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

Recommendations

Info

A FUTURE FOR PUBLIC SERVICE TELEVISION What leading creative voices in the UK think about: 1. Risk: “Let’s not sand down the rough edges of who we are” When it comes to commissioning new programmes, 73.5% of respondents say that, in their experience, public service television broadcasters are less willing to take risks than they were ten years ago. An overwhelming number of respondents point to the need for more creativity, and less committee thinking and rigidity. Many suggest that the reluctance to take risks boils down to a fear of criticism and job insecurity amongst commissioners, which leads to formulaic programming, including too many soaps, adaptations and period dramas. “It feels to me that the BBC takes fewer risks with BBC One dramas,” one respondent writes. “A TV film like Threads would never get made now or shown on BBC One prime time. The decisions seem to be to make more comfortable and pretty TV dramas like War & Peace or Downton Abbey.” Respondents’ comments reveal a strong sense that there is a risk-averse culture in television broadcasting, which does not nurture new talent and leads to practitioners from only a handful of well established production companies being heard. One respondent warns that: “There’s so little risk taking …that we risk stifling a whole new generation of makers and audiences.” This reported lack of risk taking does not stop at the types of programmes that are commissioned; it also impacts on other related areas such as casting and budgets. One respondent explains: “When I first became a casting director, the reasoning was that we’d go round the country finding really good actors to play leading parts. Now ‘names’ are required sometimes irrespective of their suitability…The result is that the so-called ‘names’ demand enormous fees, which has a knock on effect on the fees the smaller parts receive. At very least I would urge producers…assuming they have a really good script, to hold their nerve and be prepared to re-cast if they’re being held over a barrel.” This is one of many solutions respondents offer in order to create an environment that is more conducive to the commissioning of new, less formulaic programmes. Other solutions include: ensuring that those commissioning programmes also have experience of making them (“the quality of judgement of the gatekeepers needs to be the primary concern when appointing them, in particular a solid background of programme making rather than a shallow experience in commissioning alone”); increasing class and ethnic diversity amongst gatekeepers, including commissioners, and capping their job tenure; introducing a pilot season; saving money by putting writers, actors and other creative practitioners on, as one respondent describes it, “exclusive holding contracts. Most self employed would happily take a years contract for potentially less money.” Another respondent, who has more than 20 years experience in the industry, also suggests promoting a creative and fiscal environment that is more outward looking and focuses on Britain’s global and European stature to improve co-production opportunities with Europe, and instigate greater programming diversity. There should be, this respondent writes: 166
CONTENT AND PLATFORMS IN A DIGITAL WORLD Less jobs for ‘preferred customers’ who return time and again to the public trough to retread what the BBC/Channel 4 hopes will be successful formulas. Look at the Canal Plus model to help promote UK Independent film. Unless a British film receives BBC or Channel 4 backing it will not have a chance of finding a domestic release as the sales companies are either part owned by the broadcaster…or insist on a public broadcaster in the finance plan to lower their risk profile to near zero. This means the playing field is skewed from the outset towards those who have primary contact with the public broadcaster and have worked within that system. This also reduces the level of creativity, innovations and new talent and weighs against minorities and women who comprise a large percentage of the industry but do not have the same access to decision making and programming. The need to nurture new talent and give creatives the freedom to fulfil their vision is highlighted by many respondents as being particularly important. One BAFTA member writes so passionately about this issue in response to the final survey question, which asks for a recommendation about how best to secure an environment designed to produce high quality television in the UK, that it is worth quoting them at length: Nurture talent. Give them an opportunity to fail. In the 80s people like Andrew Davies, French and Saunders etc were given opportunities to experiment and make interesting shows. The shows now feel over thought, over-noted and lacking in verve. There are a few that get through and are brilliant (Black Mirror for example). But hire people when they are still forming, and let them find out who they are on the screen. Channel 4 has been traditionally very good at this. But the BBC in recent years has been less good. And now BBC Three has gone off air, there will be even less opportunity for newer, stranger voices to get their break. And it is these people who will go on to be the mainstream. They will shape the future of UK TV. Without them, we will be stuck with endless seasons of Strictly Come Dancing and Bake Off – which while good shows, do not appeal to all. We need a diversity of ages, cultures, genders to be watching TV. No one should feel BBC One is ‘not for them’. In a way BBC One defines what kind of a people we are. It is the flagship. And that’s great. But let’s not sand down the rough edges of who we are. 2. Quality: “More output, less money” The vast majority of respondents (89.4%) believe that, of all the UK television broadcasting sectors, the BBC and Channel 4 produce the highest quality, original content. Streaming services, such as Netflix, come second as far as respondents are concerned. But streaming services are seen to be a long way behind the BBC and Channel 4, with just 8% of survey respondents holding the view that such broadcasters produce the highest quality, original content. ITV, Channel 5 and the multichannel broadcasters (for example, Sky and UKTV) drew, with only 1.3% of respondents saying they produce the highest quality, original content. That said, just over half of respondents (59.3%) feel that the existing public service television broadcasters are delivering sufficient amounts of high quality UKoriginated content, with 28.4% holding the 167
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:
Page 51 and 52:
The BBC For most people, the BBC is
Page 53 and 54:
Page 55 and 56:
Page 57 and 58:
Page 59 and 60:
Page 61 and 62:
Page 63 and 64:
Page 65 and 66:
Page 67 and 68:
Channel 4 If the BBC is the most im
Page 69 and 70:
Page 71 and 72:
Only 8% of Channel 4’s total spen
Page 73 and 74:
Page 75 and 76:
Page 77 and 78:
Page 79 and 80:
ITV and Channel 5 The focus of atte
Page 81 and 82:
Page 83 and 84:
Page 85 and 86:
The changing face of ITV 1993-2002
Page 87 and 88:
Page 89 and 90:
Page 91 and 92:
New sources of public service conte
Page 93 and 94:
Page 95 and 96:
Page 97 and 98:
Page 99 and 100:
Page 101 and 102:
Page 103 and 104:
Television and diversity We have ea
Page 105 and 106:
Page 107 and 108:
THE PEOPLE SHOULD BE TELEVISED If t
Page 109 and 110:
Page 111 and 112:
Page 113 and 114:
Page 115 and 116: Nations and Regions Public service
Page 117 and 118: CONTENT AND PLATFORMS IN A DIGITAL
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 153 and 154: Conclusion Television is changing.
Page 155 and 156: Recommendations General The UK’s
Page 161 and 162: Appointing the BBC board Sir David
Page 163 and 164: APPLICATION OF THE NOLAN PRINCIPLES
Page 165: BAFTA members’ survey delivered i
Page 173 and 174: Public service broadcasting, public
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

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?