Oxford Media Convention 2004: OFCOM; PSB and the Producer

'OFCOM; PSB and the Producer: How Best to Ensure Creativity and Innovation in UK Production?'

Chair: Mark Lawson, BBC broadcaster and Guardian columnist
Speakers:
Tim Gardam, ex-Channel 4
Peter Bazalgette, Chair, Endemol UK
Jonathan Hewes, Deputy Chief Executive, Wall to Wall

I should preface my report by noting that I am not au fait with the broadcast media and television production industries and that there was a lot of 'context' that panelists expected the attendees to have. That said the chair didn't do a great job of setting the context, though he was otherwise excellent.

In his introductory remarks Gardam noted that if you liberalise the market in one area you find new problems in another. He asked how we could keep up the quality of shows, and compared 'Matt's Old Masters', which would not be funded by an international co-producer but was quirky and imaginative, with 'The Voice', a "blended smoothy" that will be much easier to get financed. The latter show was made by Endemol and Baz (as he is known) reacted to Gardam's comments in a sparring manner. (Current Channel 4 head honcho Mark Thompson was also in the audience and responded to Gardam's points more seriously.)

Bazalgette endorsed Ofcom's Ed Richards who in his Royal Television Society keynote argued for plurality. He argued that:

• Money should go to the best: if you tell broadcasters to make public service broadcast shows independents will follow the money, citing Restoration as a case in point
  
• Diversity of voice and supply: noting that you could see the whole thing as a battle between spectrum owners and talent
  
• Talent should be rewarded: observing that private capital has gone into Hatrick and the former Chrysalis
  

He added that intellectual property rights are being defeated by technology in music, and may happen in TV too. In conclusion he noted that Carter had talked about distribution for 85% of his speech and content for 15%, and questioned Ofcom's commitment to content. (We must find a better term for 'content'.)

Hewes noted that he had found that good editorial innovation is good business, and that the most innovative shows -- such as The House franchise -- have been the most popular. He reported that Wall to Wall could be a proper business as it has a business base: "talented people don't make good programmes if they are in a company that is struggling to survive". In conclusion he noted that it was a rather dispiriting idea that public service broadcasts can't be engaging.

The discussion focused on whether creativity quickly become repetitive. 'Baz' argued that the issue was whether commissioning editors were looking for new ideas. On the commercial pressure to milk formats Hewes noted that things work if they are re-invented, not repeated, and that their reluctance to do things again has been helped by being a stable business. Gardam commented, in the spirit of Goebels, that when you hear 'creativity and innovation' from the mouths of politicians he reaches for his machine gun. He noted the importance of having people in television who have a sense of purpose. (My instinct is that many of these issues can't be resolved at the level of business models, charters, and regulation. And inspiring society produces great culture, and also demands it. How do we create that?)

There was much discussion of the idea of an Arts Council of the Air. Baz argued for using the institutions we have and not creating another bureaucracy. ("God save us!") Change the purpose of the BBC using the charter renewal process and put the money in the existing institutions, he suggested. Later he noted of this idea that the "BBC and Channel 4 are organisations with a soul" and by comparison the "Arts Council model is an under-fueled, low octane thing". Mark Thomspon added that the Arts Council model would be too diffuse and rootless: how would they plug into our broader cultural life? he asked.

As the discussion was opened up Lawson, the most recognisable if not the most powerful person in the room, asked people "no matter how famous you think you are can you please identify yourself!" Quite right. Nevertheless he did name the powerful people who wanted to speak -- Mark Thompson, Jane Root -- rather than force them to say who they were.

Baz noted that there is no shortage of creative ideas, just of money to pay for them, and that the premise is different now we have unlimited spectrum. Mark Thompson of Channel 4 agreed with Baz that 'money should go to the best ideas' but asked: what is best, and who decides? noting that best is different depending on your objectives.

In his concluding comments Baz argued that it is a fantastic moment to be involved in the industry, with new technology possibilities, the BBC charter renewal, and the public service broadcasting charter review. "If we want to do something we can". Hewes agreed that the new world can only be good for independents.