Keep Broadcasting Public - observer's report

Posted by Chris Youett

THE delegates represented all sections of the profession, representatives of other creators such as musicians, trade union leaders and the political parties. Tough political choices are about to made about the future scope & direction of the BBC. At stake are not only the jobs of media workers in broadcasting but everyone’s future access to quality, informative programmes in an industry dominated by huge commercial interests.

As the Government publishes its White Paper on the proposed BBC Charter and prepares to present its proposals to Parliament shortly, this major trade union and media conference was hosted by the NUJ so that MPs and Ministers could be successfully lobbied to protect the established principle of quality public broadcasting available to all.

The first session was chaired by TUC General Secretary (and NUJ member) Brendan Barber.  He said that the TUC gave critical support to the BBC – and a key job was to continue to give impartial news in a world increasingly dominated by highly-opiniated media outlets.  He added that he hoped he would never see the likes of Fox in the UK.

Mr Barber regretted that the BBC had been to willing to appease its enemies and the current round of cuts was damaging the BBC – as would the so-called “top slicing” whereby a percentage of the licence fee would be given to commercial channels to make public interest programmes.

When the BBC was successful, it was regularly accused to taking bread from the table of commercial channels.  It was also vital that membership of any new board of governors or regulator included working people.  Ofcom was dominated by commercial interests.

Broadcasting Minister James Purnell (Lab, Stalybridge & Hyde) claimed that the Government was a great supporter of the BBC, which was a cornerstone of British culture.  The trade unions would be one of the voices which will be heard in that debate. 

He said that two key issues were how the BBC could be at the forefront on technology and how it could reconnect with the public.  There had to be a genuine consensus and the corporation needed to engage in deep discussions with licence payers.

For example, the BBC would be rolling out digital tv.  Government research suggested that over 70% of the nation’s homes now had digital tv. The licence fee would be used to complete the switch-over. Over 95% of the population tuned in to the BBC each month – and 75% said they were satisfied.

However he said that he believed there needed to be a change of governance.  The proposed Trust needed the right blend of expertise with people appointed to it on the basis of ability.

He confirmed that much regional production would be based in Manchester and 50% of all programmes would be made in-house, compared to 75% at present.  There were also questions on how the  BBC should be funded.  He believed the current mix was right. 

The future level of the licence fee would be announced shortly, the Minister concluded.

Caroline Thomson, Director of Strategy at the BBC, admitted that the current system of governance had lost the confidence of “important people”  More rigour, formality & transparency was needed.  The Government had decided that the changes proposed by Michael Grade didn’t go far enough.  A formal execute board had been set up under the current charter.  Ministerial consent would be needed for new services.

She added that there was the challenge of digital tv era to consider and issues of quality programmes.  The proposed quota for in-house programmes was 40%.  This was now 50%.  Both Greg Dyke and Mark Thompson were pushing for cuts in overheads.  This was said to be the way to fund new developments. 

If the licence fee was only raised by the rate of inflation (2.3%) this would only pay for 30% of new developments.

Responding to the Charter proposals was Professor Tom O’Malley (Campaign for Press & Broadcasting Freedom) who warned that Ofcom would have more power and be able to advise the BBC on key issues such as copyright. 

The main function of Ofcom was to protect the commercial sector and added that many people didn’t understand that of all the broadcasters only the BBC was subject to ordinary competition rules.  Commercial broadcasting often did not have to provide quality programmes and news (Mercia Sound used to have a newsdesk of 7, but now only has three journalists – Chris Youett).

Prof O’Malley was surprised that the Government seemed disinclined to scrutinise the public service broadcasting requirements of the commercial sector.  The BBC could retain all rights on all platforms, but this wasn’t on the agenda – and Ofcom wants anyone to be able to bid for a slice of the licence fee.

He added that the wording of the draft Charter set out six public purposes – but relegates information, education and entertainment to the second level.  There were no calls for expanding democracy, no help for pensioners and few words on equal opportunities or accountability to the licence fee payer.

Prof O’Malley also suggested that there was a good casen for the ITV companies to pay back the monies they had enjoyed from their terrestrial advertising monopoly.

Prof Georgina Born (author of Uncertain Vision, a critical study of the BBC) said the current proposals struck at the heart of the BBC, which is largely free of commercial pressures.  The independent sector aren’t anything like as creative as the Government or Ofcom thinks.  Small independents are more likely to innovate but don’t make enough profits.  An industry largely based on freelancing was not condusive to good programmes.

She admitted that reform of the governance of the BBC was long overdue.  Real public interest in the BBC was often ignored, although if licence payers wanted good, original programming and high-quality networks, conditions had to be right inside the BBC.

Much of this had been seriously undermined by the Birt regime who put centralisation and casualisation at the heart of his agenda. 

There needed to be mugh more thorough research into the future of broadcasting, how the governance should be organised (eg lack of diversity on the current Board).  She suggested an independent all-party panel of MPs.

The current proposals for digital tv were still controversial and the proposal to make the BBC foot all the change-over costs from the licence fee undermined the Corporation’s independence.  Commercial tv should also contribute.

Tony Lennon, president of broadcasting union Bectu, said he first got involved with charter renewal campaigns 20 years ago.  The same anti-BBC arguments were still being heard – although the White Paper was remarkable in that Labour had fended off many of the Corporation’s critics.

The Hutton Report debacle had caused many people to question just what the governors were for.  Under the new DG, Mark Tompson, the BBC was experiencing the greatest changes in it’s history in a bid to “buy off” the Government and industry critics.

The proposal to source 50% of programmes from the private sector meant that resources would drop below critical mass.  The move to Manchester would cost over £400 million, but the programmes will get the same resources.  Casualisation was due to fashionable structures in a bid to buy off the loudest critics of the BBC in the private sector.

He added that the BBC would shortly be handing over its IT services to Microsoft, while a large chunk of training would be hived off to Capita – a firm which admitted it had no idea of what sort of training broadcasters needed.

Mr Lennon wondered how many people realised that between Manchester and the English Channel, the BBC now owned no facilities.  He felt that the current chairman & DG were trying to make the BBC like Channel 4 used to be (this was predicted by the satirical magazine Private Eye just after Mr Thompson was appointed).

In conclusion, he believed the real battle wasn’t about the 2006 Charter, but whether there would be a BBC when it ran out in 2016.  The way the corporation performed during the next 10 years was critical if it was to avoid top slicing.

NUJ Birmingham and Coventry Branch chairman, Chris Youett, urged the BBC to take tough steps to de-Americanise it’s news presentation of using “anchors” taking to correspondents as most people found this very irritating.

He added that the Corporation hadn’t made too many friends when it moved the popular Pebble Mill studios to the old Royal Mail sorting office in the centre of Birmingham because a couple of Birt’s managers didn’t think the restaurants were expensive enough in the south of the city.  Greg Dyke claimed the move would be “cost neutral” although it had set the BBC had £40 million to date.

After lunch, delegates looked at what the nation wanted from public service broadcasting.

There was concern from Christine Payne (General Secretary of Equity) over who would hold her members’ rights.  It was likely that these would be held by independent producers (artists, actors, musicians, journalists, etc, can often generate 50 to 100% more income from their intellectual rights – Chris Youett).

Campaigning journalist Victoria Brittain said the knowledge was power & an effective media was needed to bring the rich & powerful to book.  However, the White Paper could lead to the dumbing down of news which we were already seeing in large sections of the media.  This was likely to continue unless the public service broadcasting requirement was ring-fenced.

There was also a danger of the power of a few media monopolies, both of which were bad for democracy.

She added that many people were asking whether a partisan broadcasting channel like Fox could happen here.  Under the current proposals, the answer was “yes”.  This was due to a mixture of Washington-dominated news slants coupled with under-staffing of regional and national officers.  However she still believed that the BBC World Service was the jewel in the crown.

Former NUJ Freelance Organiser Bernie Corbett (now General Secretary of the Writer’s Guild) said the 50% outsourcing rule actually meant that more programmes would be sourced from the private sector.  They couldn’t compete with the BBC’s world-famous output from news, natural history and current affairs.  He expected most of this output to remain in-house.

The independents would be likely to generate more quiz shows, comedy, “reality tv”, etc.

Mr Corbett warned not to rely too much on the myth of decades of archive material to which the public could have access.  Most of this would require the BBC to re-negotiate contracts with the creators – and the Corporation had been negligent in  the storage of many classic programmes, resulting in wiped tapes.

Granville Williams (Campaign for Press & Broadcasting Freedom) urged everyone to fight to retain the BBC as the gold standard for quality public service broadcasting.  Much of the output in the rest of Europe was still based on state-sponsored broadcasting. – although those countries with dual systems were not as pure as the position in the UK currently is.

He quoted US journalism icon Ed Murrow that broadcasting could illuminate, inspire and lead as far as humans would allow it to.  However there was a lack of confidence  by the BBC in its news reporting.

There were two views of the White Paper and Charter reviews: everything was done & dusted or the battle isn’t over yet as there was still the licence fee settlement to fight over.

Chris Youett asked whether a good tactic would be to encourage the BBC to appoint bigger news desks on  its network of local radio stations and to campaign to end the special tax statuses enjoyed by the Corportation’s two biggest critical, Ruper Murdoch’s News International Group (The Sun, News of the World, The Times, Sunday Times & Sky News) and Daily Mail & General Trust (Daily Mail, Mail on Sunday and Associated Newspapers).

Murdoch effectively paid no UK tax under “special arrangements” not available to most citizens and businesses while the Daily Mail ran a very large business which was allowed to hide behind charity law.  Mr Youett added that this meant other media players were subsidising these major corporations.  He was surprised that Trinity Mirror, Emap, Reed, Newsquest, Johnson Newspapers, etc, hadn’t kicked up so far.

John McDonnell MP (chairman of the NUJ Parliamentary Group) said everyone needed to campaign for a strong & independent BBC.  Other voices were starting to be heard.  The time-scale of uncertainty should be used to push for more debate and electors should put pressure on Ministers.  Other organisations like local government should also be encouraged to lobby.

Mike Smith of the TUC Secretary’s Department quoted legendary investigative journalists Carl Bernstein and Bob Woodward in the film “All the President’s men” was to follow the money.  Other media players were trying to drive down the licence fee settlement as they knew this would prevent the BBC from producing such a wide variety of quality programmes.

In conclusion, NUJ President Chris Morley and General Secretary Jeremy Dear promised that the union would continue to mount a robust defence of the BBC and public service broadcasting.  Mr Dear added that the opponents’ strategy was to undermine the BBC’s resource base.  The commercial operators still believed there was a battle to win, so the BBC’s supporters shouldn’t be afraid of taking them on.

Public service broadcasting should be there to serve the best interests of the nation’s citizens, he added.