APPENDIX 7
Memorandum submitted by Mr Tim Crook,
University of London
Sources will be indicated in brackets as the
structure of this paper is in the form of a memorandum.
1.1 OBJECTIVES
OF SUBMISSION
This paper concentrates on the cultural and
social value of a mainstream news programme such as News at
Ten and explores the available academic theory which can be
applied to the decision of the Independent Television Commission
to approve the programme's liquidation/abolition as well as ITV's
campaign to change the evening schedule for news.
The paper also examines the social and intellectual
issues which arise out of the decision and the evidence on which
the decision was based. A pilot survey was undertaken to explore
the impact of the programme changes and investigate the claims
by ITV of attitudinal research to the news programme and potential
replacement programming.
1.2 SUMMARY OF
ISSUES RAISED
(a) The ITC approved liquidation of the programme
when all the available evidence indicated public opposition;
(b) Surveying prior to the decision and interpretation
of data was selective;
(c) Subsequent surveying and analysis one
year on is qualitatively different;
(d) A pilot survey, conducted in the four
weeks since the announcement of the new Select Committee inquiry,
within a target audience that ITV asserted the programming changes
would serve, indicates:
1. 76 per cent think the axing of News
at Ten was a mistake;
2. 82 per cent regarded News at Ten
as an important institution in news and current affairs;
3. 44 per cent disagreed or strongly disagreed
with ITV's claim that removing the programme enabled them to schedule
films and programmes which had greater audience/popular appeal.
36 per cent strongly agreed or agreed with ITV's claim;
4. 51 per cent agreed or strongly agreed that
the ITC should compel ITV to restore News at Ten; and
27 per cent disagreed or strongly disagreed with
this suggestion.
The resonance of the News at Ten branding
has also been confirmed by the fact that Sky News has established
its own News at Ten programme between 10 and 10.30 pm since
the change in the ITV schedules.
2.1 SOCIAL AND
CULTURAL IMPORTANCE
OF NEWS AT TEN
The Select Committee in its Ninth Report defined
News at Ten as one of the familiar landmarks on the landscape
of British broadcasting, that television news plays an essential
role in our democracy, the free-to-air mass audience channels
play an essentially important public role in providing such news,
and there is a public interest in there being more than one provider
of television news to a mass audience. (Paragraphs 1 and 3) of
the Ninth Report from the Committee.)
2.2 This definition is reflected in much
of the available theoretical writing by English speaking academics
in media and cultural studies.
It can be argued that News at Ten helped
cement a relationship between media, the ritual of news communication
and reception by audience and a sense of location for the citizen
in a liberal democracy.
2.3 Professor Elihu Katz has emphasised
the importance of "media events" in electronic news.
The focus of a popular and mainstream news programme evokes a
sense of togetherness, and a shared sense of purpose, or common
values. In a liberal democracy the communication of media events
is different from the constructed spectacle of totalitarian regimes
because:
(a) viewers are free to withhold approval
or express dissent;
(b) media events that are reported are not
necessarily supportive of the prevailing consensus or status quo;
and
(c) media events can affirm what ought to be.
2.4 In his essay on The Intellectual
Legacy of Elihu Katz Professor James Curran explains that
Katz understood how mainstream news communications of media events
can "awaken suspended hopes or release submerged social forces
in ways that act as catalysts for change." It can be argued
that Katz's theory affirms that News at Ten played a vital
role in promoting social cohesion by reporting media events which
"counteracted pressures for atomization, privatization and
heedless individualism." News at Ten provided a public
sphere as a domain for public power, deliberation and decision
making. Television news has a ritual role in underpinning the
shared beliefs of a civil society, encouraging a feeling of mutuality
and offering a framework for cultural identity.
(Pages 1 to 19 Curran, James, The Intellectual
Legacy of Elihu Katz in Media Ritual and Identity, ed Tamar
Liebes and James Curran (1998) London, New York: Routledge.
Katz, E (1980) On conceptualizing media effects,
in T McCormack (ed) Studies in Communication, vol,
1. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press. Katz, E (1996a) And Deliver us
from segmentation, Annals of the American Academy of Political
and Social Science 546).
2.5 Reader in Communication Studies at Westminster
University, Paddy Scannell, has written about the philosophy of
"being in dailiness" that professional public service
broadcast news programmes provide audiences. Drawing on the 20th
century writings of Martin Heidegger, Scannell asserts that public
service broadcasting presupposes a "caring" relationship
of broadcasters to citizens as audience. He writes:
"The care structures of news, all geared
to today, contribute to our sense of the eventfulness of days.
Our earlier analysis attended to events as occasional. Things
whose occasionality was the mark of an eventfulness which showed
up against a background of uneventful everyday existence. . .
The care structures of news are designed to routinise eventfulness,
to produce it as an everyday phenomenon every day and thereby
historicising dailiness."
(Page 160, Scannell, P (1996) Radio, Television
& Modern Life, Oxford UK, Cambridge USA: Blackwell Publishers
Ltd.)
2.6 Patricia Holland in The Television
Handbook (1997) London, New York: Routledge, contrasted News
at Ten as "punchy and dynamic in its presentation"
compared with Channel Four News "concerned with analysis
and stresses its overseas reporting" and the BBC which "remains
more traditionalist". Holland writes that "in 1992 News
at Ten, the British news programme with the highest audience
appeal, called in an American consultant to restructure their
bulletins. The set became brighter, the items shorter and more
personal". Audience research had revealed that Trevor McDonald
was the newscaster who had generated the highest confidence within
the audience.
(Pages 180 to 190 Holland, P (1997) The Television
Handbook, London, New York: Routledge.)
2.7 Reader in Media and Communication Studies
at the University of Sheffield, Bob Franklin outlines a much more
critical narrative of the changes in News at Ten in his
publication Newszak & News Media. The Committee's Ninth
Report in Annex 2 demonstrated a fall in viewing figures for News
at Ten from 7,032,000 in 1992 to 5,413,500 in the third quarter
of 1998 which coincided with the introduction of a more popular
and entertaining style of design and content. The Committee's
Report drew attention to the context of the overall decline in
television audiences, and a similar pattern of decline for BBC
news audiences. However, very little research seems to be available
which seeks to explain the decline. Obvious factors could be competition
from an expanding spectrum of television viewing. Mr Franklin's
analysis raises the question that the problem may have been connected
with the change to "tabloidisation" or decline of broadcast
news into a form of "Newszak".
2.8 Franklin reports that a study in 1995
made a longitudinal comparative analysis of News at Ten content
before the 1990 Broadcasting Act and an equivalent sample broadcast
in 1995. The findings revealed a 65 per cent decline in international
news coverage whereas the focus on showbusiness, entertainment
and sport doubled.
(Page 13 Pilling, R. (1995) Changing News
Values in ITN bulletins for ITV unpub. MA thesis, University
of Keele, Department of Politics.)
Franklin develops his concept of "Newszaking"
of News at Ten by quoting a senior broadcasting trade union
official: "there is a more subjective element which is the
packaged and conclusive approach at News at Ten. Every
item has to be snappy, with a beginning, a middle and a very good
end and then move on quickly to the next item to keep people's
attention."
He cites the expressed mission of Channel 5
controller of news, Tim Gardam, to prevent news being "painful"
by offering "less politics and more consumer, sports and
entertainment news". Gardam reportedly said his medium-term
ambition was "beating News at Ten. That's what I want
to be measured against". (Press Gazette, 17 February 1997,
p 1).
2.9 Further characteristics of "Newszak"
according to Franklin are:
(a) the cultivation of newscaster as celebrity;
and
Franklin writes: "the presenter in the
studio gets the latest news from a correspondent live at the scene
of the story; they are typically presented side by side on separate
screens clearly and patronisingly labelled to avoid viewer confusion.
The suggestion implicit in the "two-way" is clear: this
news programme is so up-to-date that the news is happening and
unfolding even as the programme is being transmitted. But too
frequently the journalist outside the studio has little or no
information to add to what the studio presenter has already made
clear."
(Page 12 & 13, Franklin, B, (1997) Newszak
& News Media, London, New York, Sydney, Auckland: Arnold.)
2.10 Franklin charts the tabloidisation
and Newszaking of mainstream ITV news in chapter 12 of his book.
He quotes Marcus Plantin who when appointed network director for
Channel 3 on 30th September 1992, claimed he enjoyed the "black
art of scheduling". In future decisions about programme scheduling,
he committed himself to "placing more emphasis on proven
audience winners". He also quotes from a 1995 speech by Bruce
Gyngell, head of Yorkshire Television, who declared that "the
mass of viewers" are not interested in "serious news"
and declared "to his dying day" he would "use every
effort in my power to have News at Ten moved".
A consideration of the fate of News at Ten
might merit a wider approach when looking at the narrative
of the last 10 years. To what extent did the programme change
in its content between 1990 and its last transmission on 5 March
1999?
How different were the financial and news gathering
resources between 1990 and 1999?
Is there any evidence linking the gradual decline
in viewing with the change in content?
ITV and ITN are now anxious to demonstrate that
spending on news provision is no less than it was when News
at Ten was axed. But all the available evidence of analysing
the political economy of television news provision in English
speaking countries such as the USA and Australia shows that news
has become more profitable in the context of declining and more
competitive audiences because fewer people are being employed,
they are being paid less, and they are being asked to do more.
Franklin reports that ITN had a reduction in
income from ITV of £5 million in 1997. There had been a budget
reduction of £17 million in 1987. He comments: "It is
hard to imagine that such persistent and substantial cuts in budget
can be sustained without injury to the quality of programming."
He mentions that Piling's content study charted a reduction in
the average length of reports from two minutes 10 seconds in 1990
to one minute 45 seconds in 1995. A recent analysis of the new
6.30 pm news which is being presented as ITN's replacement for
News at Ten suggests average length of reports is now at
the 1 minute 30 second point. The new programme also tends to
include at least one live two-way which accompanies a pre-recorded
report on the same subject.
(Pages 252-7, 262 and 265 Franklin, B (1997)
Newszak and News Media, London, New York, Sydney, Auckland:
Arnold.)
2.11 It has been argued that the development
of rolling news satellite services is increasingly rendering structured
and ritually scheduled broadcasting news institutions such as
News at Ten as redundant. However, the depth of investigative
news and current affairs programmes such as This Week and
World In Action, matched the popularity of News at Ten
as a television "institution". These programmes had
cultural resonance and reputation. All three have disappeared
from the geography of British broadcasting. There would be some
merit in following up the pilot survey undertaken for the Select
Committee with a wider survey exploring whether:
(a) World In Action, News at Ten and
This Week have been satisfactorily replaced in ITV's public
service provision on news and current affairs?
(b) Do television viewers perceive a decline
in journalistic values?
(c) Do television viewers perceive an emphasis
on entertainment over information in ITV television news and current
affairs provision?
2.12 A recent paper by Tamar Liebes on Television's
disaster marathons; a danger for democratic process? raises
serious question marks over a reliance on unstructured and "open-ended"
news broadcasting as the main interface between news broadcasters
and the mainstream television audience. Liebes warns that "disaster
marathons" can promote a lynch mentality. She cites her analysis
of the coverage of a series of bus bombings in Israel between
February and March 1996. The open ended nature of broadcast coverage
to a mass audience was characterised by showbusiness tactics in
an intensely competitive and increasingly commercialised industry.
There was an emphasis on:
(a) melodrama by concentrating on the random
mayhem of the events;
(b) filling in the vacuum of quiet moments
with a repetition of the horror of the events being reported;
(c) providing full focus to marginalised
extremists and the grief-stricken families of victims; and
(d) not contextualising or balancing emotionally
charged demands for revenge.
Professor James Curran writes: "This had
the effect of fuelling anger and hatred, blocking out the past,
and short-circuiting rational debate. It also undermined confidence
in public authority, weakened the peace process and propelled
the Government into adopting a more belligerent stance than it
wanted. In essence, an entertainment-orientated form of reporting
elicited a populist political response." It could be argued
that News at Ten through its structured authority and reputation
and the ritual of its position in the schedule had the advantage
of contextualising mayhem and the emotional charge of domestic
and international news events.
(Page 7 and pages 71 to 84 ed. Tamar Liebes
and James Curran, (1998) Media, Ritual and Identity, London
and New York: Routledge.)
2.13 On 7 March 1999, Channel 4 broadcast
an hour long documentary on the history of News at Ten
to mark its significance and its passing from the vista of television
existence. The following points were made by the programme and
participants. They serve as an example of cultural value expressed
from the professional/organisational point of view:
(a) The programme was launched with no inkling
that it would turn out to be so important and popular. (one interviewee
said "there were no, thank God, focus groups in those days
to tell us what the public expected of us");
(b) The programme was radical, pioneering
and dramatic (Trevor McDonald);
(c) It was the news which put the
world to bed at night. (Anna Ford);
(d) The programme had reflected over the
last 30 years the way Britain has changed;
(e) It was a revolution in television broadcasting
in prime time which others tried to imitate (Sir David Nicholas);
(f) When the programme was launched in 1967
ITV bosses thought it was a barrier to successful and popular
scheduling and wanted it scrapped at the end of the first week.
They were convinced it would cause a collapse in viewing;
(g) The programme only survived in the first
two years because it was in the top ten of television ratings.
Otherwise it would have been cancelled;
(h) News at Ten pioneered the "reporter
package" in UK television news, with commentary recorded
in the field. The reporter became key, and reporting became more
informed and "on the spot". (Sandy Gall);
(i) News at Ten" pioneered the
use of satellite transmission in television news;
(j) Investment and news gathering costs were
much higher during News at Ten's heyday. ITN would spend
the equivalent of £100,000 (current value) for 40 seconds
of satellite film in order to secure an exclusive story;
(k) ITN's News at Ten pioneered non
"stage faces" or "actors" as newscasters.
The anvil of communication was the journalist broadcaster—a
programme presented by journalists for the public;
(l) News at Ten had introduced the
idea of reporting a national event in half an hour which had not
been possible before;
(m) News at Ten represented a global
presence in television news gathering which was equivalent to
that of the BBC and the three American Networks, CBS, NBC and
ABC;
(n) News at Ten pioneered the UK reporting
of war in mainstream news provision in locations such as Biafra,
and Vietnam;
(o) News at Ten used to operate in
a climate where news was "beyond price". Accountants
did not present or impose the concept of financial restrictions
on the gathering of news;
(p) There was a clear time when News at
Ten was a public service and not a business;
(q) News at Ten may have been responsible
for establishing the first star/celebrity newscaster in Anna Ford;
(r) News at Ten pioneered the concept
of "the second package" which looked at the impact of
the news event rather than the event itself, exploring in greater
depth the social consequences of news stories;
(s) News at Ten was at the forefront
of using electronic news gathering technology to increase the
speed of television news gathering and circumvent censorship by
governments; and
(t) News at Ten towards the end of
its existence found itself in a completely different context:
more source material for news, cameras were cheaper, and it was
cheaper to send material by satellite, and cheaper to send to
stories and return.
3.1 ANALYSING
THE ITC`S
DECISION TO
"PROVIDE QUALIFIED
APPROVAL TO
NEW WEEKDAY
SCHEDULE ON
ITV"
In November 1998 the ITC approved the liquidation
by ITV of News at Ten although the vocabulary it used was
in terms of approving a package of changes by ITV. However, the
effect was to remove News at Ten as a half hour news programme
at 10 pm on weekday evenings and this represented the liquidation,
the eradication of the nearest ITN news bulletin to compete with
the BBC Nine o'clock news.
ITV had constructed the proposal on the basis
peak-time was between 6 pm and 10.30 pm. ITV argued that switching
ITN's half hour programme to 6.30 pm meant that peak-time provision
was the same but simply scheduled at a different time. The 20
minute ITN news sequence at 5.40 pm would be replaced at 11 pm.
Again the argument was that the news provision was the same but
simply scheduled at a different time.
3.2 The argument proposed by ITV lacks logic
and it could be argued that it has been presented with some conceit.
It is apparent that for the purposes of comparing
competitive ratings the old ITN 5.40 pm news was in competition
with the BBC 6 pm news. News at Ten was always compared
in competition with the BBC 9 pm news. The position of any ITN
bulletin at 11 pm had no competitor and in any case did not exist.
The legal peak-time from the point of view of licence commitments
would appear to have been from 6 pm to 10.30 pm but the actual
peak-time from the point of view of competition between the main
ITV and BBC television channels was between 5.30 pm and 10.30
pm. In the five hour period between 5.30 pm and 10.30 pm BBC1
transmits two half hour news programmes. ITV now only broadcasts
one half hour news programme.
3.3 In an ITN press release for 6 January
1998, ITN emphasised that viewing figures for 1997 showed News
at Ten was watched by an average nightly audience of 6.033
million, and the press release emphasised that this was "exceeding
the Nine o'clock News average nightly figure of 5.441 million
by over half a million viewers. (In 1996 News At Ten's
lead over the Nine was 244,000 viewers)."
The press release stated that this was the sixth
year running that News at Ten had won the battle of the
ratings over the BBC's Nine and on the five occasions in 1997
when the two programmes were broadcast head-to-head, News at
Ten, beat the Nine each time, with ITN averaging a lead over
the BBC for the five programmes of nearly 1.5 million.
3.4 In a further press release at the beginning
of 1999 ITN reported that in its last full year of broadcast,
News at Ten proved itself to be Britain's most watched
prime time national news programme. During the whole of 1998 the
average nightly audience was 5.7 million exceeding the BBC's Nine
o'clock News's average nightly figure of 5.2 million by half a
million viewers.
The press release stated: "This is the
seventh year in succession that News at Ten has come out
a clear winner over the Nine o'clock News, ensuring its place
in broadcasting history as the nation's most popular peak-time
weekday news programme. News at Ten's audience share at
22.00-23.00 in 1998 was 29 per cent compared to that of the Nine
o'clock News, at the earlier time which was 23 per cent."
(Press releases are available at www.itn.co.uk).
3.5 The ITC had clearly decided that it
was approving the eradication of Britain's most popular peak-time
weekday news programme. Furthermore it would appear that it had
decided to abandon the principle of ITV competing with BBC Television
news in peak-time news broadcasting. This is because the approval
did not stipulate any conditions in the test period which were
based on ITV competing with the BBC.
The conditions set out were:
(a) there will be no diminution in the funding,
or in the range and quality of national and international news;
(b) ITV will schedule a regular headline
service in the nearest break to 10 pm on weekday evenings;
(c) the ITC expects ITV's commitment to public
service values to be undiminished and for the more diverse range
of programmes proposed from 9-11 pm to be delivered; and
(d) ITV will schedule an agreed quantity
of 3- minute slots for high quality regional programmes in or
just outside peak-time on weekdays throughout the year.
It is enormously significant that the ITC has
not set out any condition for their qualified approval that requires
ITV to compete with the BBC's main channel over the provision
of news programmes.
The ITC statement issued on 19 November 1998
states that ITV will be required to come forward with remedial
proposals, "in the event that the ITC judges that any of
the conditions outlined above are not being met". An
evaluation of these conditions is much more subjective than an
evaluation of a condition of competition based on BARB survey
viewing figures. Adjectives and adverbs such as "range and
quality" "public service values to be undiminished"
represents the language of rhetoric and not the language of science
or objectivity. ITV had never proposed any diminution of funding.
3.6 The ITC employed "a consultation"
exercise to help it make its decision. This involved on its own
admission:
(a) inviting public consultation which attracted
more than 1,800 responses;
(b) seeking the views of its viewer councils;
(c) commissioning specific audience research
in a representative quota sample of 1,932 adults interviewed in
their homes which was conducted by MORI; and
(d) distributing a self-completion questionnaire
with 7,000 members of the BARB Audience Reaction Service.
The statement of the Chairman of the ITC, Sir
Robin Biggam does not seem to count the Select Committee of Culture,
Media and Sport as any relevant form of consultation despite the
fact that the Committee held a specific inquiry into the issue
stressing it as "The Future of News at Ten". The Committee
took evidence as well as analysed audience figures. The ITC did
not even acknowledge the views of a Parliamentary Select Committee
which consists of cross-party and democratically elected representatives
answerable to constituents.
3.7 It would appear that most credible and
measurable aspects of advice and consultation were opposed to
the removal of News at Ten.
(a) Of 1,806 letters received, 82 per cent
expressed opposition to the ITV proposals.
For some reason the ITC sought to emphasise that
49 per cent of those opposed to the proposals were those who said
they wanted News at Ten to remain where it was and "gave
no specific reason".
Furthermore it is somewhat baffling why the ITC
thought it significant that 49 per cent of those opposed to the
proposals gave no specific reason for wanting News at Ten to
remain where it was. It seems clear that this was their stated
reason for being opposed to the ITV proposals. They wanted News
at Ten to remain. This assertion had no less validity than
those reporting approval for the proposals because they wanted
to see films without a long break.
If you were to ask somebody whether it was a
good idea to keep breathing you would expect the reply to be "yes".
But you would not necessarily expect a reply which then explained
that breathing involved taking oxygen from the air into the lungs
which was then absorbed into the bloodstream to sustain life.
(b) The ITC's Viewer Consultative Councils
"were divided on the issue, though on balance there was rather
more support for the proposals than opposition to them."
It is rather difficult to give this evidence much credence unless
the ITC reports the proper nature of ITC Viewer Consultative Councils.
How representative are they? How many people sit on them? What
are the specific figures that the ITC has to justify their interpretation
of the data. It is somewhat baffling that four out of the five
"typical comments" reported were oppositional rather
than supportive.
(c) The MORI research raised some important
questions. The ITC decided to pose two questions to the interviewees.
The first asked for a response on moving News
at Ten but with the proviso they would get a wider range of
programmes between 9 pm and 11 pm "including drama, films,
documentaries, current affairs, sport and comedy. In addition,
two hour feature films not suitable to be shown earlier in the
evening could be shown without a break for the news".
This is quite an astonishing slant to a question
seeking to analyse public opinion on the eradication of the News
at Ten programme. Furthermore this question and the second
question do not identify the removal of the programme in question
as ITN's News at Ten. It talks about the main news from
10 o'clock being moved. The second question was phrased:
"As you may know, there has been a proposal
that ITV should change its line-up of programmes in the evening.
One part of this would be to move the main news from 10 pm. In
general, how strongly would you support or oppose moving the news
from 10 o'clock to allow ITV to show other programmes?"
Question 1a was akin to asking 2,000 schoolchildren
if on Friday they would like to have their free lunch of poached
salmon, steamed vegetables and potatoes followed by fruit salad,
replaced with cheese-burgers, chips and chocolate cake and cream.
Not surprisingly there was a rather large net
difference in the responses to each question. The ITC seemed to
think this was "a very unusual finding". However the
ITC had to concede after a final question to all respondents:
"On balance, are you personally in favour of
ITV moving its main news from 10 o'clock to 6.30 pm, or would
you prefer News at Ten to remain where it is from Monday
to Friday?"
That "the British public say they would
prefer, on balance, that News at Ten should remain where
it is by a proportion of five to three."
3.8 Sir Robin Biggam said to "inform
our thinking" they had "analysed ITV's performance,
viewing trends and audience availability."
The most reliable data available on viewing
figures is provided by BARB-Broadcasters Audience Research Board
based at Glenthorne House, Hammersmith Grove, London W6 0ND. BARB
audience measuring is much more accurate than radio surveying.
Audiences for TV programmes are measured by electronic meters
attached to television sets in 4,485 homes. This panel, which
is one of the largest of its kind in the world, includes some
10,500 people. The meters record the state of each TV set or video.
The information is transmitted automatically each night by telephone
into a central computer and is used to calculate the size of the
audience. Since 1991, the meters have been able to record video
playbacks.
(Page 263, ed. Peak, S & Fisher, P (1999) The
Media Guide, London: Fourth Estate.)
The Select Committee sought to examine and analyse
the BARB figures in great depth and it does not appear that the
ITC has addressed any of the points made by the Committee's Ninth
Report:
(a) The audience for all of the four major
news bulletins on British television was declining and News
at Ten was not unique with the BBC's Six O'clock News showing
significant falls;
(b) To attract a higher total audience for
news, ITV would need not only to dominate the highly competitive
audience for early evening news, but also establish a new mass
audience for news at 11 pm;
(c) ITV's claim that "we may get a larger
audience" in total for news. . . seems to us to place very
considerable strain on the credulity of the public, of Parliament
and of the ITC;
(d) ITV wanted to attract "a younger,
more metropolitan, more upmarket viewer" which was under
45 and 35 which the Committee said did not advance ITV's case
on public service obligations and was "patronising and offensive";
(e) The ITV proposals would reduce regional
news programmes in peak-time from two to one. This is a reduction
in public service provision to a peak mainstream television audience;
(f) ITV's audience decline for its news programmes,
described by ITV as "terrible" and "rather cataclysmic"
needs to be contextualised via-a"-vis the BBC which has seen
a greater decline for its Nine o'clock News programme;
(g) The Committee noted that the BBC had
responded to audience falls by addressing the content of its news
programmes rather than axing them, or changing the start times;
and
(h) The Committee argued that ITV news scheduling
"has become a convenient scapegoat for other factors behind
ITV's decline".
It would appear that not one of these points
has been considered in the presentation by the ITC of its decision
to give qualified approval for the ITV proposals. The ITC statements
simply "pay lip service" to ITV's arguments for change.
It is astonishing that the ITC with the benefit of surveying (which
the Committee did not have) indicating majority and considerable
opposition to the ITV proposals, went ahead with qualified approval.
However, as the Ninth Select Committee Report
has stated the ITC committed itself in its memorandum to considering
"the ability of news services on ITV to compete effectively
with those of other national news broadcasters". (Paragraph
8, Appendix 2 of the Minutes of Evidence). This commitment does
not manifest itself in the qualified approval given to ITV in
November 1998.
3.9 THE POSITION
OF ITV
ITV's evidence to the Committee was anecdotal,
speculative and somewhat economical with the truth about the context
of its so-called terrible and rather cataclysmic audience figures.
Arguments for attracting audiences at 6.30 pm and 11 pm for news
were based on "attitudinal research which ITV did not offer
to the Committee" (Paragraph 26 of the Ninth Report). It
does seem rather strange that the ITC has undertaken the research
for ITV and provided a positive emphasis of the data in support
of ITV's arguments. For example the Select Committee used the
term "abolishing News at Ten" which in plain
English is what ITV proposed to do. The ITC has not been able
as a matter of basic English vocabulary to express this concept
as it is in fact.
In evidence to the Committee Mr Leslie Hill,
the Chairman of ITV stated that:
"Our modelling, our research, suggests that
with the combination of 6.30 and 11 o'clock the likelihood is
that we will get more viewers for the news and we will be able
to produce a much improved schedule with more viewers between
nine and 11 o'clock, something which we have not even touched
upon."
(Paragraph 71 of the Minutes of Evidence.)
3.10 NEARLY ONE
YEAR ON
The ambitions of ITV do not appear to have materialised.
For the period 8 March 1999 to the end of December 1999 (ITV)
and the entire year (BBC) the audiences for the ITV and BBC1 news
programmes showed the following average rating:
| BBC | 6 pm news
| 6.2 million | 9 pm news |
5.3 million |
| ITN | 6.30 pm news | 5.3 million
| 11 pm news | 3.2 million |
The BBC lead is therefore 3 million viewers.
Since ITV is rather prone to use adjectives such as "terrible"
and "cataclysmic" about their audience figures one wonders
how they would like to interpret this decline in competitive position
with the BBC news audiences.
Whereas before News at Ten was always ahead of the
BBC 9 pm news, now the 11 pm Nightly News is substantially
behind that of the BBC 9 pm news. ITN's 6.30 pm Evening News
was trailing behind the BBC's 6 pm news. The combined differential
of 3 million compares with the previous differential in 1997:
| ITN | News at Ten and 5.40
| 10,740.8 million | BBC |
9 and 6 pm | 11,845.0 million |
In the third quarter of 1998 the differential was:
| ITN | News at Ten and 5.40
| 9,275.4 million | | BBC |
9 and 6 pm | 10,619.5 million |
The BBC's overall lead has therefore climbed from 1,104,200
(1997) and 1,344,100 (3rd quarter 1998) to 3 million in 1999.
An important factor in the audience figures would obviously
be the ITV audience share for the period 22.00 to 22.30. In a
comparison between 1998 and 1999 there has been a reported increase
of 300,000 viewers.
1999 week 10 to week 52: 6.3 million.
A valid question to be raised at this stage is what has been
the price of sacrificing the public interest and public service
of a competitive television news service on ITV for the sake of
an increase of 300,0000 viewers in the period between 10 pm and
10.30 pm or an increase in audience share over a half hour period
of 29.2 per cent to 30.2 per cent?
The price has been a lead by BBC peak-time news programmes
of three million viewers. This amounts to an increase of nearly
200 per cent.
3.11 THE REVIEW
It would appear that the ITC has decided not to commission
another MORI poll or to distribute another questionnaire to the
BARB Audience Reaction Service. The review, according to an interview
conducted with the ITC on Friday 25 February, will be based on
"ratings analysis, analysis of the content of news programmes,
and focus groups."
This is a somewhat surprising approach since the position
would appear to cry out for an equal qualitative analysis to that
undertaken in 1998. Comparisons are difficult to make in the absence
of equivalently extrapolated data and survey information.
3.12 AN ALTERNATIVE
SURVEY
There was an opportunity to launch a pilot survey within
the Higher and Further Education social environment with a predominance
of under 35s and a social profile matching a stated target audience
of ITV in terms of its programme changes. Funding would be needed
to move on to full survey. The pilot achieved 100 responses or
10 per cent of the envisaged full survey.
The sample had a regional spread but 50 per cent were based
in London and the South East.
| Age 15-25: | 32 per cent, |
26-35: | 29 per cent, | 36-50:
| 23 per cent, | 50+ | 16 per cent.
|
The survey asked the following questions. Data of replies
is provided.
| 1.How often did you watch ITN's News At Ten Programme
|
| | |
| Frequently (At least three times a week) |
36 per cent |
| Occasionally (one or two times a week) |
47 per cent |
| Rarely (one or two times a month) | 15 per cent
|
| Never | 2 per cent |
| | |
| | |
| 2.Do you think axing ITN's News At Ten was a mistake?
|
| | |
| Strongly Agree | 36 per cent
|
| Agree | 40 per cent |
| Don't know | 15 per cent |
| Disagree | 8 per cent |
| Strongly Disagree | 1 per cent
|
| | |
| | |
| 3.How often do you watch ITN's Eleven o'clock News programme which replaced News at Ten?
|
| | |
| Frequently (At least three times a week) |
2 per cent |
| Occassionally (one or two times a week) |
20 per cent |
| Rarely (one or two times a month) | 39 per cent
|
| Never | 39 per cent |
| | |
| | |
| 4.ITV claimed that removing News At Ten enabled them to schedule films and programmes which had greater audience/popular appeal. Do you
|
| | |
| Strongly Agree | 4 per cent |
| Agree | 32 per cent |
| Don't know | 20 per cent |
| Disagree | 35 per cent |
| Strongly Disagree | 9 per cent
|
| | |
| | |
| 5.Did you regard News At Ten as an important institution in news and current affairs?
|
| | |
| Strongly Agree | 40 per cent
|
| Agree | 42 per cent |
| Don't know | 13 per cent |
| Disagree | 4 per cent |
| Strongly Disagree | 1 per cent
|
| | |
| | |
| 6.Do you think ITV should be compelled to restore ITN's News At Ten?
|
| | |
| Strongly Agree | 22 per cent
|
| Agree | 29 per cent |
| Don't know | 22 per cent |
| Disagree | 25 per cent |
| Strongly Disagree | 2 per cent
|
| | |
| 7.Why? | |
Answers to this question varied considerably: Written answers
are self-contained in quotation marks.
"The days of a regulator dictating detailed programming
policy to commercial operators are surely gone. This practice
was legitimate when there was a commercial monopoly but in a multi-channel,
multi-company/competitive environment it is putting an unfair
restriction on one sector."
"Two issues here: Many families in Britain now have
two parents working. The parents work later hours in some cases
but even if they don't, the family is occupied unitl after 9 pm
with chores, homework, meals, telephone calls. The long commuter
run in London particularly but elsewhere contributes. If the BBC
9 o'clock is missed (which it often is in our home) for
the reasons above News At Ten was the final opportunity
to catch up with the day's news.
I often find myself in the classroom first thing in the day
not knowing how a story has developed or in some cases not aware
of its existence, if it is a story which broke late and did not
make the morning headlines.
Having worked a long day and then cared for children plus
home chores I am normally in bed by 11 pm missing the 11 pm news.
The 6.30 pm with Trevor McDonald is too early—never seen."
"I am happy with later scheduling as its fits in with
my lifestyle and is a lighter alternative to Newsnight and
it gives ITV more scope for running post-watershed films from
9 pm."
"Although I don't necessarily believe News at Ten
should have remained unchanged, it was vastly superior to
anything that has followed it and ITV should be ashamed of some
of the programming. I now feel passionately that someone has to
draw the line before we are `dumbed to death.'"
"News at Ten was a meeting place for a mass audience
in television news. The BBC News has no competition between 7
pm and 11 pm."
"News At Ten interrupted films, and I can see
the news later or hear it on the radio."
"Been done, been axed. . . Time for something innovative."
"It's very difficult to replace flagship programmes.
The News at Ten format was thorough and an unchanged resource
for many for numerous years."
"Not compelled. Question of thin end of the wedge of
state telling broadcasters what to do. They are in the independent
sector and one can't justify telling them when to schedule news.
They are making a mistake, and it will perhaps help the BBC and
do them a disservice. They may realise. But in the long run it
is an impoverishment of British broadcasting. I now watch BBC
News 24 instead. But of course, it costs me, since there is
very little else on OnDigital to justify the subscription, but
it is an interesting exercise to flick through the channels and
see the lack of choice that 20 or more channels can offer. I suspect
it is an indication that generalist channels are being eroded
by specialist ones like BBC News 24 which will turn out
to be a great investment by the BBC."
"I think schedulers, for better or worse, should operate
free of outside interference".
"It is important to have news but not necessarily at
10 pm I hate institutions—they're for lunatics—which
I may or may not be. Programmes should not be dictated. It sets
a worrying precedent."
"Not that I think they will be compelled by regulators.
I'm more convinced that the awful viewing figures for the 11 pm
will persuade them to bring it forward. But of course there should
be some much stronger competition with the BBC's flagship bulletin.
And from ITN's point of view I think they need the spur of competing
more directly with the 9 o'clock to remind themselves of the value
of serious, non-tabloid journalism— such as they currently
display in the dismal Tonight."
"If we think news is important because of its function
in providing information to citizens in order that they can make
informed decisions and participate in the democratic life of the
nation-state, then the belief in democratic practice underlying
this proposition hardly squares with a notion of `compulsion'.
Moreover, it seems to me that ensuring a plurality of voices and
encouraging a commitment to independent journalism is of more
importance than fetishising a particular slot in the schedules."
"Although the programme is being trivialised I believe
it just to be following the trend toward extra profit and the
`pleasing' of as many as possible. The new slot does provide opportunities
for entertainment and personally I prefer radio news, which I
get throughout the day—if I want news in the evening, my
option is Newsnight."
"It was a public service institution and served a good
purpose in bringing news coverage to a large audience".
"It was at the right time and had exactly the right
kind of coverage that is necessary. It was also much better than
either Beeb programme."
"ITV should be allowed to decide their own schedules
with the commercial audience in mind. However, I would say that
they've not lived up to their promises. I rarely see programmes
that could not have been fitted around News At Ten."
"To be a mainstream commercial TV news flagship at a
peak-time, an alternative to BBC news at 9 pm is important."
"News At Ten used a different insight to the
analysis of news than the BBC. It seems also to have had more
feature led style."
"It was an excellent time for the majority of professional
viewers with family commitments."
"Showing films with a 30 minute news programme in the
middle is stupid. The ads are bad enough. Whether it is news at
10, news at 10.20 or news at 11.05 doesn't matter, so long as
the time slot is regular and published and doesn't vary or sometimes
change from published schedules."
"Audience rating isn't everything all the time. News
At Ten was informative, simple yet effective. It made the
news simple."
"It hasn't worked for them. They have lost a large number
of viewers to SkyTV and BBC."
"I don't think legislation should be used in this way."
"I have got used to it not being there. Anyway, it now
allows me to watch the Channel 5 film, which I have since discovered."
"11 pm is too late in the evening, while one hour's
postponenent is too little to allow anymore substantial programmes
to go in."
"I personally think that Channel 4 and BBC news are
better and when programmes were split up before in order to show
the news on ITV it was hugely irritating."
"I don't think that it would be correct to have a complete
turnaround at such an early stage. Though I disagree that shifting
the news from 10 o'clock enabled ITV to put on popular programmes
(as they used to show films between 8-10 pm which was successful)
I don't think it would be sensible to reverse the decision. Generally,
I feel 11 o'clock is a strange time to have a news programme,
as people might be going to bed around this time but equally I've
found it can be useful if you're just coming back from the pub.
It's popularity might increase given time."
"Early evening news is at a time when many stories are
still breaking and little time is given for reflection or intelligent
comment. The Tonight With Trevor McDonald programme is
little more than a British version of the American Sixty Minutes
which has a tendency to go for more dramatic, less intelligent
documentaries and stories."
"It is important to have a standard time for news and
current affairs as the majority of people get their information
from television news. However, it does not have to be specifically
at 10 pm if a film is scheduled at that time."
"I think that ITN's news should be placed in slots as
close as possible to prime time. Especially since ITN's newsroom
does offer one of the most in depth and complete coverages of
important political issues."
News At Ten was something of an institution and it
also represented a dedication to news and current affairs in ITV's
increasingly commercial output."
"The ITC has a responsibility to ensure that news output
is not sacrificed for purely commercial reasons—to gain
audiences. In general, `news' is usually marginalised whenever
Channel controllers have a preoccupation with entertainment."
"We need news at 10 o'clock. I do not mind whether it
is Channel 4, ITV or BBC. I do not think it's an advantage that
ITV reduces its news output. Although they claim they haven't,
I think they did."
"The 11 o'clock news is too brief and trivial. The 10
o'clock news had a stamp of ITN authority on it. As well as a
little entertainment. If you miss the nine o'clock , the 10 o'clock
was only an hour away. Now to wait until 11 o'clock is too long
and it's not worth the wait. It's too short and too "shiny".
I would be very pleased to see the return of the 10 o'clock news
for the same duration of 30 minutes. I feel it would give ITN
a whole lot more credibility."
"11 pm is late for someone who enjoys sleeping. Watching
the news shouldn't feel like a duty. Waiting till 11 pm makes
it seem more like one. 10 pm is a more civilised time—either
the end of your night (before bed) or the beginning (before clubbing).
I'd see more news if it was restored to 10 pm.
"News At Ten had become part of many people's
daily routine: at the end of the evening, before they go to bed,
they want a roundup of the day's news stories. 11 o'clock is too
late."
"With hourly news on all channels, the significance
of News At Ten is not as great. There is nothing more annoying
than having a break for news during a film."
"Compelled is rather a strong term. I would like them
to reflect on the opinion of the viewing public and re-assess
their programming strategy to see if it matches."
"Informed people is a key way in which television serves
the needs of the democratic system. And the shift reduces the
democratic voice of ITV by shrinking the audience and prime time
availability of news."
"I regret the demise of News At Ten. I think
it has reduced access to news but I am not sure a commercial company
can be compelled to show news at a particular point in the timetable."
"It was a particularly useful slot to bring forward
a running story from the BBC news at 21.00. Also, although we
were promised films in the 21.00 to 23.00 slot, they do not seem
to have materialised. The couple of times I've watched the 23.00
news on ITN, I felt the standards—editorial and journalistic—
had dropped significantly."
"News At Ten was a good time to review the day's
events. For people with children 11 pm is just a bit too late.
Besides I haven't noticed any good films on."
"ITV viewers have votes and there are a lot of them.
The idea of a significant section of the population having no
regular access to news and current affairs is worrying for democracy."
"What has replaced it is crap. The news and editorial
values of the new programme are much worse than many comparable
programmes in the USA—hardly the home of Grade `A' newscasts.".
"The issue is far more complex than just about one programme,
but about the whole question of how we run TV. In isolation, I
don't think it matters that much beyond the symbolic."
"Unless the Government of the day changes its mind on
broadcasting policy, it's inappropriate for broadcasters to disregard
the spirit if not the letter of the law under which they obtained
their franchises. The real confusion came from Thatcher's gross
interference in the re-franchising process. Perhaps the lesson
is for the ITC to make sure their frameworks are less easily abandoned."
"I think they will bring themselves back to an earlier
schedule by default. I'm in bed by 10.30 most nights so whether
it's a film or a news bulletin is immaterial to me. I'm sure I'm
not alone among working adults.
But just because audience figures decline for news it doesn't
mean that interest is waning.
I would like to see a cross-industry digital news channel,
where you could sort and view by story—as is possible with
newspapers and the Internet. Viewers could then select different
reports from different providers to get an overall view—something
which is getting increasingly important with the BBC making unified
reports for all platforms (listen to the 6 pm radio news then
watch the TV and you'll get the same thing). This is very worrying—far
more worrying than the timing of News At Ten. The debate
should move on to argue for a wider spread of news coverage."
3.13 COMPOSITION OF
THE ITC
Has the ITC effectively sought to preserve the public interest
in maintaining a competitive playing field for ITV news programmes
with the BBC? It would help to inspire public confidence if Commission
members included the presence of substantial journalists or individuals
who had experience and an understanding of upholding qualitative
public service traditions in journalism. None of the potted biographies
of Commission members on the ITC web site appear to provide any
indications at all of significant journalistic background. The
Commission is dominated by business people and academics. There
is a theatre director and a former Director General of the BBC
whose role in the Corporation had been primarily in the field
of finance and accountancy. Michael Shea is described as a "writer
and broadcaster" but does not include any indication of journalism
in his description.
3.14 BACKGROUND OF
KEY ITV PERSONNEL
AND INDEPENDENCE
OF ITN
What about the key figures leading the ITV move to eradicate
News at Ten?
Chief Executive Richard Eyre's background was in advertising
and business expansion with little track record in editorial and
public service programming.
Kate Stross, the Finance and Development Director, has negligible
public service editorial experience with a background emphasising
finance and strategic management.
To what extent is ITN an independent voice in this issue
capable of asserting the public interest and public service role
of the old News At Ten programme? ITN became a profit generating
independent production company in the 1990s and it is controlled
by shareholders which have a considerable agenda in relation to
the ITV programme change proposals. There might be a disincentive
for ITN management personnel to publicly challenge the aspirations
of the company's major shareholders with respect to ITV schedules.
3.15 CONCLUSIONS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS
It can also be argued that the public interest has hardly
been served by the rest of the media in relation to this issue.
The Media Correspondent for The Times, Ray Snoddy, offered
the following comment:
"the harrumphing of a few newspaper columnists bemoaning
the death of public service broadcasting as we know it, the life
went out of the (News at Ten) row remarkably quickly. There
were no marches to save News at Ten."
The evidence available seems to indicate considerable public
opposition and disquiet. There were no marches but there was certainly
a powerful expression of public opinion. The arguments advanced
by ITV and the ITC's justification for qualified approval raise
more questions than they answer. The issues are rooted in audience
trends and professional organisational changes at ITN which stretch
back further than a decade.
There is certainly a need to expand the field of research
and enquiry not only into public opinion about "Whatever
Happened to News at Ten" but the role of the existing legislation
and regulatory bodies to maintain public service principles in
UK independent broadcasting.
March 2000
| 
