“What a nice coincidence that your ‘digital’ discussion in Leipzig takes place exactly 75 years since a British scientist, Alec Reeves, filed the first patent describing Pulse-Code Modulation in 1937. Within five years, in 1943, his invention had led to the first Digital Scrambled Speech Tx System, and by 1985 to the first 12-track mixer-recorder. And the rest, as they say, is History, and very exciting too!
I am pleased to say that by and large I agree with the views, the challenges and the reservations already expressed. I was lucky enough to experience the great advantages of digital recording and editing in the early nineties, and I certainly taste the offers of the likes of Radio Player, BBC iplayer etc...
Nothing perfect under the sun, and, like any other relatively new departure, the spread of Digital offers excitements along with some worries as has already been noted. I see no need to go over known ground, but I certainly hope that the marvellous facilities in recording, editing and compiling Radio Features, for instance, of exceptional sound quality won’t compromise the essential quality of content and production. I’m sure none of us would be interested in the radio equivalent of ‘fast food’, thank you very much! The customer we serve, the good, serious radio listener, deserves better.
I firmly believe that ideally in radio drama and Features 1+1=3; that, if you like, 2+2=5, or even 6! The structure, the juxtaposition of elements can create fleeting yet almost solid entities on the listener’s inner screen, and give him or her a rare insight or satisfaction. So, let’s be positive, try to solve practical questions of Rights, of length of time allotted to recording, production, editing etc. And, above all, let’s always do our personal best for the sake of our fellow-worker, the listener.
Sorry about the size of this Coconut, but do allow me to conclude with a few lines from something I wrote for another radio occasion.
The listener’s Computer-Brain,
- The world’s most wonderful machine -,
Enables him to bring to life
What’s only heard and never seen.
At its most brilliant, Radio is
A perfect form of Television;
It gives us sounds, silence and words,
And we ourselves supply our Vision.
Yes! Genuine Radio is at heart
A Visual Craft that’s life-enhancing.
A crafted piece of Radio
Can take a man or woman
To the essence, to the very heart
Of being alive, human."
John Theocharis, freelancer, United Kingdom
Showing posts with label Nutshells. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Nutshells. Show all posts
Saturday, January 28, 2012
Nutshell: Andrey Allakhverdov
“As my colleague Elena Uporova noted, before asking whether there's future for the radio (we mean documentary radio) in my country, one has to ask whether it had the past and the present. A very short answer for Russia is no, it didn't. It was a very short period in the post-Soviet radio history when journalists got enthusiastic about making documentaries but in a very short time it became clear that the stations which can broadcast such formats would not do it for political reasons, and commercial stations would not do it for commercial reasons. And there is no culture of listening to such programmes in my country. But we regard radio documentary not only as a product but as a process, the process of making it. And strange as it may seem, in my view the new formats where video, audio, photo, graphics are mixed up can (not necessarily will, but can) give a new life for the radio documentary, at least here in Russia. All the serious documentary-makers say that a new documentary is based on an audio narration, on a story told in sound. It is radio journalists who are the core of a team which would make new documentaries. So the process has a chance to stay. It definitely won't be the good old radio which you only listen to. But its power, its palette, the deepness of a radio story will remain. At least in my country I see no other way. I understand that what I say is a bit simplified view, but I had to keep it short."
Andrey Allakhverdov, FNR, Russia
Andrey Allakhverdov, FNR, Russia
Thursday, January 26, 2012
Nutshell: Silvia Lahner
“What has the feature community achieved?
A medium called radio, which seems to be a little beyond its technical zenith: whether this impression seems to be right or wrong. But his has to be discussed.
What do we need?
We should hold on to content, which has been with us for some 40 years. But we should face other challenges – like the need to adapt to a younger audience, more familiar with new technologies of communication.
What will be our goal for the future?
Without accepting compromise on content, remain close to state of the art and be as flexible in using communication techniques as our form of art permits.
Thus radio features have to remain as close to their themes as they always were."
Silvia Lahner, ORF, head of the feature department, Austria
A medium called radio, which seems to be a little beyond its technical zenith: whether this impression seems to be right or wrong. But his has to be discussed.
What do we need?
We should hold on to content, which has been with us for some 40 years. But we should face other challenges – like the need to adapt to a younger audience, more familiar with new technologies of communication.
What will be our goal for the future?
Without accepting compromise on content, remain close to state of the art and be as flexible in using communication techniques as our form of art permits.
Thus radio features have to remain as close to their themes as they always were."
Silvia Lahner, ORF, head of the feature department, Austria
Nutshell: Kaye Mortley
“But there are several other things, as well as all the rest.
because these nutshells are all talking about so many different things, all at the same time.
first there is broadcast, or rebroadcast.
rebroadcast on the web is all for the good for the listener.
perhaps for the author there is the problem, evoked by others, of letting one's work "go"...
but it is a lovely and very proper idea for this sort of airy work.
in a sense I have always thought that this was what radio was about.
however, in some countries rebroadcasts do help to supplement the author's (small) earnings: web rights are really very small, if at all.
perhaps some authors will fall by the road financially because of this.
perhaps that's the way the cookie crumbles.
perhaps it doesn't matter.
or does it?
but
broadcast on the web... making for the web... this is where I really begin to wonder...
on internet, we can re & /or broadcast the same things as a radio station.
or the same sort of thing.
only shorter or faster or more amusing or funnier or "younger" or ...
this is not really internet specific, it has nothing to do with the aesthetics of "writing in sound" on internet... or the deontology of the problem to hand.
it is exactly the same sort of issue as broadcasting an electronic music composition (already a recording in concert form) on the air waves: it is only the support changes which changes.
no, the real question is not there.
anyway this has already been done on a lot of radio stations.
the real question is:
is there an internet specific type of product(ion)?
a product to be found?
what?
and why?
how?
and which will be made in what conditions?
and who is going to pay for these internet specific productions (except for Arte Radio and SilenceRadio.org and a few others I don't know about)?
and what are the public broadcasting services who still (even though we sometimes choose to see them as shortly to be dead and buried) going to be doing while all the (frustrated, and possibly impoverished and isolated) radio creators are trying to produce "something"- in conditions as yet undetermined, their own digitally equipped garrets and garages- to make a feature in the digital age."
Kaye Mortley, freelancer, France
because these nutshells are all talking about so many different things, all at the same time.
first there is broadcast, or rebroadcast.
rebroadcast on the web is all for the good for the listener.
perhaps for the author there is the problem, evoked by others, of letting one's work "go"...
but it is a lovely and very proper idea for this sort of airy work.
in a sense I have always thought that this was what radio was about.
however, in some countries rebroadcasts do help to supplement the author's (small) earnings: web rights are really very small, if at all.
perhaps some authors will fall by the road financially because of this.
perhaps that's the way the cookie crumbles.
perhaps it doesn't matter.
or does it?
but
broadcast on the web... making for the web... this is where I really begin to wonder...
on internet, we can re & /or broadcast the same things as a radio station.
or the same sort of thing.
only shorter or faster or more amusing or funnier or "younger" or ...
this is not really internet specific, it has nothing to do with the aesthetics of "writing in sound" on internet... or the deontology of the problem to hand.
it is exactly the same sort of issue as broadcasting an electronic music composition (already a recording in concert form) on the air waves: it is only the support changes which changes.
no, the real question is not there.
anyway this has already been done on a lot of radio stations.
the real question is:
is there an internet specific type of product(ion)?
a product to be found?
what?
and why?
how?
and which will be made in what conditions?
and who is going to pay for these internet specific productions (except for Arte Radio and SilenceRadio.org and a few others I don't know about)?
and what are the public broadcasting services who still (even though we sometimes choose to see them as shortly to be dead and buried) going to be doing while all the (frustrated, and possibly impoverished and isolated) radio creators are trying to produce "something"- in conditions as yet undetermined, their own digitally equipped garrets and garages- to make a feature in the digital age."
Kaye Mortley, freelancer, France
Wednesday, January 25, 2012
Nutshell: Kasia Michalak
“Why is the radio so close to us?
Because many of us have been growing up by the radio.
The today’s young generation is growing up in front of a screen and is not interested in listening to audio stories, perceiving this way of depicting reality as unattractive, lacking vividness.
I frequently meet young people who have never heard of a radio feature. Or they have heard the term but never the feature itself. Although there are millions of radio feature podcasts available on the Internet...
Hence, I see the need for doing the most basic things.
Promoting the art of listening.
In our regional radio station features are presented regularly from Monday to Thursday at 10 p.m. After broadcast we have live discussions with our listeners.
Once a month we give an award to the most interesting commentary sent to us by internet users.
Also once a month we organise in Lublin meetings with the most renowned feature makers.
Each time we are promoting the event wherever we can - on radio, TV, press, the internet (the internet is a means not the aim!). We meet in a cult cafe in the Lublin Old City, first listen to the feature and then talk for a long time. Lots of young people come. They say they prefer listening together than via facebook (after all, the very process of listening is always solitary experience). They seek and they find something new.
Our another project (currently at the preparatory stage) is an audiobus. We want to travel from one town to another (around whole Poland), set out loudspeakers and chairs at squares or backyards and invite the residents to join us in listening to local stories conveying a universal message. A kind of travelling audio theater.
Because it is the MEETING that a radio feature is about. A meeting with a character, with a listener. A first hand live experience. It takes three things to make this meeting possible: silence, a moment of standstill, and eagerness to find out what others think or feel.
What we can do is ensure at least the first two..."
Kasia Michalak, PR, head of radio feature, Poland
Because many of us have been growing up by the radio.
The today’s young generation is growing up in front of a screen and is not interested in listening to audio stories, perceiving this way of depicting reality as unattractive, lacking vividness.
I frequently meet young people who have never heard of a radio feature. Or they have heard the term but never the feature itself. Although there are millions of radio feature podcasts available on the Internet...
Hence, I see the need for doing the most basic things.
Promoting the art of listening.
In our regional radio station features are presented regularly from Monday to Thursday at 10 p.m. After broadcast we have live discussions with our listeners.
Once a month we give an award to the most interesting commentary sent to us by internet users.
Also once a month we organise in Lublin meetings with the most renowned feature makers.
Each time we are promoting the event wherever we can - on radio, TV, press, the internet (the internet is a means not the aim!). We meet in a cult cafe in the Lublin Old City, first listen to the feature and then talk for a long time. Lots of young people come. They say they prefer listening together than via facebook (after all, the very process of listening is always solitary experience). They seek and they find something new.
Our another project (currently at the preparatory stage) is an audiobus. We want to travel from one town to another (around whole Poland), set out loudspeakers and chairs at squares or backyards and invite the residents to join us in listening to local stories conveying a universal message. A kind of travelling audio theater.
Because it is the MEETING that a radio feature is about. A meeting with a character, with a listener. A first hand live experience. It takes three things to make this meeting possible: silence, a moment of standstill, and eagerness to find out what others think or feel.
What we can do is ensure at least the first two..."
Kasia Michalak, PR, head of radio feature, Poland
Nutshell: Daniela Manolova
“Here is my humble opinion too. A year ago I visited the 100-and-a-half-year old listener Rebecca at her place in Sofia and made an interview with her. She was blind since months, but in very good condition. Her memories about radio start with the fact that a relative of her brought some techncal pieces from Germany in the 20-s and constructed her first radio receiver by himself. During the Second War the use of radio receivers was banned in Sofia and the government officially closed each of them with a special stamp. War was somehow silent for Rebecca. Talking about radio in her life she used a special phrase: Radioto mi e priyatelche - Radio is my little friend. There is something amazing in the use of the bg word 'priyatelche' - 'little friend' here. The word for 'a friend' is 'priyatel', for 'a woman friend' is 'priyatelka' and it has a meaning of a friend and a lover as well. 'Priyatelche' is of neutral gender and sounds already asexual, small, vulnerable, sincere, fragile. Rebecca used that word to express her tenderness, loyalty, carefulness and deep deep long long dependence from it. Radio is as old as Rebecca, actually. 'Priyatelche' was the simplest and the most precise word for the phenomenon in my eyes. Maybe this is the code for the future. Objective or completely subjective, if radio (feature) remains our priyatelche there will be a reserved place in our heart for him. Maybe the question is about the tone, to find the tone or keep the tone with the help of all new tools and instruments - the tone of communication in the digital age."
Daniela Manolova, BNR, head of radio feature, Bulgaria
Daniela Manolova, BNR, head of radio feature, Bulgaria
Nutshell: Sue Schardt
“What do we take with us of our old culture when we have to go to a new country? What becomes more important, what is forgotten, what is diluted or strengthened, what is new in the old or old in the new?
Filmmaker Ulrike Ottinger speaks of the past and thre present and, indeed, public media makers in the US find ourselves at a crossroads that is affecting the political, economic, and artistic landscape relative to the role of the maker. With very few exceptions, the traditional approach to long form, sound rich documentary-making is at a low point, with little funding and few opportunities of significance in the United States to reach a meaningful audience. This situation has not come by accident, but is the culmination of a 24-year trajectory that began with the first comprehensive national report on the public radio audience. “Audience (19)88” and the well-funded, widely supported evolution of public radio’s research-driven, news journalism franchise has led the industry to great success in terms of building a significant constituency of core listeners (11% of the American public) and a diverse revenue model drawing from government, foundation, corporations, and average citizens. This evolution as resulted, too, in the virtual elimination of experimental work, and minimized opportunity for producers working in any area outside of news reportage.
At this time of greatest success, the industry is being threatened as never before by the challenges posed by digital media and the explosion of new channels that draw the attention of its traditional audience. There is, at this time of tremendous consolidation, a creative renaissance underway. AIR has, over the last 4-years and with two new initiatives – MQ2 and Localore – begun to exploit this opportunity to develop a new strategy that turns to producers – those who are most adaptive, entrepreneurial…those not constrained by institutional boundaries – to lead new invention that blends traditional, public mission-oriented storytelling, with new digital tools and platforms. Our vision is one that joins together a new creative vanguard of inspired producers with the traditional infrastructure represented by the interconnected network of 1200 public radio and television stations across the U.S. I look forward to hearing, and sharing more in the days ahead."
Sue Schardt, association of independents in radio (AIR), executive director, USA
Filmmaker Ulrike Ottinger speaks of the past and thre present and, indeed, public media makers in the US find ourselves at a crossroads that is affecting the political, economic, and artistic landscape relative to the role of the maker. With very few exceptions, the traditional approach to long form, sound rich documentary-making is at a low point, with little funding and few opportunities of significance in the United States to reach a meaningful audience. This situation has not come by accident, but is the culmination of a 24-year trajectory that began with the first comprehensive national report on the public radio audience. “Audience (19)88” and the well-funded, widely supported evolution of public radio’s research-driven, news journalism franchise has led the industry to great success in terms of building a significant constituency of core listeners (11% of the American public) and a diverse revenue model drawing from government, foundation, corporations, and average citizens. This evolution as resulted, too, in the virtual elimination of experimental work, and minimized opportunity for producers working in any area outside of news reportage.
At this time of greatest success, the industry is being threatened as never before by the challenges posed by digital media and the explosion of new channels that draw the attention of its traditional audience. There is, at this time of tremendous consolidation, a creative renaissance underway. AIR has, over the last 4-years and with two new initiatives – MQ2 and Localore – begun to exploit this opportunity to develop a new strategy that turns to producers – those who are most adaptive, entrepreneurial…those not constrained by institutional boundaries – to lead new invention that blends traditional, public mission-oriented storytelling, with new digital tools and platforms. Our vision is one that joins together a new creative vanguard of inspired producers with the traditional infrastructure represented by the interconnected network of 1200 public radio and television stations across the U.S. I look forward to hearing, and sharing more in the days ahead."
Sue Schardt, association of independents in radio (AIR), executive director, USA
Nutshell: Ulf Köhler
“It is time for documentary makers to come out of the niche of cultural radio.
The time for documentaries in the range of analogue radio is fading out. Making documentaries is so expensive that it's no longer viable to broadcast solely through the traditional airwaves, only to be listened to once - we must be looking for multiple platforms for our pieces.
Let's use the internet (podcast, download, streaming) in order to provide the pieces to more listeners.
But it is not helpful to use the worldwide web only as an additional distributer of our labour of love.
In these times the paradigm has to be changed.
Let's move over to a certain production of documentaries and sound scapes as well as for the worldwide web. In this harsh time of coping with different opinions and burning issues it is necessary to offer the user trustful information, more additional facts, more stuff coming from the background. I also mean biography of the author, slideshows, facsimiles, etc.
Nothing increases the circulation figures more than a good offer of burning issues, good sound and good stories. That's our business!
The user wants to share the author's experiences as well.
Many ARD-Broadcasting stations are using the digital radio recorder and they are having there own platforms for documentaries. In many cases an upload is also available or the user will get the piece via podcast.
The MDR Broadcasting station accompanied a lot of documentaries and essays with texts, photos, slideshows, sometimes with blogs as well.
To take part in public discussion as a documentary maker it is necessary to change our own customs and habits.
Let's create a feature community!
We can go this way because we believe in our skills and the craftsmanship of making documentaries.
Now the ship is lying in the roads."
Ulf Köhler, MDR, head of radio feature, Germany
Let's use the internet (podcast, download, streaming) in order to provide the pieces to more listeners.
But it is not helpful to use the worldwide web only as an additional distributer of our labour of love.
In these times the paradigm has to be changed.
Let's move over to a certain production of documentaries and sound scapes as well as for the worldwide web. In this harsh time of coping with different opinions and burning issues it is necessary to offer the user trustful information, more additional facts, more stuff coming from the background. I also mean biography of the author, slideshows, facsimiles, etc.
Nothing increases the circulation figures more than a good offer of burning issues, good sound and good stories. That's our business!
The user wants to share the author's experiences as well.
Many ARD-Broadcasting stations are using the digital radio recorder and they are having there own platforms for documentaries. In many cases an upload is also available or the user will get the piece via podcast.
The MDR Broadcasting station accompanied a lot of documentaries and essays with texts, photos, slideshows, sometimes with blogs as well.
To take part in public discussion as a documentary maker it is necessary to change our own customs and habits.
Let's create a feature community!
We can go this way because we believe in our skills and the craftsmanship of making documentaries.
Now the ship is lying in the roads."
Ulf Köhler, MDR, head of radio feature, Germany
Nutshell: Ljubo Pauzin
“When I have joined a so-called “social network” (namely “fb” – inspired by “Prix Europa” – as I have been inspired there so many times in the couple of past decades) first what I have noticed at the home page was their motto – “It is free, and it will always be free.” Radio has been “on air” since it has been invented and “air” is free. In my humble opinion so should the Internet be – free. Of course there is always a certain danger of piracy, but hasn’t that been a danger in the “space of air”? Since almost from the very beginning someone could have recorded music or speech from the radio, but it has proved not to be a real “big time” danger to the authors or companies whatsoever. Why couldn’t Internet be free as air? We were recently facing a wish to limit the space of Internet (what have caused Wikipedia to close the access for 24 hours just to warn us to the danger of censorship). I see the Think Tank Leipzig as the opportunity to invite our governments to bring laws, which will make Internet a free zone instead of a limited one. We are not entering the digital era, we are deeply in it."
Ljubo Pauzin, HRT, feature executive producer, Croatia
Ljubo Pauzin, HRT, feature executive producer, Croatia
Nutshell: Silvain Gire
“My nutshell is at ease with most other nutshells: yes, Internet has successfully created new audiences and new paths for radio documentaries (or crafted radio in general). The audience is listening deeply, in a way that is for me similar to the act of reading: alone, concentrated, breeding mental images. And they can now listen to our stuff other and other. This creates an understanding of the art of editing, of how sound narratives work. This allows us to build an access to a library of features, which encourages a new generation to learn and practice. This is why, for me, audioblogs, festivals and the teaching of radio are very important.
Problem is: there is no money! In France, only France Culture and ARTE Radio do actually pay for radio creations. I personally receive three to five demands every day, and can only produce about 120 sound pieces a year… So yes, webdoc is an important gateway for crafted sound (and I agree with Thomas Weibel, "Nowhere Safe" which we helped to produce is a pefect example: www.a-l-abri-de-rien.com)
Because we must be true and straightforward: not a lot of people do actually care for crafted radio ! I know my bosses don't... It is a long process, expensive, requires craftmanship and is not very flashy or glamorous. Facebook may be cool for promotion, but you don't listen to a 50 minutes-long radio feature on it. So, here are a few personal thoughts:
Problem is: there is no money! In France, only France Culture and ARTE Radio do actually pay for radio creations. I personally receive three to five demands every day, and can only produce about 120 sound pieces a year… So yes, webdoc is an important gateway for crafted sound (and I agree with Thomas Weibel, "Nowhere Safe" which we helped to produce is a pefect example: www.a-l-abri-de-rien.com)
Because we must be true and straightforward: not a lot of people do actually care for crafted radio ! I know my bosses don't... It is a long process, expensive, requires craftmanship and is not very flashy or glamorous. Facebook may be cool for promotion, but you don't listen to a 50 minutes-long radio feature on it. So, here are a few personal thoughts:
- public events like listening sessions are cheap to organize, fun and successfull in the long run. It is a slow but guaranted way to promote our art.
- time is essential: you can have the craft and ethics of a documentary in a three-minutes piece, and THAT goes well on Facebook. Formats don't work on the web. Traditional radio formats are killing creation, and they are killing us.
- the audience is king, not the author: down with the boring, self-serving, 70's avant-garde höspiel, narcissistic monologues ! We have to be challenging, interesting, funny, provocative through the course of a short or a long piece. Not selling our soul : that can mean time, silences, beautiful voices, strong characters BUT ALSO noises, brutal editing, changes of rythms, multitracks mixing, etc.
- we have to learn from new tools: I now agree with hidden microphones, which were against my ethics at first. We can blend well-crafted"classic" recordings and impure, brutal sounds from telephones or personal devices. We have to find new ways of telling stories. And we can only hope that a new generation will shock us with a "crafted radio" that is not the one we grew up with, or the one we actually produce."
Tuesday, January 24, 2012
Nutshell: Neil Sandell
“A central question: how does digital and the internet change radio features?
Abundance. It means listeners now have access to a tidal wave of features online. In the old era of terrestrial broadcasting, features competed with every other genre of radio for precious airtime on the schedule. In the old era, these limits were barriers to producers getting their work heard.
Now, features can be made and heard without a broadcast platform. Anyone can create content and make it available through a podcast whether or not they have the approval of a commissioning producer at a state broadcaster. Server space is low cost, and traditional broadcasting companies can now make hours and hours of content available for streaming or download. I am over simplifying, of course. But we are no longer constrained by a certain kind of scarcity...the scarcity of airtime.
The internet means that broadcasting companies are no longer the only gatekeepers for content. Secondly, listeners are presented with an overwhelming choice. Thirdly, though independent producers can put their work online, it is a challenge to get them listened to. How will anybody ever discover it’s there? The mainstream media can shout louder than the individual.
What does this mean? For broadcasting organizations, there is a need to help listeners choose. Curators of content and arbiters of taste become critically important. There is a need for reviews, whether they are professional or unpaid user generated. See Amazon.com for an example of this. Independent websites like Third Coast Festival which curate themes, reviews, interviews with radio makers are much needed. We must encourage sites that aggregate radio features.
Scarcity. There is an irony of course. Despite this abundance of bandwidth and opportunity to be heard, feature makers live in a world of scarce financial resources. Increasingly, big broadcasters are devoting less money to feature making. In house production is declining. Independent producers compete for fewer commissions. Aggregating sites like PRX in the U.S. don’t pay enough to sustain production costs. Yes, if you are an independent producer, there are fewer gatekeepers to getting your feature heard. But who wants to work for free? Making a feature should not be a privilege reserved for the independently wealthy.
In Canada, the CBC devotes fewer financial resources to radio features and documentaries than it did two or three years ago. One reason is that there is less money in the system. But I think the more significant reason is management’s reallocating budgets to other types of information radio: local live news programs, field news reporters, and programs that favour less expensive formats such as interviews and panel discussions. Radio features are deemed an expensive form of presentation. That’s expensive as in, cost per minute.
So, my friends, here a couple of questions I think you should tackle:
For example, I have met a new breed of business people, so called “social entrepreneurs”. Typically, these men and women have already made their fortunes. Now they’re turning their business acumen towards solving social problems. They are creating businesses with a “double bottom line”, that is, making money and doing social good. These people are bringing enormous creative energy to solving social problems, and are a genuine force in developing public policy today.
I wonder, how would they solve the money problems of the radio feature? What would they say if they were at the table in Leipzig? I think they would ask, how do we make the radio feature generate income? They would probably say, we need to abandon the artist’s aversion to commerce. They would say, think of funding radio features as a business proposition, that is, something of value. The question then follows, what is that value? To whom? What models already exist for selling content? (iTunes comes to mind.) Should downloads be free? What if they weren’t?
I know this is an alien way of thinking for creative types like us. But radio needs a business lens. I recommend we approach the philanthropic organizations (e.g. the Ashoka Foundation or the Schwab Foundation) that fund social entrepreneurship, and ask for their expertise in rethinking our financial model. In approaching these foundations, the trick would be to convince them that there is a social good from radio features. That would require some stellar examples of where radio features have made a difference in bettering people’s lives.
I understand that this suggestion may find lots of opposition. But I do think we need new revenue, as our traditional sources dry up. We need expertise to figure that out. It’s a matter of survival.
Process. Your discussions will range far and wide. They may even spill over to a venue where amber liquids are spilling over. Free range discussion is great. But I also urge you to budget your time so that, at some point, you focus on doing something. I urge you to come up with a set of actions to be taken (next steps) and deadlines for taking those actions. What’s the goal? What’s the action to get there?
I also suggest someone set up an online community to continue these discussions. (LinkedIn can be used this way, for example.)
Good luck."
Neil Sandell, CBC, Toronto, Canada
Abundance. It means listeners now have access to a tidal wave of features online. In the old era of terrestrial broadcasting, features competed with every other genre of radio for precious airtime on the schedule. In the old era, these limits were barriers to producers getting their work heard.
Now, features can be made and heard without a broadcast platform. Anyone can create content and make it available through a podcast whether or not they have the approval of a commissioning producer at a state broadcaster. Server space is low cost, and traditional broadcasting companies can now make hours and hours of content available for streaming or download. I am over simplifying, of course. But we are no longer constrained by a certain kind of scarcity...the scarcity of airtime.
The internet means that broadcasting companies are no longer the only gatekeepers for content. Secondly, listeners are presented with an overwhelming choice. Thirdly, though independent producers can put their work online, it is a challenge to get them listened to. How will anybody ever discover it’s there? The mainstream media can shout louder than the individual.
What does this mean? For broadcasting organizations, there is a need to help listeners choose. Curators of content and arbiters of taste become critically important. There is a need for reviews, whether they are professional or unpaid user generated. See Amazon.com for an example of this. Independent websites like Third Coast Festival which curate themes, reviews, interviews with radio makers are much needed. We must encourage sites that aggregate radio features.
Scarcity. There is an irony of course. Despite this abundance of bandwidth and opportunity to be heard, feature makers live in a world of scarce financial resources. Increasingly, big broadcasters are devoting less money to feature making. In house production is declining. Independent producers compete for fewer commissions. Aggregating sites like PRX in the U.S. don’t pay enough to sustain production costs. Yes, if you are an independent producer, there are fewer gatekeepers to getting your feature heard. But who wants to work for free? Making a feature should not be a privilege reserved for the independently wealthy.
In Canada, the CBC devotes fewer financial resources to radio features and documentaries than it did two or three years ago. One reason is that there is less money in the system. But I think the more significant reason is management’s reallocating budgets to other types of information radio: local live news programs, field news reporters, and programs that favour less expensive formats such as interviews and panel discussions. Radio features are deemed an expensive form of presentation. That’s expensive as in, cost per minute.
So, my friends, here a couple of questions I think you should tackle:
- How do we persuade decision makers that the feature is worth spending money on, even if it is expensive?
- How do we generate more money for the radio feature within broadcasting organizations, and from outside?
- What other financing models can we use to pay for features (with a particular view to the internet)?
- demonstrating audience growth
- arguing that features serve a special mandate or objective of a broadcaster (e.g. Outfront, the show that I produced, was created to bring more diverse voices onto the airwaves of CBC. Diversity was part of the show’s mandate.)
- position feature units as fulfilling a training function. Berit Hedeman was successful in winning support for radio features in at NRK by offering training and mentoring to others in the company.
- find an advocate – a decision maker who is persuasive and influential -- who will make the case for the feature. Court these people with purpose and a plan.
- Understand how the decision makers measure success. I think it’s difficult to persuade the powers that be that the feature is worthy, in and of itself. They just don’t care. They don’t see the world that way. To succeed, we need to understand the rules of the game they play by. That means, how do they measure success, and how do they reach their decisions? What’s in their self-interest?
For example, I have met a new breed of business people, so called “social entrepreneurs”. Typically, these men and women have already made their fortunes. Now they’re turning their business acumen towards solving social problems. They are creating businesses with a “double bottom line”, that is, making money and doing social good. These people are bringing enormous creative energy to solving social problems, and are a genuine force in developing public policy today.
I wonder, how would they solve the money problems of the radio feature? What would they say if they were at the table in Leipzig? I think they would ask, how do we make the radio feature generate income? They would probably say, we need to abandon the artist’s aversion to commerce. They would say, think of funding radio features as a business proposition, that is, something of value. The question then follows, what is that value? To whom? What models already exist for selling content? (iTunes comes to mind.) Should downloads be free? What if they weren’t?
I know this is an alien way of thinking for creative types like us. But radio needs a business lens. I recommend we approach the philanthropic organizations (e.g. the Ashoka Foundation or the Schwab Foundation) that fund social entrepreneurship, and ask for their expertise in rethinking our financial model. In approaching these foundations, the trick would be to convince them that there is a social good from radio features. That would require some stellar examples of where radio features have made a difference in bettering people’s lives.
I understand that this suggestion may find lots of opposition. But I do think we need new revenue, as our traditional sources dry up. We need expertise to figure that out. It’s a matter of survival.
Process. Your discussions will range far and wide. They may even spill over to a venue where amber liquids are spilling over. Free range discussion is great. But I also urge you to budget your time so that, at some point, you focus on doing something. I urge you to come up with a set of actions to be taken (next steps) and deadlines for taking those actions. What’s the goal? What’s the action to get there?
I also suggest someone set up an online community to continue these discussions. (LinkedIn can be used this way, for example.)
Good luck."
Neil Sandell, CBC, Toronto, Canada
Nutshell: Edwin Bries
“Breakfast saves radio.
Our mornings are madness. Can you imagine the bathroom and breakfast rush being turned into chaos due to pyjama multi media use? Those who jump from bed to facebook and from toilet to twitter will enjoy the results: ketchup on the toothbrush, toothpaste on the toast, the corn flakes flushed away and the baby in the dishwasher. Sunny side up. Only radio withstands the hectic morning jam session. Discrete and sovereign."
Edwin Bries, EBU, head of EBU master school, Belgium
Our mornings are madness. Can you imagine the bathroom and breakfast rush being turned into chaos due to pyjama multi media use? Those who jump from bed to facebook and from toilet to twitter will enjoy the results: ketchup on the toothbrush, toothpaste on the toast, the corn flakes flushed away and the baby in the dishwasher. Sunny side up. Only radio withstands the hectic morning jam session. Discrete and sovereign."
Edwin Bries, EBU, head of EBU master school, Belgium
Nutshell: Richard Goll
“Last weekend I saw in TV a report on an exhibition of David Hockney – celebrating his 75th birthday. One major topic was that Hockney had painted 51 pictures on his iPad. BUT the product - the paintings – or rather printings could have been produced in conventional technique in same quality.
Is there an analogy to our subjects – new ways of finding and shaping things – new ways of production or even more of distribution, leading to products – very similar to the known formats?
I do believe strongly that the possibilities of the internet for distribution outside the walls of publishers and companies is a really great achievement for authors. What I'm missing till now are the platforms for this type of productions (you get lost in the social networks) to build up communities of users.
But is this all, is this enough? I'm pretty interested what I will hear from younger producers that is more than distribution."
Richard Goll, freelancer, Austria
Is there an analogy to our subjects – new ways of finding and shaping things – new ways of production or even more of distribution, leading to products – very similar to the known formats?
I do believe strongly that the possibilities of the internet for distribution outside the walls of publishers and companies is a really great achievement for authors. What I'm missing till now are the platforms for this type of productions (you get lost in the social networks) to build up communities of users.
But is this all, is this enough? I'm pretty interested what I will hear from younger producers that is more than distribution."
Richard Goll, freelancer, Austria
Nutshell: Richard Goll
“I base my doubts on the old fashioned thought that the radio feature is an audio-phonic art form which requires an impeccable understanding of the different facets of acoustic composition and creativity and the perfect knowledge of the implementation of the different audio-phonic forms of radio. This is based on the fact that if I think of the multimedia development, I do not want to think of a new form of film or television because neither the visual nor the audio medium may be degraded to an accompanying medium. This would mean that additionally to the acoustical creativity the author of a radio feature should also have some form of optical competence, or at least be part of a team where these deficits can be mended.
It is a fact that additional or complementary information can be shared via the Internet as a medium (pictures, bibliography, further information etc.) – but this is not what we are talking about. That would be banal. Just like the fact that new distribution forms that are not bound to broadcasters is a possibility that the Internet has brought us, but these facts do not belong to the theme of artistic development of the radio feature.
The question at hand is the creative composition and the core remark I have - which for me is that the radio feature has created spaces or realms in the audience – realms of thought and feelings where the recipient is active in the occurrences created by the authors. (I use the metaphor of “creative realms” instead of “pictures in the mind” as I find that the metaphor of “pictures in the mind” passivies the audience). What is the result if visual requisites are added to the feature making process? I deterred a film maker to add visual colour to our radio features once – simply because I find that it minimises the need for the audience to use its imagination.
The enjoyment of using the Internet for its participatory character ends in the moment where it becomes important to compose, or shape the product. Of course, the chaos, untidy or “dirty” feeling is charming to a certain degree – but the charm wears off relatively easily. Of course, this is also not a new development, but through the Internet, this has become easier. Novels that were written in the Internet could find their analogue partner in the acoustic medium – features; authors from around the world could send the product around for editing, re-editing etc. but the idea loses it’s charm quickly once it has been done.
Maybe the Internet is rather a place to build up communities of joint interests; not in the sense of Facebook trivial talk – but more in the sense of art galleries where themes are set and the products then “published” and swapped etc."
Richard Goll, freelancer, Austria
It is a fact that additional or complementary information can be shared via the Internet as a medium (pictures, bibliography, further information etc.) – but this is not what we are talking about. That would be banal. Just like the fact that new distribution forms that are not bound to broadcasters is a possibility that the Internet has brought us, but these facts do not belong to the theme of artistic development of the radio feature.
The question at hand is the creative composition and the core remark I have - which for me is that the radio feature has created spaces or realms in the audience – realms of thought and feelings where the recipient is active in the occurrences created by the authors. (I use the metaphor of “creative realms” instead of “pictures in the mind” as I find that the metaphor of “pictures in the mind” passivies the audience). What is the result if visual requisites are added to the feature making process? I deterred a film maker to add visual colour to our radio features once – simply because I find that it minimises the need for the audience to use its imagination.
The enjoyment of using the Internet for its participatory character ends in the moment where it becomes important to compose, or shape the product. Of course, the chaos, untidy or “dirty” feeling is charming to a certain degree – but the charm wears off relatively easily. Of course, this is also not a new development, but through the Internet, this has become easier. Novels that were written in the Internet could find their analogue partner in the acoustic medium – features; authors from around the world could send the product around for editing, re-editing etc. but the idea loses it’s charm quickly once it has been done.
Maybe the Internet is rather a place to build up communities of joint interests; not in the sense of Facebook trivial talk – but more in the sense of art galleries where themes are set and the products then “published” and swapped etc."
Richard Goll, freelancer, Austria
Nutshell: Else Barrat-Due
“In Norway we now often call radiodrama “sounddrama” because radio is only one of several means of distribution. And probably not even the best one, because it is authoritarian. We tell the listeners: We decide when and for how long you must listen. Not very tempting for a young audience. Streaming and podcast with apps – that’s the future, or rather the present, right now. Technological innovation is happening so fast these days that yesterday’s truth is obsolete tomorrow. What we can observe is that more and more people walk and travel with a white cable from their pockets to their ears. Our ambition must be to fill that cable with as much sounddrama as possible. So there are at least three primary challenges: Content and distribution – and the connection between them. And production. In our horizons we don’t think budgets for sounddrama will increase. So we need to find ways to produce smarter, quicker, cheaper.
The challenge is to find the younger audience, our future audience. We have tried to find them through a project called “Horron on the net.” An interactive deal where the audience write the scripts. These small sounddramas has been free to be podcasted due to special rights for this project. So far more than 100 000 have podcasted them which is considered to be very good.
We have also a dramatic writing community, a laboratory for developing new texts with both established and younger writers. The challenges for the future are among others linked to rights, formats, leaders understanding of the necessity for means, and most of all awarenesbulding in the audience."
Else Barrat-Due, NRK, director/producer, Norway
The challenge is to find the younger audience, our future audience. We have tried to find them through a project called “Horron on the net.” An interactive deal where the audience write the scripts. These small sounddramas has been free to be podcasted due to special rights for this project. So far more than 100 000 have podcasted them which is considered to be very good.
We have also a dramatic writing community, a laboratory for developing new texts with both established and younger writers. The challenges for the future are among others linked to rights, formats, leaders understanding of the necessity for means, and most of all awarenesbulding in the audience."
Else Barrat-Due, NRK, director/producer, Norway
Nutshell: Connor Walsh
“Radio features are pure humanity, yet are grounded in technology. That foundation has evolved – field recording, to stereo, to digital broadcast and now on-demand.
Evolution, to us non-scientists, means survival of the fittest, and extinction of the laggards.
There's a feature producer at Radio New Zealand who had the choice of retiring along with the tape machines, or of facing up to learning a digital editing system. He chose to stay working, and a few years later his cubical wall was adorned with love poems to someone called "Sadie".
He chose not to retire, because of financial necessity.
This may ring familiar: the human fight amidst the machines.
Radio features makers are curious and egotistical people, so we should enjoy digging into new ways of being heard, no?"
Connor Walsh, In The Dark Radio, manager, United Kingdom
Evolution, to us non-scientists, means survival of the fittest, and extinction of the laggards.
There's a feature producer at Radio New Zealand who had the choice of retiring along with the tape machines, or of facing up to learning a digital editing system. He chose to stay working, and a few years later his cubical wall was adorned with love poems to someone called "Sadie".
He chose not to retire, because of financial necessity.
This may ring familiar: the human fight amidst the machines.
Radio features makers are curious and egotistical people, so we should enjoy digging into new ways of being heard, no?"
Connor Walsh, In The Dark Radio, manager, United Kingdom
Nutshell: Thomas Weibel
“Radio documentaries are the gems in the gravel of news and entertainment. The earplug culture spoils our ability to listen to the probably best radio can offer: atmosphere, sounds, and voices telling thrilling stories.
Radio makers tend to hang their head. New media kill cultural radio they say. Nothing could be more wrong. New Media provide an ocean of content, of knowledge and of social experience. They are not the danger they are said to be. In the beginning of the 20th century newspapers were said to push aside books, later radio was going to kill the papers, TV was killing radio. None of it came true. New media, I believe, are above all a huge opportunity. New forms and formats arise. One of them is the web documentary. Web docs can be based on photography, on video, or on audio. Last year's Prix Europa winner, an amazing French web doc called "À l'abri de rien" ("Nowhere Safe", www.a-l-abri-de-rien.com), is deep resarch and a piece of art at the same time, a shattering story about people living unter painfully poor conditions, told in their own words. "À l'abri de rien" is photography and, at the core, radio doc at its best.
New media are a new stage for the best storytellers there are: for radio doc makers."
Thomas Weibel, freelancer, associate professor for multimedia production, University of Applied Sciences, Chur, Switzerland
Radio makers tend to hang their head. New media kill cultural radio they say. Nothing could be more wrong. New Media provide an ocean of content, of knowledge and of social experience. They are not the danger they are said to be. In the beginning of the 20th century newspapers were said to push aside books, later radio was going to kill the papers, TV was killing radio. None of it came true. New media, I believe, are above all a huge opportunity. New forms and formats arise. One of them is the web documentary. Web docs can be based on photography, on video, or on audio. Last year's Prix Europa winner, an amazing French web doc called "À l'abri de rien" ("Nowhere Safe", www.a-l-abri-de-rien.com), is deep resarch and a piece of art at the same time, a shattering story about people living unter painfully poor conditions, told in their own words. "À l'abri de rien" is photography and, at the core, radio doc at its best.
New media are a new stage for the best storytellers there are: for radio doc makers."
Thomas Weibel, freelancer, associate professor for multimedia production, University of Applied Sciences, Chur, Switzerland
Nutshell: Katrin Moll
“I belong to the generation compact cassette. I grew up with the Sony Walkman, which changed the listening habit of a whole generation. Take what you want to hear with you, make it your soundtrack while you are on the move – analog and linear.
Now there is a big revival of this mobile listening habit with all these mobile devices popping up everywhere– digital and non-linear.
I have the feeling, that my generation (and younger) is constantly moving. I am thinking of canceling my landline, because I don’t use it anymore. I watch TV on my smart phone and listen to radio on the Internet. People invest in really good headphones – the mobile listening quality is often much better than if they’d listen to the stuff at home on their mono kitchen radio. And I think that’s wonderful! There are so many opportunities lying ahead. For sure every new medium offers new tools and new techniques and therefore demands new forms. And that is what I am interested in as an editor – and actually I do not worry about these new forms, I see them coming.
As an author and director I am not afraid about these new possibilities – on the contrary – but I am much concerned about how I get paid (properly) for content that is distributed via Internet. Besides finding new forms for the digital distribution platforms, I feel that is one of the big challenges for the radio stations in the digital age."
Katrin Moll, Deutschlandradio Kultur, radio drama/radio feature, Germany
Now there is a big revival of this mobile listening habit with all these mobile devices popping up everywhere– digital and non-linear.
I have the feeling, that my generation (and younger) is constantly moving. I am thinking of canceling my landline, because I don’t use it anymore. I watch TV on my smart phone and listen to radio on the Internet. People invest in really good headphones – the mobile listening quality is often much better than if they’d listen to the stuff at home on their mono kitchen radio. And I think that’s wonderful! There are so many opportunities lying ahead. For sure every new medium offers new tools and new techniques and therefore demands new forms. And that is what I am interested in as an editor – and actually I do not worry about these new forms, I see them coming.
As an author and director I am not afraid about these new possibilities – on the contrary – but I am much concerned about how I get paid (properly) for content that is distributed via Internet. Besides finding new forms for the digital distribution platforms, I feel that is one of the big challenges for the radio stations in the digital age."
Katrin Moll, Deutschlandradio Kultur, radio drama/radio feature, Germany
Nutshell: Kaye Mortley
“These eclectic pieces (woven of sound, silence, music and words) which we call "radio features" (possibly for want of a better name, so diverse are they in form, content and intention) are finding a new place in the world in the age of the web. No longer will they pass in a moment- "the real time" of their actual duration- leaving no other trace than the imprint left on the ear (and the sensibilities) of the listener who happened to have tuned in when they were floated out onto the airwaves before disappearing, perhaps forever, into some cupboard or other, more sophisticated and official archival system. Still fleeting by their very essence, they are yet becoming immanent in terms of the accessibility which internet offers...
And one wonders just what this implies... for the author, for the piece, and for the listener.
And this is one of the things I hope to reflect upon during the time of the think tank."
Kaye Mortley, freelancer, France
And one wonders just what this implies... for the author, for the piece, and for the listener.
And this is one of the things I hope to reflect upon during the time of the think tank."
Kaye Mortley, freelancer, France
Nutshell: Udo Noll
“Aside from many others, an important quality of radio is its connectivity, the ability to create an almost spatial presence, among a virtual community of listeners, and of the media itself. The broad scales of old receivers tell a a story about this relation between space and the self, they are maps of a sonic landscape centered around an open ear.
The Internet shares some of these qualities, it's closer to radio than we may think. Today's most successful platforms are mainly text-based, which is surprising, given the audio-visual power of the system. And it's hard to imagine that this is because of the great depth and quality of the exchanged content. But it has to do with a state of beeing_connected, with contiguity in an vitually endless digital space, and with the presence of an audience. It's the broadcast nature of it, though transformed into a different media and different social practises.
When thinking about its own future, the feature as one of the most intriguing radio forms, should sense this connectivity, related technologies and practises. stations should have interest and budgets for experimental projects, since new fictions and narratives increasingly develop within these digital spheres."
Udo Noll, Radio Aporee, director, Germany
The Internet shares some of these qualities, it's closer to radio than we may think. Today's most successful platforms are mainly text-based, which is surprising, given the audio-visual power of the system. And it's hard to imagine that this is because of the great depth and quality of the exchanged content. But it has to do with a state of beeing_connected, with contiguity in an vitually endless digital space, and with the presence of an audience. It's the broadcast nature of it, though transformed into a different media and different social practises.
When thinking about its own future, the feature as one of the most intriguing radio forms, should sense this connectivity, related technologies and practises. stations should have interest and budgets for experimental projects, since new fictions and narratives increasingly develop within these digital spheres."
Udo Noll, Radio Aporee, director, Germany
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)