English 版 (精华区)
发信人: Christy (绿叶~~捣鼓六仙捣毁仙), 信区: English
标 题: A Piece everyday
发信站: 哈工大紫丁香 (2002年07月16日19:31:02 星期二), 站内信件
Master of the media
The BBC is a champion, so why doesn't it start acting like one?
Peter Preston
Monday July 15, 2002
The Guardian
When Chris Smith, in his culture secretary days, first wanted to bring the B
BC under Ofcom's stretching umbrella of regulation, he received a small but
perfectly formed protest delegation. Sir Christopher Bland and John Birt, ch
airman and director-general respectively. Back off, they said, or we both qu
it. Mr Smith staged a prudent retreat. The corporation knows how to influenc
e people (if not always how to win friends).
And it still does. Who gets to rescue digital television in the wake of ITV
disaster? Who gets its charter and licence fee renewed for 15 years in an al
most insouciant aside from Chris Smith's successor? Who, any day now, gets t
he go-ahead for BBC3 so that it may sit alongside 1, 2, 4 and 24? Who (a far
pettier matter, to be sure) doesn't even bother to invite the press to its
annual report launch next Wednesday?
No prizes on offer. One ticked box answers all. But the consequences of this
endless victory roll begin to accumulate. They include, consequentially, th
e death of Sir Jeremy Isaacs' Artsworld channel, a good deed for high cultur
e in a bad world, throat slit by BBC4. Then, prospectively, there's FilmFour
and E4, left high and dry by the digital fix. Channel 4 itself is suddenly
uncomfortably boxed in with nowhere to go. Its film production arm is broken
already, while ITV itself staggers towards a merger of desperation and then
takeover by some American giant.
Meanwhile, the Beeb grows like leylandii. It's everywhere. Unstoppable, unpr
unable. Shutting out the light. Want to run a British-based news website lik
e Guardian Unlimited? You can: but you're up against the BBC using licence f
ee money in unlimited quantities (£50m... £60m ...) with no need to produc
e a return. So it is, too, with magazine publishing, blessed by the magic of
cross-promotion. And with 24-hour news channels (where you almost feel sorr
y for Sky News). And wherever you roam in radio. It is time, I think, to pau
se. To exercise due diligence and solemnly, carefully take stock.
Some of these points, of course, are self-serving. And all this from a newsp
aper group which runs websites and radio stations, among many other activiti
es. These leylandii grows at the bottom of our garden, too. Should we feel s
orry for ITV's bosses, who got digital so disastrously wrong? Or for Channel
4, who turned out some pallid movies in the end and lost the digital platfo
rm knife fight? Who weeps bitter tears when Rupert Murdoch complains about u
nfair competition?
Nevertheless, there's more than the screech of axes grinding here. We have s
pent much of the last 20 years, we admirers and defenders of the BBC, arguin
g that the licence fee is the best guarantee of continuing quality. We've sn
arled defiance at meddling politicians. We don't automatically stand and sal
ute when Gerald Kaufman or Tim Yeo promise reforms which seem to put the ent
ire enterprise in pawn. We are on the side of the corporation. Our trouble i
s different - and recent. Just the perception that the game is up; and over.
That there is no threat to the BBC or to its means of funding for as far as
the eye can see - especially once Greg's digital coup becomes the key to an
y government's plans for the analogue sale of the century.
The BBC isn't some fading player hanging on to fight another day. It's the c
hampion. Its opponents' idiocies, plus £2.5bn of guaranteed funding through
the worst media revenue recession most of us can remember, have utterly cha
nged the dynamics of the game. And that, in turn, must change our mindset. T
he Beeb is the victor here, not some potential victim. What is it going to d
o with the spoils? The questions for the next charter renewal are changed, t
hen. Here are a few of them.
How, with FilmFour gone, can BBC films take up the slack? Where's the ambiti
on and the vision and professionalism that British film-makers need? The rec
ord so far is cautious and too often conservative. Why can't a powerhouse Be
eb dare more and win more?
What, at last, about BBC World, that limp TV version of the radio World Serv
ice without Foreign Office funding? Why does it have to be so threadbare goi
ng on gimcrack, recycling motoring and travel shows against rather desultory
newscasts? If this is Britain's answer to CNN, shouldn't we clear our throa
ts and put some money where our conviction ought to be? And if that's not al
lowed under the terms of the charter, then renewal can alter the rules and p
ut it right.
Doesn't the same apply to News 24, pottering away at the back of the new dig
ital platform, eating home resources while foreign starves? Isn't the impose
d divide of licence fee use simply stupid now? Why can the Beeb wield our mo
ney to make outfits like Sky or ITN artificially weak here at home but not u
se that same cash to build its news strength abroad? What's the use of being
the English-speaking world's most formidable player, then not being allowed
to play?
And finally, and most crucially: if the BBC is here to stay, if there's no n
eed to rush round frenetically constructing a "comprehensive" service any lo
nger, then where are the boundaries to be drawn? They already include a migh
ty net presence and the creation of a service provider. Could that make the
Beeb the Yahoo or AOL of tomorrow? Could it become a multimedia entrepreneur
with funding streams that never run dry, the thinking nation's own Vivendi?
A crossroads moment. Behind us the leylandii grow and nothing original or pr
omising survives. We have the language but internationally, in movies or TV
or the net, too little to show for it. Our champion is the BBC, but the BBC
isn't allowed to win big for Britain. No good, Tessa. No good, Greg. Time to
drive on or get out.
--
Welcome to LilacPark in Literature Division of the BBS
Welcome to our Electronic Literary Periodical
Lilac Rain
The Choice of Compostions from LilacPark (on the BBS)
http://gaea.hit.edu.cn:99/ (on campus)
http://www.lilacrain.net/ (otherwise)
※ 来源:·哈工大紫丁香 bbs.hit.edu.cn·[FROM: 211.144.73.171]
Powered by KBS BBS 2.0 (http://dev.kcn.cn)
页面执行时间:4.476毫秒