Armando Iannucci Take the fight back to Whitehall
Once again, the government comes to clip what it sees as the BBC’s unfettered wings. Governments in a panic do that, sooner or later, and it’s up to the BBC’s new chair to call them out on this. They’ve reneged on an agreement to fund the BBC properly: the licence fee has been frozen for the last two years, but was set to rise in line with inflation from 2024. They’ve now changed the way they’ll be calculating inflation: the £159 licence fee will reportedly increase by about £10.50 instead of £15.
The BBC is one of our biggest cultural resources and one of our most recognised global brands, and yet the government treats it like an annoying pet. The new chair needs to take the fight back to Whitehall and hold the government to account over the agreement it made with the BBC last year. This is a huge public employer we’re talking about, as well as a vital source of support and information across the UK, and a trainer of talent and expertise that impacts on all radio, television and film, plugging billions back into our economy. The chair needs to shout, not politely plead.
And for once, could the new chair please see the BBC as not just news? So often, the headline controversies centre on political bias, whether real or imagined. The BBC is more than that: people look back and remember with fondness its drama, documentaries, entertainment, reality shows and its era-defining comedy. These form a huge part of our collective cultural experience, so the new chair would do well not to see those who run news in the BBC as necessarily the most important people in the corporation.
Jane Martinson Shah is well placed to save the BBC from both political and commercial pressures
As the first career journalist to be appointed permanent chair of the BBC since 1986, Samir Shah is well-placed to save it from both political and commercial pressures. Those pressures are great – perhaps greater than they have ever been – but the BBC, at its best, offers public service journalism to our diverse nation with the kind of fact-based reporting and investigations that those driven by more commercial interests cannot or will not do.
Good journalism transcends political affiliation. Shah’s appointment was broadly welcomed, in spite of the odd controversy and misstep (he was an author of Boris Johnson’s infamous race report), because his career focused on fact-based journalism that mattered. He was described to me as a “grownup”, “sensible” and a “peacemaker” by various éminences grises in the business.
Shah’s first outing in front of MPs this week gave some evidence that journalism could provide the touchstone of his tenure. While the political flashpoints of Gary Lineker and Robbie Gibb made the headlines, he also described the description of Hamas as a “proscribed terrorist organisation” – the new BBC language following criticism regarding how the group is described – as “a bit clunky” and “not the natural speech of a reporter”.
A series of editorial crises has led to a loss of confidence at the BBC, hugely damaging for journalists who typically have no time to dither. Shah told MPs that the ambition of a BBC journalist should not be simply to attract criticism from both sides – which is sometimes unwisely deemed a sign that one is doing a good job – but to make “everyone” think it is “doing well”. That may seem like an impossible ambition but it is nonetheless the right one.
Pat Younge Time to draw a line in the sand – and insist the government honours its deal
First, congratulations on becoming the chair of the BBC, a role with a long and proud history and arguably never more important than now. You know you are the first person of colour to be in such a powerful position – but the symbolism, while important, will matter less than your actions. So can I offer you some advice, from one stalwart BBC supporter to another?
There is much talk of the licence fee being unfit for purpose. If I were you I would put the question back to front and break it down, so that it reads like this: what do we want the BBC to be? What do we want it to do? How much will that cost? And, then, how should we pay for it?
These are the real questions that inform a funding model. So, just because the secretary of state has announced a swift review of the funding model with no public engagement, don’t let the BBC be bounced into a process that isn’t fit for purpose.
We are blessed to have the largest and most effective public service broadcaster in the world. It tells us who we are across radio, television, music, platforms and national, local and regional programming. It gives the world verified and trustworthy information. It is one of our greatest national institutions and one of the UK’s few truly global brands.
You should be saying this. And often. You know the BBC’s funding has been cut by more than 30% in real terms since 2010. Just last week the government reneged on its own agreement, in order to save hard-pressed households what might be less than 40p a month. That’s another £90m annual cut. Time to draw a line in the sand – insist now it honours the deal till the end of this charter.
Sophie Chalk Consult the public before making any changes to the funding model
Voice of the Viewer and Listener is an independent charity that promotes high quality broadcasting which maintains the democratic and cultural traditions of the UK. Yes, this means we think a lot about the BBC.
We think that the most important issues facing the new chair will be maintaining public support for the BBC, its future funding model and how it negotiates its income with the government of the day. The negotiation process should be reformed to be more transparent and subject to parliamentary scrutiny. Currently negotiations are conducted behind closed doors; these undermine the perceived and actual independence of the BBC.
Since 2010, we estimate that public funding for BBC UK services has declined by 34% in real terms. Current inflation is adding to the BBC’s woes and services are being reduced, a move that is unpopular with licence-fee payers. Another critical issue is how to ensure public support for the BBC when there are so many other services that people can use for entertainment and news. In order to foster better support from licence-fee payers, the BBC should engage better with those who fund it, consulting before reducing or closing services. The public should be fully consulted before any changes are made to the BBC funding model.
Patrick Barwise and Peter York Win the resources to deliver the BBC’s vital ‘public purposes’ remit
The key issue is money. If the BBC’s public funding had simply kept pace with inflation since 2010, it would now be more than 40% higher: enough to invest in digital transformation, new content and services for younger consumers without cutting the World Service, news, classical music and content for its traditional, mainly older audiences.
It has so far limited the damage by relentlessly cutting overheads (Richard Sharp was surprised by how low they were), aggressively driving commercial income and maximising the usage of BBC TV, Sounds and Online – still over two hours a day for the average Brit, with a weekly reach of 95%. The cost per household, excluding those with free TV licences – £3.05 per week. That’s one takeaway coffee.
In a 2015 experiment, people who initially said the licence fee was poor value were “forced” to live with no BBC for nine days. Some 69% changed their minds, rising to 70% when the study was repeated in 2022. The BBC board should be out there using evidence like this, and polling data that shows 80% disagree with the dishonest “leftwing BBC” narrative, to fight its corner and persuade the public and the next government to give it the resources to deliver its vital “public purposes” remit.
Joe Lycett It’s simple: give me a show
Among other things, the BBC, should it wish to survive, must ensure it does one key thing. Commission me to host my own political magazine show.
We’d call it something like No Nonsense: LIVE! with me, famous rightwinger Joe Lycett, at the helm. It would provide an antidote to the wokefest smug elite gravy boat that is the corporation’s entire current output. Finally, Auntie Beeb will broadcast a voice of the people, paid for by the people, rather than squirrelled away on a channel that a kind billionaire is forced to subsidise. We’ll invite respected guests like Dominic Raab and an AI version of Robert Mugabe to discuss topics such as, “Veganism: is it gay?”, “Why do people want to live here when we have sold most of it?” and “Women: have they gone too far?”
We will broadcast on BBC One and also replace all the lefty radio stations like Radio 1, 2, 3, 4 and 6 Music (5 Live can continue as normal). The audience will be able to interact with the show by calling from a landline or having their PA courier a handwritten note, and after each show I will write a piece in the Spectator about how I have been silenced.
If ITV can put Nigel Farage in the jungle then I can’t see why the BBC can’t put Suella Braverman on Strictly, Tommy Robinson on the Sewing Bee, and give me my own bloody show.
