2

Eyeopener asks “Is it time for CKLN to sign off?”


 

I wrote a few weeks ago about student-levy supported radio stations, traditionally known as "campus radio stations."

I wrote that I do not believe that students, with their non-existent income levels, should be paying for a service used by those with an income level.

At Ryerson, The Eyeopener editorial asks if students should continue funding their radio station.


 

Eyeopener asks “Is it time for CKLN to sign off?”

  1. There are many reasons to justify cutting a levy. I disagree, however, with this argument:

    “To add to its irrelevance, 60 per cent of CKLN’s budget comes from students, but this week an Eyeopener student survey found that only two per cent of respondents said they listen to the station.”

    Assuming the survey is accurate – which is a big assumption considering no details on the how the survey was conducted – the argument that a minority of students listen to it, therefore the majority should not fund it… goes against the very principle of levies!

    What is the percentage of students that use the Food Bank? Or the percentage of students that go to the Pride Centre? Or even the percentage of students that benefit directly from Foot Patrol?

    There was another dimension to the editorial. Many community members of the city of Toronto listen to the station. A better statistic would have been the percentage of listeners that are students. Not the percentage of students that are listeners.

    I am certain the Eye Opener has better arguments to use than the results of a (presumably) home-made survey.

    If the station is putting community interests above university/student issues, clearly there is a problem. The question should be whether the Eye Opener is against have a student campus station or if they are against the way this particular station is being run at this particular moment. If it is the latter, I see no justification in cutting the levy.

Sign in to comment.