This is all quite interesting stuff really. For someone who doesnt know much about media companies, the state of the Independant Television Channel3 must be bloody confusing.
I must agree with some of the comments above, why was C&G ever allowed to aquire so much of Independant Television Channel3, and even more bizzare, why they have also snatched the ITV name for their own seperate ventures (ITV2, ITVNC).
I must agree with some of the comments above, why was C&G ever allowed to aquire so much of Independant Television Channel3, and even more bizzare, why they have also snatched the ITV name for their own seperate ventures (ITV2, ITVNC).
It all started with the 1990 broadcasting act, which put into place a framework for mergers and aquisitions, each franchise was allowed to buy out another franchise (although the London stations had to remain in separate hands).
From 1993, the old style structure of the 'big 5' stations still existed, with Carlton (having just replaced Thames), LWT, Central, Granada and Yorkshire. Very soon afterwords, Granada bought LWT and Carlton bought Central, whilst Yorkshire bought Tyne Tees (they actually bought it at the end of 1992, through a special case being granted). From here it very quickly became clear that Carlton and Granada would ultimately end up in charge of ITV, with them each control two of the 5 most powerful franchises. There were no other big changes until a few years later when legislation, due to come into force from the start of 1997, allowed more than 2 stations to be controlled by the same company. From here and over the next couple of years, this is when the next big round of consolodation happened.
At the end of this, you have Carlton owning Carlton London, Central and Westcountry, Granada owning Granada TV, Yorkshire and Tyne Tees, UNM owning Meridian, Anglia and HTV, SMG owning Scottish and Grampian, whilst UTV, Channel and Border remained as independents.
This was the setup which was in place when ITV2 was launched, at the time owned jointly between Carlton and Granada. Although they were still separate companies, being a joint venture they of course both supported the use of the brand name, and hence had 6 votes, and whilst they could have been defeated, it wasn't going to happen with SMG and UTV intending to launch their own second channels.
From this point on, the local independence of the stations were gradually eroded, ultimately ending up in the introduction of the 'ITV1' name in August 2001, and then the rebranding which perceives 'ITV1' as being a single nationwide channel which happened in October 2002.
The next lot of ITV consolidation which well and truly removed the possibility of defeat for Carlton and Granada happened in 2000, when UNM sold off their ITV stations, which were bought by Granada (HTV was then subsequently sold to Carlton), and in the same year Granada bought out Border.
The situation now is that Carlton and Granada have a lot of association between them, with their jointly owned On Digital service and their jointly owned ITV2 channel, and the same situation which exists today, when only UTV, Channel, and the two SMG stations were outside of the fold.
All throughout this, the same clause preventing the same company from owning both London stations remained in place, but the new broadcasting act would remove this. This is what finally allowed a merger between Carlton and Granada, which was completed earlier this year.
They wanted to call the company ITV plc, the independents couldn't win a vote against them at ITV network centre, and their attempts to mount a legal challenge against it, claiming it as being the intellectual property of all the ITV stations, not just those which happen to be owned by Carlton and Granada, failed. And thus ITV plc came into being.
But on paper, the ITV plc controlled stations are still only there by virtue of their licence, and still (theoretically at least) can loose them and be kicked out of the ITV network, at which time the new incumbents would almost certainly stop them from using the ITV brand on their other ventures, and would have a valid cause to demand their company gets renamed too.
As to why a single company was ever allowed to have so much control (at least with a duopoly their was still the possibility of a genuine decision making process happening, even if Carlton and Granada were in cahoots over so many things), and thus take away all the effective control that the independent stations have, I don't know. There are various reasons bandied about, but ultimately it happened because the regulatory structure which previously prevented it from happening was dissassembled (i.e. the takeover of Westcountry TV was completed literally on the second that the new legislation allowing it to happen came into force, implying that it would have happened earlier if it was possible), whilst the company which ultimately ended up holding all the cards can milk ITV dry in the deregulated environment in which it exists, before selling it out to a foreign media company (which was also allowed by the new broadcasting act).
This is why, as critical as I am of what's happened to ITV, I also realise that it's present position is certainly not the end - however bad it gets, it can always get a lot worse. And I don't honestly see it existing much beyond the end of analogue terrestrial. By then it'll be a bouqet of low budget foreign owned channels competing with a hundred other channels just like them. ITV plc will be long gone and spending the money they made from sucking their cash cow dry and cutting costs to the bone, and the final sad chapter in what was once a brilliant system which managed to deliver a quality, local service *and* make money will come to a close.
Well all this shows how the ITV network set-up is stuck in the past and was only really relevant when it was just one channel. Imagine if SMG did get their way and ITV2 wasn't allowed to use the ITV name, most of the general public who don't know all the in's and out's of the network would find the idea completely bizzare.
Anyone any ideas of a solution? Maybe SMG & UTV should join ITV PLC just for the purposes of dealing with ITV2. UTV would then get their share of revenue from it, but do they realise they would have to put money in before getting money out, I bet that would shut them up.
UTV would then get their share of revenue from it, but do they realise they would have to put money in before getting money out, I bet that would shut them up.
Are you implying that UTV do not put any money into the ITV network?
Could UTV and SMG bring back Their 2nd channels (UTV2 and S2) or even join up and make a 2nd channel together? Is it possible or when they got rid last time and gave the thumbs up for Carlton/Granada's 2nd station to take over did they so to speak sign away any change of having their own local branded version of ITVplc’s 2 channel up again in the future?
If its possible for a UTV2/S2 return will they both go it alone again or will SMG/UTV team up?
look in your own region - at least we have local continuity
For someone who receives income via said broadcaster, that's a kind of pathetic approach. There are people in there who are talented, just the equipment is letting them down. Or in some cases, the people let the equipment down. And those that need to know what I meant about that, know what I mean
i have to laugh at the predictable response from the itv groupies. can you imagine their irate posts if it were to emerge that the bbc had been flogging eastenders to uk gold at a knockdown price!! there would be hell on!!
it seems the kind of situation that could easily be sorted out by a a decent regulatory body ... but there isn't one - just a mechanism for tony and tessa to push through their big media consolidation ideas.
