Community Radio Practices: A Case Study On How The Political Economy Impacts Production in The South African Community Radio Sector.

Mikko Kapanen 2007

Abstract
This ebook explores the impact of political economy on the
Community Radio sector in South Africa, concentrating specifically
on the programme Morning Cruise on Cape Town’s Bush Radio. Its
findings are based on ethnographic research conducted between June
and September 2006.

There are no significant studies on the impact of political economy to
the specific practices on Community Radio sector, as the interest has
so far been more on commercial one.

Research highlights the station, production and broadcast practices
and concludes them to be characterised by station’s funding and two
primary aims: to serve the community and train its members, and the
special conditions created by production team integrating visually
impaired and sighted people. It does not, however, concentrate on
textual qualities of Morning Cruise, as those are not impacted by
special nature of the production, but rather Bush Radio’s role as a
training station.

Community Radio Practices: a case study on how the political economy impacts 2
production in the South African Community Radio sector.
Contents
Page:

• Introduction……………………………………………………………………..4

• Chapter 1. Theorising Community Radio practices in South
Africa………………………………………………………………………………..7

1. Community and Community Radio………………………………………..7
2. Media production………………………………………………………………14
3. South African media environment……………………………………….21

• Chapter 2. Researching practices of Community Radio…..30

• Chapter 3. Research findings…………………………………………39

1. Station practices ‐ Morning Cruise within the Bush Radio
organisation……………………………………………………………………….40
2. Production practices ‐ Preparing the broadcast of Morning
Cruise…………………………………………………………………………………53
3. Broadcast practices – Morning Cruise inside the studio………...62

• Conclusion……………………………………………………………………...72
• Bibliography…………………………………………………………………..75

Introduction
Although there has been some significant research on radio
production through its political economy, none of it has focused on
the Community Radio sector on a detailed level. There are different
ways for community stations to fund their practices, but the one I am
focusing on, Bush Radio in Cape Town, South Africa, is funded mainly
by donor money. In this research I am looking into the impact of
Bush Radio’s political economy to their practices; particularly
concentrating on their mid‐morning show, Morning Cruise. This
programme is hosted by visually impaired presenters and therefore
offers an interesting, although not necessarily very common, example
on how production works. The question I am answering is, ‘what
are the distinct practices of Morning Cruise, a midmorning
programme of Cape Town based community station Bush Radio’.
Now, almost seven months since I finished my ethnography, the
producer of the programme has changed, one of the presenters has
left and the intern has finished his internship, so it seems evident that
this kind of research can only be a snapshot of a time. That, however,
does not make it less interesting, as change in itself is a characteristic
to Bush Radio’s programming, and it did impact this production
team, although during my research period, the only change was the
new intern.
My thesis is that the practices of Morning Cruise are result of the
station’s aims; as listed in the policy document, but particularly two
primary ones: to serve the community and to offer training to its
members. They are also characterised by station’s political economy,
which, together with availability, contributes to the lack of special
equipment to help visually impaired staff members. There is some
special equipment at the station, but the producer of the programme
must work as a facilitator, who helps out bridging the gap between
the professional output and the technological challenges.
The first chapter concentrates on existing academic work around my
question. It has been divided in three sections which explore the
ideas of community and Community Radio in general, production of
media and its political economy and finally, the South African media
environment, which finally helps us to understand the context within
which the object of my study exists.
Second chapter concentrates on methodological approach of this
study, exploring the theory and practicalities of ethnography.
In third chapter I present the findings of my research based on
observation and interviews conducted. This chapter has been
divided into three sections in order to give a clear picture of the
stages of production. These sections are station practices, production
practices and broadcast practices. Using these focuses I introduce
the factors that impact the programme in the context of Bush Radio,
its aims and political economy; in the office during the preparations
within the production team and finally inside the studio during the
actual broadcast.
Finally, I conclude my research highlighting its findings, assess the
usefulness of my thesis and suggest further research to broaden the
ideas I have formulated.

Chapter 1. Theorising Community Radio practices in
South Africa.
This chapter covers the key ideas of the concepts of community,
Community Radio, radio and media production and Community
Radio in an African, and more precisely South African context. These
will help us to focus on the specifics of my research by explaining the
broader framework within which the subject of my study exists.
1. Community and Community Radio
I will start of by exploring the meanings of community and
Community Radio. These will help us to understand how
communities are constructed and how will that result in their media;
radio in specific, both through regulation and on a social and
practical level.
Community
The traditional concept of community is it having common objectives,
internal cohesion and linkages amongst its members (Krohling
Peruzzo 1996, p.162). These communities often have dividing
qualities and the notions of the ones who ‘belong’ and the ‘outsiders’
are created (Crow and McLean 2000, p.223). The most common
theory is the divide between geographical community and the one of
interest (Minar and Greer 1969, p.ix). It is acknowledged by majority
of the researchers, although the line between these is not always
clear and many communities have bit of both (Crow and McLean
2000, p.227). The regulator in South Africa, the Independent
Communications Authority of South Africa (ICASA), continues to
divide the communities of interest into three sub‐groups:
Institutional, Religious and Cultural Communities (ICASA –
Community Sound Broadcasting Policy 2006).
Public service ideal in Britain has often used the term community as
an object to paternalistic betterment, while the commercial sector
use it as an audience, which can be sold to the advertisers (Wall
2000, p.193).
In an African context the meaning of community is very complex.
During the post‐colonial times there has been a tendency to create a
national unity in order for countries to develop, and therefore the
communality and the differences have been de‐emphasised. The
trend has also been to create larger communities; units of several
countries, and this has taken the decision making further away from
the traditional communities, but on a grass‐roots social level it has
been unsuccessful, as many people still feel that they live in a
community rather than in a nation (Opubor 2000, p.11). In South
Africa community has also been a connotation of race (Bosch 2003,
p.108).
Within the context of Community Radio, the meaning of community
has been questioned, as it could mean all possible listeners within the
station’s footprint, inactive listeners or the ones actively participating
(Kivikuru 2006, p.26). In the chapter three, I will explore how Bush
Radio constructs community in its function.
Communities also have different opinions and objectives within
themselves, so their voices undergo hegemonic processes, which
influence their communications (Van Vuuren 2006, p.381).
Community Radio
Community Radio, as a term, has been widely adopted. It is the word
used in the South African context as much as in the British one, but
the medium is also known by the names ‘radical’, citizen’s’ and
‘alternative’ (Lewis 2005, p.3).
During past few years there has been an increasing interest on the
academic research on Community Radio. It is due to its alternative
character, which is supplementary to, as much as opposing the
shortcomings of mainstream media (Lewis 2005, p.3). Its task is not
to replace or duplicate the existing services but rather to extend
them (Partridge 1982, p.2) as Community Radio is a response to the
lack of delivery of the other radio stations (Lewis and Booth 1989,
p.105 and Hendy 2000, p.16). Cultural differences in community
broadcasting are highlighted as they also partly determine its
function (Wanyeki 1999, p.31).
Other characteristic of Community radio is it being produced by its
audiences. It is a participatory medium which does not aim for profit
making (Partridge 1982, p.14; Fleming 2002, p.33; Hendy 2000, p.17;
Tacchi 2003, p.2183 and Opuko‐Mensah 2000, pp.165‐6).
Participatory has also been explained as a two‐way communication
rather than the more traditional ‘top to bottom’ broadcasting
(Wanyeki 1999, p.26 and Olorunnisola 2002, p.133). Bosch (2003,
p.113), in her case study points out that a challenge for participation
may be for instance not affording the transportation to the studios.
Radio as a medium can target specifically, at least in theory,
communities by using their most suitable languages, present the local
views on cultural matters and offer niche programming (Forde,
Meadows and Foxwell 2003, p.249). World Association of
Community Radio Broadcasters (AMARC) claims on its website that,
the historical philosophy of community radio is to use this
medium as the voice of the voiceless, the mouthpiece of
oppressed people (be it on radial, gender, or class
grounds) and generally as a tool for development.

AMARC ‐ http://www.amarc.org

In African context, Media Institute of Southern Africa (MISA), in their
Windhoek declaration adds, that Community Radio’s ownership must
be representative of the community (African Charter on Broadcasting
‐ http://www.misa.org).
Commercial radios are claimed to serve the communities as well (as
argued by Irvine 2000), but they measure their service by the size of
their audience for economical reasons, and often part from their
initial promise of performance for that reason (Wall 2006, p.10‐11).
Berland (1993) adds that the formats prevent local radio from being
local. She argues that the commercial local radio only tends to create
a feeling of localness, because the stations are economics driven.
This leaves Community Radio, besides the other community media,
as the most viable service for the interest of the communities as they
relate better with local issues than global (Forde, Meadows and
Foxwell 2003, p.232).
The purpose of Community Radio is to reform the already existing
structures of the broadcasting, but also to create locally controlled
stations (Lewis and Booth 1989, p.105). Wanyeki (1999, p.30) uses
the metaphor of the stations in the communities being both mirror
for it to see itself, but also a window to see the rest of the world.
Tower (2005) has done an ethnographic research on Community
Radios in Mali. He writes that FM radio suits the African societies
because it responds very well to pre‐existing

communications needs, complements other technologies
of communications, and is adaptable to prevailing social
norms.

(Tower 2005, p.8)

I try to avoid the notion of something being typically African, as it
automatically generalises a broad and diverse region, but to me it
appears that this idea applies in Cape Town as well. Also, as
electricity is not necessarily needed to listen, it is suitable for the
poorer areas. In these places the radio receivers are often more
common than televisions. Radio is also an oral medium so the
illiteracy is not creating an obstacle (Hendy 2000, p.2).
For the sustainability of the community station, it is crucial for the
community to feel social ownership over it. For this to happen, the
station must be based in a community association or committee,
work towards the broadcast must be started much before the actual
broadcast and the local people must take over the different tasks in
its production (Jallov 2005, p.22).
Bosch (2003), who has done so far the most in‐depth study on Bush
Radio in particular, uses cross academic rhizomatic method, by which
she explains the nature of Community Radio to be growing from all of
its sectors. She uses the metaphor of Community Radio growing like
grass and commercial ones like trees, which means that Community
Radio will not achieve the same popularity than the commercial ones
but in a group, they can have great effect in the community. Her
argument about Bush Radio in particular is that the structure of the
station; its staff and volunteers, work also in the same fashion and
every individual may be asked to take over a tasks from presenting a
show to taking the rubbish out (p.139).
2. Media production
After discussing some of the key ideas about Community Radio, I will
next cover the theories around the media production. I will do so by
exploring the ideas of political economic structures of media, its
production practices and finally some specifics of radio
programming.
In this research I will use the terms ‘station practice’ and ‘broadcast
practice’ following Tim Wall’s (1999, p.37) idea, where the latter
means the act of producing a programme during the time of
transmission and the former more broadly within the organisation of
given station. His work, however, does not focus on the practices of
any production team in particular while preparing the programme,
and for that activity I have adopted the term ‘production practice’.
Political economy of media production
According to Schudson (1996, p.145), the political economy
perspective of media studies has been dominant in Anglo‐American
theories but it emphasises more economy than politics. Mosco
(1996, p.12) explains this coming out of the media industry rise in
the 20th century and the increasing interest from the business sector,
which started to produce research around the media production and
marketing. Smythe (1981) introduces the ideas of audience being the
commodity in the media and the text being merely bait to get people
to be influenced by the adverts. He also suggests that the audience is
self‐promoting the products to themselves which makes them labour
for the advertisers. Jhally (1990, p.72) specifies this idea by adding
that it is not the audience that is being sold, but only their
watching/listening time, which may or may not lead to benefit the
advertiser and therefore media organisation. These ideas are market
based and apply mainly to commercial sector. The media structures
dominated by economics have been increasingly seen as insufficient,
and the idea of ‘civil society’, where media has lost much of its
dependency on state and the market is getting more support amongst
academics (Schudson 1996, p.145).
Social structures are unequal and it is problematic if the media
enforce or create an opportunity for inequality to be reproduced.
That is why it is important to ask, can the media producers produce
their texts autonomously or are they influenced by economical,
political or cultural powers (Hesmondhalgh 2006, p.2). Chomsky and
Herman (1988, p.2) argue that the media serves the elite class of
society, and that its propaganda is only harder to distinguish in
liberal democracies than in dictatorships. This idea resonates Marx’s
view in which the ruling class, that controls the means of material
production, controls automatically the mental production as well
(Marx and Engels 1974/1847, pp.64‐5). Marx was not interested in
what an individual media owner does or thinks, but treated them as
an economic class which does things by default (Downey 2006, p.18).
Hall (1996, p.17) points out that this kind of thinking does not only
ignore the ideological differences within the ruling class, but also the
fact, that different ideologies are dominant amongst the ruling classes
of different countries. Ideological analysis is based on the idea, that
the values of a media text can be seen as an indicator of its
production context (White 1992, p.163).
Media production within media organisations and society
Hesmondhalgh (2006) compares different case studies in the media
and culture production and distinguishes a Public Service
Broadcaster, BBC, having other influences in their production than
purely economic ones (p. 79). These are more traditional values of
counter discourse, universality, serving the public and justifying the
licence fee and also the pressure from the private sector media.
There has also been a change in the nature of the production teams in
recent years, as media texts used to be produced by permanent
employers, but now the teams must be more flexible. Media workers
are increasingly working as freelancers and seen as an economic
resource by their organisations (Ursell 2006, p.141), while Barnatt
and Starkey (1994, p.253) see the old way of permanent staff being
high in costs and bureaucratic in nature, and flexibility being rather
improving the production, than stretching the production team. As
the media production process has been seen to be under several
influences, Curran (1996, p.146) points out specific examples of
media producers taking action against either political or economical
pressure to prove their independence.
Wall (1999, p. 25) argues that although the production processes in
the media production are partly determined by their political
economy; ownership structures of their organisations, and although
it has been the dominant perspective in theorising about them, there
are other influences to consider. Concentrating only at the political
economy ignores the specifics of the practice of production. He lists
two ways in which some media theorists have parted from the
dominant ideas. First one claims that political economy is a factor
but there are several other factors in the ‘complex web of influences’.
This idea includes non‐Marxist thinkers who see the economics to be
minor influence and the ones using case studies of the political
media. Second way is to look at the social organisation of the
production.
Schlesinger (1978), also incorporating practical and economical
ideas, has researched the production process at the BBC news
department and explored the complex nature of the decision making
at the public service broadcasting, which, he argues, is heavily based
on a routine and structure (p.79 ).
Wall (1999) concentrates on the broadcast and station practices of
commercial radio also on everyday level. He argues that the
organisation and context of a station is a sum of many factors such as:

the station’s place in the political economy of radio,
physical and cultural geography of its location, the formal
and informal positions and the relationships of staff and
their roles and functions.

(Wall 1999, p.38)

Here the focus is on the actions of the employers, and other factors
impacting the output. He says that commercial radio broadcast
practices are heavily regulated and monitored (Wall 1999, p.266),
but argues that the regulations are not being followed.
Radio programming
In radio, the output of the station is determined by its programming
and due to the centralisation of the media ownership in commercial
media, the programming has also been centralised (Berland 1993,
p.107). Many theorist, such as Crisell (1994) and Barnard (1989)
emphasise the role of speech in the output of the radio, which would
indicate that the research around it was the most important, but Wall
(1999, pp.206‐8) suggest that it is not so, as the majority of the
station’s output is other than speech, and therefore not determined
by the presenters, but rather the different stages of the management.
In his ethnographic research on a British commercial station he
calculates that only 3‐16% of the output was fully controlled by the
presenter, but notes that it does not undermine the actual practice of
broadcasting (Wall 1999, p.56). Unlike Wall (2006, p.10) who writes
about the importance of the music in radio for political economic,
aesthetic and cultural realms, Crisell (1994, p.48) argues that it is,
although common, not really signifying anything but itself. Berland
(1993, p.105) claims that radio is produced to be part of average
peoples’ day by creating a soundtrack for activities such as breakfast,
travel and work.
The function and political economy of commercial radio differs from
the community one and the academic research has mainly
concentrated on the commercial sector, but even the indigenous
media, such as Community Radio, of which production reflects self‐
representation and expression, should be seen in the larger context
of mass media production that is dominant in its area, because it
relates to that (Spitulnik 1993, p.305). In the next section, I will look
into the South African media environment and cover two examples of
political economy models of Community Radio, as explored by
Olorunnisola (2002, pp.134‐44), but besides his rather generic study,
this has been a neglected area in the media research. That is why I
want to investigate the impact of political economy on Community
Radio production in this dissertation. Also, much of the academic
research concentrates on radio in general, and is not done by looking
closely into one station (Wall 2006, p.32) and I concentrate on Bush
Radio in specific.
3. South African media environment
Much of the academic work I have discussed so far has been either
general or focusing on British and American examples. As the subject
of my research is based in a different social environment and largely
influenced by its cruel history, it is important to explore some ideas
of South African media and Community Radio history and culture in
specific. First, though, I will begin by looking into the history of the
whole country and how that has resulted with its current media.
This way we can understand the theories in the historical and social
context of South Africa and Bush Radio in particular.
History of South Africa
There are innumerable books written about South Africa’s past and
due to the nature of the topic, and merely the fact that there has
always been a motivation for someone to rewrite the history, it is
sometimes hard to separate the facts from the facts that lack some
unwanted aspects. There has been criticism that after the 1994 first
democratic elections, the ruling party African National Congress
(ANC) has twisted the history of liberation struggle (see for instance
Van Zyl Slabbert 2006), but more importantly, the apartheid regime
was infamous for its propaganda (Thompson 1999, p.198).
First inhabited by Khoisan tribes, the present area of South Africa
was settled by Bantu tribes around the year 300. Dutch East India
Corporation built a refreshment station around the present Cape
Town area in 1652 and slowly proceeded towards the inland.
Conflicts of rule and natural resources defined the poor relations
between different ethnic groups and after the Boer War (1899 –
1902); British controlled the area until 1948, and the whites‐only‐
election victory of Afrikaner Nationalist Party (NP), which resulted
with the apartheid system (Thompson 1995).
Apartheid was a plan to ensure the white domination and the South
Africans were divided in four groups: white, Indian, coloured and
black, and in 1950, the Group Areas Act allocated separate and
unequal living areas to them. This divided these groups further away
from each other (see for instance Pampallis 1991, Ross 1999,
Thompson 1995, Worden 1994 and Meli 1989), and media supported
the notion of separate populations (Olorunnisola 2002, p.127). This
still has an impact on the communities and their co‐existence,
although more integration takes place these days (Bosch 2003,
p.112). Cape Town in particular differs from other major cities, as it
is a home to the majority of the country’s so called coloured
population (Bosch 2003, p.123).
During the apartheid, ANC, PAC (Pan‐Africanist Congress) and other
liberation movements were banned by the government, their leaders
were often imprisoned or banned and supporters harassed by the
police and military. Many events of the struggle had communal
aspect in them, and in particular, the forced removals of Sophiatown
in Johannesburg (see vivid personal recollection by Modisane 1986)
and District Six in Cape Town united the communities against the
common enemy (Pampallis 1991, p.204). In the late eighties and
early nineties the NP government started to ease up on the system,
released political prisoners, unbanned political parties and started
the negotiations for democratic elections, which finally took place in
1994, and Mandela became the first democratically elected President
in South Africa (Thomson 1995 and Ross 1999).
Evolution of South African media
During the apartheid, the broadcast media was owned and controlled
by the SABC (South African Broadcasting Corporation) which was
part of the ‘system’ and its output was biased (Bosch 2003, p.67 and
Olorunnisola 2002, p.129). Although some alternative ‘People’s
Media’ was published in print, the only major underground
broadcaster was ANC’s Radio Freedom, which was in exile in the
neighbouring countries and broadcasted on short‐waves. In the
1980’s CASET (Cassette Education Trust) started distributing tape
cassettes with speeches from the banned leaders to the townships in
Cape Town. CASET later on became Bush Radio (Bosch 2003, p.69).
Olorunnisola (2002, p.128), however, suggests that the unlicensed
stations of white supremacist movements were the beginning for the
idea of Community Radio in South Africa. For them the authorities
were less strict than to the underprivileged communities. Bush
Radio started unlicensed broadcasting soon after the white
supremacist stations, but was shut down immediately (Olorunnisola
2002, p.135).
During the negotiations for democracy a lot of emphasis was put on
renewing the old state controlled broadcast media and already
before the 1994 elections, IBA act broke the monopoly of the SABC.
Independent Broadcasting Authority (IBA) was formed to make
policy on broadcasting, issue licences and monitor and regulate the
broadcast activities in 1993. This act also forbade the government
interference on IBA’s tasks, established the three‐tier broadcasting
system with public, commercial and community sectors and ensured
the service to all of the language groups (Olorunnisola 2002, p.130).
In 2000, IBA merged with the telecommunications regulatory
authority (SATRA) and the present regulator, the Independent
Communications Authority of South Africa (ICASA) was born (ICASA
website ‐ http://www.icasa.org.za)
A lot of texts has been produced on South Africa’s political transition
and Horwitz (2001, p.5) mentions, that to move on from the brutal
past, it is important, and very likely only possible, to do so with the
help of mass media. Its reform is not only a political issue but affects
on every sector of society.
As I mentioned earlier, there is a tendency of generalising African
problems. Tettey (2001, p.11) talks how freedom of the press on the
continent is still often a victim of a colonial tradition of control, taken
over by new leaders. This statement, although partly maybe true,
does ignore the fact that according to the most recent annual press
freedom index, 20% of the African countries are ranked higher than
United States, and South Africa is one of them (Annual Worldwide
Press Freedom Index 2006 ‐ http://www.rsf.org). SABC is often
blamed for being partial towards the new government (see for
instance “DA to consider campaign against SABC” –
http://www.mg.co.za), but community media, at least in theory,
functions independently from political and economical influences
(Olorunnisola 2002, p.133).
Community Radio in South Africa
Community Radio has been seen as a way to empower the previously
disadvantaged communities in the post‐apartheid South Africa
(Buckley 2000, p.183) and soon after the re‐regulation in 1994, 80
temporary licences were granted (Mtimde 2000, p.177) and in 2003,
150 Community Radios were broadcasting (Bosch 2003, p.104). First
licences had to be renewed annually but in 1996, IBA extended them
to be for four years (Olorunnisola 20002, p.131). Some alternative
media had been working underground before 1994, but the new
regulations took the emphasis from the resistance to reconstruction
and development (Bosch 2003, p.96). Still, the economical inequality
keeps on affecting the media (Kivikuru 2006, p.7) and as the
Community Radio is starting to take its shape, there may still often be
some political interference as it represents decentralisation of power
(Opuko‐Mensah 2000, p.171). It also suffers from the delays in
licensing and regulation, lack of funding and skill shortages in many
areas (Tacchi 2003, p.2184). Olorunnisola (2002, pp.134‐44)
explores the two dominant political economies of Community Radio:
donor and advertisement funded, and concludes that while the donor
funded stations may face sudden trouble if donors disappear, the
more self‐sustaining advert funded station may easily lose a focus to
their purpose.
Concluding points
In this chapter I have explored the theoretical framework of
community, Community Radio, media production and South African
communication environment. It seems evident that there are some
interesting unanswered questions in the field of study. Most
research on Community Radios look at their impact, them as a part of
society and their history and future prospects. The actual practices
of these stations have not been researched as much. Also, the impact
of political economy in the context of a Community Radio and in a
specific programme has not been properly looked into. Of course,
when the special conditions, created by visual impairment are added,
my research also concentrates on more specific examples of
practices, which are shaped not only by their funding, but also by the
aims of the Community Radio in general and in Bush Radio in
particular.
Chapter 2. Researching practices of Community Radio
In the previous chapter I covered some of the key theories around my
research and identified an area that has not been properly explored.
Unlike commercial media, due to its economics driven nature,
community sector has not been researched through its political
economy; more importantly a specific programme and its practices
have not been examined as a product of the funding of the station. In
this chapter, I will explore my chosen research method which
enabled me to answer the question ‘What are the distinct practices
of Morning Cruise, a midmorning programme of Cape Town
based community station Bush Radio’, and analyse its strengths,
weaknesses and its specific characteristics in this research.
In order to concentrate on the actual practices of the programme and
see the actions that lead to its output, I conducted ethnography of its
production team. Workplace ethnography has been used in studies
of some stations before to answer different questions (e.g. Wall 1999,
Bosch 2003 and Tower 2005). It is especially suitable to highlight the
nature of Morning Cruise, as the production team is partly consisted
of visually impaired people and therefore some of its practices are
very different from the ones researched before. I will look into the
theory of ethnography, exploring first its observational side and then
the interviews and finally, discuss more specifically on the research I
have conducted.
Ethnography as a method
Ethnography is a qualitative research method and in the past
decades, it has become one of the dominant methods in social
sciences (Hammersley 1992, p.1). Literally, the word means writing
about the way of life or the culture of a social group (McNeil and
Chapman 2005, p.89). It consists of studying people’s behaviour in
their every day context using different ways of gathering data;
primarily emphasising the personal observation and relatively
informal conversations. The gathering of data is unstructured as it
depends on what happens in the environment of study. The set of
ethnography is often small and the analysis of the data dominated by
the interpretation of human actions, rather than any statistical data
or quantification (Hammersley 1998, p.2). There are different ways
to record the observations but field notes are generally used.
Spradley (1979, p. 75) suggests three different ways ‐ a condensed
account; based on key words and short notes which can easily be
done in the middle of the observation; an expanded account, which is
to add up the condensed notes and a field work journal where
ethnographers record their own experiences during the research
which may be useful later on when writing down the actual
ethnography.
Ethnography has its historical roots in colonial times when colonisers
tried to understand the cultures foreign to them. However, the
findings were often based on assumptions and therefore not relevant
(Taylor 2002, p.2). Although the research method and its ethics have
improved, ethnography is still questioned as a form of scientific study
as its conclusions, as previously mentioned, are an outcome of an
interpretation (Hammersley 1998, p.6). This means that the
ethnographer is both reader and writer of the ethnography; reading
his/her own and other’s work (Atkinson 1992, p.2) and it is crucial to
connect the interpretation of the field work with theoretical ideas
(Davies 1999, p.39).
Ethnographic research became relevant in the media institutions
post 1960’s, when studies done in various newsrooms concluded that
the process of making the news resulted in embedded ideological
meanings (Tuchman 1991, p.82). Hammersley (1992, p.11) notes
that ethnography avoids concluding from what people say or think
they are doing but rather draws conclusions from what they do. It is
notable that if the method concentrates on specifics of a social and
physical environment of one organisation, generalising the findings
of a research to another environment is to be avoided (Wall 1999, p.
46). The purpose of ethnographic research is to offer some concepts
and models that allow people to see things in different ways. These
conclusions are contributions to the public dialogue and their
usefulness can be judged by everyone individually (Hammersley
1992, p.15). Besides Hammersley’s (1998, p.6) criticism of
ethnography’s findings being a result of interpretation as I
mentioned before, it is the fact, that it cannot be generalised and is
very subjective, that has raised much criticism amongst the theorists
(Johnson 1990, p. 11).
Ethnography helped me to understand the text and its production
process by observing the production team and how they arrive at the
station’s output. Observational methods, such as ethnography, are
useful when one tries to understand why the output was as it was
rather than simply what it was (Deacon et al. 1999, p.259). It also
helped to find out how much influence the different members of the
team have (Rubin et al. 2005, pp.230‐1), which was very useful in this
case as the production team incorporated both sighted and visually
impaired members and the purpose of the programme was, at least
partly, to empower the latter.
Ethnography is a set of methods which usually involves the
researcher observing; following the everyday practices of the subject
but also asking questions about it (Hammersley and Atkinson 1995,
p.1). After covering the observation aspect of ethnography, I will
now look into the interviews.
Interviews are a useful part of the research, as they allow the
researchers to acquire information they could not get by only
observing (Berger 2000, p.111). Berger (2000, p.113) continues this
idea by specifying that while observing alone answers what is being
done and in what kind of context, the interviews allow us to get
deeper into the motivations and attitudes that are shaping those
actions.

Everyone is a participant observer by nature, acquiring knowledge
about their surroundings and that knowledge is a valuable source for
an ethnographer. It must still be remembered that this information
should not be taken by its face value as the answers (even to an open
question in an unstructured interview in ethnography) can often
reflect what the informant (interviewee) thinks is an appropriate
answer. The objective in such an interview is not necessarily to
minimise the influence of the ethnographer but rather to understand
it and interpret the data accordingly (Hammersley and Atkinson
1995, pp.125‐131). In an ethnographic interview, the interviewer
must also be able to recognise, based on the observations made, if
some things are seen as ‘obvious’ by the interviewee, and therefore
left out from the answers (Schwartzman 1993, p. 56).
The actual event of the interview is ideally a casual one, with the
interviewee, at times, not even feeling that an interview is taking
place, as questions can be asked in the middle of normal everyday
conversation (Spradley 1979, p.58). I found this technique very
helpful in my research as I noticed that some answers from the actual
interview situations were more diplomatic than in an everyday
friendly conversation.
Ethnography concentrates on presenting the details from the point of
view of the ones involved in the practices in question (Wall 1999,
p.45) so if the community in South Africa is constructed in a different
way to ours (Lewis and Booth 1989 p.170), then surely the
community media must have different practices that are worth
studying.
Practicalities of this research
I spent two months between June and September 2006 in the Bush
Radio studio and offices observing the production team of Morning
Cruise. I had not been exposed to blindness before, so the starting
point was not how the show is produced but rather how everything
else, on an everyday level, worked for a visually impaired person on a
work place. In order for me to learn the basics and to get to know the
presenters, I suggested that for the first week I could be the technical
operator instead of their producer, who would normally do it. This
ensured that I got to follow their actual routines, learn about them in
practice and while doing so, ask some questions for my research in
an actual and non‐threatening environment. I felt that this was
important because in the very beginning, I noticed that the producer
and some other members of the staff, besides helping the presenters,
often jumped in to answer some of the questions when their help was
not needed. I found that to be instinctive gesture to help rather than
to patronise, but in order to get closer and more honest views from
everyone, I decided to talk in smaller groups. After the first week, I
stepped out of the production team and sat in the corner of the studio
while the producer, and a few weeks later, a new intern took over the
duties of technical operator.
To back up my own observation I interviewed the Trainee Presenters
Adrian Davids and Leandre Lukas, the Trainee Producer Rahima
Omar, intern Ronald Murphy who worked as a technical operator, the
Trainee Senior Producer of the station Yana Jardine, the Programme
Integrator Adrian Louw and finally the Managing Director Zane
Ibrahim. These interviews were conducted between June and
September 2006 at Bush Radio studios but I also had personal
conversations with everyone on a daily basis. In order to get answers
that represent the opinions as honestly as possible the interviews
were unstructured (see Berger 2000, p.117) and I was merely giving
direction to the conversation. Later on in March and April 2007 I
asked further questions via email to get more specific information on
a few details.
The cultural differences between me and the subjects of this study
did not end up being a problem, as the station is quite used to having
international interns, me being one of the old ones, and me being
quite used to the culture. The mutual open minded attitude
generated an interesting research period but it is still likely, that if I
had been from the same culture, the findings could have been slightly
different. My observation period was also influenced by the fact that
I am a presenter at the station. This helped me to feel comfortable
from the beginning and my presence at the station was also viewed
as more normal, than the one of complete outsider. On the other
hand, it made it harder to detach myself from the station and people
who I was observing.

Chapter 3. Research findings

After exploring the theoretical framework around my question and
the method I am using to answer it, in this chapter I will look into the
findings of my ethnographic research at Bush Radio. To answer my
question most effectively, I have divided the chapter into three
sections: firstly, station practices, concentrating on Bush Radio as a
Community Radio and the impact of their aims and political economy
to Morning Cruise; secondly, I will explore the distinct production
practices of the production team while preparing the programme and
finally what are the broadcast practices within the studio
environment and how they are impacted by the disability, and
limitations with equipment, which is an outcome of the political
economy of the station.
Having interviewed most of the staff only once, the dates for
references are the ones which can be seen in the partial
transcriptions in appendices, unless otherwise stated.

1. Station practices – Morning Cruise within the organisation
of Bush Radio
In this section, I will explore the implications of having visually
impaired staff, the relationship between them and rest of the station
and aims of the programme Morning Cruise. I will suggest that the
programme’s broadcast and production practices are outcome of two
aims of Bush Radio: to serve the community and to create a platform
to train its members, and they are characterised by station’s political
economy and the expensive and rare nature of the special equipment
needed for the visually impaired. Emphasis of these two aims varies
within the station so, that the management, (while recognising the
importance of the needs of the audience and general programming
aspects), values the training more, while the actual production team,
sees the community service as its only purpose.
Bush Radio as an organisation
Bush Radio is a Community Radio station in Cape Town, South Africa.
It broadcasts 24 hours a day in English (50% of the output),
Afrikaans (25%) and Xhosa (25%) (Bush Radio policy document),
mainly targeting the Cape Flats; the poorer area of the city on FM
(89.5 fm) with output also available on live stream from the station’s
website (www.bushradio.co.za). Bush Radio studio and offices are
not located in the Cape Flats, but in the Salt River area. The mission
statement of the station sets its aims as:
to ensure that communities who have been denied access
to resources, take part in producing ethical, creative and
responsible radio that encourages them to communicate
with each other, to take part in decisions that affect their
lives, and celebrate their own cultures. Through such a
radio, communities will affirm their own dignity and
identity, and promote social responsibility and critical
thinking.

Bush Radio Mission Statement

It is particularly important to keep in mind that the target audience
of the station lived under apartheid legislation until 1994, and
therefore the words ‘dignity’ and ‘identity’ have an important
resonance for the communities. Also, as I noticed during my
research, but also while producing a different programme at the
station, the participation of the community, which has been long
discouraged by apartheid, takes more effort than maybe in a
historically different setting. Cape Flats itself is constructed from
several townships and areas, which have been divided by race, as
stated in first chapter, between the Blacks and the so called
Coloureds. These communities were distanced from each other by
the apartheid regime, so to locate the studio and offices in one of
them, would have proved problematic. Zane Ibrahim says: :
deciding where to place the station was one of the hardest
decisions we've had to make... this is a divided country
and Cape Town is more divided than any of the other
provinces... placing the station in Mitchell's Plain would
mean we would NEVER get people from the black
townships attend ANY functions... plus... people from the
other coloured townships would not take the risk to step
into another gang’s territory... the best was to find a
neutral place on the bus route where everyone could have
access.

interview with author 23.4.2007

He continues that while being located in one of the communities
within the larger community could help participation in that area, it
would also create dangerous circumstances for the staff, and
mentions that Radio Zibonile, another Cape Town Community Radio
located in the Khayelitsha township has had many security problems,
including rapes of staff members around their offices (interview with
author 23.4.2007).
The complexity of the community itself creates a question how does
the station understand it. Bush Radio targets a geographical area
which is dominantly very poor. As this area, characterised by its
economical structures, has different sub‐areas, divided by race and
often language, the station tries to be as inclusive as possible by
serving different needs and broadcasting in different languages.
Everyone cannot be served all the time, but programming is
structured to serve everyone at some point which characterises the
output. Kivikuru (2006, p.26) has raised a question of the meaning of
community in Community Radio as I previously established, but Bush
Radio does not divide community further by seeing it as only the
ones who participate or listen, but rather everyone who is in need of
information and help. Ibrahim emphasises the social activities of the
organisation outside of its broadcast, which attempts to reach rest of
the community. These activities range from providing people with
blankets and rain covers in informal settlements to organising day
care for working parents.
Bush Radio’s policy document also lists other, more concrete and
practical aims. Out of that list, two are extremely relevant for this
research: community participation, which, as covered in my review of
existing literature, is seen as a standard for Community Radio and
facilitating training for the members of the community. These two, as
I later establish, characterise the broadcast practices of the Morning
Cruise.
The output of radios in general, is an outcome of different aspects of
programming (Wall 1999 p.58) and at Bush Radio there are policies
and instructions for the music and content. Listeners, however, are
not necessarily experiencing the text through its separate sources but
rather as a ‘station sound’ (Wall 1999 p.59‐60). As I will explore in
this chapter, the production and broadcast practices of Morning
Cruise are largely determined by the blindness of the presenters. The
disability also challenges the more conventional practices for the
staff members who have sight and have previously worked with
sighted colleagues. However, the text itself is not influenced by these
distinct practices.
The key point here is that the condition of the production team
members has an undeniable influence on the production discourse of
the station during the show and its preparation, but its influence on
the text; the output of the station, is minimised to a point where it is
insignificant. Blindness is not mentioned and therefore, while it is
not a secret, as I will later explain, it is not used as a bait to attract
attention from the listeners or even from the donors. It neither
determines the content of the show as it is not particularly targeting
a blind audience. The absence of the textual implications of visual
impairment should still not be ignored. It seems evident that it
happens, as the primary purpose of the show, according to
management, is to encourage the employees with their disability as
well as produce quality programming for the community, which then
is empowered through that, and therefore the output is not
structured around one topic. The unemployment amongst visually
impaired people in South Africa is as high as 97% (Cape Town
Society for Blind website – http://www.ctsb.co.za), so the
Programme Integrator Adrian Louw highlights that it is important to
integrate the presenters Davids and Lukas with the other staff, and
present the show to the community without making visual
impairment its defining force, so that it is just like any other
programme on Bush Radio’s output. I am not, however, going to
approach this programme through its textual qualities as I am more
interested in the implication of the station being mainly donor
funded Community Radio to the production of Morning Cruise.
Purpose of the programme Morning Cruise
As it has been established, Morning Cruise is a magazine style mid‐
morning programme on Cape Town community station, Bush Radio.
It is on‐air weekdays between 9am and 11am and hosted by the
visually impaired presenters Leandre Lukas and Adrian Davids. The
producer of the programme, Rahima Omar, is sighted and together
these three are the immediate production team.
From left: Leandre Lukas, Rahima Omar and Adrian Davids
(photograph by author)
According to Programme Integrator Louw, Morning Cruise serves a
social purpose besides the programming one, and that is as a training
ground for young people, and especially in recent years visually
impaired people. Although training young people from the
community can be seen as part of serving it, it is still apparent, that in
the dual role of the station, one aspect can impact on the other
negatively. One could ask whether putting less emphasis on giving
training would result with better service for the community, but
according to Louw, the idea is not to compete with the other,
dominantly commercial stations in the area. On an individual level,
he says that the aim of any of the shows at Bush Radio is not to tell
people how to be DJs but rather to have an understanding of
broadcasting. Ibrahim takes an even further step back with Morning
Cruise in particular, by saying that he wants to boost the confidence
of the people in the production team rather than teach them how to
become broadcasters. He also says that while serving the community
is the primary purpose of Bush Radio, people learning and
empowering themselves while doing so is a bonus, and it appears
that Morning Cruise, specifically, represents well the station’s aim to
train members of the community. This training is not limited to
visually impaired people but is extended to the rest of the staff by
teaching them to understand disability and erasing the stigma that
surrounds it. While emphasising the training aspect, Louw reminds
that it does not lessen the value of the programme itself and its
output, which is monitored constantly by management and
specifically by Trainee Senior Producer Yana Jardine, who is
responsible for all daytime programmes on weekdays.
Social aims of Morning Cruise within the station

You’ll know that they don’t say things like “oh we’re
blind”… they’re completely integrated within… at least we
try to completely integrate them into the programming of
Bush and into the staff of Bush, and that for us is very
important.

Adrian Louw

The aim of Bush Radio to integrate the visually impaired staff
members with the rest of the station is also part of the training that
the station wants to facilitate. This training is not simply targeting
the presenters in question but includes the whole staff. Working in
such an environment ideally results with learning to understand
what the limitations of the disability are, but more importantly what
they are not.
The station has a history of having visually impaired staff so the
present production team of Morning Cruise stepped into an
environment that was already prepared for some of the special
needs. These special needs can be divided into two main sections:
equipment and social awareness. I will write more about the
equipment later but in order to, as Louw says, completely integrate
visually impaired staff members with the rest of the station, the other
staff members must be able to accommodate them. This means two
different things: firstly their attitudes; secondly remembering not to
leave chairs or other physical objects on the routes that Davids and
Lukas use, and to leave the items that they need in their correct
places, so they can be easily found without anyone being forced to
ask for help. Due to the fast pace that some of the staff members
change at a training station, some problems do occur regarding
leaving chairs in the way, but Adrian Davids says that he understands
that it takes time for people to learn. He notes that the older
members of the station are quite good at noticing these obstacles and
informing them to be aware (interview with author 27.3.2007).
Bush Radio is a relatively casual working environment where its
employees and the management do not ‘dress up’ on an ordinary
work day. The casual nature of the station extends to the social
interaction amongst the staff. Probably the most characteristic
aspect of it, is the playful chat, unrelated to work, where every staff
member is at some time the subject of jokes. As a part of the
integration aim, Davids and Lukas are included in this as well, but
according to Davids, it is possible that some people joke more about
them than others, just to indicate that they are an equal part of the
staff. This, however, eases when people learn to be more comfortable
with visually impaired (interview with author 27.3.2007). The work
related interactions are professional and therefore these casual jokes
are not characterising them.
Implications of station’s political economy
Limitations of standard radio technology and the expensive nature of
the special equipment for visually impaired people determine much
of the production and broadcast practices of Morning Cruise. Bush
Radio funds itself mainly by foreign donors (Olorunnisola 2002,
p.136) and according to Louw, selling advertising at the station
suffers from the advertisers focusing on the dominant practices of
the commercial stations and their daily programming schedules. As a
community and a training station Bush Radio’s daytime
programming standard depends often on the level of experience in
the production teams, but when a certain standard is reached, the
team changes and a new one starts from the beginning. This creates
what he calls ‘a seesaw effect’ on the daytime broadcasting, which
complicates the sales of the advertising time, although more focused
specialist programmes on the evenings with more targeted audiences
would actually serve the advertisers better.
Station raises funds internationally and acquires equipment from
various organisations working with disability. As the station already
has equipment, such as a brailler and a screen reading software
entitled Jaws, and an established relationship with Cape Town
Society for the Blind, it is easier to continue to work specifically with
visual impairment rather than to change between different
disabilities as the high price of technology sets limits to changing it
constantly.
Managing Director Ibrahim, who is responsible for the fundraising
and does that mainly by himself, emphasises that he does not use
Lukas and Davids’s visual impairment to attract donors. According to
him that would be unethical (interview with author 27.3.2007) and
therefore it appears that the station’s work with the disabled is not
connected to the fundraising. As I pointed out earlier it is not a bait
to attract donors for the special needs of the programme in question,
or any other needs of the organisation.
2. Production practices – Preparing the broadcast of Morning
Cruise
After locating some of the implications of having visually impaired
staff in the Bush Radio organisation, and their connections to the
aims of the station and its political economy in general, I will look
more closely on its specific implications while the production team is
preparing the actual programme on daily basis.
In this section I argue that the distinct production practices of the
Morning Cruise during its daily preparations are the result of the
power relations and communication within the immediate
production team and between them and the management. These
practices are also impacted considerably by the economical factors
which lead to the lack of appropriate equipment which then results in
prolonged preparation of the programme. I will do this by exploring
the role of the producer, the limitations of the equipment used at the
station and daily routines of production team in the office
Role of the producer
The role of the producer in Morning Cruise is a one of a facilitator.
That is partly an outcome of the fast pace that the producers change
in the programme and at the station in general, but also the fact that
due to the lack of special equipment to help the visually impaired
presenters, which is the result of either economical reasons or the
lack of appropriate products on the market, the production team
needs a person who can help to close the gap between the available
technology and the limitation it puts to the presenters and a
professional output. That is a task that demands social skills and
flexibility rather than media training and also because, as Ibrahim
says, in a show like this the basic rules of broadcasting are not always
applicable. Rahima Omar, who was the producer during my research
did not have previous experience from radio or working with visually
impaired people when she took over the duties. Due to her personal
character and possibly with a help of her training as a nurse, she
adjusted to these special circumstances on a social level well. As a
training station Bush Radio does offer opportunities to learn and
many times, like with Omar, these opportunities by their nature force
the learning curve to be steep.

The main task for the producers in other programmes at the station
is to organise interviews and research questions for the presenters
but in the Morning Cruise this task is divided between the production
team as a whole, with the producer participating in these practices as
a member of the team rather than a person in charge. Omar
describes her own role:
I think I am just the organiser. I am just there to basically
help them out. As far as us, we’re a team and they help me
when I need help and I’m just there to organise their lives
like the scripts and things they can’t do.

Rahima Omar

She facilitates the preparations by writing things down, finding
information that is in print such as telephone numbers and does
other things that demand sight, but she is not the final decision
maker of the content or the style of the broadcast neither on paper
nor in practice. The ownership of the show is with its presenters and
it is characterised by two different power relations between them, as
Davids is more confident on‐air and in the studio environment and
Lukas with the screen reading software and computers during the
preparations. The role of the producer is also influenced by the fact
that the Trainee Senior Producer of the station, Yana Jardine comes
from a research rather than media background and therefore the
advice given to the Trainee Producers is more focused on content and
less on style of the programmes.
It is noteworthy that at the station there are some mixed messages
about the role of the producer which then creates further confusion
in the production practices. While the Programme Integrator sees
the producer more as an intermediary, the Senior Producer sees the
role as a more dominant decision maker, and the producer is trying
to meet these expectations which at times are unspoken. These
different approaches are the outcome of former putting more
emphasis on the training aspect and latter on the content. These
mixed messages create an assumption in the production team that
something is always done wrong and the shadow of that doubt is
characteristic to the decision making process, which is based on
assumptions, not a knowledge of what is being expected from the
programme.

The two aims of the station; training and community service, explain
the nature of its production practices. While these aims of the
organisation offer us a logic to understand the way programme is
structured, their lack of clarity within the production team, which
sees serving the community as the dominant, if not the only aim,
creates a confusion in communication. For the station, the learning
experiences and gaining social confidence is more important than it
is viewed amongst the immediate production team. That may be for
the reasons that the learning experience could suffer, if they started
thinking less about their aim, as learning happens through their
professional ambition to create text that satisfies the audience rather
than concentrating on learning itself. However, this lack of clarity
about the training aim of the station and expectations from the
programme creates a feeling of uncertainty of whether they are on
the right path or not, which further on impacts on the practices,
which are, as said before, often based on assumptions of what is
expected from them.
Probably the clearest example of uncertainty within Morning Cruise is
still its music programming. At the time of the research the station
was looking into a studio software that would have played
programmed music from the computer so management did not
address the issue of music selection as it was about to be solved. In
the meantime, however, the production team was not sure of what
kind of music exactly was expected from them. While this
communication problem does not reflect on the ones I have already
talked about, it is still worth some attention as a large part of the
output is music.
There are some broad guidelines on station’s policies of what type of
music is preferred on Bush Radio. Music policy does not address the
programmes separately but talks about the station as a whole and
mentions only that half of the music should be South African,
preferably from Cape Town and the rest divided between Africa and
rest of the world, and that independent artist should also be
supported (Bush Radio policy document). The producer picks the
records played during the programme from the station’s CD library
herself and while the first part of the policy seems to be followed,
regardless of whether it is based on actual policy or just a personal
preference, the second part is not. The music of the show is mainly
consisted of House, Hip Hop, Kwaito (local dance music combining
house, Hip Hop and traditional music), R&B and Pop while Lukas and
Davids feel it should be less contemporary, as they feel the audience
is more mature. Their disability prevents them from picking the
records and even in the studio, they are depending only on their
memory of the actual songs, where as a sighted person could use an
album cover to remember what type of music is in question. This
problem is especially highlighted when technical operator is an
outsider, as during this research, who does not have knowledge on
local music or a special interest in the genres in question. Presenters
spent a considerable amount of time worrying over the suitability of
music and for instance, if they heard a guitar sound in any of the
songs, they mentioned that they have received a complaint from the
management for playing rock music. This problem seems to be one
of the backlashes of the producer not having a media background.
Although the majority of the programme’s content was music, this
issue remained unsolved both on the broader station level and
regardless of the issue being addressed, also within the production
team. Music in general was not seen as a priority over the speech by
the immediate production team although Programme Integrator
Louw saw it to be the most important part of the programme.
Although the station had some confusion about the role of the
producer, her importance to the production process was never
underestimated. Ibrahim said that the quality of the output does not
depend on the presenters on‐air alone, but largely on how well the
producer sits in. The vitality of the role was demonstrated best when
the Trainee Producer Omar was not present due to illness and I was
asked to help and although I have experience in radio, to adjust to
these circumstances and meet the demands of this role was not an
easy task.
Daily Routines
Presenters of Morning Cruise arrive at the station every morning
between six and seven o’clock. Practical concerns and logistics are
dominant factors on every aspect of the programme and even its time
slot is determined by when the transport service for blind people is
available in the area. Mid‐morning time is a natural outcome of it
being early mornings and early afternoons. When presenters arrive,
they start translating the script, written in conventional text on
computer into braille. In the practical sense, translating means that
they listen to the script using the screen reading software Jaws from
the computer, and then write it again with the brailler, which looks
like an old typewriter and makes a loud noise while punching holes
into a thick paper. This process is relatively time consuming, as work
has to be done twice but more so it is a problem as the producer
cannot write with a brailler so it is impossible to give written
information to presenters after they get into the studio. Bush Radio
has been looking into acquiring a printer that would print brailled
text straight from the computer but so far it has been unsuccessful.
All the time before the show is used to translate the script which
generally consists of interview questions, ‘Trivia of the day’, ‘Tip of
the day’ and ‘Word of the day’; all regular segments of the
programme.
After the broadcast the production team gathers into their corner of
the programming office where they talk about the show and
brainstorm ideas for the next day before starting to organise the
interviews and create the content. Producer and presenters often
have a lunch together at noon and after that they finish the script
working more individually until the transport company picks up the
presenters. The producer stays for an hour more to finish the script,
so that it is ready and waiting the next morning when the presenters
come back to the station.
3. Distinct broadcast practices of Morning Cruise inside the
studio

So far in this chapter, I have explored Bush Radio’s Morning Cruise
programme and its special nature within the organisation of the
station; how it is prepared and how those things are affected by the
station’s aims as a Community Radio and its political economy. In
this last section of the chapter I will take a closer look at what are the
broadcast practices inside the studio environment and which factors
are behind them.
In this section, I will argue that the distinct broadcast practices are
the result of the lack of special technology; partly due to its poor
availability and partly due to the political economy of the station.
This forces the technical operator and the producer to be sighted and
a new set of cues have to be created, in order to achieve the
communication, that enables the broadcast while on‐air. These
practices are not necessarily impacting the output negatively, as at a
training station its quality often varies depending on the level of
experience of the production team.
Distinct technology

I was talking to these big technology houses asking them
“do you have a studio that can be used by blind people?”.
They didn’t even take note …unless you’re Stevie Wonder
… you can only have so many blind piano players. And
what do the rest do? They sit at home.

Zane Ibrahim

The dominant practice of Bush Radio is that the presenters must
engineer during their programmes. This is due to economical
practicalities and hence the station, since hiring visually impaired
staff members has tried to upgrade the studio with the necessary
hardware and software. Partly due to the lack of appropriate
equipment available and partly due to the fact that it is expensive, the
producer or interns have taken the tasks of the technical operator.
The main problems with the technology, as identified by Louw and
Ibrahim, are the sound levels and how to ensure that they are correct.
Another problem would be created by the music, which I have talked
about earlier, as the CDs are not readable by visually impaired and
marking them all, or even some, with brailled stickers would be time
consuming and even then hard to organise in any kind of working
solution. Also, the studio’s telephone line, which signals incoming
calls by a small light, should be changed.
Lack of technology creates more challenges for the presenters, which
cannot be solved even by a human assistance, as they are not able to
make notes during the show, nor can the producer make notes which
they would be able to read so they have to rely on memory or
confirming facts just before going on‐air to talk about them. Station
does not have equipment to translate normal writing into brailled
print so if for instance an important phone number comes in the
middle of the show, there is no way to get that on a written form on‐
air to presenters. Another common example of not being able to
make notes, are the song titles and artists which presenters must
remember when going on‐air. Considering that they both have
Afrikaans as their first language, they present the show in English
and if the song title is for instance in Xhosa, which in itself is a
completely different language which they cannot speak, but large
part of the audience can, it may create pressure with pronunciation
or even remembering what they were supposed to say. Much of the
content is relying on a good memory of the presenters as only the
‘Tip of the day’, ‘Trivia of the day’, ‘Word of the day’ segments and
some questions for the interviews are usually written down. The lack
of technology to translate between normal text and Braille also
results with the lack of scripting in segments such as ‘Current Affairs’
and ‘Job Shop’, which I will look into later.
As I have so far established, the role of technical operator in the
studio is crucial but the fact that production team must always
include some members with sight, creates a need for new ways of
communicating in studio while on‐air and I will explore those next.

Davids and Lukas checking the correct distance to microphone while Omar reads
open workplaces on the background for ‘Job Shop’ (photograph by author).
Communication in the studio environment
Every time I’ve done anything with audio, sight is

involved. They (Lukas and Davids) can’t see you, so it’s
completely irrelevant all those visual cues that I’m used to
rely on. So it’s forced me to approach things differently.

Ronald Murphy

The visual impairment of the presenters results in a lack of
traditional communication in the studio during the broadcast
between technical operator or producer and the presenters. The
more conventional ways of communicating when the microphones
are on, such as hand signals and eye contact have to be replaced by
new set of cues that signal for instance incoming phone calls or
possible technical problems. These substituting signs are not
standard in the show, but they change with the person engineering.
When the Trainee Producer Omar would have walked and whispered
to the presenters, Ronald Murphy, who was the technical operator of
the show most part of my research agreed on a tap on the foot
underneath the desk to signify a phone call. This reflects the social
aim of the show, emphasised by Louw, as it is not only training for
the presenters but everyone, who as member of the team is forced to
learn how to deal with the matter and then together find suitable
ways to overcome these obstacles.
Morning Cruise on‐air
Although Morning Cruise starts nine o’clock in the morning, its
presenters Leandre Lukas and Adrian Davids get into the studio ten
minutes before that. They have an on‐air chat with the morning
show host Victor J in Afrikaans, and during that, at times, it is
mentioned that they are visually impaired. In their own programme
presenters do not talk about it as has been established already, but
according to Lukas it is good that the fact is mentioned during a
casual conversation in the previous programme, so they do not feel
like hiding it while it is not structural to the text of they produce.
After the nine o’clock news the producer or technical operator comes
into the studio with music, played from the CDs, and starts the show
with a signature tune, which is ‘Imagine’ by John Lennon. The first
link follows immediately after that and the content of the show is
gone through in that and the listeners are welcomed. The
programme consists of elements that are standard every day, such as
‘Word of the day’ and ‘Trivia of the day’ competitions; ‘Tip of the day’
which can be anything that the production team sees relevant to the
community, ‘Job Shop’ where some available jobs are read, ‘Current
Affairs’ segment with a member of the news team of the station and
two interviews. Music, as I have explained earlier is picked by the
producer and it does not follow any structured guidelines.

The rest of the links are either plugging other segments, purely music
based or just about the presenters’ presence. I will elaborate more
on ‘Current Affairs’, ‘Job Shop’ and the interviews as they offer us
some interesting examples of the broadcast practices.
‘Current Affairs’ segment, which starts at half past nine and lasts
usually around twenty minutes, creates an interesting set up as two
presenters talk through the news items of the day with a changing
member of the news team. This segment was introduced to the
programme just before my arrival so at the time it was still trying to
find a working practice. News readers, who did not have experience
on talking on a radio except as news readers, were figuring out a
ways to read the items more casually but still accurately while the
presenters were learning to tag to them as they came. This segment
was not practised or scripted and it was lacking the agreed signals of
how to move forward. The lack of eye contact also creates an
unnatural feeling in the conversation as it often distracts the
direction of speech and the news reader may end up just talking to
the paper or listener rather than the presenter who then cannot get
the attention to comment naturally.
‘Job Shop’ is an example of the aim to serve the community. After the
ten o’clock news, the producer Rahima Omar came into the studio
and read some open work place advertisements that were picked as
the most suitable to the listeners. This segment has a very different
mood to the ‘Current Affairs’ as the good chemistry between
producer and presenters can be heard. All the parties on‐air are
comfortable and understand the situation and therefore they are able
to ‘feed off’ each other better and control the direction of the speech,
so that it sounds more coherent and natural.
Presenters Davids and Lukas do not have designated roles in the
studio. Their personalities and strengths are different but neither of
them have agreed to lead the show or be a sidekick. Besides the
standard segments, there is not set clocks and the technical operator
often asks during the song if presenters want to talk after it, and the
decision making between the them is usually a common agreement
so any dominant roles cannot be pointed out. In short links, Davids
usually talks if it is about the presence of the station, such as, wishing
listeners a good day, while Lukas likes to take charge of the short
links, that are about the songs that were being played. This is a
natural divide, as Lukas is interested in music and Davids is talented
in small talk.
The interviews take place after eleven and the topics are varying.
Usually the interviewees are artist, community activists or medical
professionals. The topics are following the themes that are part of
the station’s nature and function. These interviews can either be
telephonic or live in studio. Unless the person coming to interview
has been interviewed at the programme before, they will not be
aware of the of the presenters’ visual impairment before the
interview. While on‐air, the interviewees often started talking to the
technical operator or someone else in the studio who they could have
an eye contact with. Ronald Murphy, who at the time was behind the
desk, admitted purposely doing, or pretending to do something else
to leave the interviewees to deal with the matter. With the
telephonic interviews this did not impact the output and the
interviewees did not necessarily ever find out about the special
nature of the production. This indicates that if there was a negative
impact from the presenters’ condition to the output, it was not so
much due to the actual condition but rather how other people found
it difficult to deal with. Ibrahim summarised the strength of Davids
and Lukas by saying:
The other presenters will sit there and they’ll see

somebody walks past the glass there and there goes ten,
fifteen per cent. The buttons in front of them another
twenty per cent of them… they end up with fifty per cent
focus. But with blind people, they’re totally focused. They
listen to every breath; they listen to every silence between
the sounds.

Zane Ibrahim
Sometimes interviewees undermined the presenters’ ability to sense
and experience different things. One memorable example of that was
a photographer who could not understand at all why he was being
interviewed by people who have not seen his work. But while doing
my observation, I was intrigued to hear and understand how visually
impaired people could imagine visual art. Telephonically done, this
interview would have very likely taken a different course.

Conclusion
In this research I have analysed Bush Radio’s mid‐morning
programme Morning Cruise. The question I set for myself was
highlighting its distinct practices and I answered it, based on
ethnography I conducted, using three different focuses: implications
of Bush Radio’s station practices and characteristics of production
and broadcast practices of Morning Cruise.
I suggested that the practices of Morning Cruise are combination of
two aims of the station: to serve the community and offer training.
These practices are characterised by station’s political economy and
expensive rare nature of the special equipment for the visually
impaired presenters. Output of the station, however, is not
necessarily determined by this. As Bush Radio is a training station, a
‘seesaw effect’ on its daytime broadcast is created, where its standard
is a result of experience of the trained staff members and when
certain level has been reached, they often move to other jobs and
new members start from the beginning.
I also argued that the distinct production practises of the Morning
Cruise during its daily preparations are result of the power relations
and communication within the immediate production team and
between them and the management. These practices are also
impacted considerably by economic factors which lead to lack of
appropriate equipment which then results in prolonged preparation
of the programme, and also in the role of producer being extended to
facilitator, so as to close the gap between disability, lack of
equipment and good quality output.
Finally I established that the distinct broadcast practices within the
studio are also a result of the lack of technology and station’s political
economy, which mean the technical operator and producer have to
be sighted. This means that new set of cues must be created in order
to achieve the communication that enables the broadcast while on‐
air. As established, the quality of output, although subjective, is still
merely characterised by the experience level of the staff.
Purely ideologically, Morning Cruise is an outcome of station’s social
aims and responsibility but on the practical level it is characterised
also largely by money and equipment. I would assume that it is not
on purpose, but as an inevitable side product that the conditions
created by those factors enforce the station’s role as a training
station, as also people, who are not used to working with visually
impaired people must get to understand what the implications of the
disability are. This serves to help erase stigma around this and other
similar conditions in the community.
Findings of this research on a detailed level cannot be generalised to
other Community Radios as the practices I have looked into are
outcome of very distinct circumstances. More broadly though, they
offer us some understanding of how Community Radio works and
what may be its driving factors. To get clearer picture of the impact
of political economy in Community Radio sector in South Africa, I
suggest that some further research should be conducted by
comparing different stations, also advertisement funded ones, in
order to understand the actual impact of stations’ political economy
to their function.
Bibliography

Atkinson, P. (1992) Understanding ethnographic texts. London: Sage
Publications Ltd.

Barnard, S. (2000) Studying Radio. London: Arnold.

Barnatt, C. and Starkey, K. (1994) The emergence of flexible networks in UK
television industry. British Journal of Management, Vol. 5.

Berland, J. Radio space and industrial time: The case of music formats. in:
Bennet, T. et al. (Eds.) (1993) Rock and Popular Music: Politics, Policies,
Institutions. London: Routledge.

Bosch, T. (2003) Radio, community and identity in South Africa – a rhizomatic
study of Bush Radio in Cape Town. Ph.D. thesis, Ohio University.

Buckley, S. (2000) Radio’s new horizons: democracy and popular
communication in the digital age. International Journal of Cultural Studies, 3
(2).

Chomsky, N. and Herman, E. S. (1988) Manufacturing consent: the political
economy of the mass media. New York: Pantheon Books.

Crisell, A. (1994) Understanding Radio. 2nd Ed. London: Routledge.

Crow, G. and Maclean, C. Community. in: Payne, G. (Ed.) (2000). Social
Divisions. London: MacMillan Press LTD.

Davies, A. D. (1999) Reflexive ethnography: a guide to researching selves and
others. London: Routledge.

Deacon, D. et al. (1999) Researching Communications. London: Arnold.

Downey, J. The media industries: do ownership, size and internationalisation
matter? in: Hesmondhalgh, D. (Ed.) (2006) Media Production. Maidenhead:
Open University Press.

Fleming, C. (2002) The radio handbook. 2nd Ed. London: Routledge.

Forde, S; Meadows, M. and Foxwell, K. (2003) Community Radio and local
culture: an Australian case study. Communications, 28.

Hall, S. Signification, representation, ideology: Althusser and the post‐
structuralist debates in cultural studies. in: Curran, J; Morley, D. and
Walkerdine, V. (Eds.) (1996) Cultural studies and communications. London:
Arnold.

Hammersley, M. (1992) What’s wrong with ethnography? London: Routledge.

Hammersley, M. (1998) Reading Ethnographic Research. 2nd Ed. Essex:
Addison Wesley Longman Limited.

Hammersley, M. and Atkinson, P. (1995) Ethnography – Principles in Practice.
2nd Ed. London: Routledge.

Hendy, D. (2000) Radio in the Global Age. Cambridge: Polity Press.

Hesmondhalgh, D. (2006). Media Production. Maidenhead: Open University
Press.

Horwitz, R. B. (2001) Communication and Democratic Reform in South Africa.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Irvine, N. (2000) Commercial radio: serving UK communities. Cultural Trends,
40.

Jallov, B. (2005) Assessing community change: development of ‘bare foot’
impact assessment methodology. Radio Journal, 3 (1).

Jhally, S. (1990) The codes of advertising: Fetishism and the political economy
of meaning in the consumer society. London: Routledge.

Johnson, J. C. (1990) Selecting ethnographic informants. London: Sage
Publications Ltd.

Kivikuru, U. (2006) Top‐down or bottom‐up? Radio in the service of
democracy: Experiences from South Africa and Namibia. International
Communications Gazette, 68(1).

Krohling Peruzzo, C. M. Participation in Community Communication. in:
Servaes, J; Jacobson, T. L. and White, S. A. (1996) Participatory
Communication for Social Change. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications, Inc.

Lewis, P M. (2005) Editorial. Radio Journal, 3 (1).
Lewis, P M. and Booth, J. (1989) The invisible medium – Public, commercial
and community radio. London: MacMillan Education LTD.
Marx, K. and Engels, F. (1974/1847) The German ideology. London: Lawrence
and Wishart.
McNeil, P. and Chapman, S. (2005) Research Methods. 3rd Ed. Oxon: Routledge.

Meli, F. (1989) South Africa belongs to us: A history of the ANC. Bloomington:
Indiana University Press.

Minar, D. W. and Greer, S. (1969) The Concepts of community: readings with
interpretations. London: Butterworth & Co (Publishers) Ltd.

Modisane, W. B. (1986) Blame me on history. Johannesburg: Jonathan Ball
Publishers.

Mosco, V. (1996) The Political economy of communication. London: Sage
Publications Ltd.

Mtimde, L. (2000) Radio broadcasting in South Africa: an overview.
International Journal of Cultural Studies, 3(2).

Olorunnisola, A. A. (2002) Community radio: participatory communication in
postapartheid South Africa. Journal of Radio Studies, vol. 9. No. 1.

Opubor, A E. (2000) If Community Media is the Answer, What is the Question?
Harare: New Africa International Network.

Opuko‐Mensah, A. The future of community radio in Africa. in: Fardon, R. and
Furniss, G. (2000) Radio in transition – African broadcast cultures. Oxford:
James Currey Publishers.

Pampallis, J. (1991) Foundations of new South Africa. London: Zed Books.

Partridge, S. (1982) Not the BBC/ IBA – The case for community radio. London:
Comedia.

Ross, R. (1999) A concise history of South Africa. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.

Rubin, R.B; Rubin, A.M and Piele, L.J. (2005) Communication research:
Strategies and sources. 6th Ed. Belmont: Wadsworth.

Schlesinger, P. (1978) Putting ‘reality’ together. London: Routledge

Schudson, M. The Sociology of news production revisited. in: Curran, J. and
Gurevitch, M. (Eds.) (1996) Mass Media and society. 2nd Ed. London: Arnold.

Smythe, D. W. (1981) Dependency road; communication, capitalism,
consciousness and Canada. Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corp.

Spitulnik, D. (1993) Anthropology and mass media. Annual Review of
Anthropology, 22 (1993).

Spradley, J. P. (1979) The ethnographic interview. Orlando: Holt, Rinehart and
Winston, Inc.

Schwartzman, H. B. (1993) Ethnography in organizations. London: Sage
Publications Ltd.

Tacchi, J. (2003) Promise of citizen’s media: lessons from community radio in
Australia and South Africa. Economic and Political Weekly, May 31, 2003.

Taylor, S. (2002) Ethnographic research: a reader. London: Sage Publications
Ltd.

Tettey, W. J. (2001) The media and democratization in Africa: contributions,
constraints and concerns of private press. Media, Culture and Society, Vol. 23.

Thompson, L. (1995) A History of South Africa : revised version. London: Yale
University Press.

Tower, C. (2005) ‘Arajo efemu’: local FM radio and the socio‐technical system
of communications in Koutiala, Mali. Radio Journal, 3 (1).

Tuchman, G. Media institutions: qualitative methods in the study of news. in:
Bruhn Jensen, K. and Jankowski, N. W. (Eds.) (1991) A handbook of qualitative
methodologies in mass communication research. London: Routledge.

Ursell, G. Working in the media. in: Hesmondhalgh, D. (Ed.) (2006). Media
Production. Maidenhead: Open University Press.

Van Vuuren, K. (2006) Community broadcasting and the enclosure of the
public sphere. Media, Culture & Society, vol. 28 (3).

Van Zyl Slabbert, F. (2006) The other side of history: an anecdotal reflection on
political transition in South Africa. Johannesburg: Jonathan Ball Publishers.

Wall, T. (1999) Constructing Popular Music Radio: Music and Cultural Identity
in Radio Station Discourse. Ph.D. thesis, University of Birmingham.

Wall, T. (2000) Policy , pop and the public: the discourse of regulation in
British commercial radio. Journal of Radio Studies, Vol. 7, No. 1.

Wall, T. (2006) Calling the tune: resolving the tension between profit and
regulation in British commercial music radio. Southern Review, 39/2.

Wanyeki, L M. (1999) The development of community media in Eastern and
Southern Africa. Promoting Community Media in Africa. Nairobi: EcoNews
Africa.

White, M. Ideological analysis and television. in: Allen, R.C. (Ed.) (1992)
Channels of discourse, reassembled. London: Routledge.

Worden, N. (1994) The making of modern South Africa: conquest, segregation
and apartheid. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.

Other sources:

African Charter on Broadcasting at Media Institute of Southern Africa – MISA
[Online]. Available from www.misa.org [Last accessed 15 October 2006].

Bush Radio [Online]. Available from www.bushradio.co.za [Last accessed 13
May 2007].

Cape Town Society of Blind [Online]. Available from www.ctsb.co.za [Last
accessed 13 May 2007].

Independent Communications Authority of South Africa – ICASA [Online].
Available from: www.icasa.org.za [Last accessed 20 October 2006].

National Community Radio Forum ‐ NCRF [Online]. Available from:
www.ncrf.org.za [Accessed 16 April 2006].

Press Freedom Index at Reporters Without Borders [Online]. Available from
http://www.rsf.org/rubrique.php3?id_rubrique=639 [Last accessed 10
February 2007].

World Association of Community Radio Broadcasters – AMARC [Online].
Available from http://wiki.amarc.org [Accessed 6 October 2006].

DA to consider campaign against SABC at Mail & Guardian online [Online].
Available from
http://www.mg.co.za/articlePage.aspx?articleid=274495&area=/media_new
s/ [Last accessed 20 November 2006].

Community Radio Practices: A Case Study On How The Political Economy Impacts Production in The South African Community Radio Sector.

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Community Radio Practices: A Case Study On How The Political Economy Impacts Production in The South African Community Radio Sector.

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Although there has been some significant research on radio

Bush Radio’s political economy to their practices; particularly

concentrating on their mid‐morning show, Morning Cruise. This

programme is hosted by visually impaired presenters and therefore

are the distinct practices of Morning Cruise, a mid­morning

Now, almost seven months since I finished my ethnography, the

observation and interviews conducted. This chapter has been

practices and broadcast practices. Using these focuses I introduce

Finally, I conclude my research highlighting its findings, assess the

Chapter 1. Theorising Community Radio practices in

Community Radio, radio and media production and Community

Community Radio. These will help us to understand how

internal cohesion and linkages amongst its members (Krohling

Peruzzo 1996, p.162). These communities often have dividing

2000, p.227). The regulator in South Africa, the Independent

Communications Authority of South Africa (ICASA), continues to

divide the communities of interest into three sub‐groups:

Institutional, Religious and Cultural Communities (ICASA –

an object to paternalistic betterment, while the commercial sector

communality and the differences have been de‐emphasised. The

(Kivikuru 2006, p.26). In the chapter three, I will explore how Bush

Communities also have different opinions and objectives within

themselves, so their voices undergo hegemonic processes, which

p.105 and Hendy 2000, p.16). Cultural differences in community

broadcasting are highlighted as they also partly determine its

Tacchi 2003, p.2183 and Opuko‐Mensah 2000, pp.165‐6).

rather than the more traditional ‘top to bottom’ broadcasting

(Wanyeki 1999, p.26 and Olorunnisola 2002, p.133). Bosch (2003,

views on cultural matters and offer niche programming (Forde,

Meadows and Foxwell 2003, p.249). World Association of

a feeling of localness, because the stations are economics driven.

This leaves Community Radio, besides the other community media,

Tower (2005) has done an ethnographic research on Community

because it responds very well to pre‐existing

station must be based in a community association or committee,

production practices and finally some specifics of radio

any production team in particular while preparing the programme,

According to Schudson (1996, p.145), the political economy

perspective of media studies has been dominant in Anglo‐American

theories but it emphasises more economy than politics. Mosco

for the advertisers. Jhally (1990, p.72) specifies this idea by adding

their texts autonomously or are they influenced by economical,

production, controls automatically the mental production as well

Hesmondhalgh (2006) compares different case studies in the media

and culture production and distinguishes a Public Service

Broadcaster, BBC, having other influences in their production than

counter discourse, universality, serving the public and justifying the

resource by their organisations (Ursell 2006, p.141), while Barnatt

influences, Curran (1996, p.146) points out specific examples of

the media production are partly determined by their political

economy; ownership structures of their organisations, and although

Schlesinger (1978), also incorporating practical and economical

impacting the output. He says that commercial radio broadcast

practices are heavily regulated and monitored (Wall 1999, p.266),

In his ethnographic research on a British commercial station he

calculates that only 3‐16% of the output was fully controlled by the

although common, not really signifying anything but itself. Berland

the community one and the academic research has mainly

concentrated on the commercial sector, but even the indigenous

political economy models of Community Radio, as explored by

democratic elections, the ruling party African National Congress

election victory of Afrikaner Nationalist Party (NP), which resulted

although more integration takes place these days (Bosch 2003,

are the distinct practices of Morning Cruise, a midmorning

of Morning Cruise, a midmorning programme of Cape Town