Traditional public service media should be more discoverable on YouTube
The regulator and competition authority has made a number of recommendations in its action plan that is seeking 'urgent clarity from the Government on how TV will be distributed to reach audiences in the future.'
Group director for broadcasting and media at Ofcom, Cristina Nicolotti Squires, told the PA news agency: 'We've called it (the report) Transmission Critical because we think that public service media is under real threat.
'Broadcasters are experiencing quite tough financial challenges. The business model changes with audiences fracturing everywhere.'
According to research from Barb, which is responsible for calculating UK TV official viewing figures, viewing on linear channels has fallen significantly in recent years and this decline is expected to continue.
The report says that public service broadcasters (PSBs) will have to work 'much harder to create content that audiences want to watch' on platforms like YouTube as 'they are competing with every other content creator in the world.'
Ms Nicolotti Squires said: 'We're not saying they have to go on YouTube, but we're just saying that public service broadcasters have got to make great content where audiences are, and audiences are increasingly going onto YouTube.
'They all have different deals with YouTube in terms of commercial returns, and that's down to them. But I just think it's important that the programmes that they're making, public service programmes, are available where people are.
'So just delivering on the linear channels, obviously, we're seeing that viewing has fallen significantly in those areas. So it's a question of, as I said, pretty much putting these great programmes where people are watching them.'
A key objective of the Media Act, passed in 2024, was to make it easier to find content from PSBs like the BBC, ITV and Channel 4 on smart TVs.
Ms Nicolotti Squires said Ofcom is now calling for 'a logical next step on video sharing platforms'.
She added: 'It might require some further legislative changes to regulation. We're starting the conversation rather than finalising it all.'
The report says that stable and adequate funding is needed from the Government and emphasises that discoverability on online platforms is particularly important for news and children's content.
It also recommends that online platforms invest in media literacy skills while forging ambitious strategic partnerships that can compete with global streaming platforms.
On top of this, Ofcom is launching a review of its regulation of broadcast TV and radio that will seek input from stakeholders about the priority areas for reforming regulation.
Sarah Rose, president of Channel 5, said: 'We are pleased that Ofcom's review highlighted the challenges producing specialist children's content and called for commercially viable funding models among its recommendations.
'Channel 5's Milkshake! continues to navigate those challenges to remain the only public service broadcaster offering a daily programming block which targets preschoolers with original content rooted in the UK's Early Years Foundation framework.'
A spokesperson for the Department for Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) said: 'We welcome Ofcom's Public Service Media Review and we will now consider its recommendations.'
YouTube has been approached for comment.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
26 minutes ago
- The Independent
Trump claims he's made a ‘massive' trade deal with Japan
President Donald Trump boasted Tuesday that he had made a 'massive' deal with Japan that would generate 'thousands of jobs' and billions of dollars for the U.S. The president announced the trade framework – 'perhaps the largest Deal ever made' – in a Truth Social post Tuesday, revealing that a 15 percent tax on goods imported from Japan had been agreed. In the post Trump said Japan would invest 'at my direction' $550 billion into the U.S. and would 'open' its economy to American-made vehicles as well as 'rice' and 'other things.' But further details remained scant. The 15 percent tax on imported Japanese goods is a significant drop from the 25 percent rate that Trump, in a recent letter to Japanese Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba, said would be levied starting on August 1. 'This Deal will create Hundreds of Thousands of Jobs — There has never been anything like it,' the president posted on Truth Social, adding that the United States 'will continue to always have a great relationship with the Country of Japan.' 'This is a very exciting time for the United States of America, and especially for the fact that we will continue to always have a great relationship with the Country of Japan. Thank you for your attention to this matter!' Early Wednesday in Tokyo, Japanese Prime Minister Shigera Ishiba confirmed the new trade agreement, saying it would benefit both sides and help them work together. 'The government was determined to protect national interests,' Ishiba told reporters, per the Wall Street Journal. Trump's announcement appeared to excite investors, with the benchmark Nikkei – the Tokyo stock market – climbing 2.6 percent to its highest in a year, with shares of automakers also surging. Toyota grew by more than 11 percent, with Honda and Nissan both up more than 8 percent. But American automakers were less buoyed with the deal, with concerns raised over low import levies from Japan, compared to tariffs on imports from Canada and Mexico remaining at 25 percent. Matt Blunt, head of the American Automotive Policy Council, said, "Any deal that charges a lower tariff for Japanese imports with virtually no U.S. content than the tariff imposed on North American-built vehicles with high U.S. content is a bad deal for U.S. industry and U.S. auto workers.'
NBC News
27 minutes ago
- NBC News
Debate-style video roils internet after participant openly identifies as fascist
The YouTube channel Jubilee, which is known for its debate-style videos, is facing backlash online after a participant in a recent show self-identified as a fascist. The incident has roiled the internet, inspiring online discussion for days, and it has also had major consequences. The man, who identified himself as Connor in the video, says he was subsequently fired from his job. The episode, which was posted Sunday, featured British American journalist Medhi Hasan, who was tasked with debating 20 'far-right conservatives.' Hasan hosted a show on MSNBC from February 2021 to January 2024. Hasan had made the claim that President Donald Trump is 'defying the Constitution' as one of the topics of conversation. In a roughly seven-minute-long debate with Hasan, Connor spoke about his desire for an autocracy in the United States and praised the ideas of Carl Schmitt, a Nazi Party political philosopher, while saying there was 'a little bit of persecution' of Jewish people during the Holocaust. 'You're a fan of the Nazis?' Hasan asked the participant. 'I, frankly, don't care being called a Nazi at all,' Connor said. Later on, Hasan said, 'We may have to rename this show, because you're a little bit more than a far-right Republican.' 'What can I say?' Connor replied. 'I think you say, 'I'm a fascist.'' 'Yeah, I am,' Connor said with a smile as several others in the circle clapped. In just two days, the YouTube video has garnered 4 million views. Clips quickly began spreading online, sparking criticism that the channel and YouTube were platforming pro-fascist content. 'Jubilee this isn't even a debate anymore. It's just pure hatred that these people have in their hearts. Giving these people a platform is insane to me,' said a comment that got over a thousand likes under the YouTube video. A creator known by the username @mattxiv on X posted a remark that was viewed over 500,000 times: 'i don't think a channel that gives a platform of millions to people who self identify as 'fascist' should be allowed to monetize its videos. do you @youtube.' YouTube did not respond to a request for comment. Data from Google showed that searches for 'Jubilee' jumped significantly Tuesday after Connor announced he had been fired from his job. Hasan has since said online that the extent of the guests' views were not thoroughly communicated to him before he went on the show. 'To be clear, I didn't know they would be actual outright open fascists!' Hasan said on X. In another reply, responding to someone who had inquired about why Hasan would agree to go on the show if 'Jubilee invited a bunch of nazis,' he said that 'that's not how the debate was sold to me. You can see my shock when they start expressing their views openly.' Connor later claimed that he was fired because of his participation in the video. In an interview with the right-wing online social media brand TheRiftTV, Connor said being fired made him feel 'destroyed.' TheRiftTV started a fundraiser to help him as he looks for new jobs which has already received over $30,000. Connor did not respond to a request for comment. 'Unfortunately voicing fully legal traditional right wing political views results in real consequences,' read the description of the campaign on GiveSendGo, a Christian crowdfunding site that has become a go-to platform for controversial crowdfunding campaigns. 'This is cancel culture and political discrimination on full display.' In what appears to be Connor's Telegram channel, many rallied behind him in his debate, writing that Hasan 'had nothing to say because you were right,' among other hate comments about Hasan. The YouTube video was part of Jubilee's web series 'Surrounded,' in which one guest sits in the middle of a circle, 'surrounded' by around 20 people with opposing viewpoints. The web series has featured well-known political influencers as the main debaters, including Candance Owens, Charlie Kirk and Ben Shapiro. The show works by having the main guest start a debate by making a claim and having those who wish to debate it rush up to a chair facing the person in the middle. Whoever touches the chair first is allowed to take part. Whoever is sitting in the chair is able to take part in the debate until those surrounding the chair decide to vote the participant off. People who wish for the person in the middle to be voted off can raise a red flag, and if enough people raise their flags, the person is kicked off the debate and replaced by another person in the circle. This isn't the only video that has gone viral for its controversial participants. Clips from several other 'Surrounded' videos have caused controversy in the past, with users claiming that the channel was giving a platform to bigoted views. One of the channel's most viewed videos, a debate in which Kirk is surrounded by '25 Liberal College Students,' accumulated 30 million views. In an interview this year, Jubilee Media CEO Jason Lee addressed those concerns, saying the channel hosts people with controversial views to give their audiences the 'ability to hear nuanced perspective[s].' He added that the show tries to limit misinformation by incorporating fact-checks throughout the videos. Jubilee did not immediately respond to a request for comment. 'It's a question that we've been asked about: 'Is it dangerous to platform or have certain voices or points of view on?' And the way I would respond to that is I feel like we live in a more dangerous world if two individuals are not able to sit in the same room together and have a conversation,' Lee said. 'It doesn't necessarily mean that conversation is going to be productive or that anyone is going to necessarily change your point of view, but I think that that is sorely missing.' The video featuring Hasan's debate with Connor features only one fact-check, for a claim Connor made about the number of people killed by Spanish dictator Francisco Franco. Jubilee's videos span a range of topic areas. Currently, the channel is recruiting people for its 'Surrounded' series, including 'Conspiracy Theorists,' 'Conservative Christians' and 'Anti Capitalist[s],' and are part of a larger trend of debate-style internet content.
Times
an hour ago
- Times
Government and opposition alike must do much better
Out of the three parties that matter most, only one will be looking forward to autumn. When parliament packed up for the summer recess this time last year, the new Labour administration had a stonking majority, a sense of confidence and a clear plan of action. Twelve months on, morale has collapsed. Rarely have a government's fortunes declined so far, so fast. This is not the consequence of world events or the vagaries of the global economy: Sir Keir Starmer is to blame. He came into power with the stated aim of boosting the economy's performance to improve public services. But prioritising growth demanded a degree of discipline that he has signally failed to demonstrate. Although the government has chalked up a few achievements — for instance, in reforming the planning system — too often other considerations have taken precedence over growth. Workers' rights have been strengthened to the detriment of companies. Taxes on employers have been raised with the consequence that firms are hiring fewer people. Higher pay for public servants has contributed to the deterioration of public finances. The government's big effort to rein in spending centred on its planned reform of the welfare system, but Labour backbenchers rebelled against it. Instead of facing up to the rebels by making the issue a vote of confidence, the prime minister backed down. Predictably, this cave-in has encouraged further dissent. The prime minister's problem is that he is a conciliator rather than a leader. That is why he has proved to be an effective diplomat in his dealings with foreign leaders. With his low-key style, he has succeeded in improving Britain's relationship with Europe, in encouraging European leaders to co-operate over defence and in establishing a good working relationship with Donald Trump, despite the two men's glaring ideological differences. These external successes cannot compensate for Sir Keir's domestic failures, however. They have cost him credibility and the economy momentum. In the past two months, national output has shrunk while public debt continues to mount. In June, the government borrowed £20.7 billion. That is £6.6 billion more than in June last year and £3.6 billion more than expected. As Sir Keir has lost focus on the economy, concentrating on averting short-term difficulties rather than pursuing a coherent agenda, he has come to look like a tactical politician rather than a strategic one. Both MPs and voters are increasingly unclear about what his government is for. Labour is divided between pragmatists who want order in the public finances and leftwingers who want to spend more. The autumn budget, in which Rachel Reeves will have to reconcile the conflicting demands of the bond markets and Labour MPs' desire to protect social spending, will be a pivotal moment in the government's life. Sir Keir's greatest boon has been the state of the Conservative Party. Despite a welcome recent attempt to reassert the party's commitment to fiscal rectitude in the wake of the government's welfare debacle, Kemi Badenoch has failed to establish a clear identity around which her party can coalesce. At 23.7 per cent, its share of the vote in the last election was the lowest yet; it has declined further in polling since then, to 17 per cent. This week's reshuffle will not by itself reverse the Tories' decline: changes in personnel cannot compensate for the lack of a compelling story. The one party that has succeeded in devising one in the past year is Reform. Nigel Farage has capitalised on the loss of direction in both main parties to seize a commanding lead in the polls. Sir Keir and Ms Badenoch need to develop better ways of countering Mr Farage over the summer, or he will make short work of them in the coming year. For both, it is a case of 'must do better'.
