THE "RADIO ROARER"

Press, Volume LXXI, Issue 21449, 15 April 1935, Page 18

THE "RADIO ROARER"

TO TUB Blltroa or the pri.is. Sir,— To-night I sal beside my radio act, and listened to a talk from Davcntry. Mr Herbert Morrison, chairman of the London County Council, was contributing his address to the series on "Freedom." lie had just defined freedom as, in his view, the right to think, say, or do what one likes, so long as one does not interfere with (he rights of others, when his voice was drowned by a violet roar, which persisted at intervals throughout his talk. It drowned not only iJaventry, but the sturdier signals of 3YA and 3YL. It was the voice of the "radio roarer."

These roarings ar.c almost nightly. They also drowned out, this week, J. B. Morton (Beachcomber) telling a story. Next week they will undoubtedly spoil many hours of programmes from Daventry, Paris, Berlin, Pittsburgh, Sydney, Melbourne, Auckland. Wellington, and Christchurch. I spend 25s a year on a radio license, and my set cost me £3o."* Probably this is about the average expenditure for the 100 or so radio listeners living within the same radius from the "roarer" as t do, so that when this seitish person uses his apparatus there is at least J!."000 worth of radio apparatus lying idle, fJut lie interferes with listeners much further from him, and probably about £20,000 worth of radio sets cannot be lurned on when lie is disporting himself. Before this roarer drowned Mr Morrison, the Jattor had said that British countries enjoyed freedom. But in a free country it would surely be my right to use my racti . set to listen to one of the foremost politicians in Britain, not to mention the programmes from 3YA. Since I cannot do this because another man is free to "impinge upon my rights," as Mr Morrison says, I argue that this is not a free country. And since the New Zealand Parliament passed special legislation to stop this sort of interference and yet it goes on, I argue that either Parliament or the Post and Telegraph Department, which administers the regulation, is not interested m freedom or else is inefficient. For the moment I should prefer to be living in a lesser state of freedom where this man who interferes with the pleasure of hundreds of people would be effectively dealt with. — Your.-, etc., ONE OF MANY. April 12, 1935. IThis letter was shown to an official of the Post and Telegraph Department, who said that the matter was receiving every attention by the department. Considerable difficulty was being met in finding a remedy for the disturbance, but it was hoped to eliminate the trouble very soon.]