BBC: Channel 4 privatisation to go ahead

[najaB]

From the BBC

The government has decided to go ahead with plans to privatise Channel 4.

A source said ministers believed public ownership was holding the broadcaster back "in the face of a rapidly changing and competitive media landscape".

Plans for the sale, on which there has been a public consultation, will be included in May's Queen's Speech.

But Channel 4 called it "disappointing" that ministers had made their decision despite "significant public interest concerns" over privatisation.

Money made from the sale will be reinvested in a "creative dividend" to be shared among the TV industry, with some of it earmarked for independent production companies.

Channel 4, founded by Margaret Thatcher's Conservative government in 1982 to deliver programmes for under-served audiences, is funded by advertising but is publicly owned.

Channel 4 privatisation to go ahead

The BBC is told the money made from selling the broadcaster will be reinvested in the TV industry.

www.bbc.co.uk

For those of you who thought that the Tories' obsession with privatisation ended in the 1980s, another success story is going to be sold off. As noted in the article, Channel 4 costs practically nothing to run and is likely going to end up in the hands of a foreign media consortium who will strip it for what value they can get out of it.

 

[Gloster]

And it is odds on that it will end up in the hands of an owner who is friendly to the Conservatives, but I am sure that never entered into their thinking. Of course not.

 

[yorksrob]

Damned Tories never learn.

This is why they can't be trusted.

Tory scum.

 

[Gloster]

Damned Tories never learn.

This is why they can't be trusted.

Tory scum.

Unfortunately they do learn: new ways to rig the system.

 

[yorksrob]

Unfortunately they do learn: new ways to rig the system.

They'd sell their own mother if they thought they'd get money.

That's what never changes.

 

[DarloRich]

but of course it is..........................

( Tories gotta Tory)

 

[permarquis]

At times like this I'm always reminded of that quote from (I think) Charlie Brooker:

The Conservative Party is an eternally irritating force for wrong that appeals exclusively to bigots, toffs, money-minded machine men, faded entertainers and selfish, grasping simpletons who were born with some essential part of their soul missing.

 

[brad465]

Heading down the same road as Hungary with Orban is now: rigged electoral system, opposition given limited publicity, control of overwhelming majority of media landscape, ensuring Government failures in society are blamed on minorities, banning peaceful protest, etc. Channel 4 privatisation is part of this process, even though oddly it launched under Thatcher (which shows just how populist the current lot are).

And to those who say what's happened/happening in Hungary with authoritarianism can't happen here, it's that mindset being held by a critical mass of the population that is why it absolutely can happen here (this mindset is even more concerning than what any Government might do with authoritarian rule).

 

[najaB]

And to those who say what's happened/happening in Hungary with authoritarianism can't happen here, it's that mindset being held by a critical mass of the population that is why it absolutely can happen here (this mindset is even more concerning than what any Government might do with authoritarian rule).

Ironically, it's the sense of British exceptionalism so common among those on the right which will allow them to do it!

 

[permarquis]

I've felt for a long time now that, perversely, we're quite lucky that the Tories monopolise the right in this country. I think we could very, very easily find ourselves with something quite a lot worse. There is a sizeable right-wing core to their vote who would happily go much further if given half the chance.

 

[Rick1984]

Channel 4 is public owned? Never knew!

 

[Gloster]

The trouble is that the lot we have at the moment are really just power-hungry authoritarians: many of them would have been quite happy on the extreme left (well, maybe not Jacob Rees-Mogg) if it got them in charge. Many of their policies seem to be aimed at appealing to the extreme right-wing, xenophobic voters whose votes will probably be up for grabs at the next election now that Brexit has gone through. The Tories probably calculate that the number of crucial marginal seats that they will retain by such policies is greater than the number they could lose due to voters in other seats being put off.

 

[Paul Jones 88]

Perhaps we will end up with a Channel 4 that is more balanced, I want entertainment and information that is balanced, however, at the moment, it is so far to the woke left it is in danger of falling off the edge.

 

[GusB]

Perhaps we will end up with a Channel 4 that is more balanced, I want entertainment and information that is balanced, however, at the moment, it is so far to the woke left it is in danger of falling off the edge.

I wouldn't trust anyone using the term "woke left" to have any idea what balance actually looks like.

 

[Typhoon]

From the BBC

Channel 4 privatisation to go ahead

The BBC is told the money made from selling the broadcaster will be reinvested in the TV industry.

www.bbc.co.uk

For those of you who thought that the Tories' obsession with privatisation ended in the 1980s, another success story is going to be sold off. As noted in the article, Channel 4 costs practically nothing to run and is likely going to end up in the hands of a foreign media consortium who will strip it for what value they can get out of it.

The part that follows the quote to me is telling.

Channel 4, founded by Margaret Thatcher's Conservative government in 1982 to deliver programmes for under-served audiences, is funded by advertising but is publicly owned.

Culture Secretary Nadine Dorries said: "Channel 4 rightly holds a cherished place in British life and I want that to remain the case. I have come to the conclusion that government ownership is holding Channel 4 back from competing against streaming giants like Netflix and Amazon.

"A change of ownership will give Channel 4 the tools and freedom to flourish and thrive as a public service broadcaster long into the future."

A government source said the channel would lose its "straitjacket" but retain its commitment to primetime news programming.

Competing against Netflix and Amazon (and several others) - for that they will need lots of money and will produce 'safe' programmes, programmes that will pull in a big audience. We have these already, and if Dorries thinks that this will help the British programme developing industry, she is mistaken; we'll have even more 'Hollywood' (and I don't mean Paul). I don't have much positive to say about the Thatcher government but the ambition to deliver programmes for those unserved was spot on and deserves praise. And we still need that. Channel 4 tries things - sometimes they come off, sometimes they fail. That's fine, they can afford to fail because there are no shareholders to beat at their door, but occasionally they have an idea that no-one else has thought of, they run it for for a series or two to acclaim but then it is dropped because the script writers have run out of ideas. Across the pond programmes are run for ten, twelve series, long after any innovation has disappeared, until audiences drop and advertisers desert them.

How the hell is the present model 'holding them back'? True they could do with more money - but that comes at a price and, short of treasury money, will give us nothing new!

Unfortunately Dorries champions Johnson at every opportunity so she's here for the long term.

 

[Dai Corner]

Seems like a good opportunity for those who like the channel's programming and political stance to put their hands in their pockets, buy it and ensure it stays that way or moves further in that direction.

"Left-wing Naked Celebrity Attraction' anyone?

 

[najaB]

Seems like a good opportunity for those who like the channel's programming and political stance to put their hands in their pockets, buy it and ensure it stays that way or moves further in that direction.

And if it was being privatised by sale on the stock market I definitely would. However, I fully expect it to be sold, as an entity, to a private consortium.

 

[Dai Corner]

And if it was being privatised by sale on the stock market I definitely would. However, I fully expect it to be sold, as an entity, to a private consortium.

Or you could get together with like-minded viewers and form a consortium to bid?

 

[najaB]

Or you could get together with like-minded viewers and form a consortium to bid?

Unfortunately that is unlikely to be feasible. I would be amazed if the terms of the sale don't include a clause meaning that only organisations with a "proven track record" will be allowed to bid.

 

[scotrail158713]

I know that we can all be resistant to change but even then the saying “if it ain’t broke don’t fix it” does seem particularly relevant here. Channel 4 and All4 is where most of the programmes that I watch come from and change to the current structure seems unnecessary.

 

[Dai Corner]

Unfortunately that is unlikely to be feasible. I would be amazed if the terms of the sale don't include a clause meaning that only organisations with a "proven track record" will be allowed to bid.

So a management buyout with finance from viewers would qualify.

 

[najaB]

So a management buyout with finance from viewers would qualify.

Quite possibly, yes. And I'd be more than willing to chip in.

Edit: Just Tweeted Nadine Dorries to ask if the sale will be public, waiting with baited breath for her not to respond.

 

[SuspectUsual]

Channel 4 is public owned? Never knew!

There was a fair amount about Channel 4 that Nadine Dorries didn't know either, based on her appearance at the select committee, so you're in exalted company

Perhaps we will end up with a Channel 4 that is more balanced, I want entertainment and information that is balanced, however, at the moment, it is so far to the woke left it is in danger of falling off the edge.

Then don't watch it.

 

[Gareth]

I don't think this is as big as some make it out to be. Channel 4 would still be a Public Service Broadcaster like ITV and Channel 5 are, neither of which are owned by the government.

TV's pretty crap these days anyway and Channel 4 hasn't been much cop for me for a good 20 years or so. Back in the 80s and 90s, it had quite a bit of worthy alternative programming on it.

 

[najaB]

I don't think this is a big as some make it out to be. Channel 4 would still be a Public Service Broadcaster like ITV and Channel 5 are, neither of which are owned by the government.

"Owned by the government" really means "owned by the public".

What is the benefit to the public of selling something that we own? How, exactly, is Channel 4 being held back by being owned by us? If Nadine Dorries believes that Channel 4 can compete with the streaming giants, surely it would be better to have the profits coming into the public purse rather than into the pockets of some fat cats... oh, wait, now I see.

 

[Gareth]

Surely the question is: what benefit does owning it have and is it the place for government to own commercial television stations? If the answer is that it should own such things and the benefits are there, then should the other PSB companies be nationalised too?

 

[Dai Corner]

"Owned by the government" really means "owned by the public".

What is the benefit to the public of selling something that we own? How, exactly, is Channel 4 being held back by being owned by us? If Nadine Dorries believes that Channel 4 can compete with the streaming giants, surely it would be better to have the profits coming into the public purse rather than into the pockets of some fat cats... oh, wait, now I see.

She's giving people the choice of owning a share of Channel 4. I have no interest in owning a notional slice of it but you do.

 

[DarloRich]

Perhaps we will end up with a Channel 4 that is more balanced, I want entertainment and information that is balanced, however, at the moment, it is so far to the woke left it is in danger of falling off the edge.

what nonsense. What you call "woke left" is actually holding chancers to account and asking questions that show them up for the liars they are.

The more important question is why don't you want MORE of that? I suspect it is because you only want the media to provide affirmation for your views.

PS: Can you define what "woke left" means in this ( or any) context?

 

[najaB]

Surely the question is: what benefit does owning it have and is it the place for government to own commercial television stations?

The benefit is that it can return money to the Treasury.

If the answer is that it should own such things and the benefits are there, then should the other PSB companies be nationalised too?

No, I'm not in favour of nationalisation of existing private industries.

 

[dosxuk]

I don't have much positive to say about the Thatcher government but the ambition to deliver programmes for those unserved was spot on and deserves praise.

The unsaid bit was that it was also an way of getting broadcasting funds out of the hands of the BBC & ITV companies and into the wider production company market - which many politicians had fingers in. Channel 4 being formed as a publisher broadcaster (they don't produce any programming themselves, it's all made by third party companies), was the start of regulations to open up ITV and BBC production contracts (which eventually leads to the farce these days of BBC programmes being produced by an ITV owned production companies in BBC owned studios, with money going round and round in circles to pay for it and everyone slicing off their bit of profit).

The flip side of course being that by requiring them to produce programming for underserved audiences, it meant that they weren't directly competing for funding against the the ITV companies, thereby protecting the existing interests they had in those companies and fending off any lobbying attempts those companies might take up.

I don't think this is as big as some make it out to be. Channel 4 would still be a Public Service Broadcaster like ITV and Channel 5 are, neither of which are owned by the government.

Channel 5 is owned by Viacom/Discovery. ITV has been fighting off takeover attempts by the big American media conglomerates for decades. There's more chance of a Channel 4 sale ending up in the hands of Disney / Viacom / Netflix / Amazon than there is of it competing against them all. I've not heard many voices calling for more American influence on our media in the UK!

She's giving people the choice of owning a share of Channel 4. I have no interest in owning a notional slice of it but you do.

We already own all of it. She's giving the chance for the mates of the Tory party to sit and collect more public funds. Note that not even the broadcast industry want the channel selling off - literally the only support for the idea comes from Government itself.