Letter: Radio offers little licence

Professor Anthony Field
Tuesday 29 December 1992 00:02 GMT
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

Sir: The Radio Authority scrupulously invited bidders for Independent National Radio 1 and 2 under carefully regulated applications. The bidders had to present detailed business plans, which were equitably vetted. This apparent even-handedness led to many possible applicants withdrawing on the basis of the conditions laid down.

It is therefore necessary to question the propriety of the authority now awarding reductions of nearly 40 per cent in annual licence fees to Classic FM (launched successfully in September) and Virgin rock radio (not yet on the air) and cuts of up to 16 per cent in the fees charged to local radio stations. Part of these generous donations has no doubt been found from the thousands of pounds charged by the authority to 'scrutinise the business and programme plans' of failed applicants.

Surely the business plans of the bidders (and those who aborted their bids) for INR 1 and 2 would have been very different had they known that the licence fee for the eight-year contracts would end up 40 per cent cheaper.

Further, surely this appears to be a tacit admission by the authority that its original conditions were ill-considered if, indeed, it is now acknowledged that even the successful stations cannot be reasonably expected to pay the high licence fees originally requested.

Yours faithfully,

ANTHONY FIELD

London, EC2

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in