TV Home Forum

Ofcom's report into Ch3 and Ch5 Licence renewal

Possibility raised of a new franchise round Pt2 (May 2012)

This site closed in March 2021 and is now a read-only archive
WP
WillPS
623058 posted:
Quote:
and every single one of them later renegotiated those terms to cut back on PSB / regional requirements. That process has never stopped, with even the bare minimum PSB which ITV has left still under threat.


I don't believe STV group did, there continue to broadcast above what is required, and even at a desperation, slotted in 10 year old kids programmes to try and keep them in.


wknd@stv appeared at the height of the tension between STV and ITV. Part of me wonders if it was partly to defy them - and of course it was super cheap since they owned the rights to everything they showed, with production cost limited to a couple of sixth formers and a cameraman.
CW
cwathen Founding member
Quote:
I don't believe STV group did, there continue to broadcast above what is required, and even at a desperation, slotted in 10 year old kids programmes to try and keep them in.

STV Group might be more interesting to pres fans because there are differences between them and ITV plc's franchises, but they're no better. When (what is now known as) STV Group took over Grampian it was effectively shut down and turned into a news operation only with Scottish Television broadcasting to the whole of Scotland - represented a substantial shift from the level of service and the kind of operation provided by the original company when entering into the franchise agreement.

STV Group hold two franchises which are supposed to be providing two different regional television stations yet they spent several years being operated as one channel with split regional news which just happened to be branded as 'Scottish' or 'Grampian' depending on which half of their empire you happened to be in. More recently they stopped bothering to pretend there was a difference any more and so now they operate under a single name.. This exactly mirrors what happened in England & Wales - 'STV' was their 'ITV1' moment.
Last edited by cwathen on 30 May 2012 7:40pm
:-(
A former member
If itv controlled then would just a itv version of reporting Scotland. No Scotland tonight. Lot less. I'm none to either but that how TV works these day and stv done a.dam good job.
CW
cwathen Founding member
623058 posted:
If itv controlled then would just a itv version of reporting Scotland. No Scotland tonight. Lot less. I'm none to either but that how TV works these day and stv done a.dam good job.

It's not a matter of 'how TV works these days' - there is nothing about ITV's basic business model to move from a regional to a national broadcaster which wouldn't have been done in the 1950's if it were allowed to happen.

It is a fact that current ITV stems directly from the 1991 franchise round as that is when all current franchisees were appointed and none of them have had to rebid for their franchises since. It is also a fact that in 1991 every single franchisee won their franchise based on a business plan and commitments which they all then failed to honour, whilst a toothless regulator allowed constant renegotiations, concessions and changes to the rules to suit them and deliver what they as businesses wanted in spite of the fact that this was neither to the letter nor the spirit of the contracts that were originally signed.

That's why I repeat what I said earlier - if there are any channel 3 licence renewals, this should in my view be the point at which the regulator either gives up pretending they are trying to preserve ITV for what it was and advertise a national franchise (or at least nation(al) franchises), or if they are truly interested in preserving ITV as a regional PSB broadcaster, then they must agree commitments for this in the franchises and not allow any renegotation during the lifetime of the franchise.

But this really isn't about doing 'the ITV argument' yet again. It's been done numerous times for at least the last 15 years.

My point was more that I fail to see exactly what makes STV Group any better than ITV PLC. From where I'm standing, STV have simply done the same thing on a smaller scale, limited only by the fact that they only hold two franchises. There is nothing about them or their practices which I can recognise as deserving of their apparent reputation as the 'last bastion of regional ITV' - if they want to do anything other than run their franchises as single stations with individual services (which they don't) then they can't claim to be that, regardless of their reasons for why they operate as they do. As I said above, from a pres fan point of view the argument is there, but on the wider picture of the ideological or operational view, it's absolutley not.
BR
Brekkie
To add to that I wonder how differently, if at all, the ITV network would be judged today if unique regional identity had remained in terms of continuity, idents and branding - but exactly the same cuts had been made to the amount of regional programming on offer.
CW
cwathen Founding member
Brekkie posted:
To add to that I wonder how differently, if at all, the ITV network would be judged today if unique regional identity had remained in terms of continuity, idents and branding - but exactly the same cuts had been made to the amount of regional programming on offer.

Picking up on that point, it's interesting to note how little branding had to do with regional ITV in the past. Many stations would quite happily run from an advert to a trailer for a programme 'on ITV', to some IVC against an unbranded backdrop where the announcer doesn't mention the station name, to a frontcap for a different station which made the programme...yet to their viewers their regional identity would have been very firmly cemented because of the regionalised service provided.

It's rather ironic that in all of ITV's history pretty much the only time when all stations were 100% branded up with the station's own name and nothing else was in the mid-late 1990's...precisely because they could keep the regional names up on screen to carry on the pretence of being a regional operation whilst removing everything that underpinned the station and hoping that no one would notice.
:-(
A former member
95% of all programming on ITV back in the day was broadcast on most areas just when there felt like it, I Agree there should be more local programmings, there plenty of slots

112 days later

:-(
A former member
How did this get past everyone?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2012/sep/18/itv-to-get-licence-renewal?newsfeed=true

Hopeful the two issues are resolved, IE Wales becomes a new franchise and borders area in Scotland goes to STV

Quote:
ITV looks set to win a renewal of all its broadcast licences covering England and Wales for a 10-year period from the end of 2014 to 2024, without any major changes to the current terms and conditions.

The decision, expected from the government later this autumn, would give the company security, but could make it a more likely takeover target.

The only outstanding issues are understood to be whether a new ITV franchise for Wales needs to be carved out, from the Wales and west of England region, and an adjustment made in the Borders region, so that people in southern Scotland can receive a Scottish news service from STV.

The new culture secretary, Maria Miller, is being urged by her senior civil servants to renew all the licences owned by ITV and the two other channel 3 companies STV, UTV and Channel 5 for a 10-year period, without making any changes of substance to the current terms, conditions or statutory quotas on programme supply.

"Seeing everything is pretty calm at the moment, why upset the situation?" said one senior Department for Culture, Media and Sport insider, adding it was hoped an announcement would come before December.

ITV owns all 11 channel 3 regional licences for England, Wales and the Channel Islands.

In a submission to Ofcom's consultation on licence renewal earlier this year, the broadcaster proposed cutting the local content within its weekday evening regional TV news programmes and instead transmitting more aggregated output of interest to viewers across several regions.

The broadcaster also proposed increasing the number of regional news programmes it broadcasts in England, Wales, the Scottish Borders and Channel Islands from nine back to the 17 it offered before 2009.

Channel 5, owned by Richard Desmond, has already said in public it is happy to renew without changes to its public service broadcasting remit, to maintain its children's Milkshake service, news, and commitment to screen 50% original UK content.

All four companies have confirmed they wish to remain public service broadcasters and in talks with the government have made it clear they are not trying to cut their PSB commitments.

In May, Ofcom presented three "credible" options for commercial PSBlicence renewal to former culture secretary Jeremy Hunt in a statutory report required under the 2003 Communications Act.

They included renewal for 10 years; an extension, to allow parliamentary debate about how PSB content should be delivered in a digital world; and a licence auction to test "fresh approaches to public service broadcasting".

"We have received Ofcom's statutory report on the relicensing of channels 3 and 5. The secretary of state is considering the options open to her and will make a decision in due course," a DCMS spokesman said]
MK
Mr Kite
623058 posted:
The broadcaster also proposed increasing the number of regional news programmes it broadcasts in England, Wales, the Scottish Borders and Channel Islands from nine back to the 17 it offered before 2009.


Yep, revert to 17 news services to compensate for the loss of overall air time, then we all know what's next; a mere few years down the line, they'll revert back to the service that they have now, albeit with the shorter air time. I'm really getting to the point now where I think regional ITV should just be put out of its misery and given a decent funeral. It seems inevitable that it's going to die anyway and deserves better than to be constantly castrated and violated in the way that it has been in this last decade. I don't even think it comes down to just cost, ITV do seem to loathe their regional roots. It's like it's embarrassed that it was originally a confederation of separate companies and that this perhaps makes them not a proper TV company.

Weirdly, the modern fetish of breaking the UK up into its constituent countries, as if they are culturallly massively different, comes into play too. Whilst I sort of understand the Border Scotland thing, not least because of the rubbish service the whole Border region gets these days, I don't see the point of the Wales franchise, only to go and give it to ITVplc anyway without a contest. Giving STV half of Border without a contest also seems a bit crap. At the very least, ITVplc should be allowed to contest this new all-Scotland franchise, if not third parties also.

In fact, why not open all the franchise to competition. It'd certainly be intersting to see what companies bid and what they would offer.
:-(
A former member
ITV would not win the STV franchise if there tried, STV would say look at what we are doing at this moment of time, 3 full length services at 6pm and Scotland tonight, plus still waiting 6mins at lunchtime, plus lots of other local shows, ie 90mins per week in peak times,, ITV want not waste there time, someone else might.

Half the problem is Anyone can compete with ITV, look at Freeview, Why arent some of these channels, being more regulated?
MK
Mr Kite
623058 posted:
ITV would not win the STV franchise if there tried, STV would say look at what we are doing at this moment of time, 3 full length services at 6pm and Scotland tonight, plus still waiting 6mins at lunchtime, plus lots of other local shows, ie 90mins per week in peak times,, ITV want not waste there time, someone else might.

Half the problem is Anyone can compete with ITV, look at Freeview, Why arent some of these channels, being more regulated?


Yeah, you love STV, it's well-known and fair enough but you miss the point. STV, or anyone, shouldn't just be gifted extra area just like that at the expense of another company without some sort of due process. If ITVplc can't match STV's offer, then fair enough. You're right about all the non-PSB channels competing with ITV though. There isn't a level playing field, even taking into account some of the perks that ITV may get, such as a high EPG number. Really, we need fewer, better quality channels, or just accept that 21st Century television is a dog's dinner and have little regulation all round with no great expectation.
:-(
A former member
I will say this STV does have its faults and can do better in a number of areas, but I agree it should not be handed to them on a plate.

But how many companies would really go into get hold of ITV franchise? its an whole level of different kettle of fish, compared to local tv serving a few 100'000 people. I still would have liked a ITV franchise to be put out to proper review or tender and interworked with the new Local tv stations.

Newer posts