Doctoral thesis

1.Introduction 20

1.Introduction 20

1.1Community Broadcasting 20

community 21

alternative 21

radical 21

citizens’ 21

activist 21

grassroots 21

civic 21

participatory 21

social movement-oriented 21

development-oriented 21

civil society-based 21

Objectives: to provide news and information relevant to the needs of community members, to engage these members in public communication via the community medium; to empower the politically disenfranchised; 21

Ownership and Control: often shared by community residents, local government and community-based organizations; 21

Content: locally oriented and produced media production by non-professionals and volunteers; 21

Audience: predominantly located within a relatively small, clearly defined geographic region, although some community networks attract large and physically dispersed audience; 21

Financing: essentially non-commercial, the overall budget may involve corporate sponsorship, advertising, and government subsidies. 21

freedom of speech and media plurality 22

public and gender access 22

cultural diversity 22

not-for-profit 22

self-determination 22

transparency 22

promotion of media literacy 22

1.2Community Radio 27

1.3Community Television 29

1.4The Project: Problem, Aims, Questions, Methods 31

“What values of community broadcasting are important to participants?” 32

“To what extent does Austrian community media policy, often cited as among the world’s best, align with the values important to Austrian participants?” 32

“To what extent does the proposed new Czech Republic community broadcasting policy and plan align with the values important to Czech community broadcast participants?” 32

1.5Contents of the Thesis 33

2.History of Community Broadcasting 36

2.History of Community Broadcasting 36

2.1Community Radio 36

Figure 2. Community Radio Stations in the United Kingdom 2015. OFCOM 43

2.2Community Television 47

3.Community Broadcasting
in Austria and the Czech Republic 53

3.Community Broadcasting
in Austria and the Czech Republic 53

3.1Austria 53

Figure 3. Map of Community Radios in Austria. VFRÖ 2015 57

3.2Czech Republic 61

4.Review of Theory and Literature 70

4.Review of Theory and Literature 70

4.1Community 70

4.2Civil Society 73

4.3The Public Sphere 77

4.4Community Broadcasting 82

4.4.1Publics 82

4.4.2Participation 86

4.4.3Policy 91

Mediterranean Polarized Pluralist: minimal civil society - government cooperation, dysfunctional media legislation and regulation, over-commercialization, and restricted access to the broadcasting public sphere for alternative media (Spain, Italy, Greece). 93

North Atlantic Liberal: minimal civil society - government cooperation, powerful commercial sector, functional public service sector, functional media legislation and regulation, limited access to broadcasting public sphere for alternative media (USA, UK, Ireland). 94

North Central European Democratic Corporatist: extensive civil society - government cooperation, functional media legislation and regulation, limited commercialization, strong public service sector, extensive access to broadcast public sphere for alternative media (Denmark, Netherlands, Germany). 94

Very Active Community Media Sector (Netherlands, Germany, France) 95

High Community Media Activity (Sweden, Italy, Spain) 95

Moderate to Active Community Media Sector (Austria, Portugal, Belgium) 95

Limited Community Media Activity (Finland, Slovenia, Romania) 95

Well-established sectors with supportive policies, sustainable models that include strong state financial support (France, Netherlands); 95

Well-established sectors with supportive policies, but minimal state financial support (United Kingdom, Ireland, Hungary); 95

Medium-developed sectors with some supportive policies but no state financing (Italy, Spain, Sweden); 95

Under or undeveloped sectors where there are limited or non supportive policies and funding (Czech Republic, Croatia, Slovakia, Greece). 95

4.4.4Digital Technologies 98

Figure 4. Online Radio Listening in USA 2105. Edison Research 2015 100

Figure 4. Identity Communities in Social Networks. Centola 2015 102

6.Methods 105

6.Methods 105

6.1Overview 105

“What values of community broadcasting are important to participants?”. 105

“To what extent does Austrian community media policy, often cited as among the world’s best, align with the values important to Austrian participants?” 105

“To what extent does the proposed new Czech Republic community broadcasting legislation align with the values important to Czech alternative broadcast participants?” 105

6.2Methodology 106

6.3Population and Sample 108

6.4The Survey Instrument 112

6.5Data Analysis Method 113

8.Findings and Discussion 119

8.Findings and Discussion 119

8.1Participants 119

Figure 6. Importance of Other Media Platforms for Distribution of Output (Austria) 121

Figure 6. Importance of Other Media Platforms for Distribution of Output (Czech Republic) 124

8.2Primary Research Question: What Values are Important? 124

8.2.1Austria 124

Figure 6. Ranking of Importance by “Total Sample” Group of Austrian Respondents 124

Figure 6. Ranking of Importance by “Age: 40-59” Group of Austrian Respondents 125

Figure 6. Ranking of Importance by “Education: University” Group of Austrian Respondents 125

Figure 6. Ranking of Importance by “Employment: Employed” Group of Austrian Respondents 125

Figure 6. Ranking of Importance for the Term “Multilingual” by Austrian Respondents 126

Figure 6. Ranking of Importance for the Term “Local” by Respondents in Austria 127

Figure 6. Ranking of Importance for the term “Gender-Balanced” by Respondents in Austria 128

Figure 6. Rating of Importance for the Term “Radical” by Respondents in Austria 131

8.2.2Czech Republic 132

Figure 6. Ranking of Importance by Total Sample of Czech Respondents 132

Figure 6. Ranking of Importance by “Age: 19-25” Group of Czech Respondents 132

Figure 6. Ranking of Importance by “Education: High School” Group of Czech Respondents 133

Figure 6. Ranking of Importance by “Employment: Student” Group of Czech Respondents 133

Figure 6. Ranking of Importance of the Term: “Multiethnic” Czech Respondents 133

Figure 6. Ranking of Importance for the Term: “Multilingual” by Czech Respondents 134

Figure 6. Ranking of Importance for the term: “Gender-Balanced” by Czech Respondents 135

Figure 6. Ranking of Importance for the Term: “Political Representation” by Czech Respondents 135

8.3Secondary Research Question: Policy Alignment 136

8.3.1Austria 136

Figure 6. Ranking of Importance by Total Sample of Austrian Respondents 136

Figure 6. Ranking of Importance by “Age: 60+” Group of Austrian Respondents 137

Figure 6. Ranking of Importance by “Age: 40-59” Group of Austrian Respondents 137

Figure 6. Ranking of Importance by Age: 19-25 Group of Austrian Respondents 138

8.3.2Czech Republic 138

Figure 6. Ranking of Importance by Total Sample of Czech Respondents 139

Figure 6. Ranking of Importance by “Education: University” Group of Czech Respondents 139

9.Conclusions 140

9.Conclusions 140

9.1Publics and Participants 140

9.2Values 142

9.3Policy Alignment 144

9.4Outcomes 145

10.Bibliography 146

10.Bibliography 146

11.Appendix 184

11.Appendix 184

11.1Documents 184

11.1.1Proposed Community Broadcasting Policy and Plan for the Czech Republic (excerpt from full document) 184

11.1.2Project Survey Questionnaire 188

11.2Websites 193

11.2.1Project Informational Website 193

Research Project Informational website http://diss-website.webnode.com/ 193

11.2.2Survey Questionnaire Landing Page 194

Survey questionnaire landing page (University of Ljubljana 2015) 194

11.3List of Figures 195

11.4List of Tables 195