Thompson argues for public service future

[BGonaSTICK]

BBC director general Mark Thompson today outlined a spirited argument for the continued existence of public service broadcasting - and the corporation itself - in 21st century Britain.

In a keynote speech titled Delivering Creative Future: The BBC in 2012 delivered at the QE2 Conference Centre in London, Thompson argued that public service broadcasting will become more, not less, important as digital media takes hold in a post-digital switchover world.

"Public service broadcasting is not a piece of arid theology," he said. "It's a passion – a passion which I believe you can see in Planet Earth and hear in Alan Johnston's voice...

"Public service broadcasting is broadcasting that seeks to do more than satisfy immediate consumer demand. It seeks to promote a wider good for individuals, for households, for the public at large.

"Public service broadcasting is the reason – the only reason – why the BBC exists. The point of the BBC is not to make profits or generate value for shareholders but to improve the public's quality of life.

"The "good", the "public value", which the BBC seeks to build is something which the public at large understands and wants. They tell us so, in overwhelming numbers, every time we or Ofcom or DCMS or anyone else asks them. There is no evidence that this public appetite is reducing in any way. On the contrary.

"And the good is definable and, with the help of the public, demonstrable. It is set out, more clearly than ever, in our new Charter in the form of six "public purposes". Every year, the Trust will report – with evidence – progress against those purposes."

Thompson went on to discuss a fifth reason to ensure the sustained existence of public service broadcasting.

"My fifth and final point is more complex, but it's worth spelling out because it's the source of so much confusion and misunderstanding.

"The only economic justification for the BBC – indeed for any public intervention in broadcasting – is market failure. If purely commercial media can adequately deliver all of the public value that the public actually want, you don't need a BBC or a Channel 4. You don't need a licence-fee. You don't need to intervene at all in the commercial objectives of ITV or five or anyone else.

"We should acknowledge moreover that commercial media can and does deliver public value: Sky News helping citizens understand the big issues of the day; Disney, Time Warner and Dreamworks delivering high quality original family entertainment; and so on.

"The claim for public service broadcasting – and for the BBC – is not that it seeks to correct some absolute market failure, that without it there would be a public value score of zero. It is that it delivers far more public value than the market would on its own. More than that, that it conditions the media market as a whole, promoting more quality and more choice than otherwise would be the case. Finally that it encourages a culture of creative risk-taking which would be impossible to justify on purely commercial grounds.

"So: yes – market failure is key. If there is no market failure, you don't need public service broadcasting. And yes – PSBs like the BBC must demonstrate that what they offer is distinctive and has a meaningful and net positive effect on the choices available to audiences and on the creative industries as a whole.

"But beware of crude and self-serving versions of the market impact argument – or the suggestion that if anyone anywhere is producing a given genre to any standard then the case for PSB involvement instantly collapses. In survey after survey, the British public themselves make it clear that they have a broad rather than a restrictive definition of PSB."

[BGonaSTICK]

:clap: :clap: :clap:

Slag off the Beeb all you want, but this is an excellent speech that expresses with perfect clarity why we must have Public Service Broadcasting alongside commercial broadcasting, no matter how much it costs.

The alternative doesn't bear thinking about.