Memorandum submitted by the Alliance of
Black Media Professionals
BACKGROUND TO
THE ABMP
The ABMP—Alliance of Black Media Professionals—is
an organisation comprised of actors, producers, directors, writers,
casting agents and technicians of black African heritage who have
worked for all the major British broadcasters and film institutions
over the past two decades.
As a direct result of these professional experiences,
the members of the alliance have come to recognise that while
a small (but significant) increased ethnic and cultural diversity
has been achieved across British film and television as a whole,
there are still major issues relating to the crucial fields of
representation, production and funding, and commissioning/decision-making
that have yet to be properly addressed.
The ABMP was formed to address and bring about
changes regarding this situation through consultation with broadcasters,
funding bodies, industry organisations and relevant Government
bodies. We have prepared a series of strategy documents and embarked
on meetings with key figures within the film and television industries
with a view to pressing for changes that are considered by many
in broadcasting and the country at large to be long overdue.
THE ABMP'S
AIMS
Through discussion among its members, consultation
with outside media bodies and individuals, and drawing on a wealth
of statistical reports and surveys, the ABMP has drawn up a series
of strategy documents outlining our position on and proposed solutions
to the problems of a true and fair reflection of cultural diversity
(both on-screen and off) by the publicly-funded film and broadcasting
organisations. These documents have thus far been made available
to the BBC, Channel Four, The Film Council and Ofcom, with whom
we have also held initial meetings. We also hope to have the documents
publicly available on our website: www.abmp.org.uk in the near
future.
A copy of our submission to the DCMS inquiry
on the BBC Charter Renewal is attached (not printed).
In brief, the ABMP's aims are:
— The ring-fencing of funds and commissioning
to ensure the creation of black-instigated projects.
— A clearer definition of black-instigated
projects (writer, producer or director of black origin and at
least 40% of the production crew).
— The appointment of senior commissioning
executive(s) and/or department to ensure compliance with these
proposals.
Whilst this strategy broadly encompasses the
media as a whole, we believe it has special relevance for the
BBC as the major public service broadcaster in this country.
Our attached DCMS submission (not printed)
provides further analysis of our position regarding the BBC. However,
its primary purpose is to address failures and possible solutions
within the organisation as currently constituted, and therefore
while it hints at long-term trends and developments, it does not
specifically address itself to the broader question of the future
of the BBC as defined by the committee.
To this end, we have provided an initial response
to the Committee's main lines of inquiry below:
Given expected growth in digital TV and likely
developments in the internet and other new media, what scope and
remit should the BBC have?
As stated in our strategy documents, the ABMP
believe that the BBC still provides a valuable role as this country's
primary public service broadcaster—a window on Britain if
you like—and that unless technological developments so fragmented
and reduced its audience as to make the notion of a universally
licence-funded broadcaster untenable, we see reason why its current
scope or remit should fundamentally change. If anything, its remit
to provide diversity (both on-screen and off) should be strengthened,
with greater transparency, accountability and sanctions for non-compliance.
Though we may differ politically, we share the view expressed
by the Broadcasting Policy Group that the "unfashionable"
yet accurate definition of public service television is one of
"what the market cannot or will not provide". We believe
the BBC should be protected from attempts (both internal and external)
to justify its licence fee by neglecting or abandoning certain
"minority interest" programming in favour of the mass
audience.
In our view, the BBC's very raison d'etre is
its need to strike the right balance between both, and that ratings
should not be the ultimate arbiter.
In the context of scope and remit, how should
the BBC be funded?
Whilst the licence fee may no longer be the
ideal catch-all solution it was once considered, if a robust BBC
that actively represented Britain's diversity was to be encouraged
both internally and externally, the ABMP would support the continued
funding of the BBC by licence fee. Whilst other funding models,
with perhaps greater relevance, could also be supported (for example:
subscription, advertising, mixed funding), the licence fee, for
all its faults, is still by far the most viable option for satisfying
the demands of the broadest range of society, including our own
objectives. However, we must state again that any support for
the licence fee must be linked to greater transparency, accountability
and sanctions for non-compliance.
How should the BBC be governed and/or regulated
and what role should be played by the Office of Communications?
The ABMP believe that a universally licence-funded
BBC should retain its independence from Government together with
a non-regulatory tier that represents the interests of viewers
and listeners in consultation with BBC management. We believe
the composition of this tier—whether they be governors or
non-executive directors—should more accurately reflect a
balance between ordinary viewers from all walks of life and media
practitioners (rather than the great and the good), and that they
should be responsible for insuring the BBC carries out its public
service remit to the full. Ofcom could be given responsibility
for the advertising and appointing of members to this new board,
as well as monitoring the fulfillment of the public service remit,
with the power to impose sanctions for non-compliance. In the
event that the new BBC board is unable to insure BBC management
carries out its public service remit, this responsibility will
then pass to Ofcom as well.
In a changing communications environment, does
a 10-year Royal Charter and Agreement with the Secretary of State,
together, provide the most appropriate regime for the BBC?
The ABMP believe that in our changing communications
environment, the 10-year Royal Charter and Agreement with the
Secretary of State are no longer viable options.
If the BBC is to continue as a universally licence-funded
public service broadcaster, it must be made more democratically
accountable and responsive to changing audience and technological
developments. We believe the BBC's Charter should be reduced to
five years in the first instance, and the functions of its Agreement
with the Secretary of State delegated to Ofcom.
This submission is purely an initial response
and must be taken in context with our written strategy documents,
background research and verbal submissions to the Committee (or
individual members) as and when further clarification or detail
is required. We hope this initial document and accompanying papers
will prove of use in opening a dialogue and look forward to your
feedback.
October 2004
| 
