Journal of Radio Studies The new competitive

This article was downloaded by: [Statsbiblioteket Tidsskriftafdeling] On: 30 April 2015, At: 02:58 Publisher: Routledge Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Journal of Radio Studies Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/hjrs19

The new competitive environment of radio broadcasting in the Nordic countries: A short history of deregulation and analysis a

Taisto Hujanen & Per Jauert

b

a

Associate Professor of Electronic Media in the Department of Journalism and Mass Communication , University of Tampere , Finland b

Associate Professor at the Department of Information and Media Science , University of Aarhus , Denmark Published online: 05 Jun 2009.

To cite this article: Taisto Hujanen & Per Jauert (1998) The new competitive environment of radio broadcasting in the Nordic countries: A short history of deregulation and analysis, Journal of Radio Studies, 5:1, 105-131, DOI: 10.1080/19376529809384533 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19376529809384533

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content. This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http:// www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Journal of Radio Studies/Vol. 5, No. 1,1998

The New Competitive Environment of Radio Broadcasting in the Nordic Countries: Downloaded by [Statsbiblioteket Tidsskriftafdeling] at 02:58 30 April 2015

A Short History of Deregulation and Analysis Taisto Hujanen and Per Jauert The new competitive environment of radio broadcasting in the Nordic countries consists of three sectors: (1) public service radio channels, (2) commercial radio stations and networks, and (3) community radio. Commercial radio represents the latest phase in a long process of transformation that started with decentralization inside the national broadcasting corporations in the 1960s and continued with introduction of noncommercial forms of local and community radio since the late 1970s. In the 1990s, commercial radio represents a hegemonic cultural form whose values and meanings penetrate to all sectors of radio. As a response to commercialization, the public service broadcasting tradition is undergoing a serious rearticulation. In contrast with the radical liberalism of the 1980s, there seems to be a growing political will to safeguard a balanced dualism of noncommercial and commercial forms of broadcasting. INTRODUCTION In their book on global broadcasting systems, Hilliard and Keith (1996) conclude that Scandinavian countries held out against commercialization longer than the rest of Europe. This contrast with the rest of Europe is clearest when the Scandinavian experience is compared with rapid changes of traditional broadcasting structures in France and Italy, where the public institutions lost

Taisto Hujanen (Ph.D., University of Tampere-Finland, 1986) is Associate Professor of Electronic Media in the Department of Journalism and Mass Communication, University of Tampere, Finland. His research interests include generic development and cultural transformation of broadcast journalism, comparative analysis of broadcasting and electronic media. Per Jauert (Cand. Phil., University of Aarhus-Denmark, 1978) is Associate Professor at the Department of Information and Media Science, University of Aarhus, Denmark. His research interests include radio, local media and media policy, and history of Danish broadcasting.

Downloaded by [Statsbiblioteket Tidsskriftafdeling] at 02:58 30 April 2015

106 Journal of Radio StudiesNoL 5, No. 1,1998 their dominant position in the 1980s. The longer resistance to commercialism in Northern Europe—here referred to as the Nordic countries—is most striking with regard to radio broadcasting.1 Hilliard and Keith use the term commercialization in connection with the ownership and control of broadcasting, referencing the familiar distinction between two opposing approaches to broadcasting—public and commercial. This historical distinction is important but a bit too narrow because "public" and "commercial" represent aspects of two intersecting dimensions. These are the public/private dimension of ownership and the commercial/noncommercial dimension of finance. The traditional division of public and commercial connotes a cultural distinction as well, one in which "commercialization" highlights a pivotal cultural transformation in broadcasting. As in the United States, commercial radio in the Nordic countries is equated with private ownership and control of broadcasting. For particular historical reasons, "public radio" has somewhat different connotations because it refers, first of all, to the national public broadcasting institutions that enjoyed monopolies in radio broadcasting for decades in their respective countries. Therefore, the notion of "private radio" in the Nordic countries includes forms of noncommercial radio that the US practice would label as public. As will be shown later, the privatization of radio broadcasting in the Nordic countries started with noncommercial forms. Commercial radio is a far more recent phenomenon. A critical point for understanding the historical role of public broadcasting institutions in the Nordic countries lies in their relationship with the state. Despite monopoly status, these organizations were never state institutions in the sense of public schools or government offices. Therefore, speaking about "state systems" or "government channels" to reference them may be misleading (see Hilliard & Keith; cf. McCain & Lowe 1990). In fact, their formal status as public corporations has guaranteed a necessary measure of journalistic independence in relation to governments and parliaments. The reason for that lies in the principal form of funding in all Nordic countries— the user license fees. From the point of view of public broadcasters, the license fee is a guarantee of fruitful autonomy from the market and politics, with "market" referring to advertising as a source of revenues and "politics" to direct government funding (see, for example, Wessberg, 1997). The classic "enlightenment mission" of the public broadcasters has turned to a more politically-oriented mission of creating informed Citizens. Historically, the new mission can be linked with the ideology of the Nordic welfare societies in which an equal access to knowledge was seen as a cornerstone of democratization (for details, see Hujanen, 1995). In addition, one should remember that in the 1960s, regions received a more independent status in the national broadcasting institutions, which opened new possibilities for audience identifications. In this way, modernization of broadcasting became


Taisto Hujanen, Per Jauert /RADIO IN THE NORDIC COUNTRIES 107 linked with decentralization and the much later commercialization of radio broadcasting. In fact, decentralization can be considered as a key factor in the successful adaptation of public radio monopolies to meet the challenge of television. As is documented later, decentralization resulted in forms of radio that broke the traditional monopoly structure even before the introduction of commercial radio. This modernization not only succeeded in keeping radio alive, but allowed it to compete amazingly well with the increasing popularity of television. However, towards the end of the 1970s, and keenly in the early 1980s, it became clear that radio had difficulties in keeping a grip on younger audiences. To avoid marginalization, radio broadcasting needed to make major changes in its professional work cultures. In this atmosphere, which coincided with the deregulatory trends of the 1980s, the traditional suspicion about commercial radio decreased. Gradually but inexorably, a partial commercialization of radio broadcasting unfolded in the Nordic countries. The past ten years or so in the history of broadcasting in the Nordic countries represent a qualitatively new phase in the development of radio culture. The new competitive situation between public and commercial broadcasters has revitalized radio as a medium. The amount of radio programming has increased and the average listening time has also grown (for more details, see Nordicom Review, 1991). Recent Nordic statistics show that the average listening time is 220 minutes a day in Finland, 190 in Iceland, 199 in Sweden, 153 in Denmark, and 138 in Norway (Carlsson & Harrie, 1997). Commercialism has not only resulted in the introduction of American-style commercial radio stations in the Nordic countries, but has also dominated the transformation of radio culture in general—that is, even public broadcasters have adopted values and practices characteristic of commercial business operators.2 The question on the new role of the public broadcasting institutions is one of the important issues to be dealt with by this symposium. It justifies this body of work about radio broadcasting in the Nordic countries for a symposium in this American journal (JRS). It illuminates the impact of American commercial radio on the former exclusively noncommercial radio environment. But, parallel to that, it also highlights a new kind of interplay between competitive models of radio broadcasting in a situation in which the public element is much stronger than is the case in the United States. As documented below, public access and applications of citizens' radio concept are also important in most Nordic countries and add to the diversity of the present structures of broadcasting. We begin with an overview of the composition of radio in the Nordic countries at the systemic level. This perspective identifies basic structures and policy issues in the present day competitive environment of radio broadcasting. Then, we turn to professional and cultural changes within radio broad-


108 Journal of Radio StudiesA/o\. 5, No. 1,1998 casting practice. Here we will focus on developments in the 1980s, which, in broadcasting and telecommunications in general, is known as a decade of deregulation (or as some prefer to call it, reregulation). Our intention is to give a concise description of when and how the former national monopolies of radio broadcasting turned to a more decentralized and diversified structure, and how this change affected the professional culture as well as the radio culture in general. The article will end with a review of recent discussion concerning the reinterpretation of public service and the future role of public service broadcasters in the Nordic countries and beyond. FROM MONOPOLY TO COMPETITION The sweeping structural changes of radio broadcasting in the Nordic countries, which gradually moved from rigid national radio monopolies to the presentday open market situation, can be traced to the 1960s. This process of decentralization and deregulation is presented below (Figure 1) as occurring in three phases. As to the nature of these phases, one should emphasize that they do not strictly follow each other in time; they may overlap in part and even appear in a different order because of varied national conditions. The earliest phase is represented by decentralization within the national public broadcasting corporations, which, since the 1960s, have invested in regional program production and transmission. In the beginning, regional production aimed at strengthening the visibility of regions in the national public sphere, but with increased local transmission time, the regions also adopted a more autonomous status. Since the 1970s, regional operations within the national broadcasting corporations have developed into a network of regional radio stations. The network only secondarily serves the national public sphere and primarily adopts a specific regional identity. In Iceland, the smallest of the Nordic countries, this phase came latest and overlapped with commercialization in the middle of the 1980s.3 As demonstrated in Figure 1, the most radical form of the early decentralization initiatives was implemented in Sweden where the regional operations were separated from the Swedish Broadcasting Corporation (SR). Since 1977, these regional centers have formed an independent public corporation called Sveriges Lokalradio AB (Sweden's Local Radio Ltd, LRAB), which formally assumed the status of a separate daughter company to SR. A functional separation of educational radio took place also in the form of Sveriges Utbildningsradio (Sweden's Educational Radio), which formally had no link with SR. In 1993, due to the introduction of commercial radio, Sweden returned to the integrated model of public service radio, and LRAB's regional operations were reintegrated with the national broadcasting corporation. The second phase of change is characterized as the introduction of noncommercial local and community radio. This noncommercial trend in local

Introduction of regional production & transmission

Experimental period 1983-86 Advertising allowed in local & community radio since 1988 Law on local radio 1986

FINLAND


Since 1987

ICELAND


NORWAY


First experiments 1981-1983 Advertising allowed in local & community radio since 1988 Permanent since 1988 National commercial radio 1993

SWEDEN


Experiments with "narradio" 1979 (Neighborhood radio) Permanent "narradio* since 1986

DENMARK

—

Sveriges Lokalradio AB 1977 (Sweden's Local Radio Ltd) Sveriges Utbildningsradio AB 1978 (Sweden's Educational Radio Ltd)

(Since the Mid-1980s)

Introduction of commercial local radio stations 1985; permanent 1989 National commercial radio 1997 National commercial radio 1986

Introduction of commercial local radio stations 1993 Advertising allowed in "narradio" 1993

U

fHE NOF?DIC COUNTRIES 105

(Since the 1960s)

LNIOI

PHASE III: Introduction of Commercial Radio

PHASE II: Introduction of Non-Commercial Local/Community Radio (Since the late 1970s)

PHASE I: Decentralization of National Radio

ert/RAD


Phase/Country

faisto Hujanen, F

Figure 1. Decentralization/Deregulation of Radio Broadcasting in the Nordic Countries.


110 Journal of Radio StudiesA/ol 5, No. 1,1998 and community radio is typical of the early deregulation of radio broadcasting in the Nordic countries. Finland and Iceland differ, however, in that they introduced private commercial radio without the prior turn to noncommercial forms of local and community radio. Since 1987, noncommercial local and community radio appears also in Finland, but remains a marginal phenomenon. In addition, one should keep in mind that Iceland is a unique case among the Nordic countries due to its policy of allowing advertising as a source of revenue for the national broadcasting corporation. The aspect of "locality" in the characterization the new radio stations in Phase II implies, in part, their form of organization and also the ideology of localism as a basis for their operations. The second aspect—community— demonstrates the role of the new radio as a critique of the paternalism associated with the national broadcasting corporations. The new stations rejected the professionalized forms of radio and instead emphasized public access and direct community participation (on this discussion more generally, see Jankowski, Prehn, & Stappers, 1992; cf. Jauert & Prehn, 1995). The Swedish experiments of narradio since 1979 introduced the noncommercial trend of privatization. The term narradio refers to the limited reach of the transmissions of such stations. As the English translation into "neighborhood radio" indicates, these transmissions were limited to a reach of some five kilometers (about 2.5 miles). The stations were operated by neighborhood radio associations that represented local people, organizations, and interest groups. After a long period of experiments, neighborhood radio was made permanent in 1986. By then, the number of stations had grown to 98 and the number of concession owners to 1542 (Hedman, 1993). Experiments in noncommercial local and community radio were introduced in Denmark and Norway soon after the Swedish narradio initiative. They applied, in part, to the organization and spirit of neighborhood radio, but in their case the localism of these new operations played a more important role. Technically, local and community radio reached a wider community than in Swedish narradio. In the beginning, the new stations typically covered one municipality, but were later allowed to spread to a maximum of five municipalities. The local organization of these stations smoothed the step from noncommercial forms of privatization to outright commercialization, and that helps explain why commercial radio was introduced so much earlier in Denmark and Norway when compared to Sweden (cf. Jankowski et al., 1992). Private commercial radio was introduced earliest in Finland (1985) and a year later in Iceland. In Finland, the new private operators consisted of commercial local radio stations whereas in Iceland a private national channel was launched. In Denmark and Norway, commercialization was introduced in the late 1980s within the already existing sector of local and community radio stations. These stations were given the right to solicit advertising and, as a result, this sector was divided into business-oriented commercial stations and


Taisto Hujanen, Per Jauert/RADIO IN THE NORDIC COUNTRIES 111 community radio stations, which carried on the spirit of neighborhood radio. The resistance against commercialization lasted longest in Sweden, where the new sector of commercial local radio was launched only in 1993. Parallel to that, advertising was allowed as a source of revenue in neighborhood radio. The latter decision symbolized the de facto commercialization of a part of neighborhood radio stations. As in Denmark and Norway, commercial radio started developing within the earlier noncommercial private sector, and the official introduction of advertising marked only the completion of this developmental trajectory. After the initial phase of commercialization, a national commercial channel was launched in 1993 in Norway, with Finland following suit in 1997. A similar reform is being considered in Denmark and Sweden, as well. As to the specific features of these developments, a major conclusion is that the deregulation of radio broadcasting in the Nordic countries took place in a controlled manner and was based on explicit goals within media policies. In this sense, the process is really more characteristic of reregulation rather than any kind of overall deregulation. As pointed out by some analysts, the reforms took place more "from above" than in Southern European countries where the national radio monopolies were pressed jointly by market forces and social movements (Jauert & Prehn, 1994; cf. Jauert & Prehn 1996; Kleinsteuber & Sonnenberg, 1990). In the Nordic countries, such pressures were filtered through an elaborate process of political and expert committees, which is one of the main reasons why the first phase of deregulation remained less commercial here than in Southern Europe.4 The key aspects of the new radio—that is localism, community, and participation—were considered vital for the development of democracy and, therefore, too important to be submitted to market forces. The controlled nature of deregulation here has allowed sufficient time for the national broadcasting corporations to adapt. The public service broadcasters, as the former monopolies are now called, have succeeded in maintaining their dominant role despite increased competition and the overall commercialization of radio culture. Their legitimacy and success today is, however, based on a new kind of market and audience orientation that has affected their value framework, production practices, and program output. In fact, as will be shown, the whole conception of "public service" has been reinterpreted in response to the new competitive situation. THE PRESENT STRUCTURE OF RADIO BROADCASTING The contemporary mixture of radio broadcasting structure in the Nordic countries consists of three sectors: • public service radio channels operated by the traditional national broadcasting corporations; • commercial radio stations and networks; • community radio.

112 Journal of Radio StudiesNol 5, No. 1,1998


Each sector will be considered separately. The main source of comparative statistics is a recent publication of NORDICOM entitled Media Trends 1997 (Carlsson & Harrie, 1997).5 More description and analysis of recent developments is available in English in another recent publication of NORDICOM (Carlsson, 1997), which is based on the first Nordic conference on radio research held at the University of Tampere, Finland, in October 1995. Public service radio Public service radio consists of the national and regional operations of the traditional national broadcasting corporations. Their names and channels are listed in Table 1, including a categorization of channel formats and the daily reach of the channels. The categorization of channel formats demonstrates the response of public service broadcasters to increased competition. Earliest in Finland (1990) and soon after that in Denmark (1992), Norway (1993) and Sweden (1993), national public service broadcasters restructured their services into three basic categories characterized as (1) an adultoriented channel; (2) a speech, culture and music channel; and (3) a youthoriented channel. The adult-oriented channels are the most popular among the listeners, except in the case of Denmark. The adult-oriented channel is typically a mixture of national and regional news and topical magazines, with a lot of middle-of-the-road (MOR) music. The services of the channel are regionally organized, serving nine regions in Denmark, 28 in Finland, 18 in Norway, and 25 in Sweden. National popular music dominates the music profile. The core audience of the adult-oriented channels is between 30 and 50 years of age. More details of this and other public service channels will be given by Kemppainen in his article that analyzes the strategies and logic of the channel reform (pp. 133-150 of this issue of JRS). The figures of daily reach in Table 1 show that the public service broadcasters compete well with the commercial sector in popularity. One might wonder, however, whether the case of Norway is representative of future developments in other Nordic countries. Norway introduced a commercial, privately owned national channel in 1993 and, as the data in Table 1 demonstrate, the overall reach of Norwegian NRK is clearly less than in the other countries. A similar trend can be identified on the basis of market share, measured as a percentage of the total listening time (see Carlsson & Harrie, 1997). In 1995, the share of public service broadcasters was highest in Denmark with 78 percent, followed by Finland and Sweden with 69 percent. The respective figure in Norway was 62 percent. In terms of daily reach, the commercial sector is most important in Finland. In addition to an early introduction of commercial local radio, seminational commercial radio networks have also been recently introduced there (Classic FM, Kiss FM), and a national commercial channel (Radio Nova) was launched in spring 1997.


Table 1 Channel Formats of Public Service Radio in the Nordic Countries and the Daily Reach in 1995 (%) Country/Corporation & Channel/Reach DENMARK (1992) Channel Format Danmarks Radio (DR) Channel Reach(%)

ADULT ORIENTED CHANNEL

Danmarkskanalen

33

55

u FINLAND (1990) Yleisradio (YLE) Reach (%) Channel

Radio Suomi

44

NORWAY(1993) Norsk Rikskringkasting (NRK) Channel Reach (%)

P1

33

SWEDEN (1993) Sveriges Radio (SR) Channel Reach (%)

P4

CD sa

TJ

39

D SPEECH, CULTURE, MUSIC

YOUTH ORIENTED CHANNEL

P1

11

P2 Musik

3

P3

Cf. with: Local Radio National & Commercial

41

19

YlenYkkSnen

13

P2

5

P1

14

o z

P2

2

H

m z Radiomafia

22

39

P3 Petre

10

21

11

P3

30

18

o 70 a o o o c z m


114 Journal of Radio StudiesNol. 5, No. 1,1998 The continuing dominance of the public service broadcasters is highlighted by their economic resources. Their overall program output grew enormously in the 1980s, and that growth has continued upward in the 1990s (on the 1980s, see Nordicom Review, 1991). Their financing, which is based on user license fees, has not grown in a similar way and, in fact, the corporations have been obliged to make major cuts of expenses. However, their economic resources remain more than double in comparison with the private sector of radio broadcasting, including commercial and noncommercial operators. The Danish DR and the Finnish YLE separately report their costs for radio, and the figures from 1995 show that DR used 732 million crowns and YLE 644 million marks for radio (Carlsson & Harrie, 1997). These figures correspond to around 130 million US dollars. As to DR's total costs, the share of radio is 30 percent; a respective share at YLE is 33 percent. In comparison with the private sector, most operations of the national broadcasting corporations still represent a high-cost form of production that naturally affects their production practices as well as the amount and content of the output. Commercial radio Commercial local radio is the dominant type of private radio in the Nordic countries since its introduction more than 10 years ago. In economic terms, commercial radio is still a small business, but that scenario is changing. In 1990-1994, the average share for radio of total advertising revenues remained at 3 percent. That amount is low compared with the European (and American) averages of 7 percent. The potential for growth is demonstrated by the case of Norway where radio's share of the advertising revenues reached 6 percent in 1994. At that time, Norway and Iceland were the only Nordic countries that allowed national advertising on radio. In these two countries, the advertising revenues of radio per capita were also higher than in other Nordic countries. In absolute figures, the 1994 revenues were about 51 million US dollars in Norway, 30 million in Finland, 26 million in Denmark, 21 million in Sweden, and 7 million in Iceland (Carlsson & Harrie, 1997). As a business, the commercial sector of radio is dependent on a number of regulations that have restrained its growth and its role as an advertising medium. First of all, one should mention the ban against networking of programs, except for short news releases and—in some countries—music programs during the night. Secondly, regulations have restrained other kinds of networking in terms of concentration of ownership and cross ownership. Despite regulative intentions, however, various forms of networking are spreading, and national and multinational companies are infiltrating the Nordic markets (Table 2). Networking dominates commercial radio in Sweden where almost all local radio stations belong to some network. Here networking means that the

Taisto Hujanen, Per Jauert/RADIO IN THE NORDIC COUNTRIES 115


Table 2 Commercial Local Radio in the Nordic Countries (Fall 1996) Country

Name of Network

DENMARK

Uptown The Voice Alle Nordjyders Radio Radio ABC / Radio Alfa XFM Other stations

FINLAND

ICELAND

NORWAY

SWEDEN

No. of Stations

6 5 3 3 3 130

Media Groups

Tele Danmark Radio A/S Voice/SBS ANR Cooperating radio organizations 3 cooperating student organizations Independent

Classic FM 10 Kiss FM & other stations 4+5 Alexpress / Radio Alex 3

GWR / Classic FM SBS Aamulehti Group

Other stations

39

Independent

Aoalstooin, Klassik FM, X-iO

3

Aflvakinn h.f.

Other stations

7

Independent

Radio 1 Norge Radio Nettverk

15

Other stations

350

Radio Rix Energy Megapol Fria Media Other stations

25 2 13 10 7

Norsk Aller A/S Norsk Alter A/S Independent Kinnevik NRJ SF (Bonnier) Foundation Fria Medias Moder Independent

Notice: As to Norway, the category "other stations" includes all local radio stations. No statistics were available as to how many of these stations were commercial. The table in total is composed on the basis of Carlsson & Harrie, 1997, Tables 1-2 (pp. 195-196).

stations are run by the same owner in an affiliated structure, specified by identical formats and types of programs. Each station, however, composes its actual transmissions separately from other stations; in other words, networking does not mean identical flow of programming. The latter kind of networking is the model of national commercial networks considered separately below. Among the networks listed in Table 2, Classic FM and Kiss FM in Finland do not, in a strict sense, represent the model of commercial local


116 Journal of Radio StudiesNol 5, No. 1,1998 radio because they act as seminational networks, transmitting identical content in all their stations. The biggest network in Sweden, Radio Rix with 25 stations, is owned by a Swedish company called Kinnevik whose other operations include a Nordic television channel, TV3. Another domestic owner is the Bonnier group with 13 stations of Megapol. Bonnier is the biggest newspaper publisher in Sweden and now holds important shares in the Aamulehti Group in Finland, which owns the second biggest daily newspaper and a major share in a Finnish commercial television company. One of the Swedish networks, Energy with 21 stations, is owned by a foreign operator, the French NRJ, which is involved in private commercial radio in several European countries. In Norway, a Danish owned magazine company, Norsk Aller A/S, is a dominant shareholder in the Radio 1 network with 15 stations. The same owner is involved in a production company called Radio Nettverk that supplies news to 160 local radio stations in Norway. In Finland, the commercial local radio is dominated by the newspaper companies, and the second biggest group, Aamulehti, operates one of the major local radio networks (Radio Alex). A multinational company, Scandinavian Broadcasting System (SBS), is involved in one of the seminational networks, Kiss FM, as well as in a number of individual stations. SBS is a part of Walt Disney/Capital Cities. Classic FM, another seminational network, is a part of the British Classic FM. There is an interesting link between commercial local radio stations in Finland and the British public broadcaster BBC. More than 20 stations relay the BBC news in Finnish, which is produced by BBC's Finnish language section. The multinational SBS is also engaged in Danish commercial local radio and television. In Denmark, the dominating company is Tele Danmark Radio A/S with 6 stations. In March 1997, it also launched the first Danish commercial cable and satellite radio—Radio 2—which covers almost 60 percent of all Danish households. Until now, commercial local radio has found it difficult to convince advertisers that radio is a reliable and efficient medium for marketing. Their reluctance is due in part to restrictive regulations and the general legislative framework in the Nordic countries. Furthermore, development has remained slow because of small markets and for technical reasons, especially weak transmitters. The audiences may consist of 200,000 potential listeners or even less, and it is difficult for such small stations to meet the professional standards required by advertisers. In spite of these initial difficulties, commercial local radio now has a firm place in the structure of radio broadcasting in the Nordic countries and, as will be discussed shortly, their cultural impact exceeds economic criteria. The commercialization of radio broadcasting was introduced on a local level, with the nationwide developments being a quite recent phenomenon in the Nordic countries. Iceland launched a commercial national network called Bylgjan


Taisto Hujanen, Per Jauert/RADIO IN THE NORDIC COUNTRIES 117 ("The Wave") in 1986. It is a part of a private radio and television company that operates two nationwide television channels (Broddason, 1996). Norway's national commercial channel is called P4 (Radio Hele Norge A/S) and was established in 1993. It is run by a private company in which Swedish Kinnevik holds 25 percent of the capital share. The channel is targeted to people from 20 to 50 years of age, and the output is dominated by news, entertainment game shows, and music. The format does not differ from local commercial radio, except in its national orientation. For that reason, the market share of local commercial radio has gone down since the introduction of P4, while NRK's adult channel seems to be less affected by the competition. Unlike its commercial competitors, NRK's adult profile is more journalism oriented. By originally restricting commercialization to the local level, the Nordic governments tried to create a sort of functional divide in the market across various sectors of radio broadcasting. The argument was that the "infection" of commercialism into the values of the public service sector could thus be controlled. Another official argument was that the scarce FM frequencies available should be reserved for the diversification of the public service output. But in the spring of 1997, Finland joined Iceland and Norway by allowing commercialization at the national level. The new commercial channel is called Radio Nova and is owned by the commercial television company, MTV3, together with smaller shareholders who are loosely linked with major political parties. It was originally launched as a news channel, but after having secured the franchise, it started marketing its profile with adult rock music mixed with new hits. In Denmark and Sweden, the governments are considering plans for nationwide commercial channels, but at this writing (September 1997), no decisions had been made. Community radio Community radio is most widespread in Sweden, where there are some 900 franchised operators distributed among about 200 transmitters. As documented in the historical review of deregulation above, Swedish community radio can be characterized as a neighborhood radio, which refers to its small transmission areas. The nonprofit local and other organizations that operate the neighborhood radio stations represent religious, political, and environmental groups, as well as organized forms of leisure-time activities. Most operators are on air for only a few hours weekly or monthly. As to the definition of community radio in the Nordic countries, one should emphasize that advertising is now allowed on these stations, but it remains marginal in their economy and output. Community radio stations do not exist for profit making. In this sense, they are closer to public service radio than to local commercial stations. In Denmark and Norway, the number of community radio stations is lower, but one should remember that in these countries the community stations correspond technically to local radio (as previously discussed). Denmark has


118 JournalofRadio StudiesNol 5, No. 1,1998 about 100 stations and Norway has about 250. In Iceland there are 10 community radio stations, most of them in the capital of Reykjavik. Community radio is least visible in Finland where only a couple of stations follow that ideology, and a few others apply its concepts as one aspect in their overall activities. In fact, the notion of broadcasting fits rather badly with regard to the activities of community radio stations. Narrowcasting better characterizes their output, which often aims at very narrow audiences with special interests or particularized backgrounds. "The community" of community radio stations is not always based on local traditions or geography; ethnicity and interest orientation are typical features. Sometimes the "local" point of view is even connected with a global orientation. There is also a growing interest among community radio activists in the Nordic countries to join international experiments with radio and Internet, and participate in community radio associations like AMARC (Association Mondiale des Artisans de Radios Communautaires). Economically, community radio stations are run on very low budgets and, for years, some have been impoverished. Both in Denmark and Norway, the national authorities have tried to create a system of public funding—the so-called "Robin Hood model"—based on a tax fee generated from the commercial stations. These arrangements have, however, been cancelled in both countries because of poor results. But in 1997, the Danish government decided to start funding noncommercial local radio and television stations directly from the state budget with an annual amount of 50 mio. DKR (approximately $7.5 million US). IMPACT OF THE NEW COMPETITIVE SITUATION The breaking up of national radio monopolies and the introduction of commercial radio stations and networks have deeply changed the social, political, and cultural understanding of radio in the Nordic countries. A profound transformation of professional work cultures and practices is giving rise to a new kind of relationship between radio and its listeners. The earlier dominant view of radio as a forum of the national public sphere and a vehicle for the unified national culture has given way to more diversified and contradictory meanings. In comparison with radio historically, the new dominant view considers radio less serious and less political, and also more entertaining, individualistic, everyday-like, and business oriented. All of these meanings illuminate the central importance of commercial radio as a model and a source of innovation for the Nordic radio today. In Figure 2, the cultural transformation of radio in the Nordic countries is highlighted in terms of two theoretical models of radio that are termed as Old and New Radio.6 The model of Old Radio illuminates the cultural understanding of radio prior to the new competitive situation that started emerging in the middle 1980s and that, step by step, introduced commercial radio in all


01

ft o

Figure 2 Cultural Impact of the New Competitive Situation - Comparison of Old and New Radio 3 "TJ (0

Old Radio: CD

POLICY

ORGANIZATION

PROGRAMMING

CONTENTS

AUDIENCE(S)

Education Enlightment Information Public Service

Bureaucratic Departments & Units Separation of Editorial / Technical

Main/Parallel Coordination Programs & Blocks

Universal Pluralism Balance

National / Regional Cultural Unity Citizenship Minorities Family Age, Gender, Occupation

3.

g o z H

m z

New Radio: POLICY

(0

o ORGANIZATION

Audience & Market Managerial & Orientation Industrial Populism Stations & Networks Channels Producers, DJs, Teams Independents

PROGRAMMING

CONTENTS

AUDIENCE(S)

Format Radio Profiled Channels Flow & Rotation

Fragmentation Diversification Products Music Radio

Segments & Demography Individualism Consumerism Life Style & Taste Channel Loyalty

3J D O O O

c z 7J m 0) to


120 JournalofRadio StudiesA/ol 5, No. 1,1998 Nordic countries. It represents the traditional ideology, organization, values, and norms of the national public broadcasting corporations in the Nordic countries. The other model, New Radio, is a typological construction of those features of radio broadcasting that have dominated the cultural transformation of radio in the new competitive environment of the 1990s. As one can quickly see, the basic features of New Radio correspond to typical elements of commercial radio and, in this sense, the latter model describes the commercialization of radio culture. Despite increasing commercialization, one should not see the relationship between the Old and New as exclusive. In culture, there are no clear-cut borders between Old and New. The Old forms continue living side by side with the New and, in addition, the various models influence each other. The notion of the new competitive situation demonstrates, in fact, the essence of today's radio culture in Nordic countries. Although commercialization has been the dominant trend in recent years, competition over the meanings of radio continues to be of decisive importance. Besides the basic contradiction between the public service tradition and commercial radio, one should keep in mind those forms of "new radio" that are often critical of all types of professionalism, public or commercial. These earlier forms of decentralization, particularly applications of public access and community radio, preceded the commercial turn and opened up the critique of the paternalism of the national broadcasting institutions (see Phase II in Figure 1). The two models of Figure 2 consist of five dimensions: policy, organization, programming, contents, and audience(s). Within each of the five dimensions, major changes can be identified. We will consider them point by point. Policy At the policy level, a general turn towards audience and market orientation has occurred. The paternalistic mission of education and enlightenment belongs to history, and even the public service broadcasters legitimate their policies in relation to audiences and markets. However, one should keep in mind that market orientation means different things for commercial and noncommercial operators. For commercial stations and networks, the market is in a direct and calculable relationship with the turnover and, in particular, with the advertising revenues of the operator. In the case of public broadcasters, this relationship is more indirect, and the market is first of all linked with the legitimation of their operations. In fact, one can say that instead of the earlier political legitimation of their positions, the public broadcasters are now entitled to legitimate their operations in terms of audiences and markets. That is, their public service mission is now linked with an obligation to demonstrate the success of their policies in terms of audience and market results. Increased populism is another dominant trend of the policy level. In its commercial formulation, the populism of New Radio is expressed by the


Taisto Hujanen, Per Jauert/RADIO IN THE NORDIC COUNTRIES 121 slogan "Give people what they want." In the relationship with the audience, such an approach is maintained through the overall consumerist ideology of New Radio. Populism is a general trend of the commercialization of culture, and a central feature of popular cultural forms labeled as "popular culture." In a historical perspective, one can conclude that the populism of New Radio symbolizes a major change in the role of radio as a social and cultural institution. Having been a forum of the national public sphere and a vehicle of the national culture, radio today represents a major link in the circulation of popular cultural forms like popular music. The populism of New Radio can also be understood politically, which is in fact more typical in the analysis of populism. As to commercial radio and television in the United States, populism is often linked with a general hostility toward politics and/or the political establishment. The latter aspect is typical to the origin of populist social movements. Such expressions of hostility and critique can be found in the New Radio of the Nordic countries, as well. However, it seems that the populism of New Radio is less an expression of open hostility or critique toward politics and/or the political elite, and more a celebration of the unique link between radio and its listeners. In other words, the populism of the New Radio emphasizes the media-mediated community between radio and its listeners, and considers politics and/or the establishment to be outsiders or alien to this community. In this media-centered relationship, common sense and everyday life constitute the frameworks within which the outside world is interpreted.7 Organization Old Radio was organized as a bureaucratic structure of departments and editorial units. Because broadcasting was not supposed to be a business, it was not seen as an industry, either. In Old Radio, there was a clear division between the editorial and technical sectors of professionalism. As to editorial work, an interesting historical curiosity is the fact that individual program makers (reporters, program editors, producers), despite their submission to a bureaucratic structure of production, had a far more independent status than they have today in the new managerial and industrial organization.8 Since the 1960s, their position has been safeguarded through collective action in the form of labor unions. In the 1980s, the notion of cultural industries was widely adopted as a point of departure for media and cultural policies in the Nordic countries. The new orientation was linked with the liberalization of economies and the deregulation of broadcasting. Parallel to that evolution, the European Community initiated several actions in support of the European audiovisual industry. The organization typical to New Radio corresponds to this orientation and, accordingly, today's radio is organized along managerial and industrial principles (for a case-study on this, see Lowe & Aim, 1997).


122 Journal of Radio StudiesA/oL 5, No. 1,1998 The commercial stations and networks follow the model of American commercial radio, but similar practices have been widely adopted by public broadcasters as well. In the new organization of production, producers and DJs are the key figures. A team led by a producer is the most important collective form of the new organization. Different from the bureaucratic units of the old organization, teams are much more open and temporary. Such a structure emphasizes the role of managerial positions as the guarantee of continuity and coordination. Among the managerial operations, scheduling is of growing importance because of increasing competition. In the production teams of New Radio, the division between editorial and technical professionalism is also narrower than earlier. Besides organizational factors, such a development has been supported by the new technology of production. As to the combination of production and transmission, commercial and public service radio are still different. Commercial radio introduced the American-style culture of radio stations. This is still the dominant form of commercial radio, although the networking of individual stations is increasing. Independent producers are still a marginal phenomenon here, but on some small stations in Finland, they do play a major role. The public service broadcasters transmit via channels that are specific to different audiences. However, their regional centers also operate now in the form of stations, although jointly they may constitute a national channel. Programming New Radio brought American-style programming into radio broadcasting in the Nordic countries. Naturally, Old Radio had its own practices in programming, but it never constituted such a strict set of rules (a nearly iron law) as today. As mentioned above in relation to organization, programming belongs to key managerial operations in New Radio. But in addition, a general awareness of the importance of programming characterizes today's professionalism of radio. As a result, the understanding of what constitutes the output of radio, and of what characterizes the relationship with the audience, has changed. Since the introduction of FM transmission, national public broadcasters have operated at least two parallel channels—at first, in the form of the main and the parallel program. In the beginning, the channels were considered complementary to each other, which created the problem of coordination between the channels. Gradually more specification between the channels took place, but a complete specialization of the channels is a result from the new competitive situation and represents the trends of New Radio. In other words, today the whole channels or, as in the case of commercial operators, the whole stations, are formatted with their specific sound, output, and audience. The basic ideas of formatting are borrowed from American commercial radio, but practices are different because of history and local conditions of competition.

Taisto Hujanen, Per Jauert/RADIO IN THE NORDIC COUNTRIES 123


The adoption of format radio not only meant specialization in relation to output and audiences but it also put an end to the program-centered aesthetics of radio. In New Radio, the output is structured as a "flow," and increasingly the individual elements are arranged according to a principle of rotation typical of American commercial radio. Contents Three principles—universalism, pluralism and balance—guided the program content of Old Radio. The rule "Something for everyone" describes the core of universalism. But as shown later in the discussion of the future of the public service mission, universality means also availability to all. Pluralism refers to a value basis of broadcasting; balance is predominantly a political concept. In the history of national public broadcasting corporations, balance has been the most contested field of the three principles due to its political implications. Fragmentation of content as an aspect of New Radio demonstrates the principles of format radio. Segmented, specialized audiences and markets presuppose specialized contents. Universalism may fit certain segments of audiences, but is no longer valid as an overall principle of programming. As to values and norms, diversification replaces the earlier pluralism. The former national cultural unity based on value pluralism breaks into diversified segments whose interaction with each other may remain minimal. Music radio refers to the central importance of music in the output of New Radio. Music has been important, and often dominant, in radio since its introduction. But in New Radio, its central role is perhaps overemphasized because of the importance of music in programming strategies and in the construction of audiences. The term "products" in the listing of New Radio's content features points to product orientation in the packaging of the output. It means that, similar to the production of consumer goods, each element of the output is carefully considered in relation to users and markets. In this way, product orientation in the output is linked with the audience and market orientation in the policy. Audiences The old national radio constructed a national audience, which later was complemented by regional subaudiences. The national audience was supposed to live in a cultural unity guaranteed by the value of pluralism in broadcasting. Socially and politically, broadcasting was seen as a forum of the national public sphere and, in this sense, the construction of citizenship was to be its central function in relation to the audience. The care of minorities was, and continues to be, an obligation of the national public broadcasters. In addition to its national obligations, Old Radio recognized some more limited identifications in the construction of the relationship with the audience. The domesticity, the


124 JournalofRadio StudiesA/ol 5, No. 1,1998 family orientation of Old Radio, is one of those aspects. With increased research on audiences, age, gender, and occupation were also acknowledged. Segmentation of audiences and the increased importance of demography are probably the most repeated aspects of New Radio, and the new competitive environment of mass communication in general (see, for example, Ang, 1991). In its relationship with listeners, radio has always been more individual and person-to-person oriented than any other mass medium (see, for example, Crisell, 1994). For New Radio, however, an individual means much more than a characteristic of the medium. Individualism is a central ideological construction of New Radio and, as such, it is maintained by the overall consumerism of New Radio. Besides individualism, life-style and taste are other important aspects of the commercialized radio culture, as well as of the commercialization of culture more generally. As to the characteristics of New Radio, the last aspect on the list is channel loyalty, which can be seen as an expression of New Radio's media-centered populism. For the listener of New Radio, the medium is not whatever channel or radio station, but is, rather, his or her own channel or station, dedicated to keep one going and satisfied. In the overall context of reception, this aspect is related to radio's close incorporation in the everyday life of its listeners (cf. Alasuutari, 1997; Ruohomaa, 1997). THE FUTURE OF PUBLIC SERVICE RADIO New interpretation of public service In media research and in the public debate on broadcasting, the concept of public service has recently become one of the major issues in the Nordic countries.9 As Hulten and Sondergaard pointed out in their introduction to a recent review of research on public service (Hulten, Sondergaard, & Carlsson, 1996), there are contradictory opinions of how the almost two decades of deregulation have affected the role of the public service broadcasters. Some debaters think that public service broadcasting remains a historical relict, while others argue that in the new environment its unique features will be more important than ever. In the legitimation of their policy initiatives, both critics and protagonists often refer to public service in a ritual manner. Such taken-for-granted use of the concept conceals its historical specificity and makes it difficult to rearticulate public service in a meaningful way (on this debate in the broader European and worldwide context, see Avery, 1993). In the following discourse, the research and debate concerning the conception of public service and the future of public service broadcasting will be reviewed and analyzed from the perspective of the Nordic countries. Our intention is to demonstrate that a serious rearticulation of the public service tradition is taking place in the Nordic countries, and that public service broadcasters will have a major role to play in the foreseeable future.


Taisto Hujanen, Per Jauert /RADIO IN THE NORDIC COUNTRIES 125 As previously pointed out, since the late 1970s, several governmental committees and expert groups have tried to control the deregulation process in the Nordic countries. The tradition and challenges of public service broadcasting have naturally been on the agenda of these committees and working groups. An illuminating example is the Danish Media Commission (19801984), which defined the guidelines for the future development of public service broadcasting (Mediekommissionen, 1985). Parallel to this endeavor, plans for a new private local radio sector and for the second nationwide television channel were launched. As a result, the Danish broadcasting corporation (DR) redefined its concept of public service based on five pillars.10 Public service broadcasting must: • Offer a diversified flow of programs that aim at different audiences during the day and are relevant to the specific audience segments. • Ensure that an essential segment of the programming is nationally produced. For small markets like the Nordic countries, such a requirement is essential and belongs to the core of cultural policies. It does not aim only at protecting national culture and national languages, but also at maintaining professionalism in domestic production. • Support the national production of cultural commodities in a broad sense. Here the goals of the national public service media are related to other areas of cultural policy. The broadcasting media should cooperate with the arts (music, drama, ballet, visual arts, film, etc.) in transmissions and coproductions. The central aim is to strengthen cultural production, first and foremost on the national level, but also in a Nordic and even a broader European perspective. • Ensure that the programs are accessible in a good technical quality and for the same price to all citizens, wherever they live within the borders of the nation. Unlike the commercial sector, it is not acceptable for public service broadcasters to concentrate on densely populated, lucrative areas alone. Public service radio and television continue to have a public utility function. • Be independent of private and specific political interests—and of the state. Although independence from government is underlined, public service broadcasters remain under public control. The control should not endanger the editorial independence of broadcasters, and should not serve anyone's specific political interests. Corresponding updatings of the concept of public service have been made in other Nordic countries, as well. Toward the end of the 1980s, in the wake of


126 Journal of Radio StudiesA/ol 5, No. 1,1998 intensified deregulation, it remained a central issue in the political debate on broadcasting and mass media in general. Most recently in Denmark, the governmental Media Committee (1994-1996) carried out a comprehensive survey of the national media policy and evaluated future perspectives. As to public service broadcasting, the committee developed a concept that may be considered representative for recent tendencies of media policy in the Nordic countries. First, there is now a more clearly defined distinction between those public demands that concern the entire media system and those that exclusively deal with public service broadcasting. The core of the new definition is that public service is seen as a kind of contract or agreement between the state and the public service broadcasting institutions. Such a contract focuses on the program output of the public service channels and sets more or less specific demands on the structure of the output. The demands may refer to the share of certain genres or program types of the output, to the composition of program flow in prime time, and to the share of nationally produced programs in comparison with foreign production. Contrary to the earlier practice in the Nordic countries, new definitions of public service do not necessarily link public service with a specific kind of ownership. Public service obligations are now incorporated in the franchises of some private broadcasters as well. Examples of that inclusion are represented by Norway's commercial television channel TV 2 and the Swedish TV4. Even the traditional combination of public service and license-fee funding is loosening, and today there are several public broadcasters who rely on mixed revenues from license fees, advertising, and sponsoring. In conclusion, one can say that in the future public service will dominantly refer to a certain kind of program output in broadcasting and less to organization, forms of control, or sources of financing (Medieudvalget, 1995, Appendix 64). However, Finland is an example of national broadcasting corporations that may still enjoy a special status through the public service mission. Since 1993, the national broadcasting corporation, YLE, has operated on the basis of a separate law that maintains its special status among broadcasters. In contrast to other broadcasters, it needs no longer apply for a franchise from the government for its operations. The turn toward contractual interpretation of public service has created a need for new forms of public control in broadcasting. The new approach can be understood as an evaluation of the public accountability of broadcasters (cf. McQuail, 1992; Sepstrup, 1994). By means of so-called public service accounts, the public service broadcasters are supposed to verify the degree to which they have met the standards, aims, and goals defined in their contract with the state. Their increased editorial and operative independence is seen to require that they submit their operations to a continuous public scrutiny.


Taisto Hujanen, Per Jauert/RADIO IN THE NORDIC COUNTRIES 127 The European reevaluation of public service It seems that there is now a growing concern, not just in the Nordic countries, but also in several joint European forums, about the future of public service broadcasting. This recent development contrasts with the radical liberalism of the 1980s, which considered public service broadcasting institutions as a threat to free competition. Even the European Commission, the executive body of the European Union, now seems ready to reevaluate its policy concerning public service broadcasters. An important milestone of the recent turn is a resolution that the Council of Europe adopted at its annual conference for the European ministers of the media in 1994. It reflects the contents of a declaration concerning the future role of public service broadcasting on which the European Broadcasting Union (EBU) agreed a year earlier.11 Among many similarities in these two documents, the most essential is that they underline the freedom of public service institutions to make strategic decisions with regard to new market conditions. In other words, public service broadcasters should be free to. pursue active competition with private broadcasting companies. The European ministers of media also agreed on a policy framework for public service broadcasting and defined a long list of public service requirements that characterize its special status. Within the member states of the European Union, the European Parliament has also stressed the need to strengthen public service broadcasting. This attitude is most recently expressed in a resolution attached to the so-called Green Paper about "Strategic Possibilities to Strengthen the European Programme Industry within the Audiovisual Policy of the European Union." The Green Paper acknowledges the right of public service broadcasters to compete on equal terms with private companies in the audiovisual market.12 The Parliament also made a proposal to the European Commission concerning financing of public service broadcasting and the EU-Treaty's provisions of free competition. According to the proposal, the Commission should clearly state that the funding of public service broadcasting does not conflict with the requirements of the Treaty. The proposal was accepted by the Commission in the Amsterdam summit in June 1997. The Council of Europe, the European Parliament, and the Commission have, in addition, adopted resolutions and agreed on reports concerning the third sector of radio broadcasting—the private noncommercial operators. In those documents the member states are encouraged to secure optimum conditions for noncommercial stations that aim at public access, diversity of programming, and strengthening of local democracy. (For a more extensive analysis of these problems, see Jauert & Prehn, 1994.) Clearly, then, media policies in the Nordic countries and on the European level show a refreshing tendency for strengthening the possibilities of public service broadcasters to meet the intensified competition. There is


128 JournalofRadio StudiesA/ol. 5, No. 1,1998 also a growing concern about the conditions of alternative forms of radio, particularly community radio and noncommercial local stations. Parallel to this concern, one should remember that the growth of the private sector will continue. However, recent changes in media policies demonstrate that there is a growing political will to safeguard the vitality of public service broadcasting and to maintain a balanced dualism of noncommercial and commercial forms of broadcasting. But will the digital future render superfluous the national and supranational attempts to maintain any public control of broadcast and other media? Why not let market forces decide the future? Such questions are posed all over the world today, not only by professionals in broadcasting but also by media scholars and politicians. One should remember that the digital future won't arrive overnight, and that there is currently plenty of room for new initiatives. Despite the fact that all Nordic public service broadcasters are now starting the transfer to DAB (Digital Audio Broadcasting), the transition period will take 10-15 years; meanwhile, the analogic channels will continue side by side with the digital ones. Commercial operators, in fact, remain hesitant and are waiting for more evidence of the niches for digital radio. Recent European decisions in Wiesbaden, Germany (1995) concerning the distribution of the future digital frequencies show that in the Nordic countries the number of available frequencies will not remarkably increase (Kemppainen & Soramaki, 1996). Each Nordic country was granted two so-called "multiplexes," one needed for regional operations, the other for national services. So the problem of scarce frequencies persists in the landbased networks of digital radio, and that problem highlights the continuing need for regulation. However, because of digital satellite transmissions and of integration of media technologies, cultural, economic and political arguments will play a more important role in the future media policies. References Alasuutari, P. (1997). Why does the radio go unnoticed? Radio research in Denmark, Finland, Norway and Sweden. The Nordicom Review of Nordic Research on Media and Communication, 1 (Special Issue), pp. 161-172. Ang, I. (1991). Desperately seeking the audience. New York: Routledge. Avery, R.K. (Ed.). (1993). Public service broadcasting in a multichannel environment. The history and survival of an ideal. New York: Longman. Broddason, T. (1996). Television in time. Research images and empirical findings. Lund studies in media and communication 2 (Monograph). Lund: Lund University Press. Carlsson, U. (Ed.). (1997). Radio research in Denmark, Finland, Norway and Sweden. The Nordicom Review of Nordic Research on Media and Communication, 1 (Special Issue). Carlsson, U., & Harrie, E. (Eds.). (1997). Media trends 1997 in Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway and Sweden. University of Gothenburg: NORDICOM.


Taisto Hujanen, Per Jauert/RADIO IN THE NORDIC COUNTRIES 129 Crisell, A. (1994). Understanding radio (2nd ed.). New York: Routledge. de la Garde, R., Gilsdorf, W., & Wechselmann, I. (with collaboration of J. LercheNielsen). (1993). Small nations, big neighbour: Denmark and Quebec/Canada compare notes on American popular culture. London: John Libbey. Hall, S. (1980). Popular democratic versus authoritarian populism: Two ways of taking democracy seriously. In Alan Hunt (ed.), Marxism and democracy (pp. 175-185). London: Lawrence & Wishart. Hedman, L. (1993). Radio. In U. Carlsson & M. Anshelm (Eds.), Medie Sverige 1993 (Media Sweden 1993), (pp. 235-246). NORDICOM-Sverige. Hilliard, R.L., & Keith, M.C. (1996). Global broadcasting systems. Boston: Focal Press. Hujanen, T. (1995). Political versus cultural in critical broadcasting research and policy: A reevaluation of the Finnish radical experiment in broadcasting in the late 1960s. In J.A. Lent (Ed.), A different road taken (pp. 257-268). Boulder: Westview Press. Hujanen, T. (1996). Democratization of communication as a Utopia. The experience from the Finnish radio reform in the 1980s. In Gazette, 57(3), 181-195. Hulten, O., Sondergaard, H., & Carlsson, U. (Eds.). (1996). Nordisk forskning om Public Service (Nordic Research on Public Service). Nordic Media Trends 2 (Monograph). Gothenburg: NORDICOM. Jankowski, N., Prehn, 0., & Stappers, J. (Ed.). (1992). The people's voice: Local radio and television in Europe. London: John Libbey. Jauert, P., & Prehn, O. (1994). Local radio policy in Europe and Scandinavia. Nordicom Review, 1 (Special Issue), pp. 137-162. Gothenburg: NORDICOM. Jauert, P., & Prehn, O. (1995). Lokalradio og lokal-tv. Nu og i fremtiden. (Local radio and local television, present and future). Copenhagen: Ministry of Culture. Jauert, P., & Prehn, O. (1996). Ownership and concentration in local radio broadcasting in Scandinavia. Nordicom Review, 1(Special Issue), pp. 81-106. Gothenburg: NORDICOM. Kemppainen, P. (1997). The development of radio and radio research: Perspectives towards a New Order. Radio research in Denmark, Finland, Norway and Sweden. The Nordicom Review of Nordic Research on Media and Communication, 1 (Special Issue), pp. 229-238. Kemppainen, P., & Soramaki, M. (1996). Den kommerciella konkurrensen, rundradions radioreform och den digitala framtiden (Commercial competition, radio reform and the digital future). In O. Hulten, H. Søndergaard, & U. Carlsson (Eds.), Nordisk forskning om public service (Nordic Research on Public Service), pp. 31-46. Gothenburg: NORDICOM. Kleinsteuber, H.J., & Sonnenberg, U. (1990). Beyond public service and private profit: International experience with noncommercial local radio. European Journal of Communication, 5(1), 87-106. Lowe, G.F. (1992). Value and meaning transformation in public service broadcasting: Competition and legitimacy in the Finnish radio renaissance. Dissertation of Telecommunications, The University of Texas at Austin. Lowe, G.F., & Aim, A. (1997). Public service broadcasting as cultural industry: Value transformation in the Finnish marketplace. European Journal of Communication, 12 (2), 169-191.


130 JournalotRadio StudiesNo\. 5, No. 1,1998 McCain, A., & Lowe, G.F. (1990). Localism in Western European radio broadcasting: Untangling the wireless. Journal of Communication, 40(1), 86-101. McQuail, D. (1992). Media performance. Mass communication and the public interest. London: Sage. Mediekommissionen (The Media Commission). (1985). Betasnkning om dansk mediepolitik (Report on Danish Media Policy). Copenhagen. Medieudvalget (The Media Committee). (1995). Betaenkning om de elektroniske medier (Report on the electronic media). Copenhagen. Nordicom Review. (1991). Media in transition: Studies of Denmark, Norway, Sweden and Finland. The Nordicom Review of Nordic Mass Communication Research, 2 (Special Issue). Nordic Television. (1994). History, politics and aesthetics. Sekvens, Special Edition & Festival Nordico—Prixltalia, RAI. Department of Film & Media Studies, University of Copenhagen. Ruohomaa, E. (1997). Radio as a (domestic) medium. In U. Carlsson, Radio research in Denmark, Finland, Norway and Sweden. The Nordicom Review of Nordic Research on Media and Communication, 1 (Special Issue). 151-160. Scannell, P. (1992). Public service broadcasting and modern public life. In P. Scannell, P. Schlesinger, & C. Sparks (Eds.), Culture and power (pp. 317-348). London: Sage. Sepstrup, P. (1994). TV i kulturpolitisk perspektiv (Television in a cultural policy perspective). Arhus: Klim. Syvertsen, T. (1990). 'Kringkästing i 1990-Œra: hvem ermest 'public service'? (Broadcasting in the 1990s: Who is most 'public-service'?). In U. Carlsson (Ed.), Medier, MŠnniskor, SamhŠIle [Media, Men, Society] (pp. 183-195). Gothenburg: NORDICOM. Syvertsen, T. (1992). Public television in transition. Oslo: Kult; Wessberg, A. (1997). Public service broadcasting: Towards autonomy from the market and politics? [A Keynote Speech in the International Seminar on Public Service Broadcasting and Editorial Independence: Strengthening Democratic Voices, Tampere, Finland, June 16-18, 1997.] The Finnish National Commission for UNESCO. Notes In the original call for papers of the symposium, the region to be covered was identified as Scandinavia. We prefer, however, to use the term "Nordic countries" to include in addition to Denmark, Norway, and Sweden also Finland and Iceland. These five countries in the Northern hemisphere of Europe constitute together an entity that, in our cultural understanding, is known as the Nordic countries. 2 For more information on the history and development of broadcasting in the Nordic countries, see Nordic Television (1994) and a special issue of Nordicom Review (1991) on Nordic media systems in transition. For an analysis of the American impact, see de la Garde et al., 1993. 3 The conclusion is based on communication with professor Thorbjôrn Broddason, University of Reykjavik; see also Broddason, 1996, on the development of broadcasting in Iceland. 1

Taisto Hujanen, Per Jauert /RADIO IN THE NORDIC COUNTRIES 131


4

The main examples of such committees are Radio Committee 1974-1977 in Sweden; Radio and Television Committee 1979-1984 in Finland; Media Commission 1980-1984 in Denmark; and the so-called Hanssen Committee 1981-1982 on neighborhood radio in Norway. 5 Nordicom means The Nordic Information Center for Media and Communication Research. It is a joint Nordic institution that has existed since 1972. It is a network of national Nordicom centers that is coordinated in the University of Gothenburg, Sweden. 6 Kemppainen (1997) uses a respective distinction by separating Old/New Order. On the cultural transformation of Nordic radio, see also Hujanen, 1996; Lowe, 1992; and Lowe & Aim, 1997. 7 Another kind of populism, different from commercial radio, is represented by community radio. One might apply Stuart Hall's (1980) distinction between authoritarian and democratic populism to highlight the difference. Scannell (1992), considering the history of British broadcasting, points out that populism is a general feature of broadcasting. For example, broadcasting did not adopt the language of the political and economic elite as such but has rather acted as a mediator and/or translator. Differing from Scannell, we argue that today's populism in radio is qualitatively different from earlier forms. It devalues and neglects politics and emphasizes the unique link between the medium and its users. 8 As to the distinction between editorial and technical, all editorial personnel has been traditionally identified as "redactors" (from the Latin "redactus"; cf. with the French "redacteur") in the Nordic countries. The Finnish word "toimittaja" corresponds to this. 9 A critical analysis of the historical development of the public service concept in British and Norwegian broadcasting can be found in Syvertsen (1990 & 1992). 10 The concept of the five public service pillars was developed by Sepstrup (1994). 11 The referred documents are: (1) 4th Ministerial Conference on Mass Media Policy, Prague, December 1994: Resolution No 1, The Future of Public Service Broadcasting; (2) EBU Declaration, Public Service Broadcasting: Europe's Opportunity. Why Public Service Broadcasting? Bruxelles, 1993. 12 Resolution A4-0140/95 on the Green Paper: Strategic possibilities to strengthen the European programme industry within the audiovisual policy of the European Union. (Com (94)0096-C-0222/94).