18 Puaner oF THE ARTS / NovemBer 1995

7

t

pBe tk

Co-op Radio

Which is good, I don’t think that
Co-op radio can function the way
that it should if it’s got govern-
ment sponsorship. Government
should be providing a lot more
support than they do, particularly
by providing start up costs for sta-
tions, or for big capital improve-
ments or things like that. They
should take an interest in the fact
that these organizations are impor-
tant, and do things to make sure
that they are well supported and
that they will continue. And they
don’t, which is a shame. But I
really don’t think that there should
be any core government funding,
because as soon as you do, people
start pandering to the government,
whether they realize it or not. You
have no choice in the matter, you
just can’t avoid it.

I think that’s one of the major
problems with the CBC. They’re
state funded, there’s no way that
they can really provide an objec-
tive voice; it’s always going to be
compromised. Like commercial
broadcasters, they won’t touch
things that they know that their
major sponsors won't like. PBS
doesn’t do a lot of stuff on the
pharmaceutical industry, because
that’s one of their big supporters.
Or the oil industry, and that really
compromised their ability to do
criticism, in certain circumstances
like the gulf war, without wonder-
ing whether it was going to affect
their funding in the future.

And we do the same things;
when the city [of Vancouver] was
coming around to our grant we
thought, “well, if we’re really criti-
cal of things that they do, what's
going to happen?” In the past,

when there were a couple of peo-
ple who were out stirring up ques-
tions and problems about arts
funding, and all kinds of other
things, other people were saying,
“don’t piss the city off because
they give us money”. So you have
to be careful- that’s not a good
situation for us to be in

as media.

JC: Co-op espe-

Granted, there’s a membership fee,
but that’s the practical part of run-
ning an operation in a day and
age where that’s how things work,
with money. Things have to be
paid for, and while radio is cheap,
it’s not free. But the main thing is
that people take an active inter-
est and are involved in
some way, and
make a commit-
ment to doing

cially is Ideally, it. So that
founded on individual
the idea everyone who people
that it is ss actually
account- listened would take
able to no 2 owner-
one outside have some kind ship and
of it’s mem- take
bers. of i n p ut z responsibil-
_ity for one
IP: of the most

Unfortunately, the
membership is not big
enough to pay for the sta-

tion. Listener-supported is the
model that we use, and yet there is
not enough listener support to run
Co-op radio, so we have to go to
other things.

JC: It’s my impression that one of
the founding ideas of Co-op was
easing the distinction between the
audience and the source. I guess
financial support is one aspect of
that. Ideally everyone who listened
to the station would also have
some kind of input into supporting
the station.

IP: And that’s true not only in
terms of money- sometimes I hear
myself talking and | think all I
ever talk about is money- but it’s
not really about money. You're
right, everybody out there should
take an active interest in the sta-
tion and that’s what it’s about.

FREE EMIL¥

There will be an open work-

shop for anyone interested
in participating in Radio
Free Emily on Saturday,
October 28 at 1:30 pm in

Room 406 in the new building.

You could be the Casey Kasem

of the Art world...

AODIO a

THE, SOUND
EMILY

ARE

INVITED

gt ore

important public
resources that exists

in this day and age, elec-
tronic media. There are only a cer-
tain number of radio frequencies
available, and if Co-op radio goes
down, there will not be another
community radio station like this
one. The problem right now is that
there’s a lot of support, there’s a
lot of people who want [Co-op],
but it’s not an easy organization
to run and we've never had
enough support. We need more.
About half as much as we've got,
again.

JC: You were saying that there
have been ups and downs. It’s my
impression that when Co-op was
first started, there was a pretty
high awareness of the need and
desirability of people taking an
active role in mass media. So is
the difference the general spirit of
the times, or is it more specific?

IP: I don’t know, I mean, I was
just a wee tyke in the 1970's.
There was certainly more govern-
ment money around, certainly a
more liberal attitude, there was
more interest in people doing and
trying new things. A lot of the
same type of rhetoric that was
involved with Co-op radio was
involved with other things as well:
you know, ‘independent’ and
‘democratic media’, ‘new democra-
tic technologies’, ‘alternatives. The
idea that as commercial and cor-
porate things were growing, com-
munity things had to grow at the
same time: the whole cooperative
movement, ‘community owned’,
those sort of things. Looking back,
a lot of stuff has already been
tried, and it didn’t make that big a
difference, on a big macro level;
on a micro level it’s made a huge
difference, but on a big level, Co-
op radio didn’t change the world,
didn’t change Vancouver.

JC: The kind of energy it must
have taken to get this place off the
ground, clearly that’s a whole dif-
ferent ball game than the state it’s
in today. But on the other hand it
probably wasn’t as diverse or rep-
resentative as it is today.

IP: a lot of that kind of energy
comes from knowing who you're
working with, liking who you're
working with, respecting who
you're working with, feeling like
everybody has common goals.
Trying to find commonality these
days, in an organization like Co-
op radio, is very difficult, and
that’s one of the big changes.
There’s a lot of people who don’t
respect other peoples politics,
there’s a lot of division in the left
in general, it hasn’t come together
yet. People are still exploring dif-

ferences, and that’s really impor-
tant, but it’s not very conducive to
those really energetic, ‘let’s do
this, let’s really work together’
kinds of things. If you say, ‘let’s
work together, let’s work coopera-
tively’, a lot of people, myself
included, part of my reaction is,
‘you've gotta be kidding’, you
know, ‘get over it, don’t gimme
any of that schmaltzy energetic
kind of stuff.

It’s a different community
today too, there’s a different group
(in Vancouver) to be represented
than at the time. But at the time
[of the station’s founding], the
political environment was very
different than it is now. The kind
of political movement or motiva-
tion that was behind Co-op radio,
to me looking back, seems very
much like a white, leftist, male
(largely but not exclusively) view-
point...I think identity politics are
a hell of a lot more prevalent now
than they were in the ‘70s. I don’t
think the term had even been
defined then. Politics are far more
than just being what people say, or
what they think, to a large extent
it defines how an organization will
change, and also who are the pri-
orities for being involved in the
organization. Those things are
really difficult, and I think they’re
reflected most clearly in communi-
ty-based organizations that are
there as a resource and as a tool
for social change.

It had to change. But I think a
lot has been lost by the fact that
it’s changed in that way and noth-
ing really has come up in it’s place
that is as cohesive and as unified
and as energetic...There’s a lot of
struggling to find out where things
are going, and as people try to
articulate it and take power for
themselves, it pisses other people
off, and things get divided, and
the simple fact of the matter is
that in a lot of cases the work just
doesn’t get done. You spend a lot
of time being politically correct-
which is very important, that you
have good correct political analy-
sis, it is very important, regardless
of how the term has been changed
or manipulated- but you can have
amazing political analysis, and if
you don’t have the people who’re
going to do the work, there’s no
point.

JC: I would think, though, that in
a place like this, even with the
lack of a banner to gather under,
just the physical place and the
sense that you're all in something
together would be enough to give
people that sense of collectivity.

IP: I think it’s enough, I’m not sure
that it does but I think it’s enough.
I've always thought that commu-
nity radio was an ideal and logical
place for coalition building,
because everybody comes here
with the same ideas of freedom of
speech, freedom of expression,
self-determination, the right of
people to speak in their own voic-
es no matter who they are; and
everybody’s in one space under
one roof, everybody has the same
goal in seeing that the form and
the opportunity and the outlet is
still there and that it gets perpetu-
ated. So it’s true, it may not hap-
pen but it is enough.

‘es

JC: Another kind of structure I
was trying to compare Co-op radio
to was a pirate radio station. It
doesn’t have the same aspect of
responsibility to an audience that
Co-op does, but it’s also certainly

Tain ath a oh ook hain enn ok ona

18 PuveroF ne Aus | Nowe 1995

Co-op Radio jrvirrecsicses wg

soe Paes funding, and all kinds of other

Which is good, 1 don't think that things, other people were saying,
Co-op radio can function the way “don't piss the city off because
that it should if i's got govern- they give us money’: So you have
‘ment sponsorship. Government to be careful- that’s not a good.
should be providing a lot more situation for us to be

support than they do, particularly as media.
by providing start up costs for sta-

tions, or for big capital improve- JC: Co-op espe
‘ments or things like that. They cally is

hhave no choice in the matter, you membership isnot big

Just can't avoid ‘enough to pay forthe sta-
think that’s one of the major tion. Listener-supported is the
problems with the CBC. They're model that we use, and yet there is

state funded, there's no way that not enough listener support to run
they can realy provide an objec- Co-op radio, so we have to go to
tive voice; its always going to be other things.

‘compromised. Like commercial

:

t

DRek

broadcasters, they won't touch JC: I's my impression that one of
things that they know that their the founding ideas of Co-op was
‘major sponsors won't like. PBS easing the distinction between the
doesn't do alot ofstuffon the audience and the source. I guess

pharmaceutical industry, because financial suppor is one aspect of
that's one oftheir big supporters, that. Ideally everyone who listened
Or the oil industry, and that really to the station would also have
compromised their ability to do some kind of input into supporting
criticism, in certain circumstances the station,

like the gulf war, without wonder-

ing whether it was going to affect IP: And that's true not only in

ther funding in the future. terms of money- sometimes I hear
‘And we do the same things; myself talking and I think all 1
when the city [of Vancouver] was ever talk about is money- but i's
‘coming around to our grant we not really about money. You're
thought, “wel, if we're really criti- right, everybody out there should
‘al of things that they do, what's take an active interest in the sta-
‘oing to happen? In the past, tion and that’s what i's about.

RADIO ;FREE EMILY

@

There will be an open work- Zap
shop for anyone interested

in participating in Radio

Free Emily on Saturday,

October 28 at I:30 pm in
Room 406 in the new building.

You could be the Casey Kasem
of the Art world..

THE) SOUND

YauPRoaoio. |e

INVITED

Granted, there's a membership fee,
‘but thats the practical part of run-

ning an operation in a day and
‘age where that's how things work,

‘with money. Things have to be
paid for, and while radio is cheap,
it’s not free. But the main thing is

that people take an active inter-

stand are involved in

some way, and
make a commit-
‘ment to doing

Ideally, it. So that

Should take an interest inthe fact founded on individual
lees everyone who \Wiu
tant, and do things to make sure’ that tis 5 betually
ickgermescee | listened would |i
that they oil contie Aeditey,  aeeaTag , one
don't, which is a shame, But one outside have some kind //euEa
relly don* think that there should of ts mem- WW ' take

be any core government funding, bers. responsibil-
because as son a8 you do, people of input. iy forone
start pandering tothe goverment, IP: ofthe most,
whether they realize ior not. You Unfortunately, the portant public

resources that exists

in this day and age, lec-
tronic media. There are only a cer-
tain number of radio frequencies
available, and if Co-op radio goes
down, there will not be another
‘community radio station lke this
fone. The problem right now is that
there's a lot of support, there's @
lot of people who want [Co-op],
but its not an easy organization
to run and we've never had
‘enough support. We need more.
‘About half as much as we've got,
again,

JC: You were saying that there
hhave been ups and dons. It's my
Impression that when Co-op was
first started, there was a pretty
high awareness of the need and
desirability of people taking an
active tole in mass media, So is
the difference the general spirit of
the times, or is it more specific?

1: I don't know, I mean, ! was
Just a wee tyke in the 1970's.
“There was certainly more govern-
‘ment money around, certainly a
‘more liberal attitude, there was
‘more interest in people doing and
trying new things. A Tot of the
same type of rhetoric that was
involved with Co-op radio was
Involved with other things as well
you know, ‘independent’ and
‘democratic media’ ‘new democt
tic technologies ‘alternatives: The
‘dea that as commercial and cor-
porate things were growing, com=
‘munity things had to grow at the
same time: the whole cooperative
‘movement, ‘community owned’,
those sort of things. Looking back,
alot of stuf has already been
twied, and it didn't make that big a
difference, on a big macro level;
‘on a micro level its made a huge
diference, but on a big level, Co-
‘op radio didn't change the world
didn't change Vancouver.

IC: The kind of energy it must
hhave taken to get this place off the
ground, clearly that’s a whole dif
ferent ball game than the state it’s
Jn today. But on the other hand it

probably wasn't as diverse or rep-
resentative as it is today.

IP: a lot ofthat kind of energy
comes from knowing who you're
working with, liking who you're
working with, respecting who

you're working with, feling like
everybody has common goals.
‘Tying to find commonality these
days, in an organization like Co-
op radio, is very difficult, and
that's one of the big changes.
There's a lot of people who don't
respect other peoples politics,
there's a lot of division in the let
in general, it hasn't come together
yet. People ate still exploring df=

ferences,

i that’s really impor-
tant, but i's not very conducive to
those really energetic, le’ do
this, let's really work together
kinds of things. Ifyou say, ‘let's
work together, let's work coopera-
tively’ alot of people, myself
included, part of my reaction is,
‘you've gotta be kidding’, you
know, ‘get over it, don't gimme
any ofthat schmaltzy energetic
kind of stuff.
a diferent community,
today too, there's a different group
{in Vancouver) to be represented
than at the time, But atthe time
[of the station's foundingl, the
political environment was very
different than i s now. The kind
of politcal movement or motiva
tion that was behind Co-op radio,
to:me looking back, seems very
much like a white, lefts, male
(largely but not exclusively) view=
point.1 think identity politics are
hell ofa lot more prevalent now
than they were in the "70s. I don’t
‘think the term had even been
defined then. Politics are far more
‘than just being what people say, or
‘what they think, to a lange extent
it defines how an organization will
‘change, and also who are the pri-
orities for being involved in the
‘organization. Those things are
really difficult, and [think they're
reflected most clearly in communi
ty-based organizations that are
there asa resource and asa tool
{or social change.

had to change. But I think a
Tot has been lost by the fact that
its changed in that way and noth-
ing really has come up in it’s place
that is as cohesive and as unified
and as energetic..There’s a lot of
struggling to find out where things
fare going, and as people ty to
articulate it and take power for
themseives, it pisses other people
off, and things get divided, and
‘the simple fact of the matter is
that in alot of cases the work just
doesn't get done. You spend alot.
of time being politically correct-
which is very important, that you
hhave good correct politcal analy-
sis, itis very important, regardless
‘of how the term has been changed
‘or manipulated but you can have
amazing politcal analysis, and if
you don't have the people who're
Boing to do the work, there's no
point

JC: I would think, though, that in
a place like this, even withthe
Tack of a banner to gather under,
just the physical place and the
sense that you're all in something
together would be enough to give
people that sense of collectivity.

IP: think its enough, '™m not sure
that it does but I think it's enough
Tve always thought that commu
nity radio was an ideal and logical
place for coalition building,
Ibecause everybody comes here
with the same ideas of freedom of
speech, freedom of expression,
selfdelermination, the right of
people to speak in their own voic-
‘es no matter who they are; and
‘everybody's in one space under
‘one roof, everybody has the same
‘al in seeing thatthe form and
‘the opportunity and the outlet is
still there and that it gets perpetu-
fated, So it's true, it may not hap=
pen but itis enough.

JC: Another kind of structure 1
was trying to compare Co-op radio
to was a pirate radio station. It
doesn't have the same aspect of
responsiblity to an audience that
Co-op does, but i’ aso certainly