NOISY "RADIO."

Auckland Star, Volume LXIV, Issue 149, 27 June 1933, Page 5

NOISY "RADIO."

THAT SET NEXT DOOR.

IS THERE LEGAL REDRESS? A BROADCAST THAT OFFENDED. (From Our Own Correspondent.) SYDNEY, June 23. The use of "wireless," especially in the form of radio sets, has expanded with great rapidity in this country during "tlio last two or three years, and a few weeks ago the managing director of Amalgamated Wireless told a Melbourne audience that Australians spend between £2.000,000 and £3,000,000 annually in paying for various services, and in purchasing wireless equipment. No doubt this accounts for the popularity of "radio," and also for the pathetic complaints that constantly appear in the newspapers about the noise made by wireless sets, and also about the objectionable character of some of the items broadcasted.

To take the last difficulty first —not long ago "Private Lives" was transmitted from one of the Sydney stations on the "national" programme, and the responsible authorities chose Sunday night for it! There were protestations, loud and long, from all sorts of people who had not been brought into contact with this sort of before, especially on Sunday evenings. Nor were they to'be appeased by the assurance speedily forthcoming from the station that "Private Lives" is "a comedy by the celebrated playwright Xoel Conrad." For the name of Noel Conrad, though it generally means that a play is amusing, is by no means a complete guarantee of its propriety and "respectability." As to "Private Lives"—l always remember a line from a criticism of the play that I read some time ago —"The men in this play are not healthv-minded males, but 'introspective cats —tom-cats, if you like —but none the less feline." Most of the play is like that—screeching and scratching, and breaking crockery, and climbing fcnces after other people's

sweethearts—feline all through. So the remonstrances were not surprising, and they point to one of the disadvantages of "wireless," from which all sensitive members of the community are liable, occasionally, to suffer. A Flood of Complaints. But the other grievance is at once more commonplace and more widely diffused —the horrible noise that radio sets make, or at least can make, in irresponsible hands. A short time back the newspapers here were flooded with complaints from people who could not sleep, people who could not study, people whose wives or husbands were becoming victims of neurasthenia, people whose boarders were shaking the dust of the locality from their disappearing feet— because the radio sets were going "fortissimo" night and day. I think that there must have been an epidemic of this sort of thing for the time, inspired at least in part by the earnest desire of too many license-holders to get their 24/ worth of fun out of their machines. Of course, everybody appealed to everybody else to know if the Law could not intervene on behalf of the sufferers, but apparently there is no very definite ground for action available. Restriction Suggested. It seems that the Local Government Act gives power to councils to deal with this sort of trouble by means of by-laws. If that is so, it is quite certain either that the local councils have not exercised their powers, or that they make 110 attempt to enforce them. A suggestion lias been made that the local bodies should limit the hours for which wireless sets can be used, as in Germany in regard to the hours for practising the piano in all the great musical centres. Mr. Howard Carr, president of the Associated Musical Clubs of Australia and of the Jiadio Artists' Association, has advocated a law to safeguard people from this infliction. But the lawyers see many difficulties in the way. There is already a law against anything that can be defined as a public nuisance, but to each individual citizen his neighbour's radio is only a "private" torment. It is agreed that the private citizen has a case against "any discordant noise calculated to disturb his wonted quietude," whether barking dogs, cackling geese or loud speakers. But if you went to the trouble and expense of appealing to the Equity Court it is not likely that the judge would grant an injunction against "wireless" in.the liouse next door.

The Lady and the Roosters. A lawyer in Sydney the other day quoted this interesting case: A Brisbane woman went to Court to complain of the crowing of her neighbour's roosters, but the Court dismissed her application on the ground that "she could not determine the actual times nor the volume of sound emitted by the offending fowls." And, when she carried the case to the High Court her appeal was rejected on the same ground as before. Evidently it would not be easy either to apply any existing law or to frame a new law to cover the case of "wireless," to the complete satisfaction of its innumerable victims. But the feeling in Sydney is strong and insistent that "something must be done."