Examination of Witnesses
(Questions 140 - 149)
THURSDAY 22 OCTOBER 1998
MR MARK
WOOD, MR
STEWART PURVIS,
AND MR
RICHARD TAIT
140. Have they ever come to you and suggested
one of the channels they might show would in fact be a 24-hour
news service provided by you?
(Mr Purvis) The background to that is that in the
application by SDN, which was a consortium based around S4C, the
Welsh language channel, there was a proposal by ITN for what is
described as an information channel. That is the most advanced
form of both having a video window and having an interactive text
on the screen. Discussions are still continuing with SDN and with
other possible platforms for that service. I personally have a
great passion for that service, I think basically it allows you
to both watch traditional television and get the benefits of an
Internet-style service. It has been quite slow to persuade some
people of its commercial value, but I think I would point to the
fact that our partner in this venture, Teletext, already makes
a substantial healthy profit by providing information services
via your television screen. I think, frankly, we will achieve
this service. There will be people who understand the commercial
benefits and the public information service benefits of having
a fully interactive service. In truth with an existing new channel
like News 24 or Sky News or even the Euro News we operate, we
decide in which order we put the news, and one of the big steps
forward which the Internet offers (and I think digital television
should offer) is the ability to actually select the items in the
order you want and not necessarily the order we give them. That
is why I am a great believer that this information channel should
come about.
141. Presumably it is also offering the background
information as well?
(Mr Purvis) Absolutely. We have all sorts of extra
services which come on the back of that; the ability to eventually
select video. I would mention the people who have not been mentioned
here at all today, particularly in the light of the Chairman's
remark about Mr Murdoch, and that is the cable companies. We are
talking to NTL, we are talking to Cable & Wireless, we are
involved in very advanced ideas with them, which for commercial
confidentiality we cannot reveal, but I think Mr Murdoch will
get an interesting surprise when he sees what cable operators
like those are providing in information services.
142. Are we not really coming to the point which
Mr Keen was referring to, which basically is, as with anything
else on television, whether people watch the news should be a
matter for them and it should not be something which is shoved
down their throats every so often, and therefore there ought to
be several 24 hour news services for people to watch if they want
to and then there are entertainment channels which are designed
for entertainment?
(Mr Purvis) All I would say against that is the concept
of information-rich and information-poor, which has not been mentioned
here today and I thought was an issue close to some people in
the Labour Party; the idea that some of these services we are
talking about are only available to those who can afford to pay
for them and that public television, both the BBC and regulated
commercial television, has a role in providing the public with
information.
143. That is a bit of a myth, because if you
look at the figures, which our Chairman has been quoting at some
length, the drop in the ITV viewing figures is almost exactly
comparable to the growth in the satellite and cable figures, whereas
the BBC have not dropped anything like as dramatically as that.
They are almost exactly analogous. That would suggest in fact
it is ITV that are losing their market to cable and satellite,
and I think probably we could say that the ITV market is marginally
down-market from the BBC, and it would appear that that market
is going down.
(Mr Purvis) Nobody would dispute that ITV and other
broadcasters have lost audience to cable and satellite. The point
I am making is that people are paying for the cable and satellite
services, and I would have thought there was a public interest
in continuing a free-to-air service by the BBC and by commercial
regulated television alongside a paid-for commercial service.
144. A large part of digital terrestrial, once
it comes on stream, will be free-to-air except for buying the
actual box, which will come down in price very dramatically very
quickly. Then the BBC 24 hours new service will be available to
anybody who has that box and will be free-to-air.
(Mr Purvis) All I am saying is that we can argue or
discuss the likely take-up of the box and the price of the box,
but that situation does not exist today, it is not in reality
likely. Why, in a sense, are politicians so slow to decide the
turn-off for analogue? Because they are not sure about the take-up
of these services. Therefore, I would argue, certainly until at
very least the analogue turn-off, these free-to-air services are
a vital part of the public debate on information policy.
(Mr Tait) The research which has been done by us amongst
others shows that the public still very much trusts terrestrial
television news, both the BBC's and ITN's, in moments such as
the Gulf War, at the time of general elections. The research that
NOP did in the 1997 election and I think Gallup did in the 1992
election showed that television news was much more trusted than
newspapers, whether tabloid or broadsheet. So at this stage of
the development of British broadcasting we have an important public
role, and we take it very seriously.
145. I read through the report we did on this
five years ago and I am aware of the dramatic changes which have
taken place in those five years. If you forecast five years forward,
the same changes if not more will take place.
(Mr Wood) There are very great changes but they do
not always change all habits very quickly. I think we have seen
the same thing with newspapers, there were big predictions a few
years ago that the advanced on-line services would make newspapers
redundant. It has not happened, if anything it has bolstered newspaper
circulation in some instances. I think the same thing will happen.
The news bulletins, which are familiar and comfortable, are the
television equivalent. People will go to the brands and the presenters
and the content which they trust and which they are familiar with
and that will last a very long time, I think, even if they have
alternative sources of supply. I think that is why it will still
be an attractive part of an evening schedule for a long time.
Mr Maxton: I do not believe it, but there
we are.
Chairman
146. One final question to each of you. I have
read your letter, Mr Wood, in which you say in the last paragraph,
"ITV's own future development is closely intertwined with
ITV's success. We understand ITV's reasons for the changes."
I would like to ask each of you if your own personal preference
would be to keep News at Ten or not?
(Mr Purvis) I have enormous emotional ties to News
at Ten because I started working in television news 25 years
ago on News at Ten, I have been involved in it directly
and indirectly through all that period, I used to write scripts
for Reggie Bosanquet, and there are all sorts of those landmarks
in one's career. But one has to say that that is a personal view
and one has to look at this professionally and I have to ask myself
in particular three questions. First of all, does the new schedule
threaten the quality of what we do? I do not believe it does.
Secondly, does the schedule meet the licence requirements? It
is really not for us to judge, it is for the ITC to judge, and
I think ITV have a very strong case. Thirdly, and perhaps most
importantly, is it going to allow us to continue to compete vigorously
with the BBC, which is really what we are about, to be blunt?
I think what has been under-played here this morning is the importance
of a half-hour in the early evening whereas at the moment we are
only doing 15 minutes at 20 to 6, which always was an odd length
at an odd time. So I believe we will be more competitive with
the BBC in the early evening. In reality, we are going to be less
competitive in the late evening, but taken on balance I think
it is a neutral position. So weighing all that up, we decided
it was not right for us to try and stand in the way of ITV on
their new schedule.
147. That is not the question I asked you.
(Mr Purvis) I gave you my personal view, which is
that we will be sad to see it go, but we have to be professional
as well.
148. And you, Mr Wood?
(Mr Wood) I am very attached to it as well and it
is a great success, but, on balance, I am convinced by the arguments
for change. I think it is in the commercial interests of ITN to
work with ITV to make that change and, therefore, yes, I support
the proposals for change.
149. Mr Tait?
(Mr Tait) Well, I share my colleagues' and my staff's
enormous attachment to News at Ten and to what it stood
for in ITN as a very important programme on the most watched network
in British television, so personally I regret its passing, but
professionally I am convinced that we have the resources and the
talent in ITN to produce high-quality news programmes for ITV
for whatever schedules they and the regulator determine and my
focus and the focus of the teams who are working on looking at
different schedules will be to make sure that those programmes
work as effectively as they must if the ITC should decide to allow
this schedule change to go through.
Chairman: Thank you very much, gentlemen.
|
