N.Z. RADIO CONTROL.

Grey River Argus, 11 August 1931, Page 8

N.Z. RADIO CONTROL.

(To the Editor.) Sir, —Will you please allow me the privilege of the use of your columns for the object of placing before some of your readers some views regarding the matter of radio broadcasting in this country. Those of your readers ■who are interested in this matter -will probably be aware that some time ago an organisation called New Zealand Radio Listeners’ League was organised in Dunedin, and met with a large amount of success. Unfortunately,

however, this success was not maintained in same degrees in other centres in New Zealand, and whilst in the various parts of the Dominion, branches of the League have been established, the memberstip in these places is only very small. The objects of the League were to protect the interests of listeners in the various matters which are cropping up from time to time in connection with Radio Broadcasting. The League is intended to be a non-poli-tical body run by listeners for listeners, and as such, it could do a great deal of good, not only to the community at large, but would be a great benefit to 'hose who pay the sum of 30/- per annum for the privilege of owning a wireless receiving set, listening in '’o the various programmes which are disseminated during the year for their benefit.

The present Broadcasting Company is not satisfying the majority of listeners in New Zealand, and it is no* rght that any private company or firm should control the interests of 60,000

listeners, beside? being allowed to make huge profit out of the industry. Wo do not deny thaf the Broadcasting Company has in the past built the serv'ce and done as well as they could under the circumstances, but the system under which their present contract is held is wrong. It does not cost any more to serve 60.000 listeners than it does to serve 30,000 listeners. The Broadcasting Company at present receives 25/- out of every 30/- licence i issued, and. as the number of licences : increases, S 6 does the profit. This ' extra profit should nof be allowed to

go into the pockets of the members of any private firm or company. If there is a surplus profit, it should go to the Government. At a recent deputation to .the Postmaster General representing the Radio Trade, the deputation .contended that as the trade supplied £lO,OOO in revenue by means of Dealers’ licences the dealers were entitled to one representative on the Board. On this basis the listeners who supply £90,000 worth, of revenue are entitled to*n?ne rep resen ti atives. I would not go so far as to 1 suggest this, but T would suggest that i there should be four listeners’ repreI sentatives, one from each of the four centres. When all is said and done, the whole matter is a listeners 7 matter. If there were no listeners, there would be no need of a Broadcasting Service, i and no, Radio Trade. The listener I supplies everything and he who pays ' the piper should call the tune. The [ average man in the street who does not ow n a wireless set, doos not cart who controls Broadcasting or who makes the profit out of the business, but it is a vital matter to the listener. I have suggested to the PostmasterGeneral that he should call a conference of listeners representatives to discuss the matter before placing the Bill before the House, but he informs me that the’ proposals are already before Cabinet and that the listeners will be satisfied when the details arc published. I cannot conceive how this can be, because when .the Bill is passed no further action can be taken. The objection that the Government cannot face the financial aspect of taking over is absurd because the listeners themselves provide the revenue. The whole matter is a listeners matter only, and they should be consulted. Whatever the issue, the future should be controlled by a Board of Control. The present Broadcasting Company which has n ow had five years’ experience, should be able to estimate the annual cost of the service, and so should any other firm, providing they know’ the requirements. If this is so, it should be possible to tender for the contract at a fixed price irrespective of the number of licences issued and after payment of this sum out of the revenue received the surplus would bo a handsome profit for the Government. This is the basis on which we contend the contract should ho let; not on a basis of so much per licence but on a fixed contract price. The Postmaster-General has announced that the Government will take over the Control of the Service. I do not think that this will meet with the approval of the majority of listeners. In any case I do not think the Government should attempt the programme side of the business. This should be let by tender to one. or more firms either to one firm for the whole of New Zealand, or to say, four different firms for the four centres. The Government might successfully take over the technical side of the business, but even so there should be a. board of control on W’hich the listeners should be adequately represented. There is plenty of revenue to pay for the cost of this Board. The number of licences is now’ in the vicinity of fiO,000 and is increasing every day and will soon be nearer 100.000. There is the master of the suggested increase in the power of the four main stations and the installation of relay stations. This is a matter that should only be done after consultation with experts and .after very careful enquiries have been made. Relay stations are not necessary, because it is a useless waste of money .to install a chain of Relay stations when there are plenty of B Class Stations which operate nt their own. expense. I trust that those of your readers who are Radio enthusiasts will be interested in the subjectmatter of my letter. and I shall be pleased to receive correspondence from any of them who care to got into communication w’ith me. I am, etc., 11. BOOTH, Secretary and Organiser, N.Z. Radio Listeners’ League, Dunedin.