RTV Theory and Practice - Special Issue

1 ) the small size and modest budgets of most regulatory bodies , which makes it difficult for them to weigh evidence presented to them by would-be licensees and by citizens of the communities where service is being proposed . For example , the French CNCL has about 200 staff members , and roughly 1,500 licensed radio stations (with a few to several hunđred more pirates) . 2 ) the possible presence of political or economic infiuence , which could render the careful assessments of the regulatory body meaningless (presuming that the body were able to undertake them in the first place ) . Hence , why bother with the effort and cost of a careful assessment? 3) fear on the part of governments that the 'wrong' sorts of applicants may wish to operate stations , e.g. for the strengthening of a local or regional cultural as opposed to the national culture . If the government keeps the licensing conđitions general or vague , then it doesn't risk embarrassment when the 'wrong' applicant ioses and then accuses the government of having rigged the licensing conditions so that it couldn't possibly have won . 4) lack of апу overall communications policy that would indicate the roles the various media are to play in serving society . If there's no overall sense that there аге roles to be piayeđ , then licensing conditions have no ultimate founđation . 5) the possible presence of a free-enterprise or egalitanan philosophy that advocates the last possible regulation , so that, to paraphrase Mao Tse Tung, 'a hundred flowers (stations) may bloom , a hundred thoughts contend . Under such conditions , a regulatory body will try to make available as much frequency spectrum space as possible in order to permit the existence of as many stations as possibie , no matter what the nature of their service (so long as it doesn't violate criminal law ) . The task of the body then becomes a technical one - to keep stations from mterfermg with опе another - and statlons will rise and fall accordmg to the support they're able to muster , whichever audiences are served or unserved . 6 ) the feelmg on the part of the government in general or the regulatory bođy in particular that it simply isn't feasible to delineate the component parts of a community , and that апу attempt to do so will only arouse expectations that ultimately are unattainable .

133