Community  Broadcasting:  Country  Case  Studies         The  Czech  Republic       In  the  Czech  Republic,  community  broadcasting  on  terrestrial  channels  doesn't  exist,  and  is   limited  to  a  select  few  alternative  online  forms.  Legalization,  licensing,  and  support  for   community  broadcasters  are  the  natural  steps  in  the  process  of  development;  steps  the  Czech   Republic  has  yet  to  take.       Public  Service  Broadcasting   Public  service  broadcasting  in  the  Czech  Republic  consists  of  Ceska  Televize  and  Cesky  Rozhlas,   both  delivering  programs  featuring  information,  opinion  and  entertainment  similar  to  their   Austrian  and  European  counterparts.  Operated  from  their  respective  headquarters  locations  in   Prague  and  regional  sites,  the  broadcasting  organizations  are  recognized  as  legitimate   institutions  with  continuing  government  support  (Krupicka  2014).  Since  its  founding  in  1923,   the  state-­‐run  Czechoslovak  radio  has  also  earned  a  degree  of  iconic  status  in  Czech  history  for   its  role  during  various  conflicts,  including  providing  the  setting  for  street  battles  over   Czechoslovak  sovereignty  in  1945  and  1968.  Following  the  1989  Velvet  Revolution  and  through   the  1993  secession  of  the  Slovak  Republic,  these  broadcasters  transformed  from  state-­‐run   censored  institutions  to  models  of  public  service  broadcasting  operating  in  a  new  democratic,   free-­‐market  environment  (Culik  2001).       In  the  generation  that  followed,  Cesky  Rozhlas  and  Ceska  Televize  through  their  national   coverage  and  regional/local  extensions,  seem  to  have  incrementally  regained  their  legitimacy.1   By  international  standards,  Cesky  Rozhlas  and  Ceska  Televize  provide  a  comparatively  small   interactive  discourse  on  political  issues,  but  this  may  be  a  merely  a  reflection  of  the  overall  lack   of  political  participation  on  behalf  of  Czech  society  as  a  whole.  Local  insertion  of  news,   information  and  entertainment  is  part  of  their  offerings;  the  degree  of  localism  limited  by  time   allotted,  resources  devoted,  and  the  perception  of  need.     Diversity  and  inclusion  have  been  subjects  of  discussion  among  lawmakers  and  regulators  with   regards  to  broadcasting  in  the  Czech  Republic.  Citing  European  Union  (EU)  mandates  for  the                                                                                                                   1 The Czech radio Annual Report 1998 can be accessed at: http://media.rozhlas.cz/_binary/00294547.pdf. protection  and  inclusion  of  marginalized  groups  in  societal  institutions,  government  officials   proclaimed  their  intentions  to  integrate  minorities  into  Czech  public  service  broadcasting   (Romea  2007).  The  2001  Act  on  Radio  and  Television  Broadcasting  (RRTV  2001)  encoded  these   intentions  into  law,  requiring  every  broadcast  licensee  to  contribute  to  the  development  of   national  and  ethnic  minorities.  Monika  Metykova  notes  public  service  broadcasters'   responsibility  to  democracy  and  diversity:  “There  are  many  references  in  legislation  to  diversity   –  public  service  broadcasters  should  cater  for  the  needs  of  diverse  groups  such  as  ethnic   minorities,  children,  the  deaf  and  blind  etc.  The  obligation  includes  the  provision  of  programs  in   minority  languages.”  (2006,  107).  Some  programs  which  meet  these  responsibilities  are  shown   on  the  Czech  public  service  broadcasting  platforms,  but  in  a  very  small  percentage,  relative  to   the  overall  output.  For  example,  Cesky  Rozhlas  serves  the  Romani  minority  with  a  regular   Roma-­‐based  show  called  “O  Roma  vakeren”  which  was  awarded  the  2013  “Roma  Spirit”   award.2     Funding  for  Czech  public  service  broadcasting  is  provided  by  the  radio  and  television  user  fee   charged  to  households,  supplemented  by  a  small  percentage  of  revenue  from  advertising.   Czech  public  service  broadcasting  has  strived  to  be  an  accepted  and  trusted  source  of  news,   information,  and  entertainment,  despite  weathering  several  well-­‐publicized  conflicts   concerning  government  interference  and  control  (BBC  2001).  These  incidents  seemingly   compromised  their  role  as  an  important  voice  of  democratic  pluralism,  and  as  a  watchdog  of   powerful  public  and  private  interests.  Nevertheless,  Cesky  Rozhlas  and  Ceska  Televize  currently   can  be  viewed  as  legitimate  institutions  fulfilling  their  mandate  as  national  public  service  radio   and  television  providers  in  a  bipolar  public/commercial  broadcasting  environment  (Metykova   2006).     Commercial  Broadcasting   Since  the  political  changes  of  1989,  the  private  commercial  radio  and  television  operators  of  the   Czech  Republic  have  emerged  ostensibly  as  the  independent  media  component  in  a  developing   open  and  pluralistic  society.  In  the  formative  stages  of  the  new  democratic  political  system,  the   politicians,  regulators,  and  license  applicators/holders  were  enthusiastic  in  their  embrace  of   western  commercial  broadcasting  models.  The  initial  Czech  model  in  the  early  1990s  was  built   to  most  resemble  the  Anglo-­‐American  paradigm  establishing  a  bipolar  system  of  strong   commercial  operators,  balanced  by  a  public  service  broadcaster  supported  primarily  by                                                                                                                   2 For details see the report “Cenu Roma Spirit získala i vedoucí romského vysílání Českého rozhlasu” at: http://www.rozhlas.cz/radiozurnal/zpravy/_zprava/cenu-roma-spirit-ziskala-i-vedouci-romskeho-vysilani- ceskeho-rozhlasu--1431456. government  funding  (Smid,  Kaplan  and  Trager  1996).  This  model,  with  modifications  along  the   way,  is  generally  still  in  place.       The  commercial  broadcasters  are  both  national  and  local  via  their  networks  of  program   distribution  and  advertising  sales,  delivering  mostly  entertainment  output  with  limited  news   and  information.  While  subject  to  licensing  and  regulation  activities  of  the  media  regulator   Rada  pro  Rozhlasove  a  Televizni  Vysilani  (RRTV),  they  are  truly  independent  and  mostly  immune   to  undue  government  interference  in  their  news  coverage  and  programs.  In  addition,  the   broadcasters'  political  influence  and  ability  to  seek  successful  redress  in  the  courts  to  overturn   decisions  by  the  regulator  has  minimized  most  regulatory  issues.  National  radio  stations   Frequency  1,  Impulse,  and  Europe  2,  and  televisions  Nova  and  Prima  combine  with  local   stations  serving  all  major  regions  and  cities.  They  effectively  cover  the  country  with  predictable,   commercially  viable  programming  similar  to  their  European  and  American  counterparts.  The   market-­‐based  paradigm  continues  to  deliver  substantial  profits  from  media  properties,  led  by   TV  Nova,  the  most  profitable  commercial  television  in  Central  Europe.3       Czech  commercial  broadcasting  is  expected  to  be  a  viable  source  for  “independent”  news  and   information  for  Czech  citizens,  and  provide  an  effective  counterbalance  to  output  from  the   state-­‐controlled  public  service  broadcasters.  Commercial  stations  are  licensed  to  serve  local   communities  and  in  the  process  should  serve  those  local  communities  with  important  local   news,  information  and  culturally  relevant  or  appropriate  programs.  Recent  consolidations  of   ownership  in  the  Czech  commercial  broadcasting  sector  have  resulted  in  the  centralization  of   programming,  and  in  a  subsequent  reduction  in  locally  focused  and  locally  originated   programming.  Continuing  consolidation  also  makes  acquisition  by  foreign  ownership  easier  and   perhaps  more  likely  as  already  American,  French,  Irish  and  German  operators  have  significant   presence  in  the  national  stations  and  national  sales  networks.  In  addition,  the  media  scholar   Vaclav  Stetka  (2013)  identifies  a  new  trend  of  media  consolidation  by  wealthy  Czech  oligarchs   in  search  of  new  platforms  of  political  power,  likely  to  further  marginalize  civil  society  and  local   communities.       Community  Broadcasting   In  the  Czech  Republic,  many  alternative  interests  and  perspectives  are  served  by  print   publication  of  books,  magazines,  newsletters  and  brochures.  Some  alternative  cinema  can  be   found  in  major  cities  such  as  Prague  and  Brno  and  Zlin.  Neighborhood  live-­‐production  theaters   are  a  regular  fixture  across  the  Czech  landscape,  serving  their  communities  as  a  non-­‐profit                                                                                                                   3 Go to Central European Media Enterprises Operations: TV Nova for more details at: http://www.cetv- net.com/en/operations/nova-tv-cr.shtml. source  for  access,  community  development,  and  cultural  representation.  The  situation  with   terrestrial  broadcasting  is  virtually  the  opposite.  While  a  few  small  cable-­‐access  television   production  studios  generate  local  programming,  their  footprint  is  minuscule  in  relation  to  the   powerful  public  service  and  commercial  television  broadcasters  on  terrestrial  and  cable  delivery   platforms.  Some  online  radios  and  televisions  offer  student  radio  (Radio  R,  Radio  Up  Air)  (see   Figure  12),  alternative  radio  (Radio  Streetculture),  and  minority-­‐based  programs  (iRoma  Radio).   Currently,  no  recognized  community  broadcasting  exists  on  any  Czech  terrestrial  frequency.       Figure  12:  Facebook  page  of  participants  at  Radio  R  in  Brno,  Czech  Republic       One  interesting  aspect  of  the  Czech  case  has  been  the  role  of  the  media  regulator  RRTV   attempting  to  find  ways  to  implement  their  mandates  for  inclusion  and  diversity  in   programming.  The  RRTV  has,  through  its  regulatory  powers,  sought  to  intervene  in  several   procedural  processes  in  the  interest  of  carrying  out  those  requirements.  In  the  licensing  process   for  any  broadcaster,  the  RRTV  first  solicits  programming  proposals  with  a  general  guideline,   then  approves  specific  proposals  by  candidates,  often  with  little  or  no  changes  or  amendments.   This  process  has  enabled  it  to  develop  opportunities  for  creating  broadcasters  who  will  deploy   programs  with  the  desired  attributes  of  alternativism  and  diversity.       An  early  example  of  this  commitment  can  be  seen  in  the  case  of  Radio  1  in  Prague.  It  was   originally  established  started  by  students  in  the  1980s  as  the  illegal  Radio  Stalin,  so  named  due   to  its  location  under  the  iconic  statue  of  Josef  Stalin  on  the  Letna  Plain.  After  the  Velvet   Revolution,  it  was  licensed  in  1991  as  Radio  1,  the  first  legal  commercial  radio  in  the  Czech   Republic  (Radio1  2015).  Radio  1  has  very  specific  requirements  that  stipulate  it  remains   alternative  to  the  mainstream  by  broadcasting  only  content  deemed  alternative,  new  and   artistic.  Should  the  radio  violate  the  mandate  by  programming  more  popular  commercial  fare,   it  would  be  subject  to  sanctions  from  the  media  regulator.  This  avant-­‐garde  music  format   proved  popular  among  successive  generations  of  young  listeners4  as    Radio  1  staked  out  a   sustainable  position  in  the  competitive  Prague  radio  market,  later  bolstered  by  the  influx  of   expertise  in  management  and  advertising  sales  by  its  foreign  ownership.  Today  it  maintains  that   position  as  a  relatively  successful  legal  alternative  commercial  broadcaster,  seemingly  an   endorsement  of  the  regulator's  use  of  the  licensing  process  to  implement  alternativsim  in  the   broadcast  spectrum.     The  narrative  of  the  now  defunct  Radio  Student  in  Brno  offers  another  interesting  example  of   the  media  regulator's  commitment  to  the  values  of  diversity  and  alternativism.  The  case   illustrates  the  importance  of  enacting  enabling  legislation  to  assure  the  opportunity  for  success   of  alternative  broadcasting  organizations.  Radio  Student  won  the  2005  tender  for  a  new  radio   in  Brno  targeting  the  large  student  population,  and  was  awarded  the  license  to  broadcast  on   107  FM  frequency.  In  awarding  the  license,  the  RRTV  endorsed  the  licensee's  proposed   commitment  to  multilingual,  diverse,  and  alternative  programming.  Radio  Student  owner  Petr   Holecek  promised:  “Student  radio  program  will  have  a  different  format  than  commercial   radio...should  broadcast  in  different  program  blocks  twenty  four  hours  a  day...will  be  broadcast   in  foreign  languages...devoted  to  minorities  of  various  types  and  will  focus  on  xenophobic   sentiments  in  our  society”  (Ondruskova  2004,  1).  These  attributes  of  the  program  are  typical   components  of  the  community  broadcasting  ethos,  and  it  seemed  as  if  the  RRTV  had   accomplished  its  goal  of  establishing  an  alternative  radio  for  Brno.       Although  designed  and  approved  as  an  alternative  to  the  mainstream,  Radio  Student  was  still  a   commercial  radio  however,  completely  reliant  on  the  selling  of  advertising  spots  for  its  revenue,   and  the  owners  soon  realized  the  harsh  realities  of  the  competitive  commercial  radio  market.   Alternative  programming  is  not  inherently  designed  to  be  commercially  viable,  so  the  radio   failed  to  attract  enough  listeners  to  make  an  impact  in  the  audience  surveys,  or  the  advertising   market.  That  defect,  coupled  with  the  owners'  backgrounds  in  academia  and  culture,  not   business,  put  them  at  a  serious  disadvantage  against  the  skill  and  experience  of  their   competitors  in  the  highly  developed  commercial  broadcasting  industry.  After  a  short  2-­‐year   existence,  the  station,  with  the  approval  of  RRTV,  was  sold  to  a  competitor  and  converted  to  a                                                                                                                   4 For the complete survey report on the report, see: http://apsv.netgate.cz/data/vsichni%201.4.%20- %2030.9.2013.pdf. commercially  viable  format  which  jettisoned  all  the  alternative  and  diverse  aspects  of  the   original.5  In  this  case  the  media  regulator  was  unable  to  fulfill  its  goal  of  implementing  the   mandates  of  alternativism  and  diversity  by  intervention  in  the  licensing  process.  Inserting  a  true   community-­‐type  alternative  broadcaster  into  the  commercial  market  without  adequate  support   was  a  failure.     Another  “hybrid”  type  terrestrial  radio  is  the  religious  broadcaster  Radio  Proglas,  which   transmits  programs  by  and  about  the  Catholic  Church  on  frequencies  located  throughout  the   Czech  Republic.  Although  a  registered  charity  under  Czech  law,  the  radio  is  organized  as  a   commercial  enterprise  in  order  to  qualify  for  the  terrestrial  licenses  under  Czech  broadcasting   regulation.  Questions  of  whether  the  institutional  form  of  religious  broadcasting  is  actually  a   community  medium  is  an  ongoing  debate  among  international  stakeholders  (Doliwa  2015).   Attributes  such  as  open  access,  alternative  programs,  social  and  cultural  representation  are   conspicuously  absent  from  this  model,  and  would  disqualify  it  as  a  true  form  of  community   broadcasting  to  many  observers.       In  the  Czech  Republic,  the  FM  band  is  limited  by  geography  to  prevent  interference  with   neighboring  systems.  It  is  already  largely  allocated  to  the  bipolar  operators  of  public  service  and   commercial  stations,  leaving  little  opportunity  for  further  expansion  to  accommodate  any   aspiring  community  radio  stations.  In  addition,  the  current  regulatory  system  requires  potential   licensees  to  conduct  all  necessary  technological  feasibility  research  themselves,  with  their  own   financing.  This  further  increases  the  difficulty  and  raises  the  bar  for  a  community  organization   without  prior  broadcasting  expertise  and/or  funding  to  obtain  a  license.  With  the  possible   switchover  to  digital  terrestrial  technology  (O’Neill  2010),  more  frequencies  could  be  available   to  potential  new  radio  operators,  but  community  broadcasters  may  not  even  be  considered  as   a  candidate  for  this  spectrum  access.  If  the  current  Czech  media  power  paradigm  holds  true  to   form,  the  large  public  broadcaster  Cesky  Rozhlas,  and  the  politically  powerful  commercial   sector  could  dominate  the  spectrum  allocation  process.  For  now,  alternative  broadcasting  in   the  Czech  Republic  is  denied  access  to  the  primary  terrestrial  delivery  systems,  struggling  for   legitimacy  and  sustainability,  limited  to  online  distribution  for  their  programs.     Community  Broadcasting  Policy  Development   Community  broadcasting  development  in  the  Czech  Republic,  as  a  component  of  the  larger   Central  /Eastern  European  broadcasting  landscape,  is  also  of  particular  interest  to  European   community  broadcasting  advocates.  The  Community  Media  Forum  Europe  (CMFE),  leaders  in                                                                                                                   5 For more details about the history of Radio Student, see Marketing & Media at: http://mam.ihned.cz/c1- 61769050-puvodni-radio-student-se-po-vstupu-strategickeho-partnera-zmenilo-na-free-radio. policy  interventions  at  government  institutions  and  bodies  across  Europe,  have  actively   pursued  strategies  to  promote  the  establishment  of  community  broadcasting  in  nations  of  the   former  communist  bloc.  The  Board  of  Experts  at  CMFE6 ,  an  assembly  of  advocates,  practitioners   and  scholars,  formed  the  Czech  Community  Broadcasting  Working  group  in  2009,  with  the   intention  to  support    the  establishment  of  community  broadcasting  in  the  Czech  Republic.  The   group  facilitated  the  attendance  of  several  members  of  the  Czech  media  regulator  RRTV  at   CMFE-­‐sponsored  European  conferences  on  community  media  in  Nicosia,  Cyprus  in  2011  and   Salzburg,  Austria  in  2012  at  which  they  consulted  on  best  practices  and  strategies  for  the   implementation  of  community  broadcasting.  The  RRTV  then  opened  a  consultation  in  2012  on   the  prospects  of  developing  community  broadcasting  in  the  Czech  Republic,  for  which  the  CMFE   experts  group  provided  several  interventions  (Marketing  &  Media  2012).  The  first  was  a   presentation  of  the  processes  and  benefits  of  community  media  from  a  theoretical  perspective   authored  by  the  scholar  Nico  Carpentier  (RRTV  2012)  which  was  introduced  at  a  public  meeting   of  the  consultation  in  Telc.       Also  provided  for  the  2012  RRTV  consultation  was  a  proposed  new  community  broadcasting   policy  and  plan  composed  with  input  from  the  CMFE  Czech  working  group  (see  Appendix).  The   plan  follows  a  step-­‐by-­‐step  format  for  the  design,  construction,  management,  funding  and   control  of  a  community  broadcasting  sector  of  radio,  television  and  telecentres.  Because  every   society  and  media  policy  is  different,  it  stands  to  reason  that  no  single  policy  can  be  optimal  in   every  environment.  The  proposed  policy  text  is  based  on  a  compilation  of  best  practices  taken   from  existing  broadcasting  environments,  policies  and  practices  from  around  Europe  and  the   world,  combined  with  several  new  ideas  for  effective  funding  and  sustainability.       The  proposed  policy  document  opens  with  a  very  simple  definition  of  community  broadcasting:   "not-­‐for-­‐profit  audio-­‐visual  services  provided  by  and  for  a  local  community  on  terrestrial  and   wired  delivery  services".  Perhaps  most  important  of  these  attributes  are  the  delivery  platforms,   as  the  lack  of  access  to  terrestrial  frequencies  is  a  major  impediment  to  the  establishment  of   community  broadcasting  in  the  Czech  Republic.  The  next  section  lists  a  number  of  "reasons   why"  the  sector  should  be  established  and  includes  many  of  the  basic  philosophies  upon  which   community  broadcasting  is  based  in  other  countries  and  environments.  Important  among  these   are  its  role  in  active  citizenship,  community  development,  individual  development  and   promoting  local  culture.  One  additional  role,  that  of  independent  media  watchdog,  could  be   valuable  to  the  Czech  Republic  and  other  states  of  Central/Eastern  Europe  that  currently  lack   effective  watchdog  media  in  the  commercial  and  public  service  sectors  (Doliwa  and  Rankovic   2014).                                                                                                                   6 The CMFE Board of Experts can be seen here: http://cmfe.eu/?cat=10.   The  section  of  the  plan  regarding  license  eligibility  presents  a  detailed  list  of  requirements  for   individuals  and  groups  to  participate  in  community  broadcasting,  including  specific  language   designed  to  avoid  conflicts  of  interest  and  co-­‐opting  of  licenses  by  outside  parties.  It  also   outlines  the  fulfillment  requirements  that  must  be  met  in  order  to  retain  the  license,  the  most   important  of  these  are  requirements  that  maintain  the  primacy  of  volunteer  participants  in  the   broadcasting  organization,  and  that  the  majority  of  programs  are  produced  by  volunteers  from   local  communities.  Sustainability  of  the  sector  is  supported  first  by  an  innovative  structural   funding  scheme  that  combines  national  funding  from  the  broadcast  user  fee  combined  with   funds  from  local  municipalities.  That  is  augmented  by  project-­‐based  funds  awarded  in   competitions  by  the  various  national  government  ministries.  Finally,  a  community  media  trade   association,  funded  by  the  national  government  and  member  fees,  would  provide  expertise  and   support  to  the  sector,  further  assuring  its  sustainability.     The  Proposed  Community  Broadcasting  Policy  and  Plan  for  the  Czech  Republic  is  intended  to   provide  a  template  for  the  process  of  enacting  community  broadcasting  policy,  and  establishing   a  genuine  community  broadcasting  sector  in  the  Czech  Republic.  In  2014,  the  Czech  Republic   Ministry  of  Culture  commissioned  a  report  authored  by  Jan  Krecek  (2014)  of  Charles  University   to  examine  the  feasibility  of  establishing  a  new  community  broadcasting  sector.  That  document   incorporated  concepts  and  features  of  the  CMFE  policy  proposal,  and  in  2015,  the  ministry  was   considering  the  inclusion  of  community  broadcasting  elements  in  an  upcoming  revision  of  the   general  media  law.         Community  Broadcasting  Policy  &  Plan  for  the  Czech  Republic       DEFINITION       >Community  Broadcasting  is  not-­‐for-­‐profit,  audio-­‐visual  services   provided  by  and  for  a  local  community  on  terrestrial  and  wired  delivery   systems.   REASONS  WHY       >Inform  the  community  about  issues,  activities,  and  events     >Provide  access  and  participation     >Strengthen  local  communities     >Promote  local  arts  &  culture     >Serve  marginalized  and  underserved  groups     >Provide  discourse  for  civil  society  and  promote  active  citizenship     >Independent  media  watchdog  role     >Improve  media  literacy     >Development  of  employment  skills   REQUIREMENTS       >Not-­‐for-­‐profit  social  enterprise     >Local  community-­‐based     >Volunteer  supported     >Open  to  all  voices     >Sustainable     >Alternative  to  the  mainstream   LICENSING       >RRTV  endorses  and  implements  the  "Community  Media  Sector   General  Plan"  licensing  mandates.   Eligibility       >Not-­‐for-­‐profit  civic  associations,  public  benefit  corporations,  churches,   schools  (all  must  have  DIC);  no  individuals     >Must  be  transparent  &  registered  for  min  1  year;  Consortiums  are   welcome  if  at  least  50%  of  partner  orgs  have  min  1  year  legal   registration;  min  50%  of  board  members  must  live  in  the  designated   coverage  area;  Board  members  must  be  volunteer     >No  owners,  licensees,  board  members  or  salaried  employees  of   commercial  media,  elected  officials,  or  political  party  officials  may  be   board  members  or  salaried  employees.   Application       >Temporary  Service  License  (TSL)  -­‐  max  60  days;  no  funding  available   (CapEx  expenditures  applicable  for  re-­‐imbursement  under  guidelines  if   full-­‐term  license  granted);  max  2  TSL's  per  applicant/  year     >Standard  license:  6  year  term,    award  licenses  in  open  competitions   among  eligible  community  non-­‐profit  orgs  utilizing  points  system;  then   open  renewal  competition  with  current  license  holder  given  points  for   effective  operation;     >Applicant  must  submit  a  standardized  "License  Applicant  General   Plan"  containing  proposed  business  plan,  budget,  technical  plan,  social   gain  plan,  access  &  participation  plan,  volunteer  plan,  and  program   output  plan.     >License  is  non-­‐transferable;  must  be  re-­‐allocated  by  RRTV   Fulfillment       >Licensee  must  keep  a  "public  file"  of  relevant  information  relating  to   the  delivery  of  their  key  commitments  that  must  be  available  for   inspection  within  2  business  days  of  any  written  citizens'  request     >Licensee  must  adhere  to  the  terms  and  conditions  set  forth  in   approved  license  application     >Upon  repeated,  deliberate  and/or  serious  breach  of  the  terms  of  its   license  conditions  or  RRTV  codes  by  licensee,  RRTV  may  impose   sanctions  including  fines,  restrictions  and/or  cancellation  of  license.  The   penalty  must  be  appropriate  and  proportionate  to  the  breach  for  which   it  is  imposed.     >Licensee  must  submit  to  RRTV  a  standardized  "Annual  Licensee   General  Report"  with  P&L,  balance  sheet,  public  file,  technical  report,   social  gain  report,  participation  &  access  report,  volunteer  report,   updated  business  plan/budget  and  tax  filing;  due  according  to  gov’t   fiscal  year  deadlines.     >Licensee  must  maintain  a  minimum  ratio  of  volunteer  hours  to  paid   staff  (1  volunteer  hour  for  each  1.000kc  of  salary)     >Salaries  may  not  exceed  50%  of  total  expenses   Programming       >The  fair  and  comprehensive  journalistic  coverage  of  community   activities,  concerns  and  issues.     >No  advertising:  including  no  call  to  action,  specific  items,  prices,  or   offers     >Paid  sponsorship  announcements  maximum  15  seconds  length;   maximum  8  announcements  per  hour     >Clearly  distinguish  sponsorship  from  regular  program  content     >Minimum  50%  of  total  output  must  be  original  content  from  licensee   facilities     >Maximum  20%  of  total  output  from  network  programs     >Ensure  that  reasonable  efforts  are  made  to  correct  substantial  errors   of  fact  at  the  earliest  possible  opportunity   TECHNICAL   SPECIFICATIONS       >RRTV  endorses  and  implements  the  "Community  Media  Sector   General  Plan"  technical  mandates.     >RRTV,  and/or  external  providers  to  analyze  spectrum  (analogue  and   digital),  identify  available  frequencies,  and  provide  access  to  those   frequencies     >"Must  Carry"  rules  apply  to  all  platforms     >Ceske  Kommunikace,  private  tower,  multiplex,  IP,  telephone  network   and  cable  systems  operators  guarantee  special  non-­‐profit  access  rates   in  negotiation  with  RRTV  &  CMA     >"Platform  Neutral"  policy  applies  to  all  platforms     >Allocated  frequencies  shall  fulfill  coverage  mandates   REGULATORY  ROLES       >RRTV  responsible  for  the  successful  deployment  of  the  "Community   Media  Sector  General  Plan"     >Separate  RRTV  sections  for  licensing,  technical,  funding     >No  implicit  obligation  is  attached  to  "structural"  funding,  and   requirements  for  any  management  decisions  or  program  output  by  any   government  agency  (state  or  local)  other  than  RRTV  is  prohibited.   Agreements  related  to  "project"  funding  are  subject  to  separate  rules   and  regulations  of  the  appropriate  ministries.     >Government  ministries  are  responsible  for  developing  and  executing   project-­‐based  funding  initiatives  which  comply  with  RRTV  licensing   regulations   FUNDING       >RRTV  endorses  and  implements  the  "Community  Media  Sector   General  Plan"  funding  mandates.     >Due  to  it's  important  role  in  civil  society,  community  media  could  be   funded  directly  from  the  TV/Radio  tax,  or  from  the  General  Fund.     >Both  state  and  local  gov’t  funding  is  mandated  (no  option  out)  upon   license  approval  and  subsequent  annual  endorsement  by  RRTV.     >All  structural  funding  must  be  in  accordance  with  the  approved   "Applicant  General  Plan"   Capital  Expenditures       >Capital  Expenditure  fund  (CapEX)  available  only  at  the  start  of  full-­‐ term  license;  licensee  submits  "License  Applicant  Capital  Expenditure   Plan"  for  approval;  one  amendment  permitted;  expires  after  18   months;  80%  gov't  (state  &  local  combined)  20%  matching  funds   required.   Operating   Expenditures       >Operating  Expense  fund(OpEx)  available  each  year  subject  to  approval   of  required  documentation  by  RRTV;  80%  (state  &  local  combined)  20%   match   Project  funding       >Project  funding  directly  from  ministries  for  specially  designed  projects   utilizing  CM;  20%  match  required;  application  approval/  terms  &   conditions  autonomous  to  each  ministry                                                                               >Project  funding  requires  separate  P&L;  no  salaries  or  CapEx;  limits  on   travel  spending;  volunteer  minimums  apply;  20%  match  (donated  labor   OK);  activities  report  included  in  Licensee  Annual  General  report   COMMUNITY   MEDIA   ASSOCIATION       >RRTV  endorses  and  implements  the  "Community  Media  Sector   General  Plan"  mandate  for  the  Community  Media  Association.     >Non-­‐Profit  org  with  volunteer  elected  board,  paid  president  and  staff   person.     >Subject  to  same  CapEx/OpEx  funding  requirements,  including  20%   match     >Submit  "CMA  Annual  General  Report"  with  P&L,  balance  sheet,  public   file,  technical  report,  social  gain  report,  participation  &  access  report,   tax  filing;  due  according  to  gov’t  fiscal  year  deadlines     >Responsible  for  liaison  with  government  and  bureaucracies  -­‐  especially   RRTV,  participate  in  media  and  telecommunications  policy  discourse,   cooperate  with  other  media  sectors  and  stakeholders,  promote  good   practice  by  providing  tools,  training,  exchange  and  awards,  research   important  trends  in  technology  and  innovation,  organize  annual   congress  &  conference,  communicate  information  internally  and   externally,  cooperate  with  community  media  groups  worldwide.   British  Broadcasting  Service  (BBC).  (2001).  "Czech  Law  Set  to  End  TV  Crisis".  BBC  News.  24   January  2001.  http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/1133532.stm  Accessed  4.1.2016     Doliwa,  U.  and  L.  Rankovic  (2014).  Time  for  Community  Media  in  Central  and  Eastern  Europe.   CMFE.  http://cmfe.eu/wpcontent/uploads/U.DoliwaL.RankovicCEJoC_12.pdf  accessed   13.12.2014.     Krecek,  J.  (2014)  “Implementace  Komunitních  Médií  do  Mediálního  Systému  České  Republiky”.   http://diss-­‐website.webnode.com/news/report-­‐on-­‐implementing-­‐community-­‐mediain-­‐the-­‐ czech-­‐republic/  accessed  21.1.2015.     Marketing  &  Media.  (2012).  “Komunitní  Média  by  Mohla  Začít  Fungovat  i  v  ČR”.   mam.ihned.cz/c1-­‐57813780-­‐komunitni-­‐media-­‐by-­‐mohla-­‐zacit-­‐fungovat-­‐i-­‐v-­‐cr  Accessed   29.12.2015     Metykova,  M.  (2006).  Regulace  Vysílání  Veřejné  Služby  v  České  Republice,  na  Slovensku  a  v   Irsku.  Brno:  Masaryk  University  Archive.    http://147.251.49.10/th/32153/fss_d/    accessed   13.1.2015.     Rada  pro  Rozhlasové  a  Televizní  Vysílání  (RRTV).  (2001).  “Czech  Republic  Act  No.  231/2001  of   May  17,  2001  on  Radio  and  Television  Broadcasting  Operation  and  on  Amendments  to  Other   Acts”.  http://www.wipo.int/wipolex/en/details.jsp?id=7720  Accessed  4.1.2016     Rada  pro  rozhlasové  a  televizní  vysílání  (RRTV).  (2012).  “KOMUNITNÍ  MÉDIA”.   http://www.rrtv.cz/files/pracovni-­‐skupiny/komunitni_media.pdf  Accessed  29.12.2015     Radio  United  Services  (Radio1).  (2015).  “O  HISTORII  RADIA  1”.  http://www.radio1.cz/o-­‐nas/   Accessed  4.1.2016     Romea (2007). “Czech Minorities to Receive Minority TV, Radio Broadcasts”. http://www.romea.cz/en/news/czech/czech-minorities-to-receive-minority-language-radio-tvbroadcasts. Accessed 4.12.2014