A FUTURE FOR PUBLIC SERVICE TELEVISION CONTENT AND PLATFORMS IN A DIGITAL WORLD

Recommendations

Info

A FUTURE FOR PUBLIC SERVICE TELEVISION year, less than the annual budget of Channel 5 but more than that of BBC Three and BBC Four combined. 289 In the course of our Inquiry, we heard recommendations to consider levies of this kind. The National Union of Journalists, for example, argued in its submission to us that there was a need to consider new sources of funding including levies and tax breaks to raise additional money for public service content. 290 There is a long history of the use of levies – for example, on recording equipment and blank media – in the European communications industries. 291 More recently, we have seen a £50 million payment by Google to support the French culture industries as well as a new rule that forces video-on-demand operators to invest a proportion of their revenue in French cinema. 292 A recent report for the thinktank ResPublica suggested a levy on the revenue of large digital news intermediaries to support a fund aimed at sustaining new forms of public interest journalism. 293 Furthermore, we believe that a levy would be popular with audiences. In a 2015 YouGov poll, commissioned by the Media Reform Coalition, 51% of respondents said that they would support a levy on the revenue of social media and pay TV companies to fund new providers of investigative and local journalism, with only 9% disagreeing. 294 We think that the support would be even higher with a remit to provide a wider array of public service content. DIGITAL INNOVATION GRANTS We estimate that a 1% levy on UK revenues of digital intermediaries and ISPs would raise in excess of £100 million a year. Money awarded by the DIG fund would be disbursed via a new independent public media trust with a clear set of funding criteria, transparent procedures and an accountable system of appointments, as per our proposals for the BBC unitary board. The trust would also recognise the need for meaningful representation from all the nations of the UK. The DIG would be open to any cultural institutions or bodies that wanted to produce public service audiovisual content and could provide evidence of their creative purpose and expertise. These applicants should not be wholly commercial operations; rather, they should have demonstrable public service objectives and purposes. It should not be for existing commercial broadcasters 289 The fund would have to abide by European Union rules on state aid if the UK votes to remain in the EU but we believe that such a fund would have a strong case for meeting the relevant criteria. 290 National Union of Journalists, submission to the Inquiry. 291 See Institute for Public Policy Research, Mind the funding gap: The potential of industry levies for continued funding of public service broadcasting, 2009. 292 See IHS Technology, ‘France introduces new tax on VoD operators based abroad’, September 2014. 293 Justin Schlosberg, The Mission of Media in an Age of Monopoly, ResPublica, 2016. 294 Media Reform Coalition, ‘Poll shows strong support for action on media ownership’, April 1, 2015. 100
CONTENT AND PLATFORMS IN A DIGITAL WORLD or production companies to subsidise their content production. The funding could, however, be used to work with partners of any kind, and these might include broadcasters or producers. In awarding grants, the fund would be mindful of the kind of programming that is not appearing on established channels or is under threat. It could fund local and investigative journalism, for instance, or education, science, history and other specialist factual content. It should look to innovation in form and content, to adopt a phrase from the original remit of Channel 4. In fact, we believe that this intervention could provide something of the energising quality that Channel 4’s launch gave the broadcasting world more than 30 years ago. This would be a Channel 4 moment geared to digital convergence and the networked world of today. It is crucial that all of the content created with DIG funding is made widely available and easily discoverable on all interfaces. Any organisation applying to the DIG would need to provide a distribution and access plan as part of its application for funding, and this would be treated with as much importance as the content of the proposal. We do not believe that DIG content should be tied to a particular platform, while developing a standalone app and brand implies a big overhead in technology and marketing. Applicants for funding may already have their own channels (and brands) with significant audience reach and traction, so DIG funding should not preclude them from strengthening their own public service objectives. We propose, therefore, that the DIG would create partnerships and framework agreements with the public service broadcasters and other platform owners to promote and distribute DIG-funded content with appropriate branding and acknowledgement. At the heart of this arrangement would be distribution agreements with the BBC and Channel 4 for access to and promotion on the BBC iPlayer and All4 platforms, which would detail the appropriate editorial presentation and curation of DIG-funded content. The DIG would be expected to make other agreements with other partners that would maximise the prominence, findability and reach of the content it funded. DIG funding would not be limited solely to linear video content and would include other digital content, applications and mobile and online experiences that met its objectives. Applicants would be expected to use their own digital channels and those of partners to maximise prominence and access to this content. Qualifying applicants for DIG funding would retain all the intellectual property of their output and retain editorial and contextual control of the content once funded. Applicants would be expected to hold discussions with distribution and funding partners prior to making their application to create both a funding proposal and a distribution and access plan. The DIG would not necessarily be the sole funder, nor would distribution partners be limited to those with which the DIG has a framework agreement. We believe that the work of such a fund would help to transform and revitalize the relevance of public service content for UK audiences. 101
Page 1 and 2:
A FUTURE FOR PUBLIC SERVICE TELEVIS
Page 3 and 4:
Contents Foreword by David Puttnam
Page 5 and 6:
To instruct democracy, if possible
Page 7 and 8:
Welcome Television is leading a cha
Page 9 and 10:
CONTENT AND PLATFORMS IN A DIGITAL
Page 11 and 12:
PSB channels 71.9% All other channe
Page 13 and 14:
Page 15 and 16:
Why television matters Television i
Page 17 and 18:
Page 19 and 20:
1982 1990s 2012 The BBC-ITV duopoly
Page 21 and 22:
Page 23 and 24:
Time for action Today’s policymak
Page 25 and 26:
Page 27 and 28:
Page 29 and 30:
Basic principles At the core of pre
Page 31 and 32:
Page 33 and 34:
Page 35 and 36:
Page 37 and 38:
Page 39 and 40:
The multichannel revolution Perhaps
Page 41 and 42:
Page 43 and 44:
Page 45 and 46:
Page 47 and 48:
Page 49 and 50: CONTENT AND PLATFORMS IN A DIGITAL
Page 51 and 52: The BBC For most people, the BBC is
Page 67 and 68: Channel 4 If the BBC is the most im
Page 71 and 72: Only 8% of Channel 4’s total spen
Page 79 and 80: ITV and Channel 5 The focus of atte
Page 85 and 86: The changing face of ITV 1993-2002
Page 91 and 92: New sources of public service conte
Page 99: CONTENT AND PLATFORMS IN A DIGITAL
Page 103 and 104: Television and diversity We have ea
Page 107 and 108: THE PEOPLE SHOULD BE TELEVISED If t
Page 115 and 116: Nations and Regions Public service
Page 129 and 130: Content diversity One of the key wa
Page 135 and 136: Sports content now accounts for som
Page 145 and 146: Talent development and training In
Page 151 and 152:
Page 153 and 154:
Conclusion Television is changing.
Page 155 and 156:
Recommendations General The UK’s
Page 157 and 158:
Page 159 and 160:
Page 161 and 162:
Appointing the BBC board Sir David
Page 163 and 164:
APPLICATION OF THE NOLAN PRINCIPLES
Page 165 and 166:
BAFTA members’ survey delivered i
Page 167 and 168:
Page 169 and 170:
Page 171 and 172:
Page 173 and 174:
Public service broadcasting, public
Page 175 and 176:
Page 177 and 178:
Inquiry events Do we still need pub
Page 179 and 180:
Acknowledgements Inquiry Report Con
show all

A FUTURE FOR PUBLIC SERVICE TELEVISION CONTENT AND PLATFORMS IN A DIGITAL WORLD

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?