Latest news with #publicservicebroadcasting
BBC News
21-07-2025
- Entertainment
- BBC News
YouTube should give more prominence to public service media content
YouTube should give videos made by channels like the BBC, ITV and Channel 4 more promotion to help tackle a "serious threat" to the UK's public service broadcasting, according to media regulator spend much more time watching YouTube than all of the public service broadcasters combined, but "the future of public service media is at risk" if young viewers don't start watching their output, Ofcom watchdog suggested broadcasters should "work urgently with YouTube" to make sure their content is "prominent and easy to find" - and there's "a strong case" for the government to consider a law to make that service broadcasters also need to work much harder to create content that audiences want to watch on such platforms, Ofcom's report said. The BBC, ITV, STV, Channel 4, S4C and Channel 5 are all classed as public service broadcasters (PSBs)."If children do not turn to PSB content as they get older, the future of PSM (public service media) is at risk," said Ofcom's report into the future of public service should particularly offer more news and children's programming from those traditional TV channels to its users, Ofcom about 20% of material viewed on YouTube in the UK is actually made in the UK, the regulator found. 'Proud tradition' "Public service media has a long and proud tradition in the UK. It delivers duly impartial and trusted news and original programmes which reflect British culture and bring the country together," a statement said."But the system is now under serious threat, with audience choice wider than it's ever been, broadcasters experiencing fundamental financial challenges and structural change in the advertising market."And in this environment, public service broadcasters are finding it much harder to fund the production and distribution of high-quality UK content to all audiences."Ofcom has published a six-point plan, which also includes asking the government to consider additional funding for some genres such as news, local news and children's also announced a review of its regulation of broadcast TV and radio, because much of the current framework was designed for traditional TV. Ofcom also asked for urgent clarity on whether digital terrestrial TV - which is transmitted using masts and ariels, and which currently supports Freeview - will be phased out after 2034.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.
Telegraph
07-07-2025
- Entertainment
- Telegraph
I covered live music for the BBC. Here's how to fix its disastrous Glastonbury coverage
As the dust still settles on Somerset, it is looking likely that Glastonbury 2025 will be remembered less for sunshine, champagne-swilling celebs or even for stellar sets than for another cack-handed attempt at censorship by the BBC. Is that really fair? Well… BBC bosses, always so desperate to signal that their fingers are firmly on the pulse of popular culture and the latest cutting edge technology, literally took their eyes off the box. Instead, they were gazing at live-streaming. It's the future. Or it was. Because with it the BBC forgot its role – to provide public service broadcasting. To select what to show and programme it accordingly for the enjoyment of their TV and radio audiences. It lost control. Music festivals are bound to be an absolute minefield for the BBC. They are not strictly structured and controlled like, say, a football tournament. Imagine if a player on the pitch at the World Cup was wired for sound. You couldn't control their language. You couldn't edit out the rude bits, stop matches or choose not to show them altogether. You can't control front musicians with mics, and egos bigger than that of the entire baying crowd, either. I'm thinking of Snoop Dogg on the Pyramid Stage one afternoon at Glasto, clutching his crotch while rapping that women are asking to be f---d and demanding: 'What's my motherf---ing name?' You can't tame them. And you shouldn't try. Bands shouldn't fear having their collar felt when they're in full flow because of an off remark between songs. I'm not talking about mouthing off at a mob and inciting to kill by the way. Glastonbury has always been billed as celebrating counter-culture and promoting protest and provocation. But then the BBC gets involved with its remit to reflect popular culture, desperate to get down with the kids and yet to comply with the law of the land. On top of the BBC Charter, Ofcom, the BBC Board, its own editorial guidelines and compliance policy, and the court of public opinion constantly on its back. What are the dozens of Auntie execs on site supposed to do? How about spending less time being starstruck in the VIP hospitality tent? Get out into where the music, and possible trouble, is being made. The BBC's role and responsibility is not to host the freeloaders. It is to be selective. Since 1997, when the BBC took Glastonbury on, this has often left those licence payers on the sofa in front of the set furious if their favourite act doesn't show up in the schedules. The excuse has been time constraints and limited resources. The suspicion is that their heroes were at odds with Auntie's agenda. You know, DEI and all that. But now there's no time restraint on how much or what can be shown and, with the BBC eager to exploit the endless possibilities provided by the latest technology, it has slavishly committed to showing everything from everywhere on site. I was at another festival on Saturday where, backstage, the bands were being given written instructions on how to behave. The organisers, Labour-controlled Coventry city council, (40 of 54 seats) demanded that performers refrained from: using language that may be deemed offensive; making political statements; references to political, religious or other affiliated groups to be categorised as unlawful or hate speech of any kind; or the show could be stopped. One band blurted out: 'It's not like Glastonbury is it, where they tell you to be political and provocative? We refused and got banned for four years.' Another band told me that they fell out of favour at Worthy Farm back in the 1970s when they refused to vocally support nuclear disarmament on stage when Glastonbury was championing and donating to CND. They have only played there once since and that was only when their agent agreed to supply them and Worthy Farm favourites The Worzels as a package. Let's not forget, the BBC does not book these bands. It does not curate the festival. But did nobody at the BBC anticipate that an artist with previous for inciting violence and murder from festival stages might kick off – especially as he was the warm-up act for a band they had already very publicly and controversially banned? Had anyone done their homework? BBC bosses still can't seem to explain why they banned Kneecap – a bunch of blokes from Belfast with their Irish 'rebel' music, one of the boys wearing a tea cosy on his head that his mammy probably knitted for him – and yet they let loose Bob Vylan, two self-styled punks who also had form at recent festivals. Was anybody monitoring the live stream as it went out? Was anybody of the right pay grade around to pull it? Were the production staff all ignorant, incompetent or deviant? We deserve to be told which exec on site on the day and on a six-figure salary was responsible for fulfilling their main responsibility to provide an impartial public service. It's not enough to say: 'The livestream was monitored in line with the agreed compliance protocols and a number of issues were escalated but the editorial team decided not to cut the feed.' Or even to admit: 'That was an error.' The track record of production staff handling live situations has often been a bit hit and miss. My friend who was a very busy BBC head of complaints told me this week: 'Of course it's always easier with a presenter on hand to deal immediately with a situation.' DJ Bruno Brookes and I learnt this very quickly in 1980s Ireland. Another band of angry young men were set on causing mayhem at our Radio 1 Roadshow in Ulster's second city. All the advice we'd been given before we anxiously took to the stage, overlooked by paramilitaries perched on the city walls, was to alternate the name Derry with Londonderry. The bosses were confident that would keep all those sectarians on side, and were very relaxed even when the producer shoved a bloke up from the crowd to be our competition contestant, handed him a mic, and he immediately launched into a rant about the British and their political prisoners, chanting: 'Free The Birmingham Six!' The crowd went wild. And not in a good way. 'Fantastic. You've won, mate. Liz, give him a goody bag. Let's get him off the stage. More fun from Northern Ireland after Rick Astley!' A few years ago a legend of punk was suggested for an 'in conversation' at the 6 Music festival. On stage he was straight into character. Anarchic effing and blinding, and fantastically funny. The audience in the venue were lapping it up as he slagged off his rivals. but particularly when he explained that he had chosen his famous instrument because 'it's an extension of my penis'. All this apparently offended nobody in the room. Except our producer. It was all too rock'n'roll for radio. So it was duly sent off to be considered by the compliance committee. It took nearly a week for a ruling to come back. But it was well worth the wait. 'His penis is fine. That can stay in. But there are to be no f---s under any circumstances.' BBC bosses have now announced that they won't be live-streaming the festival. Ever again. Good. Let Glastonbury do it themselves. As I'm sure Michael Eavis knows, Karl Marx said that 'the workers must have the means of production'. Eavis has certainly got the means. So just dent those multimillion annual profits with a few cameras and a website. Crack on. Then sit back and broadcast whatever you've booked. And you deal with the er…mud… when it hits the fan.
Irish Times
26-06-2025
- Business
- Irish Times
O'Donovan has ‘no notion' of abolishing TV licence fee or replacing it with tax on tech companies
Minister for Communications Patrick O'Donovan has insisted he has 'no notion' of abolishing the TV licence fee or replacing it with a tax on big tech companies. Mr O'Donovan was responding in the Dáil to People Before Profit (PBP) TD Paul Murphy , who described the licence fee as a 'regressive, unjust tax' where the richest and poorest households pay the same €160 fee. Mr Murphy said increasing numbers are 'boycotting' the licence as he asked the Minister to instead tax the social media and technology giants to fund public service broadcasting. 'No, I won't, so that's the end of that,' said Mr O'Donovan. 'I have no notion of doing it. This is a fund that's in place to support RTÉ and public service broadcasters.' READ MORE It also supports the 'sound and vision' sectors, he said. 'I have no intention of replacing it and I have no intention of going down a cul-de-sac that Deputy Murphy would like us to do, which is a road to nowhere for RTÉ and everybody associated with broadcasting,' the Minister said. 'So the short answer is no.' Mr Murphy said the 'tax is deeply unpopular and licence sales have plummeted '. He said 950,000 paid in 2022. That figure dropped to 825,000 in 2023 and to 790,000 in 2024. Mr Murphy said that was a fall of more than 155,000 households 'who are refusing to pay either in protest or because they cannot afford to pay this regressive flat tax, which takes no account of ability to pay'. [ Why I stopped paying my TV licence fee: 'The whole model is broken' Opens in new window ] The Minister replied that 'the licence fee is not a tax. I don't see references to that anywhere in the legislation'. Describing it as an 'important funding mechanism for RTÉ,' Mr O'Donovan said Mr Murphy seems 'to think that there's a phantom entity out there that can pay for everything'. Mr Murphy said the licence accounted for just more than a third of funding for public service broadcasting. He said his party's proposals included a 'radical plan' to increase funding for public service broadcasting by taxing big tech corporations. Mr Murphy said they had a 'parasitical role' in journalism, not creating content but getting most of the advertising from it and it 'clearly makes sense to allow them to pay'. 'I'll continue to support those who refuse to pay the TV licence, and I warn you that that number is increasing,' he said, adding that the number of prosecutions was also dropping. 'You're entitled to start whatever campaign it is you want to start to undermine another public service,' Mr O'Donovan replied. 'I don't support it… and I don't think most people do either.' He said if Mr Murphy gets an opportunity to be in government, he will 'actually see that there's more to running a public service than a megaphone'.
The Guardian
24-06-2025
- Entertainment
- The Guardian
UK ministers ‘too scared of Donald Trump' to back levy on TV streaming giants
British ministers are 'running scared' of Donald Trump in their refusal to force US streaming services to fund more UK-focused shows, the director of the BBC's Wolf Hall has warned. Peter Kosminsky said a 'supine and terrified' government was worried about anything that might upset the 'bully in the White House'. He said programmes that spoke truth to power were needed amid global tensions and political division. However, he said important UK dramas were 'under threat as never before', with the BBC and ITV struggling to fund shows and cautious about productions that did not appeal to audiences outside Britain. Kosminsky is calling for a 5% levy on streaming companies – to be spent on UK-focused television – and said a similar surcharge had been adopted by 17 other countries. But he accused UK ministers of being afraid to follow suit because of the US president's threat to impose huge tariffs on films made outside the US. 'We're running scared of Donald Trump and his tariffs,' he said in a speech last week, reproduced in Radio Times. 'The government is so supine and terrified that it's not prepared to run the risk of upsetting Trump and the delicate trading relationship that they've fought so hard – and grovelled so intensely – to achieve.' Kosminsky said ministers could still be pressured into changing course because they were 'terrified of swings in public support'. He added: 'If you care about public service broadcasting, if you care about the BBC, ITV and Channel 4, I would beg you – get out there and campaign for the government to stand up to the bully in the White House and protect the 100-year tradition of public service broadcasting in this country, of which we are rightly proud, before it is lost for ever.' His speech follows warnings from other television figures, including Elisabeth Murdoch, that UK stories could be lost from the small screen as producers and broadcasters turn to shows they can sell internationally, most notably in the US. Kosminsky said the overall effect had been to ensure shows such as Three Girls, a drama about the Rochdale child sexual abuse scandal, or Mr Bates vs the Post Office, which brought a huge miscarriage of justice to wider public attention, would not be made in today's market. He said Wolf Hall was turned down by streamers and that senior figures behind the historical drama had voluntarily given up payments. His demand for a 5% levy on companies such as Netflix and Amazon Prime has split the television industry. Other senior figures are pushing for a significant increase in the tax relief, which they say would ensure more shows are economically viable. A spokesperson for the Department for Culture, Media and Sport said: 'As the creative industries minister, Sir Chris Bryant, told the culture, media and sport select committee in January, the government has no plans to introduce a levy on streaming services.'
The Independent
21-05-2025
- Business
- The Independent
Channel 4 boss urges Ofcom to be ‘brave' and back public service broadcasters
Channel 4 chief executive Alex Mahon has called on Ofcom to be 'brave' in ensuring public service broadcasters remain discoverable in an age of misinformation and disinformation. Launching the broadcaster's annual report in central London, Ms Mahon, who recently announced she was stepping down from her role, made a final call for the regulator and policy-makers to ensure that younger generations remain connected to the world through 'objective truth'. A report from Ofcom is due to be published this summer and is expected to lay out recommendations on which TV apps should be given prominence to ensure public service content can be easily found. She said: 'I would say that doing nothing simply isn't an option because, without action, we really risk losing that generation's connection to the world around them and society's grip on objective truth. But we definitely can't do it alone as just Channel 4. 'I do encourage Ofcom and the policy-makers to be brave, to stand with us against misinformation and disinformation by ensuring that Britain's peerless public service media remains prominent and easily discoverable on all the platforms that younger generations use.' Ms Mahon also urged the Government to reconsider copyright proposals to ensure that they 'don't harm British creativity'. This comes as the Data (Use and Access) Bill is at its final reading and could allow copyrighted work to be used to train AI models without permission or remuneration. The Bill has been condemned by high-profile figures in the creative sector, including musicians such as Sir Elton John, Annie Lennox, Sir Paul McCartney and Kate Bush, who say the Government's plans to make it easier for AI models to be trained on copyrighted material amount to the theft of music and will decimate the sector. Ms Mahon added: 'Ofcom has confirmed that they're looking at digital prominence for PSM (Public Service Media) content, and the Government, I hope, is reconsidering its stance on copyright proposals, on training LLMs (Large Language Models) to ensure that they don't harm British creativity.' In April, Channel 4 announced that Ms Mahon would be stepping down as the chief executive after nearly eight years. Joining the organisation in 2017 as the channel's first female chief executive, she will be leaving the business in the summer when the broadcaster's chief operating officer, Jonathan Allan, will serve as interim chief executive. The annual report revealed that Ms Mahon took home £1.29 million last year, including £544,000 worth of bonus payments which was worth 88% of her salary. This marked a 30% increase on the £993,000 total pay package she received in 2023. Senior executives have the opportunity to earn up to 80% of their salary in performance-related bonuses each year with Ms Mahon's being lifted this year due to a 'great performance', according to the company's annual report. The company's pay-setting committee said the bonus payouts reflected a 'year of strong strategic, financial and operational delivery in 2024', particularly while 'navigating a challenging transformation across the organisation'. It cited coverage including the Paralympics, current affairs programmes, and growth of its streaming platform. The report also revealed that Channel 4 ended 2024 with a pre-tax deficit of £12 million, better than the £52 million reported the previous year, while the broadcaster's revenue rose to £1.04 billion, a 1% rise year-on-year. It said digital advertising made up 30% of total revenues, reaching a target that the corporation set itself back in 2020, a year earlier than planned. Meanwhile, the broadcaster said it spent £643 million on content last year, slightly less than the £663 million in the previous year, though it saw a 4% rise in spending on commissioning content from Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland and the English regions.
