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

A FUTURE FOR PUBLIC SERVICE TELEVISION
Even if the threat of full privatisation has
receded, it is still the case that some kind
of privatisation-lite would not be good for
Channel 4. If it were to be part-privatised,
that could prove to be a stepping stone to a
full sale. We are at a loss as to why it should
service the interests of another organisation,
especially a profit-seeking company. If it
were be to be made to pay a dividend to the
Treasury, where would that money go? Such
an arrangement would in any case endanger
Channel 4’s independence and encourage
it to become more commercial - in order to
generate a surplus to meet the payments.
Channel 4 cannot be protected indefinitely
from the whims of democratically
elected governments, unless there is a
fundamental change to its status, such as
the ‘mutualisation’ proposed by its former
chairman Lord Burns. 214 We believe that the
status quo has the advantage of keeping
Channel 4 as a public asset rather than
one turned over to other stakeholders, for
example independent producers. The current
structure is admirably straightforward and
gives Channel 4 a clarity of purpose: it is
owned by the public and serves the public
interest but costs the taxpayer nothing. Its
commercial revenues must cover its costs,
but there are no shareholders or specially
privileged stakeholders to satisfy.
It is crucial that the government clarifies
its views on the future on Channel 4. We
believe it should set out unambiguously that
Channel 4 will remain in public hands for the
foreseeable future.
The future of Channel 4
We do not believe the Channel 4 model
is broken. But even if Channel 4 avoids
privatisation, it cannot be complacent about
the future. As we have outlined above, it has
faced challenges in recent years that could
ultimately represent a threat to its ability to
provide public service television.
We hope that audience share will level off
and not dip below 10% across the portfolio
now that digital switchover has been
completed. Audience share is crucial to
advertising revenues, and it is important that
Channel 4 retains the freedom to broadcast
commercially successful programmes that will
keep those revenues coming in. At the same
time, it must look to expand its provision in
some genres, giving particular attention to
its duty to older children, which it is failing to
meet at present.
The speed at which Channel 4’s audiences
migrate to online, on-demand viewing and
the associated dilution of the benefit of
EPG prominence – a point Channel 4 has
raised with us 215 – will be a crucial factor in
the coming years. Ofcom has put forward
suggestions about changing the regulatory
model to head off this looming threat. 216 It is
worth considering simplifying this model so
that full public service status is shared across
Channel 4’s services and not just accorded to
its main channel. This could make it easier to
find a way of getting Channel 4 to do more
for older children and young adults.
214
Jane Martinson, ’Channel 4 chairman to step down as ministers consider privatisation plans’, Guardian, September 28, 2015.
215
Channel 4, submission to the Inquiry.
216
Ofcom, PSB in the Internet Age, p. 31.
76