The recent announcement of an increase in the Community Radio Fund (CRF) for 2025/26 is welcome recognition of the importance of community-based broadcasting across the UK. With £1 million now allocated—up from £400,000 in previous years—stations will have greater capacity to sustain vital functions such as management, volunteer training, community outreach, and fundraising. This uplift arrives at a time of real need, as many stations struggle to balance rising costs with growing community expectations.
However, if this renewed investment is to make a lasting difference, we must now ask a more fundamental set of questions about the future of community radio, and what public funding is ultimately for.
Download: Community Radio Fund for a Foundational Economy Briefing
The CRF has always functioned as a public subsidy. It exists to support organisations that meet specific social purposes—organisations whose value lies not in their ability to generate profit, but in their ability to generate trust, inclusion, representation, and cohesion. The recent increase in funding must therefore be matched by a sharper definition of the outcomes we expect in return. Without clear civic priorities, public value can become an afterthought. Subsidy becomes disconnected from service.
As community media evolves, we must also recognise that not all operators share the same aspirations. Some stations, especially those with strong brand identities, broad appeal, or commercial experience, may increasingly look to the market for their future growth. This is entirely legitimate. There is space in the UK’s media ecology for independent commercial media rooted in community practice. But if this is the ambition, then a transition must take place—from publicly subsidised community radio licences to commercially oriented platforms and models.
This transition should be supported, but it must be clearly managed. Commercial ambitions require commercial freedoms. Public funding comes with obligations to inclusion, accountability, and civic service. Mixing these models creates confusion and tension, both within the sector and among regulators and funders. We must be honest about the difference between running a service in the public interest and running a service in pursuit of market share.
Growing a sustainable market in media from the ‘middle’—that is, media rooted in local relevance and ethical practice, but commercially viable—requires a very different policy framework from that which supports the foundational or social economy. It means enabling access to investment capital, building shared infrastructure, and promoting diversified income strategies. These approaches are not incompatible with community media values, but they belong to a different policy conversation. They cannot be delivered through the CRF alone.
If the Community Radio Fund is to be an effective tool for strengthening public service media, then it must be shaped accordingly. Community radio should be expected to meet specific civic purposes—promoting social cohesion, advancing cultural democracy, and supporting the broader goals of devolution and local accountability. These are not vague aspirations; they are measurable, meaningful, and politically urgent. Funding should support content and activities that meet these needs, and evaluation should be based on their impact.
The alternative is drift. Without clarity of purpose, community radio risks becoming an increasingly incoherent sector—neither fully civic nor truly commercial. To avoid this, we need sharper policy distinctions, transparent pathways for development, and a renewed commitment to communication as a public good. Only then can community media thrive on its own terms, delivering the social value that justifies its continued support.