maintain local radio expression were used to argue for liberali- as non-commercial media sector while si-

111 multaneously introducing advertising as government to propose a legislation that the main source of income for these sta- sought to retain the local affiliation and re- tions. The arrangement soon turned out to strict the economic gains for each radio be, as the critics foresaw, a contradiction in station as much as possible (Ot.prp nr 47 terms. (1986-87). Not unexpectedly, no parlia- Advertising was, by those parties in fa- mentary majority supported the proposal, vour of allowing it, seen as the only realis- and, as a result, new compromises were tic source of income for local radio, fol- worked out in the parliamentary commit- lowing naturally from the point that radio, tee that prepared the legislation before the as for instance newspapers, is a business final decisions were reached (Innst. O. nr. 3 which should be free to exploit its market [1987-88]). potentials. The opposition refused to re- Thus, the legislation on local radio that cognise local radio as a business, arguing emerged in 1987 was a result of negotia- that this would be in contravention of the tions and compromise formations between original objectives that stressed decentrali- one minority that was essentially sceptical sation and democratisation of the media to the effects of advertising and another structure. By allowing advertising, they ar- minority that regarded advertising as a gued, the sector would be opened to inter- natural part of independent broadcasting. ests whose primary objectives would be to In the end, a majority regarding advertising make profits, and the local affiliation, pro- as unavoidable emerged, and it agreed on a grammes and ownership would be threat- legislation that was designed to minimise ened. Both sides grounded their arguments the negative consequences that were ex- in the initial objectives by which independ- pected to result from the decision. Thus, ent local radio was motivated (see the Local Broadcasting Act imposed a Skogerbø, 1996, chs. 7-9 for an extensive number of obligations on local radio sta- discussion). tions that, theoretically, restricted both The conflict over advertising was the ownership and control and most of the main reason why permanent legislation on programming to the local level: the cover- local broadcasting did not emerge until age was mainly restricted to local commu- 1987. Not until the Labour Party, in go- nities, that is, one municipality; the major- vernment from 1986, changed its opinion ity of the owners should be located within on the issue in early 1987, was it possible the license area; the stations should have a for the Norwegian parliament to negotiate programme menu consisting of at least a solution to the problem of permanent 75% locally produced programmes; net- regulation. The reason for the change of working with other stations was restricted position within the Labour Party was not, although not forbidden; in spite of the fact however, that the party had reconsidered that advertising was allowed as a source of its beliefs concerning the effects of allow- income, local radio stations should not be ing advertising. Rather, the change was ow- run as commercial enterprises, and finally, ing to a recognition of the fact that adver- each station was obliged to pay a 16% tax tising was the only possible compromise of its advertising incomes to a ’local radio that could be reached on the issue of find- fund’ that was to redistribute advertising ing a permanent source of income for incomes from the rich to the poor radio these media. Still, however, the analysis of stations. the effects of advertising led the Labour

112 Many of these restrictions have later incentives and the privileges needed to ob- been softened or totally removed as they tain these objectives. have proved ineffective or directly harmful Traditionally, media policy has been an- to the local radio sector in general. This chored in the national states, but during the was the fate of the local radio fund, which past decade the EU, the European Council was intended to improve the resources of and the World Trade Organisation have in- poor stations that were unable to attract creased their efforts to harmonise regula- advertising revenues. To some extent, there tions concerning transnational broadcast- was a transference of funds from the rich ing and liberalise trade with audiovisual to the poor stations, as for instance and multimedia products. The bulk of Ananthakrishnan (1994) reports. On the these regulations do not have much impact other hand, a more striking consequence concerning radio, which is a medium that, of this regulation was that it encouraged with some exceptions, is restricted to the radio stations to bend or avoid the rules, national level because of the language. and thereby created a ’business culture’ However, when the Agreement on the Eu- that was anything but known for its high ropean Economic AREA (EEA) between ethical standards (Nærkringkastingsnemn- EU and EFTA took effect in 1994, Nor- da, 1992a). However, the Local Broadcast- way, in practise, entered the European Sin- ing Act was a good illustration of the recal- gle Market.3 One of the consequences of citrance by which the parliamentarian ma- this, was the removal of restrictions on for- jority accepted advertising, and how much eign ownership of local radio and televi- emphasis it placed on decentralisation, lo- sion stations. Such restrictions are not al- calism and non-commercialism in 1987. lowed by EU regulations. Restrictions on The effects of these decisions were how- foreign ownership were one of the main ever, as for instance Høyer and Tønder instruments of Norwegian legislators in or- (1992) pointed to, to install regulations that der to ”keep local radio local”. However, it failed both to provide incentives in order had already been undermined by the exten- to maintain the cultural obligations and to sive ownership and chain-formation of the acknowledge the business aspect of local Aller Group. radio, and which, as a result, gave results that neither the market sceptics nor the Liberal Licensing Practices – Over- market liberals had intended or wanted. The cultural obligations that were im- Establishment and Economic Problems posed on local radio in the form of local Further, until 1994, the practices followed programme quotas were not, as was the by the Local Broadcasting and Cable Authority4 case with public service broadcasting, ’paid (from 1994 The Mass Media Authority) when for’ by policy makers by granting local ra- granting licenses, or concessions, to oper- dio stations exclusive privileges in the mar- ate local radio stations were neither ket place, for instance by providing them adapted to the cultural obligations nor to with a local monopoly that would give the commercial needs of the stations. On them a secure economic basis. Thus, the the contrary, these practices were condu- legislation sought to maintain local radio in cive to over-establishment in the most at- the hands of local and non-professional in- tractive markets, namely the largest towns, terests by strictly regulating ownership and as licenses were allocated according to cri- content, but failed to grant the necessary teria of diversity and representation of in-

113 terests within the radio structure, not ac- the overall economy of the rural stations5 cording to the size of the market and according to the latest reports is not good, whether it could sustain a high number of they have considerably less problems than local radio stations. In the experimental pe- the urban radio stations (Høyer et al, 1995; riods from 1982-1988, the objectives to Statens medieforvaltning, 1994). In rural decentralise and democratise the media areas, the local radio stations are normally structure had been interpreted in terms of sole operators in their local advertising liberal licensing practices. In order to com- markets, and they rarely depend totally on ply with the intentions in the local broad- advertising but combine several sources of casting legislation, the licensing authorities income (Nærkringkastingsnemnda, 1992a/ sought to obtain a diverse and accessible b; 1993; Statens medieforvaltning, 1994). local radio structure, without considering The rural stations are organised in a the size of the advertising market. All eco- number of different manners. It is quite nomic considerations were left to the licen- common for local interest organisations to sees, who often lacked the competence to cooperate on owning and operating a local judge their own economical and competi- radio station, although the station is often tive strength in relation to other stations. quite independent of its owner. The rural On the national level, close to 400 radio radio stations may be financed by advertis- stations were licensed during the second ing, donations, games such as bingo, volun- experimental period that started in 1984. tary licence fees, or most often by a combi- The practice was maintained when the first nation of these sources. Local stations are regular license period started in 1988, and also operated by individuals who are al- the number of radio stations were even in- most total amateurs. In these cases they creased. In 1989, approximately 460 radio live partly off advertising, partly off a vari- stations were licensed, many of which ety of other sources. Thus, as I previously were located in the four largest towns. The have argued (Skogerbø, 1992; 1995), many number of licensees has been steadily de- of the rural stations are relatively close to creasing, and there were 369 local radio the locally oriented and anchored stations stations by the end of 1995. The most that were perceived by some, if not all, of marked decrease took place after the estab- the supporters of independent broadcast- lishment of the two national radio chan- ing in the beginning of the 1980s. nels that both competed directly with the local radio stations in 1993. The results were unavoidable: after only a short time, Segmentation and Differentiation the number of bankruptcies and close- By the early 1990s, it was possible to argue downs of local radio stations in the largest that the local radio in Norway had devel- towns were dramatic. The reduction of li- oped into three (or even more) distinct censees in these areas started almost im- segments that had different economies, mediately and must be seen as direct con- different programme profiles, and served sequences of the liberal licensing practices different audience interests (Skogerbø, (Skogerbø, 1996). 1996). The first segment consisted and still Outside of the large towns and cities, consists of the urban commercial radio the development has been quite different stations that are operated as business enter- since the competition between rural sta- prises. The most successful of these have tions are either absent or minor. Although been very profitable and attracted major

114 shares of the advertisers and listeners. endured by the local commercial stations. They adapted to the taste of a large and In the same period, P4 had since the start heterogeneous audience by producing in 1993, increased its share from 6% to mostly news, light entertainment and mu- 29% (the figures are provided by NRK Re- sic, as described by a journalist in one of search and the statistical database Medie- the most successful commercial stations: Norge). The Norwegian advertising market has ... the Radio 1-style is funny, curious and humorous also increased substantially since advertis- and, at the same time, our stories are up-dated. Few ing in local radio was allowed in the 1988. items last more than 2-3 minutes. No listeners In 1991, the entire advertising market was should be alienated by an issue that do not interest NOK 4,437 million, whereas it had grown them.6 to NOK 6,690 million in 1994. A small but The least successful in this segment did increasing share goes to radio: in 1991, ad- not survive the intense competition be- vertising in radio was worth NOK 31 mil- tween commercial stations operating on lion, 0.7% of the total market; in 1994 the the same markets, and this contributed to amount was NOK 214 million which the substantial turnover in this category of equals a market share of 3.2% (MedieNorge licensees. In 1993, the competition further 1995: 220). These figures explain why in- increased, both in the listeners’ and in the ternational media corporations regarded advertising markets, as two new nation- Norwegian local radio stations as attractive wide radio channels were started. The objects of investment: by controlling the Norwegian broadcasting corporation, most popular local radio stations, consider- NRK, launched a youth-oriented third able shares of the advertising markets channel, PETRE, in order to recapture the could be controlled, too (Høyer & Tønder, young listeners’ segment that had been lost 1992: 46). Thus, the launching of both PE- to local radio stations during the 1980s and TRE and P4 in 1993 had immediate effects early 1990s. PETRE is a non-commercial on the largest commercial local radio sta- channel in the sense that it is part of the li- tions as the new channels influenced both cence-fee financed NRK, and thus it com- the attraction of listeners and advertisers. petes with local radio stations only in the This segment was the most commercial- listeners’ market. However, it’s programme ised but also the most vulnerable to chan- formats and target groups were quite simi- ges in competitive conditions. Consequent- lar to those of the commercial local radio ly, many of the local radio stations in this stations. category have had considerable economic The same year, the privately owned Ra- problems, caused by over-establishment of dio Hele Norge opened its commercial radio commercial stations in local markets, and channel P4, which had the same profile. P4 after 1993, by the competition from P4. soon attracted major shares both of the lis- Even the largest local radio stations that teners and of the advertising market, as it make up the chain called the Radio 1 Norge- could offer a nation-wide audience (Aften- stations, and which are controlled by the posten 30-9-1993). By 1995, the weekly Aller Group, were unprofitable in 1995.7 share of the total listeners’ market ob- The second segment was the rural sta- tained by local radio stations had decreased tions that served geographical communi- from 30% in 1992, which was the top year, ties described above. As media, many of to a mere 11%. Much of this decrease was them seemed to share characteristics with

115 local newspapers, as the following descrip- nisms of capitalism. In spite of the fact tion indicated: that the ”market” for these stations is as- sumed to be non-existing or minor, they . . . the ambitions [are] high; to keep the inhabit- survive by donations and other means that ants in Ås informed and tie them together. There are not generated by advertising. Hågensen are children’s programmes, youth programmes and and Tollersrud (1983) noted in the first news for retired pensioners; local news and direct book on Norwegian local radio that the re- transmissions of everything from church services to ligious stations were the first to start, as the dancing parties. Pure disc jockeying is not local ra- religious organisations were well prepared dio, the founders [of the radio] say.8 for ’media age’ through their own educat- ing system and previous transmission to There are many descriptions of radio sta- Norway from abroad (see also Syvertsen, tions working according to these principles 1987; Hågensen, 1991). These stations are in local communities. Although their qual- often neglected as their attraction of the ity, importance, impact and meaning for audience is so small that they are only the community vary considerably, they are rarely included in surveys and other statis- probably important as fora for entertain- tics, but the religious radio (and television) ment, cultural expressions, local news, dis- stations probably represent some of the cussions and debates in local communities. most typical ’particularistic’ or group me- This is one of the types of community ra- dia in Norway. This category was the one dio stations that attracted support from that justified the support from the Chris- both liberal reformers and the more recal- tian People’s Party for breaking the broad- citrant Social-Democrats and Left Socia- casting monopoly in 1981. lists when they adopted the objectives of Yet, the situation for the ’idealist’ or the local radio reforms. ’ideological’ radio stations should not be The third, and often neglected segment romanticised. Although the religious sta- because of the minor attraction of listen- tions seem to have a striking potential for ers, is the ideological stations; radio sta- survival, Ananthakrishnan (1994) describes tions that serve a community of interest, a much more difficult situation for ethnic with or without a missionary ambition. minority stations in Norway in the early The most numerous, and over time the 1990s. Drawing on case studies of Radio most stable, category among these, is the Immigranten, an immigrants’ radio station religious radio stations. They represent all run by the Anti-Racist Centre, and Radio kinds of religious congregations and socie- Ofelas, a Sami station, both located in the ties, from prosperous and very outspoken Norwegian capital, Oslo, Ananthakrishnan evangelical movements to the more quiet illustrates that the problems of these sta- and introvert religious groups who de- tions had impact on the continuity and scribe their radio station as follows: quality of journalism through quoting one God owns everything – also this equipment. We use of the editors: the material to spread His wisdom. It would have There is a clear need for radio [stations] such as been selfish to use this kind of equipment only on ours, but how long can we continue running on vo- yourself. The objective of the radio is to share wis- lunteerism and enthusiasm without the necessary fi- dom with others.9 nancial support and training facilities? ... The whole The ideological radio stations seem to have idea of community radio as something controlled by a potential for survival beyond the mecha- the community may remain an unfulfilled dream if

116 timely intervention is not made by the authorities years have focused on quite different (interview with Jan Gunnar Furuly, chief trends: the entrance of large national and editor of Radio Ofelas, not dated, quoted in multinational corporations as owners with Ananthakrishnan, 1994: 124). the subsequent establishment of ’local ra- dio chains’ dominated by one owner has The situation for these small idealistic sta- transformed local radio into a business tions was, as Ananthakrishnan also points where the main objective is to compete for out, more difficult in the cities than in shares of the total advertising markets smaller communities where the competi- (Nærkringkastingsnemnda, 1992a; Høyer tion both for funding and listeners was less & Tønder, 1992; Høyer et al., 1995). Con- sharp. In spite of these problems, however, centration of ownership, measured in the cultural and ethnic minorities have been size of the markets, is substantial and not and still are consistently present in inde- likely to decrease. Concentration and pendent local radio, and they have been a cross-ownership, chain-building, and the source of recruitment to the ’mainstream’ unhappy economic situation of the large media. commercial radio stations (Høyer et al., 1995; Jauert, 1995), led the Ministry of Backwards into Future or Protec- Cultural Affairs to the following summary of the situation in the White Paper on lo- tion of the ’Original Promises’? cal broadcasting that the Norwegian La- In the middle of the 1990s, independent bour Government presented to parliament local radio had turned into a medium of in April 1995: substantial diversity. Considering the fact It can be stated that the local broadcasting sector has that the number of stations in operation by not developed according to the original intentions. the end of 1995 was close to 369, spread This holds for both the programme profile, ownership all over the country, independent local ra- and local affiliation. Among other trends, a number dio was an integrated and well-established of local radio stations have acquired typically com- part of the Norwegian media system. Re- mercial characteristics concerning programme profile garded as media for local communities, and business concept. Among these radio stations many municipalities and regions have inde- there are also tendencies towards chain-formation in pendent radio stations that are parts of the the sense that owners own shares in several stations local public sphere, and they are integrated around the country (St.meld. nr. 24 (1994-95): in the national communication system so 11).10 that they can be used in situations of emer- gency, crises, or catastrophes. Regarded as Based on these observations and the re- media for communities of interests, a large commendations from the reports on the number of stations serve specific audi- state of the art in local broadcasting ences, of which the religious congrega- (Høyer et al., 1995; Jauert, 1995), the Mi- tions are the most numerous and stable nistry recommended a radical revision of category. the regulations for both local radio and lo- Yet, ’stability’ and ’success’ are not parts cal television. Summarising the recommen- of the vocabulary normally applied to de- dations for new regulations of local radio, scribe the development of local radio in they were directed at improving the condi- Norway. Reports over the past two-three tions for the commercial, or the so-called

117 ’general interest’11 radio stations. The pro- The last political decisions and the pre- posals included, first, introduction of a ceding debate seemingly brought the Nor- regulatory distinction between ’general in- wegian regulatory system out of line with terest’ stations and ’organisations’ radio the other Nordic countries, and to a cer- stations’, or, in effect, between commercial tain extent the present situation contradicts and non-commercial radio; second, exten- the expectations voiced by the Per Jauert sion of the geographical license areas, or in and Ole Prehn when they wrote about the other words, extension of the advertising Norwegian situation that: markets for the commercial stations; third, The question is whether the establishment of P4 reservation of the most attractive broad- and the restructuring of NRK’s channels have been cast hours for commercial radio only, leav- catalysts for a process that forces the local radio trade ing the non-commercial stations to ’off- into a two-level structure, that is, in accord with the prime time’ hours; and fourth, liberalisa- structure in Sweden and the one that seems to be tion of the programming requirements in evolving in Denmark (Jauert and Prehn, 1995: order to allow for co-broadcasts and ex- 217, my translation). change of programmes between local ra- dio stations and between local stations and In Sweden, the independent local radio the national channels run by NRK and P4. sector was totally restructured in 1993, Except for the latter, the proposals can when private broadcasting was liberalised be described as adapting policies and regu- and a clear regulatory distinction was es- lations to the situation of the commercial tablished between commercial and non- segment that has had the most acute eco- commercial local radio (Hedmann, 1995). nomic problems. On the other hand, this The results of the political decision-mak- segment also represents the type of radio ing process in Norway in 1995 postponed a that the majority in the Norwegian parlia- similar development in Norway indefi- ment least wanted in 1987. In the parlia- nitely. There are probably several reasons mentary debate of the above-mentioned for this, and two of them can be found White Paper, this position was reflected: within the political system. The parliamen- the categorical distinction between com- tary situations in Sweden and Norway were mercial and non-commercial, including the very different at the points of time when drawing up of licensing areas and reserva- these decisions were reached. tion of ’prime time’ broadcast hours for The liberalisation in Sweden was pro- the commercial category, was rejected. The posed by a Non-Socialist coalition govern- parliamentary majority argued that the ment, led by the Conservative Party which situation for rural radio stations might de- advocated close to libertarian economic teriorate if the license areas and broadcast policies, and which was backed by a major- hours were implemented as proposed by ity in parliament. The revision of the Nor- the Government. As a result, no fixed size wegian local broadcasting legislation was of the license area and no reservation of proposed by a Social Democratic minority broadcast hours were included in the new government which probably did not even regulation. The parliamentary majority ar- have the full support of its own parliamen- gued for flexibility in order to accommo- tary group. In addition, whereas the Non- date for the large variety of radio stations Socialist Swedish government promoted (Innst. S. nr 190: 20-23). their own liberal policies, the Labour Gov-

118 ernment in Norway clearly left their Conclusion former line of thinking by proposing a policy that were much more in favour of I have argued above that the political his- the commercial interests than had been the tory of Norwegian local radio can be de- case earlier. scribed as a series of compromises worked Further, the rejection of the proposals out as answers to deep conflicts over the by the majority of the Norwegian parlia- issues of what interests should acquire ment draws new attention to the issues of control over the local radio sector in Nor- control and content. By working out yet way. I have further maintained that the jus- another compromise in which the interests tifications and motivations used by the of the ideological and the rural stations Conservative Party after having broken the were given priority over the commercial broadcasting monopoly consisted of a segment, the Norwegian parliamentary ma- number of essentially contested concepts jority signalled that it is not yet ready to ac- that have later been adopted by all parties, cept the description of local radio as pri- and used as justifications for very different marily a business sector. The result was regulations. The most recent outcome of thus negative for business interests, but the this conflict, was the Norwegian parlia- decision of the parliament was in line with ment’s rejections of dividing local radio the ’original intentions’ of the Local into one commercial and a non-commer- Broadcasting Act from 1987. It signals that cial segment. local radio in Norway almost 15 years after The political history of Norwegian lo- its start still is perceived by the parliamen- cal broadcasting is not a story about politi- tary majority as a medium that should be cal impotence, it is a story of minority gov- open to, if not totally in the hands of, ama- ernments being defeated by parliamentary teurs and community interests. majorities. It may, on the other hand, be By the recent decision, business inte- read as a story of lacking political compe- rests have been ’legalised’, but they enter tence. The process described above illus- the sector at their own risk. The outcome trates the incapacity and the general lack of the parliamentary debate in Norway is of knowledge shown by Norwegian politi- interesting both because it confirms the cians when it comes to regulating competi- ’original intentions’ of the local radio re- tive markets. The removal of public con- form by pointing to the need to maintain trol and the privatisation of access to and access, decentralisation and diversity, but at ownership to broadcasting have not yet re- the same time, it does very little to come to sulted in a debate on restrictions of owner- terms with concentration, cross-ownership ship, cross-ownership, public funding of and commercialisation (see also Østbye, non-commercial local broadcasting, or 1996). The question thus remains whether other measures that would be instrumental the new compromise is a way of walking for securing that access to the media for backwards into the future, or an important other groups than strong corporate own- signal that non-commercial and amateur ers. The remarkable point is, however, that radio will attract more attention from the the diversity still is present by the number policy makers in the near future. of minority and interests groups repre- sented in the local radio structure, in spite of much evidence of the opposite.

119 Notes 10. In Norwegian: ’Det kan slås fast at nærkring- kastingssektoren ikke har utviklet seg i overens- 1. The article was first presented as a paper at stemmelse med de forutsetninger som opprinnelig lå the Nordic Seminar on Radio Research at til grunn for virksomheten. Dette gjelder både pro- the University of Tampere, Finland 26-29 gramprofil, eierforholdene og den lokale tilknytning. October 1995. I thank the participants at the Blant annet er det vokst frem en rekke nærradioer seminar for questions and comments. It med et utpreget kommersielt preg både når det gjel- draws extensively on my analyses in der programprofil og forretningskonsept. Blant disse Skogerbø (1996). The author is currently radioene er det også tilløp til kjededannelser ved at working on the ARENA (Advanced Re- samme eiere har eierandeler i flere radioer rundt om search on the Europeanisation of the Na- i landet.’ tion-State) programme financed by the Nor- 11. In Norwegian: ’allmennradio’. wegian Research Council. 2. In Norwegian: ’Lov om nærkringkasting’ 3. Norway is not member of the European References Union, but of EFTA. The EEA Agreement gives EFTA countries access to the Euro- Ananthakrishnan, S. I., 1994: ”The develop- pean Single Market. In return, EFTA coun- ment of local radio and ethnic minority ini- tries implement, if they pass the political tiatives in Norway”, in Husband, Charles process in each country, all regulations con- (ed.) A Richer Vision: the development of ethnic cerning the Single Market in their national minority media in Western democracies, London: legislation. John Libbey 4. In Norwegian: ’Nærkringkastingsnemnda’ Connolly, William, 1983: The Terms of Political 5. In Norwegian: ’bygderadio’ Discourse, Second edition, Oxford: Martin 6. In Norwegian: ”Radio 1-måten [er] morsom, Robertson kuriøs og humørfylt samtidig som sakene er De Bens, Els & Vibeke Petersen, 1992: ”Mod- aktuelle. Få innslag er lengre enn 2-3 els of Local Media Development”, in Siune, minutter. Ingen lyttere skal skremmes bort Karen & Truetzschler, Wolfgang (eds.): Dy- av en lang sak de ikke er interessert i”. Inter- namics of Media Politics. Broadcast and Electronic view with Pål Jørgensen, Radio 1 Oslo, Media in Western Europe, London: Sage Aftenposten 25-9-1992. Gramstad, Sigve, 1988: Norsk mediepolitikk, Publika- 7. Hans Hjellemo: ’Aller størst i nærradio’, sjon nr. 5, Linje for media og journalistikk, Dagens Næringsliv 16-2-1996. Møre og Romsdal distriktshøgskule, Volda 8. In Norwegian: ’ambisjonene er store; å holde inn- Hedmann, Lowe, 1995: ”Radio”, in Carlsson, byggerne i Ås informert og spleise dem sammen. Her Ulla & Magnus Anshelm (ed.): MedieSverige er barneprogrammer, ungdomssendinger og pensjo- 1995. Statistik och analys, Göteborg: Nordi- nistnytt. Lokale nyheter, og direkte overføringer av com-Sverige alt fra gudstjenester til dansefester. Ren plateprating Høyer, Rolf & Gro Tønder, 1992: Sentrale eier- er ikke nærradio, mener initiativtakerne’. Inter- strukturer i mediabransjen i Norge i mars 1992, view with Jan Vidar Magnussen and Gro Sandvika: Handelshøyskolen BI Svendstad, non-professional workers, Ås Høyer, Rolf et al., 1995: ”Nærkringkasting i Radio’n, Aftenposten 25-9-1992. Norge 1994”, Utredning for Kulturdeparte- 9. In Norwegian: ’Gud eier alt – altså også dette mentet, Medieprosjektet BI, Handelshøy- utstyret. Vi bruker det materielle til å spre hans skolen BI. Vedlegg 1, St.meld. nr. 24 (1994- visdom. Det hadde vært egoistisk å bruke slikt ut- 95): Nærkringkasting, Kulturdepartementet styr bare til seg selv. Målet med radioen er å dele vis- Hågensen, Finn-Ove & Tore Tollersrud, 1983: dom med andre’. Interview with programme Da monopolet sprakk – Nærradio i Norge, Oslo: host and Krishna-monk Rune Peder Lind- Universitetsforlaget strom, Radio Krishna, Aftenposten 25-9-92.

120 Hågensen, Finn-Ove, 1991: Nærradio, hoved- Skogerbø, Eli, 1991b: ”Om norsk TV2, medie- oppgave, Institutt for statsvitenskap, Univer- politikk og internasjonale forhandlinger”, sitetet i Oslo Pressens Årbog 1991, København: C.A. Reitzel Innst. O. nr. 3 (1987-88) Innstilling frå kyrkje- og Skogerbø, Eli, 1992: What’s Left of Brecht? The undervisningskomiteen om lov om nærkringkasting. Status and Future of Norwegian Local Broadcast- Oslo: Stortinget ing Ten Years After the Start, Working Paper Innst. S. nr. 190 (1994-95) Innstilling frå familie-, no. 02/92, Department of Political Science, kultur- og administrasjonskomiteen om kringkas- University of Oslo ting og dagspresse 1993 m.v., om nærkringkasting, Skogerbø, Eli, 1996: Privatising the Public Interest: om eierskap i nærkringkasting og om framlegg frå Compromises and conflicts in Norwegian Media Po- stortingsrepresentant Jan Simonsen om å gje lokal- litics 1980-1993, Report no. 20, Department TV.selskap adgang til vidareformidling av norske of Media and Communication, University og utanlandske satellittsendte TV-program. Oslo: of Oslo (Dr. polit. dissertation) Stortinget St.meld. nr. 88 (1981-82) Om medieutvikling og nye Jauert, Per & Ole Prehn, 1995: Lokalradio og kringkastingsformer, Oslo: Kulturdepartemen- lokal-tv. Nu og i fremtiden, København: Kultur- tet ministeriet St.meld. nr. 24 (1994-95) Nærkringkasting, Oslo: Jauert, Per, 1995: ”Nærradio og lokalfjernsyn i Kulturdepartementet Norge – set i vesteuropeisk perspektiv”, Statens medieforvaltning, 1994: Årsmelding, Vedlegg 9, St.meld. nr. 24 (1994-95) Nær- Fredrikstad kringkasting, Oslo: Kulturdepartementet Syvertsen, Trine, 1987: Ny teknikk, ny politikk og Keane, John, 1991: The Media and Democracy, ”nye medier”, Report no. 4, Department of Cambridge: Polity Press Mass communication, University of Bergen MedieNorge 1995, red. Geir Engen, Bergen: Syvertsen, Trine, 1992b: Public Television in Tran- Nordicom/Norge sition: A Comparative and Historical analysis of Nærkringkastingsnemnda, 1992a: Evaluering av the BBC and the NRK, Levende bilder no. 5/ den første, permanente konsesjonsperiode. Nærradio. 92, Oslo: Norges allmennvitenskapelige Fredrikstad forskningsråd (Ph.D. thesis) Nærkringkastingsnemnda, 1992b: Årsrapport, Østbye, Helge, 1996: ”Små medier og store Fredrikstad eiere”, Norsk medietidsskrift, no. 1, vol. 3 Nærkringkastingsnemnda, 1993: Årsrapport, (forthcoming) Fredrikstad Ot.prp nr. 47 (1986-87) Lov om nærkringkasting.

121 122