Be Excellent To Each Other

ITV is likely to win its battle to reduce its public service commitments while the BBC may have to give part of its licence fee to Channel 4, according to a leaked blueprint prepared by the media regulator Ofcom. Under the proposals, ITV will be allowed to cut back on regional news, reduce its current affairs output and reduce programmes produced outside London, saving almost £40m a year.

The document, drawn up by Ofcom as the basis for the second stage of its wide-ranging review of public service broadcasting and leaked to MediaGuardian, is likely to please ITV - and pitch the BBC into conflict with the regulator.

The decision, following Ofcom research that suggests the costs of ITV's public service status will outweigh the benefits by £60m by 2012, is likely to spark outrage from MPs and the broadcasting unions, who campaigned against the plans.

Ofcom is likely to suggest that the BBC's "excess" licence fee money be diverted to other broadcasters for public service television from 2012, rejecting the corporation's argument that its "unique link" with the public needs to be maintained.

The regulator also supports Channel 4's argument for public subsidy, at a lower level than the broadcaster has suggested. Ofcom says that Channel 4 will need about £40m a year in the medium term rather than the £100m it has argued for.

ITV will be allowed to reduce news output in 18 "sub-regions", reduce the volume of regional news by a fifth and halve its commitment to other regional programming in England and Wales. It will also be allowed to reduce its current affairs programming by a third and reduce its out of London production quota.

Controversial plans to merge Border and West Country with neighbouring regions will be rejected. But Ofcom will say their bulletins may be produced from outside the region, saving ITV money, if new research backs the case.

A spokesman for Ofcom said: "No decision has been made yet with regards to ITV's request to reduce its regional news production. The future funding of the BBC is being considered as part of Ofcom's wide-ranging review of public service broadcasting. The switch-over [analogue to digital] surplus is one of a number of future funding options that Ofcom has highlighted as part of its review. Those options will be taken forward in Ofcom's second consultation due to be published in the autumn. However, no decision has yet been made about the future funding of public service broadcasting in the UK."

So long as the playing field is level, the market will take care of the set top boxes, the distribution systems, the digital pipelines to the audio-visual retail outlet that is the consumer’s television, while the licence fee can – if it must and likes the idea – pay for content that can’t pay for itself in the normal cut and thrust of the marketplace. And if Channel 4 wants to (or must because of its remit) make that kind of public service programme as well as Hollyoaks and The Girl Whose Breasts Talk German, then the licence fee should cover that as well. The days of the BBC as a national institution, hosting and front-ending publicly funded content are over. The mighty oak must have some of its branches lopped off to light in on the smaller trees around it. Public Service Broadcasting is now merely the management of licence fee monies: we don’t need a BBC for that, or rather the BBC we need is a slimmed down BBC. It doesn’t need to try to be all things to all people, it can concentrate on public service and leave the commercial populist programming to the private sector.

Don't the BBC already give a hefty chunk of their licence fee money to C4 anyway?

Stephen Fry made a fantastic speech about this. You can download the podcast or read it on his site.
This bit is quite telling:

Wow! Radical. And tempting. Perhaps. Perhaps tempting. Not to me, I have to say, but then I am not Britain or an average Britain. This image of the consumer’s home as a kind of electronic bookshop, as outlined by media business guru Barry Cox, where we move from passive viewer to active consumer may seem beguiling to some, but actually we already know that model. We know it from hotel rooms and aircraft entertainment systems.

ITV local news was fucked over years ago and BBC local news has got worse and worse. Alot of the ITV locals are now based in shitty tin sheds on industrial estates and staffed by kids.

No.

Doesn't he go one to make a point that to some extent counters that though?

This would possibly explain why the West Country news on both channels is always ALL ABOUT BRISTOL, as they're based in a shed there and can't afford to send their reporters out to anywhere else in the several counties served by those two news programs.

ITV want to do Westcountry news from Bristol but this has yet to be approved by Ofcom.

At the moment I think both the BBC and ITV have small scale studios in Plymouth. The problem with reporting is more likely to do with a lack of resources. I believe ITV Westcountry do have a number of sub-opts for the different parts of the area but I imagine there is a lack of reporters or at least an unwillingness to send them great distances.

Both BBC London news and ITV London news are guilty of this. This transmissions cover nearly all of Surrey, and parts of Sussex and Kent but they rarely venture outside the M25.

Yeah, but in fairness fuck all happens in Surrey other than rich people wanking around on quadbikes.

Plymouth? Hmm - perhaps I'm talking about the wrong geographical area, then. Either the BBC or ITV one that we get is called "Points West", and serves the "north" westcountry (Somerset, Wiltshire, South Gloucestershire, Gloucestershire). The one on the other channel seems to cover the same area too.

Yeah, but in fairness fuck all happens in Surrey other than rich people wanking around on quadbikes.

Ah, that's ITV West isn't it? Formally HTV West. Not Westcountry (formally TSW and Westward).

ITV want to merge the two regions because they think you are all a bunch of cider drinking simpletons.

Boris and fucking Ken.

Somewhat, although I got the overall feeling that he thought that would be a good idea.

ITV will be allowed to reduce news output in 18 "sub-regions"

Why should it be forced to show stuff if it's not getting licence money?

Because it has a hugely valuable big fat slice of spectrum to itself?

People will shit if Corrie ends though, I'd imagine.

I won't. It'll free up about 100 hours or TV a week. Is Emmerdale ITV as well? Then all they need to do is ditch Eastenders.

I know I don't watch much TV, but I honestly can't think of a show I'll miss that's on ITV if it does die.
People will shit if Corrie ends though, I'd imagine.

And they'll take my FM broadcasting when they pry it from my cold, dead hands.
Seriously, do what you like with telly, it's boned anyway, but don't touch Radio 4.

I know I don't watch much TV, but I honestly can't think of a show I'll miss that's on ITV if it does die.
People will shit if Corrie ends though, I'd imagine.

Digital's got 4 and also the brilliant 6 and 7 though.

Excellent, excellent stuff.

Please, convince me of this! The only thing I've heard of value so far was an episode of The Nick Revell show (repeated off Radio 4 from back when Maggie was PM, so that's aged well...) and I heard it on listen again anyway so it's of dubious value to "broadcast" all this stuff on separate "channels" AFAICS.

And you can get rid of BBC1 while you're at it. Seriously, it was a load of rubbish before I was even born, who watches it now?