As a professor with a background in public service broadcasting (PSB), I’m often asked — What exactly is public service broadcasting?
Take a popular programme like Neighbours. From 1986 to 2008 it appeared on the BBC and was an important piece of PSB, popular with viewers, and valued for its airing of gritty but universal human themes played out in an Antipodean setting.
Alas, in February of last year it moved to Five, and became a piece of commercial, schedule-filling tat that appealed to the lowest common denominator.
Hang on prof! I thought Five still wanted to be considered a public service broadcaster?
Well, yes. But whereas everything the BBC does is public service — only little bits of what Five does actually qualify. Like the news.
So why is Five laying off staff at its news service?
Ironically, it’s to demonstrate that public service commitment. And with respect, minor staffing isues like that are inconsequential in the broad policy picture. You’re missing one of the key suggestions from Ofcom’s review. Everything Channel 4 does now qualifies as public service and there’s a possibility that Five could merge with it. Five is just demonstrating that public service costs. Under a merger Five could just take Channel 4 News, or More 4 News, and save all the millions it spends on public service, plus getting the wonderful quality of Jon Snow and the team…
But prof, wouldn’t it be cheaper to dump Channel 4 News and get the Five News team to do the news for both channels? After all, Channel 4 News is expensive and more people watch Five News at 5pm. And Ofcom have never criticized the content or quality of Five News, so it must be as good?
You’ve obviously understood nothing.
And what about regional news on ITV? Couldn’t the Emir of Qatar offer to do it for free?
I’m going to the library now. Leave me alone.
{ 1 comment… read it below or add one }
“What’s a library Prof?”
;-)