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

Recommendations

Info

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
CONTENT AND PLATFORMS IN A DIGITAL WORLD As we will argue in the following chapter with reference to ITV and Channel 5, a new deal on EPG prominence that takes account of changing user interfaces is likely to be necessary too. Certainly, if Channel 4’s full portfolio of channels is to be given public service status, they should all benefit from EPG prominence in today’s linear world, and, together with All4, continue to enjoy that prominence as interfaces evolve. In return, Channel 4 would be expected to provide more content of a demonstrably public service character both in relation to its existing broadcast output and to digital output that is likely to be popular with younger audiences. “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 – WILL BE A CRUCIAL FACTOR IN THE COMING YEARS.” In the meantime, we believe that the channel needs to complement its more commercial instincts and imperatives with a continuing commitment to take risks and to target minority audiences with the imagination and energy that it displayed in its early years. Lenny Henry told us that “Channel 4 had a remit when it began to represent voices from the margins and, I don’t know about you, but it seems to me that they’ve drifted away from that…We had Desmonds and things but I hope that there are more programmes like Chewing Gum and all kind of things coming up.” 217 Channel 4’s strongest defence against the threat of a takeover is not simply its continuing financial sustainability but the loyalty that it continues to command across a range of constituencies and cultures – a loyalty, however, that it can not afford to take for granted. 217 Comments to Inquiry event, ‘Are you being heard?’, 22 March, 2016, Goldsmiths, University of London. 77
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: CONTENT AND PLATFORMS IN A DIGITAL
Page 29 and 30: Basic principles At the core of pre
Page 39 and 40: The multichannel revolution Perhaps
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 75: CONTENT AND PLATFORMS IN A DIGITAL
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 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 127 and 128:
Page 129 and 130:
Content diversity One of the key wa
Page 131 and 132:
Page 133 and 134:
Page 135 and 136:
Sports content now accounts for som
Page 137 and 138:
Page 139 and 140:
Page 141 and 142:
Page 143 and 144:
Page 145 and 146:
Talent development and training In
Page 147 and 148:
Page 149 and 150:
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

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

Delete template?

Save as template?