Music on PBS: A History of Music Programming at a Community Radio Station Rochelle Lade (BArts Monash, MArts RMIT) A thesis submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy January 2021 Abstract This historical case study explores the programs broadcast by Melbourne community radio station PBS from 1979 to 2019 and the way programming decisions were made. PBS has always been an unplaylisted, specialist music station. Decisions about what music is played are made by individual program announcers according to their own tastes, not through algorithms or by applying audience research, music sales rankings or other formal quantitative methods. These decisions are also shaped by the station’s status as a licenced community radio broadcaster. This licence category requires community access and participation in the station’s operations. Data was gathered from archives, in‐depth interviews and a quantitative analysis of programs broadcast over the four decades since PBS was founded in 1976. Based on a Bourdieusian approach to the field, a range of cultural intermediaries are identified. These are people who made and influenced programming decisions, including announcers, program managers, station managers, Board members and the programming committee. Being progressive requires change. This research has found an inherent tension between the station’s values of cooperative decision‐making and the broadcasting of progressive music. Knowledge in the fields of community radio and music is advanced by exploring how cultural intermediaries at PBS made decisions to realise eth station’s goals of community access and participation. ii Acknowledgements To my supervisors, Jock Given and Ellie Rennie, and in the early phase of this research Aneta Podkalicka, I am extremely grateful to have been given your knowledge, wisdom and support. You seemed to know when to push and when to hold back. Now, at the end, I have my health, my sanity and a thesis. I thank my review panel, Diana Bossio, Cesar Albarran‐Torres and Julie Kimber, for their valuable advice and encouragement. And thank you, Niki Frantzeskaki, for letting me stay in the same building, surrounded by people I knew, when structures changed at Swinburne. This project would not exist without the support of the PBS Board, Adrian Basso and Mara Williams. I hope what we have produced will serve PBS and Melbourne’s music community for a long time to come. As usual, the PBS community was exceptional in answering my calls for help. To those I interviewed, I thank you for your time and candour. For your assistance during the research phase, thank you to: Laura Cameron, Jennifer Crowley, Moira Drew, Alan Fitzpatrick, Michelle Gearon, Garry Havrillay, Sam Johnstone, Owen McKern, Adrian Ockerby, Ashley O’Halloran, Bill Runting, Nic Scurry and Patrick Wain. I was fortunate to have, and at times rely heavily on, the support of fellow PhD students and friends: Viktoria Adler, Alexandra Dane, Keren Greenberg, Indigo Holcombe‐James, Ben Morgan and Melissa Pineda Pinto. I am also grateful for the support and assistance I received from the wider radio community: Danny Chifley, Maryanne Doyle, Juliet Fox, Shane Homan, John Tebbutt and Chris Wilson. I acknowledge my personal support crew for their enduring care. Thank you to my mentor Justin Wibrow and treasured friends Dominic Autelitano (special thanks for reading the very first draft), Laura Kool, Tal Levitas and Daniele Noel. And to my parents, Janne and Geoff Lade, and my brother, Steven, thank you for instilling the value of education and setting the bar of achievement. Finally, to the wonderful boys in my life. Izo Lourival, thank you for your constant support, excellent cooking and ability to take the load. I look forward to the next phase of our lives together, using our newly gained degrees for good. Raffy, my little mate, thank you for being my constant companion. iii Declaration This thesis contains no material which has been accepted for the award to the candidate of any other degree or diploma. To the best of the candidate’s knowledge, this thesis contains no material previously published or written by another person except where due reference is made in the text of the examinable outcome. Accredited professional editor Mary‐Jo O’Rourke AE provided copyediting and proofreading services according to the national university‐endorsed ‘Guidelines for editing research theses’ (Institute of Professional Editors, 2019). Rochelle Lade January 2021 iv Table of Contents Abstract ................................................................................................................ ii Acknowledgements ............................................................................................ iii Declaration ......................................................................................................... iv List of Figures ...................................................................................................... x List of Tables ...................................................................................................... xii Abbreviations ..................................................................................................... xv Introduction ......................................................................................................... 1 Theoretical Framework ................................................................................................... 3 Methodology .................................................................................................................... 4 Significance ...................................................................................................................... 5 Chapter Outline ............................................................................................................... 7 1. Literature Review .......................................................................................... 11 1.1 Introduction ......................................................................................................... 11 1.2 Theoretical Framework ........................................................................................ 12 1.2.1 Cultural capital and cultural intermediaries.................................................. 12 1.2.2 Subcultural capital and subcultural intermediaries ...................................... 15 1.2.3 Volunteer, subcultural intermediaries at PBS ............................................... 21 1.3 Community media .............................................................................................. 25 1.3.1 Australian community media ......................................................................... 31 1.3.2 Community radio and local music ................................................................ 38 1.4 Programming music radio .................................................................................. 43 1.4.1 Playlisted music programming ...................................................................... 44 1.4.2 Unplaylisted music programming ................................................................. 48 1.4.3 Study of broadcast content ............................................................................ 53 Conclusions ................................................................................................................... 59 v 2. Methodology ............................................................................................... 60 2.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................60 2.1.1 Case study .......................................................................................................60 2.1.2 Insider researcher ........................................................................................... 62 2.2 Archives ............................................................................................................... 65 2.2.1 Programming grids......................................................................................... 70 2.2.2 Data entry ....................................................................................................... 70 2.2.3 Classifying music ............................................................................................ 72 2.3 Oral history interviews ....................................................................................... 83 2.3.1 Recruitment .................................................................................................... 85 2.3.2 Interviews ....................................................................................................... 87 3. 1970s: “Clearly dissimilar” ........................................................................89 3.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................89 3.1.1 Alternative to what? ...................................................................................... 90 3.1.2 Licensing community radio ........................................................................... 93 3.1.3 Licensing Melbourne’s community stations ................................................. 97 3.2 Programming policies, procedures and people .................................................. 102 3.2.1 Doing things differently ............................................................................... 104 3.3 Test transmissions ............................................................................................