BCC(3) 19

The Future of PSB and the Impact of Digital in Wales

Submission to NAW Inquiry into PSB
Hugh Mackay, Faculty of Social Sciences, The Open University
May 2008

Ofcom, the BBC, ITV and a PSP

1.1  The discourse on the future of psb and the impact of digital focuses largely on choice and diversity and on the inevitability of the deregulation of broadcasting. Ofcom is the loudest voice in the debate, but its position lies at one end of a spectrum - a spectrum running from free markets and consumer choice at one end to state regulation in the interests of citizenship and democracy at the other. The Communications Act 2003 details the 'principal duties’ of Ofcom as 'to further the interests of citizens in relation to communication matters’. Meeting the needs of the public and of citizens, however, is construed by Ofcom largely in market terms. Whilst Ofcom is charged under the Communications Act with looking after the interests of consumers and citizens, it has focused very much on the former, seeing liberalisation of the market as the best way to optimise plurality, diversity and quality, and to foster a strong European AV sector. Ofcom downplays the cultural significance of broadcasting and of its importance for citizenship. Broadcasting is not simply a sector of the economy, it is a core part of the cultural life of Wales.

1.2  It is important to stress the centrality of the BBC for audiences in Wales. It is often suggested that, with multi-channel TV, consumers are fleeing the BBC. Whilst BBC audiences are declining with the growth of digital, the reach of the BBC remains both unbeaten and vast  Even in multi-channel homes BBC1 and ITV are viewed much more than any other channels. In other words, far from becoming unpopular, the BBC and other psb channels remain the mainstay of the TV diet in Wales (as in the rest of the UK). There remains very strong support (albeit declining with the growth of digital) for the old channels, despite the widespread availability of new channels - most of which have audience shares of a fraction of 1%, e.g. MTV at 0.2%. These channels will not offer much in the way of possibilities for informing and communicating the NAW’s policies. It is unlikely that ITV’s slide from its psb commitments to being a commercial broadcaster like any other from 2012 will mean it remaining a major player. The idea that public subsidy of the necessary scale could salvage this situation seems extremely optimistic.

1.3  Ofcom has consistently reduced the psb requirements that it imposes or enforces on ITV, on the grounds that, with the growth of digital and onset of switch-off, ITV must be released from the requirements of the licence, due to the squeeze that it is experiencing. Although obvious to Ofcom, it is a mystery to many scholars, commentators and others why Ofcom so interprets its duty regarding enforcement of ITV’s psb requirements. ITV remains highly profitable (albeit down from £340m in 2004 to £188m last year, though it is worth noting that in 2004 its profits were 57% up on 2003) and, whilst it is experiencing a fall of advertising revenue, according to Ofcom ITV will not face the main squeeze until 2011. Profits, it should be remembered, are a means of sustaining share value, not of serving us as citizens. Companies, ITV like any other, always want more profit, and a tame regulator is a real assistance to ITV in this endeavour. Media regulation is a political question, it is a matter of laying out public objectives, not starting with ways of ensuring private profit. - especially in the context of the lack of transparency of ITV’s accounts.

1.4  Despite the remarkable efforts and achievements of ITV Wales, it is inconceivable to imagine a future in which the company is kept afloat by public subsidy. Last year Google’s advertising revenue exceeded that of ITV1, in a trend that is continuing. Five, meanwhile, has never expressed an interest in universal psb. A PSP would be a complex, new, expensive organisation.  

2.  Choice, plurality and diversity

2.1  Choice, plurality and diversity are core elements of the discourse regarding the emerging media landscape - and are echoed in this Inquiry’s call for evidence. Pluralism is also important, though is given less attention.  It is worth distinguishing between 'diversity’ and 'plualism’: they are not synonyms, the former relating to breadth of programme types and content, the latter to the number of voices or perspectives that are heard. Given appropriate standards, it is possible to have considerable plurality from one channel or one broadcaster; and it is quite feasible to have many broadcasters but very limited diversity. Diversity can be achieved within channels or across the breadth of the broadcasting system - so we can think of channel and system diversity. The question is how to regulate to achieve the greatest plurality and diversity.

2.2  It is questionable whether Ofcom’s regulatory regime has caused an increase in choice and diversity. Undoubtedly there are more channels and more programmes but this does not necessarily mean greater diversity of programme content. Instead, there has been a drift towards the middle ground - as David Liddiment, then Director of ITV, said in 2001: 'The relentless quest to find out what viewers want and then give it to them has made for sameness’. The market, in the form of increased rating pressures, seems to have made all broadcasters more cautious and less innovative. Markets do not in themselves enhance diversity, and in the case of television in the UK today they are leading to a general shift to the centre ground; thus diversity is reduced, not enhanced, by market pressures

2.3  Competition can lead to more imports and a decrease in the proportion of transmission time that is original production. Certainly, the new channels spend relatively little on original programming (though much on sporting and film rights). A larger percentage of the licence fee goes on programme production compared with the percentage of advertising revenue or subscription that are spent on production (Oliver and Ohlbaum, cited by Harvey). 70% of BBC income goes into making new television programmes, whereas 50% of ITV’s, C4’s and Five’s (combined) does so. In the case of pay TV channels the figures are very much less.

2.4  There is an alternative to the market model, the European public service model, which has concerned itself with quality and pluralism, providing a wide range of programme content and reflecting (and giving voice to) the breadth of groups in society. Although facing challenges in the multi-channel environment, this offers considerable merits that are well worth seeking to preserve - in the interests of democracy if not profits. The BBC has shown itself well able to adapt to a changing environment, in the recent past but also going back to the 1950s and the arrival of ITV.

2.5  Implicit in Ofcom’s direction of thinking, and perhaps that of this Inquiry, is that the BBC has (or will have) too much control of communications in Wales. Occasionally members of WAG and the NAW have suggested that the BBC is not doing as good a job as it might of communicating the policies of the NAW.

However, it is important to bear in mind that surveys consistently demonstrate extremely high public support. In the Hutton affair it was remarkable how the public supported and believed the BBC rather than the government. The impartiality conventions and regulations that underlie the work of the BBC allow the voicing of a diversity of perspectives and opinions. With this deep-rooted ethos, there is no reason why a plurality of voices cannot be achieved without a multiplicity of psb providers.

2.6  Quality in television is extremely hard to measure. Like psb, it a much used but rarely defined term. Geoff Mulgan has developed an elaborate definition of quality in television:

1. Consumer quality and the market: the best TV is that which best fits the preferences of viewers.

2. Producer quality and professionalism: experts’ judgment and broadcasters’ commitments lead to high standards.

3. TV and the person: TV should extend us and be good for us.

4. The TV ecology: broadcasting should be truthful.

5. Quality as diversity.

6. TV as ritual

7. Quality and the medium: television’s aesthetic.

Some of these seem more useful to the purposes of this Inquiry than others, but it is worth considering what we mean by this important term. It is hard to get away from the tension between subjective and objective measures of quality.

3.  The opportunities provided by new media

3.1  To some extent, the pressures on psb (and other) broadcasters are enhanced with the arrival of the Internet. Television viewing is down by 3.6% since 2003 and radio listening by 2%. Younger people especially are shifting away from TV and turning to the Internet, so the trend is likely to increase.

3.2  The Internet facilitates the expression of, and connection with, an enormous plurality of sources, facilitating new patterns of connection and creating virtual spaces where new publics are enacted, enhancing plurality and diversity. In some ways this challenges existing institutions - the mass media and the government. At the same time the Internet opens up institutions of government and civil society to participation, at least potentially enhancing the public sphere. It facilitates expression of, and access to, new voices. Web 1.0 allowed access to extensive sources of information, offering pleasure and empowerment. With Web 2.0 there are increased possibilities to contribute allowing a greater diversity of content, plurality of voices and debate. Uploading, blogs, citizen journalism and other forms of user-generated content (UGC) allow everyone to be a producer, breaking down barriers and changing the relationship between production and consumption. They can be seen as profoundly democratising, eliminating gatekeepers and transforming the one-to-many nature of broadcasting. They augment, diversify and inform the agenda of mainstream media, shifting power from institutions to people.

3.3  On the other hand, there is nothing inherently progressive or inherently democratic about this, with pornography a very major use and anti democratic forces, holocaust deniers etc among the cacophony of voices. Most blogs are about identity rather than politics, the nature of interactivity is often very limited (entering credit card details); and technology in itself will never transform political participation. So the benefits of the Internet for democracy and citizenship need to be viewed in a balanced way

3.4  There is strong evidence - as one would expect - that the Internet increases the distance over which connection and communication takes place. Rather than a process of homogenisation, this is often a process whereby the local is made accessible globally. This is important for diaspora communities in Wales (for example Somalis, who use the BBC World Service website) and also for the Welsh diaspora. Wales and the Welsh language are well-represented on the web.

3.5  There remains a continuing and pressing need for the provision of information in and about Wales, and this needs to reach all households - the psb principle of 'universality’. Television, despite the growth of the Internet, remains vital for promoting social inclusion and contributing to the development of a common culture as well as cultural pluralism.

3.6  As yet, however, the main Internet providers of reliable information on world events are the major 'old media’ (press and broadcasting) organisations. TV is easy to use, has an established market position, is trusted and is more 'lean back’ and in living room. Despite the importance of the Internet, broadcasting and the broadcasting organisations remain terribly important.

4.  Citizenship

4.1  'Citizenship’ is a term not used much by television viewers or radio listeners (nor, indeed, is not used much by users of health and education services). Definitions of the term are varied and imprecise - it is a slippery but important notion.

4.2  In the early days of the BBC in Wales, the then monolithic broadcasting system served politicians and cultural leaders well, facilitating communication and dialogue with the people of Wales. Broadcasters have played a major role in constructing modern Wales. It is ironic that, at the moment of the arrival of the national Assembly when, more than ever before, there has become a need for a mature pan-Wales media system, the media are fragmenting, reducing prospects for politicians to communicate with the people.

4.3  A key issue for this Inquiry is to identify what media - forms and institutions - are best suited to serving citizenship. The BBC has a deserved worldwide and long-standing reputation, second to none, in reporting the political process, in Wales, the UK and globally and stimulating public debate on range of subjects. It has an incredibly high reputation for providing accurate, impartial and balanced coverage of news and current affairs.

5.  A case for strengthening not squeezing the BBC

5.1  Far from abusing a monopoly position, there is evidence that the BBC is highly cost effective - in that it provides for a greater proportion of viewing than its proportion of costs. It leads and sets standards for plurality, diversity and quality. It would be perverse to have a Welsh policy that undermined the cultural and broader contribution of the BBC to the life of Wales. The BBC is a benchmark of quality in UK broadcasting that should be facilitated to contribute to the life of the Welsh nation. It is not only the UK’s leading brand, but is also attributed by John Davies with having constructed modern Wales. It is an institution to be cherished and not attacked or reduced in effectiveness by whittling away its resourcing. There are very real dangers of unravelling the BBC: the licence fee settlement and its responsibility for ensuring digital switchover are placing it under very real pressure, with 150 jobs being cut in Wales. Sky, as ever, is both courted by the Labour government and keen to get a share of the BBC’s market.

5.2  There’s a specifically Welsh dimension to this argument to defend the BBC in that the growth of digital and market-based systems make 'subsidised’ broadcasting appear out of place and vulnerable. Wales has a particularly large psb sector, compared with the rest of the UK and the world. The gradual shift to market-based broadcasting carries considerable risks for S4C, in that increasingly it appears anachronistic. Clearly there is no threat to the notion of Welsh language broadcasting today, but the level of public subsidy of S4C should encourage politicians in Wales to be defending psb rather than contributing to its demise. In an ideal world, backing a PSP and ITV would be good ways of enhancing diversity and plurality, but to do so by reducing the funding of the BBC is unlikely to achieve this objective.

6. Research needs

6.1  The NAW might like to consider commissioning a study of the plurality, diversity and quality of information and opinion that is broadcast by the breadth of providers in Wales.  Without a clear understanding of the extent of plurality, diversity and quality in existing Welsh broadcasting, we are guessing in the dark about the implications of changing current arrangements. This is the crucial evidence and it is simply not available. There are several researchers across the universities in Wales who would be interested in working alone or together on this.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/1508370.stm

2 Carole Tongue and Professor Sylvia Harvey (2004) Citizenship, Culture and Public Service Broadcasting. Submission to Ofcom Review of Public Service Television Broadcasting Phase 1.

3 Ibid.

4 The public trusts the BBC more than any other news provider. See e.g. BBC (2004) The BBC’s contribution to informed citizenship. Submission to the Independent Panel on Charter Review.

5 Geoff Mulgan (1990) The Question of Quality. BFI, London.

6 Ofcom (2007) Communication Market Report.

7 Dutton, W.H. and Helsper, E.J. (2007) The Internet in Britain 2007 Oxford: Oxford Internet Institute, University of Oxford.

8 See for example D. Miller and D. Slater (2000) The Internet: an Ethnographic Approach, Berg, Oxford, a study of Trinidad on the Internet.

9 See Andrew Green (2005) Wales on the Web. Institute of Welsh Affairs, Cardiff.

10 A YouGov poll in 2005 found the BBC the most trusted news provider.

11 Carole Tongue and Professor Sylvia Harvey (2004) Citizenship, Culture and Public Service Broadcasting. Submission to Ofcom Review of Public Service Television Broadcasting Phase 1.

12 John Davies (1994) Broadcasting and the BBC in Wales. University of Wales Press, Cardiff.