Examination of Witnesses (Questions 60
- 79)
THURSDAY 2 MARCH 2000
MR MARK
WOOD, MR
STEWART PURVIS,
AND MR
RICHARD TAIT
60. If there is really a public service remit,
if there is truly a news, then News at Ten should come
back. That is not your problem but that is the dilemma that is
out there currently. Is the problem that ITN sees itself that
ITV may well decide not to award the contract for news to you
in the future and therefore you have to become more independent
because not all of your shareholders are shareholders in ITV any
more and therefore you are moving to a global position like CNN
and like the BBC? Is that a weakness you see in the future for
ITN?
(Mr Wood) I think we are doing what we need to do,
which is to position ITN well for the future. We have announced
the launch of a digital news channel. We have done a lot of other
things, including building up our web news activities and controlling
euro news. Altogether we are positioning ITN to be a vibrant news
provider in the future and to be a strong competitor to the BBC.
We have the full support of the ITV shareholders in doing that.
They see these activities are complementary. The strong foundation
of ITN is the ITV schedule and ITV business and we have to position
ITN for other platforms, the digital platform and the Internet,
which we are doing. The two help each other. ITV wants ITN to
be a successful news service outside the ITV remit.
61. Do you feel that what is required of a journalist
for a 6.30 news and an 11 o'clock news is actually quite different,
it is more populist at 6.30, it is more straightforward at 11
o'clock, and in a sense a depth of argument and a depth of journalism
is changing as a result of the way you have moved the news?
(Mr Tait) I am not sure I agree with that. If you
look at our coverage of Mozambique—
62. It is easy to look at Mozambique because
it is hot.
(Mr Tait)—or Kosovo or any of the major stories,
what we said [is] we could achieve in October 1998 was that the
change in the schedule would not affect our commitment to high
quality news, it would not affect our commitment to foreign reporting,
political reporting and to having the best correspondents we have
seen not just in Mozambique with Mark Austin and Robert Moore
but also in Kosovo with Julian Manyon and Bill Neely and the rest
of our team. You have seen the continued commitment, notably on
the Nightly News, which is a shorter programme than the
News at Ten was—which has incidentally been extended
by ITV for the last few nights because of the importance of the
story—we have not just shown the sensational pictures which
everyone has seen around the world of these dramatic helicopters,
which are our pictures shot by our crews, but we have also had
the analysis of how logistics are working, how the rescue operation
is being co-ordinated, how the world community—which has
been moved by those pictures which we first showed—is mobilising
our effort with the aid agencies. I do take issue with the idea
that we have abandoned our commitment. That was certainly a fear
when we came to this Committee, and we discussed it, that there
would be, in that terrible American phrase, dumbing-down. I can
assure you that there is no dumbing-down at ITN. We are not in
any way abandoning the commitment to high quality news that the
News at Ten encapsulated.
Derek Wyatt: It is great to hear that.
Ms Ward
63. You are putting a completely different argument
to the questions that we are putting. You are arguing about the
quality. I do not think any of us is saying that the quality has
gone down. The quality of the news is still superb. The issue
is about the time. No matter how good the news programmes are,
if your regular bedtime pattern is to go to bed before 11 o'clock
and you are not available to watch the news in the early evening
you will not see the good programmes, irrespective of how good
they are. Can you focus your argument, for a moment, on to the
issue of timing. If you take out the issue of the quality of the
programmes, what effect do you think that timing, purely timing,
has had upon the viewing figures?
(Mr Purvis) If you look at the figures in terms of
how many people are watching television at various times, people
are beginning to turn off from about 10 o'clock onwards and they
are turning off in particularly large numbers from about 10.30
onwards. Obviously there are less people watching television at
11.00 than there are at 10.30. To change people's habits is an
extraordinary big task. In Canada the main evening news is at
11 o'clock in the evening and nobody finds that unusual. In fact
there is a pattern on ITV now which is broadly in line with most
of the developed English speaking world, by which I mean the United
States, Canada and Australia. 6.30 pm and 11.00 pm are pretty
much the basic times. It has not been a tradition in Britain and
changing traditions takes time. I agree with you that timing means
that less people are watching the 11 o'clock News compared
to the News at Ten. That is not the only criteria but on
that criteria that need not be the situation forever. News ratings
do go up, they do not just go down. Channel Four news ratings
have gone up on a decade ago, ITV Lunchtime News ratings
have gone up on a decade ago, euro news ratings have gone up since
we took over, LBC ratings have gone up, News Direct ratings have
gone up. You can actually put ratings up, we are not in terminal
decline about news watching here. We believe we can build these
figures back and these viewers are not lost forever.
64. You are making comparisons with America
or with any of these other countries where, perhaps, news programmes,
because of the diversity of channels, means that news is available
all through the day at different times, much more than the access
for most of my constituents who will not have the ability to view
news at any time that they want but will want to watch the main
news programmes on the main channels.
(Mr Purvis) Without going into all of the detailed
specifics of the countries I mentioned—obviously there is
a lot of television in the States—the pattern of news viewing
has not changed dramatically in terms of the main programmes and
the flagship news. The pattern remains that in commercial television
in most of the English speaking, developed world 6.30 pm and 11.00
pm are the accepted times for commercial news.
(Mr Wood) I have two points to make. The reason we
were focusing a bit on quality was because that was an issue last
time when we appeared before this Committee. It is important to
stress that we do not think there is an issue there now. Secondly,
on the figures, ITV have had a number of problems with their schedules
and one of the problems was the loss of viewers in the 10.00 pm
to 10.30 pm slot. It is a much more satisfactory position now
for us to be in a position where we have growing audiences for
news programmes and strong audiences at 6.30 pm, which is growing
very healthily, rather than to be responsible for parts of the
schedule which were showing decline and causing problems. In that
context we are in a healthier schedule overall, if you like, and
we are in a very important part of it. Overall the trends are
going in the right direction for us.
65. You are in a healthier schedule if you take
the overall viewing figures for ITV, you are not in a healthier
schedule if you take the viewing figures for ITN programmes, because
viewers have fallen and that really affects your production, not
just ITV?
(Mr Wood) Correct. The figures are changing and as
we have said a number of times here—this is a huge change
and it will take a long time for a change of this scale to settle
down and for viewers to become accustomed to the new schedule.
It is beginning to happen, but a year is not a long time. Other
professionals would say the same thing.
66. Could you give an estimate of how long it
will take?
(Mr Wood) I think Leslie Hill has made comments which
cover that and he is far better informed than I am. I do not know
if anybody else has a view.
Chairman
67. When you are talking about audiences—I
must confess I am baffled about some of the things you are saying—you
talk about the extraordinary audiences for Channel 3. In fact
Channel 3's audience between 6.00 and 10.30 pm between March and
December of last year, which is quite a long period to measure,
fell from 36.8 per cent to 36.2 per cent. Channel 3's audience
is consistently outperformed by the two BBC channels, and BBC1,
which is your nearest rival, is 6.3 per cent behind you compared
with 6.1 per cent for the News at Ten before it was abolished.
None of that strikes me as extraordinary in anyway whatsoever.
If you look at the 7 pm to 11 pm figures they are comparable.
If you are talking about your growing audience for your evening
bulletin, in view of the fact it is now in the peak hour and it
was not then, that is not surprising, but on the other hand the
gap between you and the BBC 6 o'clock News continues to
be very wide.
(Mr Purvis) The two points I would make are, first
of all, to say that by whatever measure you compare the performance
in 1998 and 1999, the sliding audience in ITV has been halted.
Whether you regard these figures as stability, an increase or
decrease compared to previous years, these are good figures and
the advertising industry is pleased with them, which means more
advertising on ITV, which means more money spent on programmes.
One of the other matters that I would point out, for instance,
on the ITV figures was that you will notice how there was a decline
in the 6.30 News during the summer but actually how it
has built back. In August, for instance, it was 4.9, built up
to 5.5 in October, 5.9 in November and in January it actually
got to 6 million. Quite simply our target is to make the 6.30
News the most watched television news programme in Britain,
and we believe that is a realistic target over the next few years.
68. It does not seem to me you have any hope.
In every single month between April and January ITV have provided
us with figures and every single month between April and January,
which means the fluctuation is taken account of, the BBC 6
o'clock news has substantially outperformed your bulletin—for
January it was 900,000 ahead. Good luck to you if you feel you
can overtake that.
(Mr Purvis) I am old enough to remember when Lunchtime
News at the BBC had 2-3 million more viewers than ITN and
the gap is now down to less than a million. You can have shifts
in audiences of that over a period of time, you will get odds
and ends happening over a period of months. We are building that
audience back, as is shown in the figures. I have to say, the
ITV schedule did change in January, there is a change in some
regions at 5.30, which is getting a stronger inheritance to local
news at 6.00, which is getting a stronger encouragement to us
at 6.30. I hope that the same thing can begin to happen at 11.00
with the new schedule there.
69. You are saying, Mr Purvis, that when the
figures suit you a single monthly figure could be cited as evidence.
(Mr Purvis) You would never commit that sin yourself,
Mr Chairman?
Chairman: I am a politician, you are
a journalist.
Mr Faber
70. Can I briefly repeat the questions to you
which I asked ITV before you. We have had the submissions from
Sir Alastair Burnet and Sir David Nicholas. Are they still seen
around the office at all?
(Mr Purvis) I see Sir David Nicholas socially all
the time and I recognise Sir Alastair Burnet's typewriter.
71. The point is that they are very well respected
names in ITN's history. They are clearly very concerned about
the effect that the changes have had on ITN. That is what they
are worried about, reducing the intake of promising young journalists
and being deliberately disassociated from the news being delivered.
Can you deal with the latter first, that is something which ITV
readily acknowledged was happening?
(Mr Purvis) Basically ITV is in a period of transition.
We are in two parts of an organisation, one part is producing
what we call "own-label news", in other words we are
making news for channels under their brand. That is really why
ITV fell in line with Channel Four and Channel 5 who wanted their
name on the brand. At the same time we are developing a whole
series of news service under the ITN bracket. At the moment you
are not seeing many of those unless you look at the ITN website.
From the launch of the ITN television news to whole series of
other things about to be announced you will suddenly see ITN emerge
in its own brand. That, I think, is a very, very exciting future
for ITN. That takes a bit of explaining to people working in the
organisation who have seen these kind of numbers—I actually
have a meeting at lunchtime today to begin to try to explain this
transition. I think there is a very exciting future for ITN but
I can understand how some external people and some distinguished
former editors and indeed some ITN staff do not quite understand
the transition that is going on.
72. What you are saying is that as management
you are prepared to trade, perhaps, a slight diminution of your
coverage, of your branding, on your existing news programmes for
the exciting new times ahead in competing with News 24, CNN and
Sky News.
(Mr Purvis) There is a certain amount of trade going
on, but I have to say that every supplier must accept that if
the customer is paying you a multi-million pound contract it must
have a say in what that product is called. The principle of supplying
news to other channels under the label and under the brand of
those channels goes back to Channel Four News in the early
80s and, in a sense, ITV is falling into line with that. We have
achieved a co-branding, if you like, the ITN brand still appears
prominently on ITV News, the two brands stick together well, and
it also enables us to use that as a platform developing ITN own
brand products.
Chairman
73. I do not think it was any secret that when
you appeared before us originally in the first inquiry into this
you were perhaps a bit lukewarm as an organisation about the removal
of News at Ten. You obviously had to be careful with your
words. You were a bit lukewarm. You seem much more confident today
about what has happened in spite of the fact that your own ITN
viewing figures have dropped as a result of this, and dropped
quite drastically.
(Mr Purvis) Can I explain that the Chairman and I
have spent the past year working on the future of ITN, not the
past of ITN. We see a very exciting future for ITN across a whole
range of platforms. We are making announcements this week about
our developments in the United States, we have turned Euro News
around from a completely broken back organisation into one of
Europe's biggest news channels, etc, etc. People are not aware
of all these facts but we will make them aware of those facts,
that is why we are bullish and that is why we would like to be
put this ITV situation into context. Of course ITV is our biggest
contract, of course it is our access to a mass audience. It is
early days and we are also working on others ways of putting our
share of News Voice, as we call it. There are other ways of reaching
the British public other than ITV and we are working on that.
(Mr Wood) ITN have successfully launched two entirely
new news programmes in the ITV schedule, which is quite some achievement,
I think. It has attracted strong audiences to them and given them
character in a relatively short time. That is why, I think, there
is enthusiasm among the staff at ITN who have produced these programmes
and are very, very proud of them and should be.
(Mr Tait) Could I add on this issue, there was a real
concern in this room and there was a real concern at ITN that
these changes might result in the diminution of our policy and
our commitment to serious television journalism. I think we have
demonstrated, and I am very pleased to hear that members of the
Committee feel, that we have not gone away from our traditional
commitment to high quality television news, and therefore the
changes in the schedule have not had any impact on what we do
on the screen. Again, that adds to our confidence that we have
a journalistic base to develop ITN into the new world of digital
television.
Miss Kirkbride
74. Can you tell us about your financial relationship
now with ITV, what kind of funding you get from them and how that
has changed over the last few years?
(Mr Purvis) It has not particularly changed. From
the moment when there was a new ITV and an ITN as a result of
the Broadcasting Act there was a five-year contract that was put
in place between ITV and ITN. We are now basically in the middle
of another five year contract and that price increases each year
via the retail price index, so we have a good long-term position.
We know where we stand, we know how much money there is to spend
and we are always looking ahead to the end of the next contract
and the contract beyond that. It gives us a base to develop all
of these other services. If we did not have this strong base with
ITV we would not be able to develop these other services, which
is really a part of our public policy role to provide competition
with the BBC on a whole series of platforms. By the end of the
year you will see us competing with the BBC on every platform.
In fact we are ahead of the BBC on mobile phones, we are ahead
of them on palm pilots, we are ahead of them in America, but we
do need that continuity and that stability and the ITV contract
to provide that non-BBC voice. News-gathering costs, I am happy
to reveal, are going down rather than up. At the start of the
contract we had, I think, about one or two satellite trucks at
the most and we now have eleven satellite trucks around the United
Kingdom. They are fired up the whole time, they were firing up
this morning for GMTV's coverage of Pinochet. We have been able
actually to put more people into the field, more people into satellite
trucks, more people into Mozambique helicopters with just the
retail price index.
75. I do not watch the 11 o'clock News,
it is too late for me. Has the actual amount of air time that
you go out for changed?
(Mr Purvis) The contract allows for a certain flexibility
of minuting.
76. You are not paid on that basis. You have
had no diminution in the amount of money you are giving.
(Mr Tait) We are paid a flat fee, we have to be because
we have to plan ahead. The capital investment that Stewart Purvis
mentioned in satellite trucks is obviously essential for the immediacy
of news, and all of the modern digital equipment we installed
at ITN to make us the most efficient news organisation as well
as the best news organisation in Britain has come from the fact
we have the security of a long-term contract and we can therefore
make plans and make capital investments and recruit and retain,
as you mentioned, very good quality staff.
77. The next renewal of that contract would
be when?
(Mr Purvis) In about a year and a half.
78. What about special projects?
(Mr Purvis) There are more special programmes now,
we are still doing general election programmes, we are still doing
budget programmes, we are still breaking news stories. We also
have a relationship with the Tonight programme, which is
primarily produced by Granada—we are partners with Granada—and
tonight you will be able to see a ten minute report from Mozambique
by Mark Austin, which is a classic example of ITN news and current
affairs working together. We have the resources and the people
on the ground, we have the reporter who, in a sense, broke the
story and has been running with the story since Sunday and there
will be a chance to see a long-form version of that, a current
affairs film, if you like, tonight at about 10 o'clock.
79. Are these all sold as separate projects
as part of your core contract?
(Mr Tait) It is not part of the core contract.
(Mr Purvis) There was never any structure in the past
for how that could ever have happened, that just could not have
happened.
|
