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