‘A unique institution’ is a term that nicely fits the shoulders of the BBC. This institution has been lauded and despised by many an incoming or outgoing politician – sometimes concurrently. And of course media commentators seem to relish the opportunity to point out the corporation’s moth-to-the-flame-like relationship with politics. In the infamous Unofficial guide to the BBC website, Tony Gosling wrote that Auntie has never been the same since the 1987 resignation of ‘the last independent minded Director General… [and now suffers from a] hard-nosed business culture combined with unparalleled cronyism, which has ripped out the heart of this once respectable institution.’
Now this respectable institution has been through a lot lately – particularly with the David Kelly affair and its subsequent Hutton Inquiry. For those in the BBC’s upper administrative stratum, it must certainly seem like a long time has passed since it was being marvelled over as one of the finest broadcasting organisations ever to benefit from the spectacular efforts of Guglielmo Marconi.
The official BBC website still insists that the broadcasting corporation is ‘innovative, progressive and pioneering…[and] has proved a powerful force in the 20th century.’ Yet despite this rich tapestry, a current crisis has hit the corporation. Dealt by the hand of Secretary for the Department of Culture Media and Sport (DCMS) Tessa Jowell, it was recently announced that a Charter Review is to be conducted into the BBC.
However this is not just any old Charter Review. Jowell promises it to be unlike any other. ‘Previous Charter reviews have been conducted in a range of ways. By the great and the good. By politicians and civil servants. But this review will be different. For the first time the driving force will be the British people. Through the licence fee, they are in effect the BBC’s shareholders.’
That’s right – the general public have been invited to take part and ‘have their say’ in this consultative process. All comments, criticism, praise, and of course condemnation will be taken until 31 March 2004. All you have to do is visit the DCMS website, where you are instructed to send your comments to the honourable Tony Blair – who will clearly be waiting on the other end of the Internet to collect and collate.
Although this might sound somewhat French Revolution-esque, Jowell quickly promises that ‘The one certain outcome of the review will be a strong BBC, with the courage to be editorially autonomous and independent from the Government.’ An interesting spin of course, particularly considering it is the Government itself conducting the review.
Looking at the history of Royal Charters that govern the BBC, the first was implemented in 1927, whilst the current Charter is the 7th and set to expire at the end of 2006. Now the existing Charter is a long and arduous read, but in a nutshell, the BBC is meant to be an egalitarian, independent, apolitical broadcasting service for the people of the United Kingdom. It is financed by a TV licence that the public pay for, and it does not sell its editorial content for advertising money or political advantage. Basically it is the people’s own broadcasting agent – or at least, is meant to be.
The BBC ‘Purpose and Values’ document does read something like the American oath of allegiance, but the intentions are first-class as it declares that:
‘Trust is the foundation of the BBC: we are independent, impartial and honest. Audiences are at the heart of everything we do. We take pride in delivering quality for money. Creativity is the lifeblood of our organisation. We respect each other and celebrate our diversity so that everyone can give their best. We are one BBC: great things happen when we work together.’
This Charter Review has been hyped as the ‘biggest ever public debate on the BBC’ and as reported by The Observer’s political editor Kamal Ahmed, Tessa Jowell is asking the big question. ‘The BBC must prove it can be trusted to provide impartial and factually accurate news coverage or else face fundamental changes in the way it is regulated.’ The Observer article indicated Ms Jowell had made it clear when interviewed that although this review was not the outcome of the Hutton Inquiry into David Kelly’s death, the inquiry’s findings would indeed be included in the overall Charter assessment. The Observer also revealed that Lord Hutton is expected to send letters to those mentioned in his report before the document is released.
As reported by The Telegraph’s Deputy Political Editor, Francis Elliott, it was BBC journalist Andrew Gilligan’s assertions that the Government had overstated the basis for a war in Iraq that instigated the current bad blood between Downing Street and the BBC. Gilligan is the defence correspondent for BBC Radio 4’s Today programme.
Another Observer journalist James Robinson pushed the Hutton Inquiry link even further by suggesting that perhaps Downing Street were looking to see whether public condemnation of the BBC’s handling of David Kelly will help deny it an increase in licence fee. Surely, a calculating stand by those at Number 10, particularly since it is a Labour government driving this move.
Yet it’s not over yet for the BBC. The corporation is not standing apart from this Charter review process. Rather the BBC’s Director General is reported to have said that the corporation will play a full part in the debate. Yet its biggest challenge is to stave off calls for it to become answerable to Ofcom, and hence lose its self-regulative process.
Ofcom is the newly designed Office of Communications. Its role will be, in this converging world of technology, to amalgamate the utility of the Independent Television Commission (ITC), the Broadcasting Standards Commission (BSC), the Office of Telecommunications (Oftel), the Radio Authority (RAu) and the Radiocommunications Agency (RA).
And perhaps in this age of technological convergence there is an “Ides of March” stench to the term ‘unique’. The adjective was used a noticeable four times in the DCMS announcement of the Charter Review. In their statement DCMS said: ‘The BBC is a unique institution. Unique in the role it plays in the public life. Unique in the way it is funded. Unique in the place that it holds in the public’s affections.’
Whether this uniqueness will be Auntie’s downfall, it is yet to be seen. And the end is still a long way away. In true bureaucratic form a White Paper will follow this initial public consultation. A second round of consultation will then be conducted. And finally the Charter Review will be concluded with an opportunity for both Houses of Parliament to contribute their views.
So it could be years before the public’s say is even seen to be heard.
To find out more about the BBC Charter Review process and submit your comments see: www.bbccharterreview.org.uk
