The Big Broadcasting Debate

Elmo

The following articles come from the Evening Hearld: -

Matt Cooper(TodayFM/TV3 presenter): -

You may have less money available for going out to socialise, but there may also be less worth watching on Irish television during the evenings you stay at home in the future, despite your paying €161 each year for the privilege of legally watching your TV.

The media industry is suffering from a major advertising downturn and television is bearing the brunt of it.

Television is not delivering the mass audiences of the past to justify the prices charged for advertising because of the alternatives available and the dilution caused by the multiplicity of stations available.

Television remains very expensive to make, so many broadcasters are suffering from the sudden mismatch between revenues and costs. The simple answer is to make less expensive programmes -- or just import cheap replacements -- but this can be counterproductive too: Irish audiences want to see Irish-made programmes on their Irish stations.

RTE is engaging in a major cost-cutting initiative -- trying to take €25m out of annual running costs -- which, it says, may reduce its ability to make or buy domestic programmes.

Luxury

Remarkably, it says it is trying to ensure there are no redundancies, which might strike some people as odd: your licence fee is being used to subsidise people in possibly unnecessary jobs instead of paying for programmes that you want.

Unfortunately, the independent sector, which is commissioned to make some of the programmes RTE broadcasts, will have no such luxury. They simply can't afford to keep people in jobs and large-scale redundancies are looming.

This is State outsourcing: RTE could be accused of letting suppliers lose their income and jobs rather than dealing with internal staffing issues.

TV3 is scaling back some of its weekend commitments, reducing the length of its Saturday and Sunday news bulletins and moving its top-class political programme, The Political Party, to 11pm on Fridays to avoid the extra costs of filming it on Sundays.

It may not get the audience it deserves there, even if it is repeated at the weekend. TV3 has also let people go and reduced its freelance shifts, despite operating with a much smaller staff than its main competitor.

TV3 simply does not have the luxury of depending on the licence fee for income. RTE gets 95pc of what's collected, amounting to nearly €200m a year, which is a powerful comfort at a time when advertising income is falling for all.

Here, I must declare an interest. I have a commercial interest in the success of TV3 as someone who has been contracted to provide services to the station. I was co-host of a pre-election series (along with Eddie Hobbs) last year and hosted the station's coverage of the rugby world cup.

I have an ongoing commitment to host the live broadcast of a number of All-Ireland senior championship football and hurling matches as part of a three-year contract TV3 signed with the GAA.

It's irritating to hear people complain there are too many adverts on TV3 during big programming events such as sports fixtures. What do people expect when TV3 depends solely on ads for income and has to compete with RTE to purchase the rights to programmes?

If RTE broadcasts a GAA match, for example, it funds its purchase through a mix of ads and licence fee income, increasing the price it can pay. Do people really want RTE to have a monopoly on broadcasting every match?

People can disagree -- and accuse me of self-serving bias -- but I would argue that the TV3 coverage of GAA this year was of the highest quality and put RTE under pressure to do its job better.

Critical

How can the viewer suffer in those circumstances? More importantly, perhaps TV3 also provides an alternative voice in the provision of news and current affairs. RTE's current affairs output rightly draws much critical acclaim and good audiences, too, but surely there could be more of it? Prime Time is only on air two nights a week (apart from the occasional Prime Time Investigates series).

In any case, the idea that only one station -- and one that is under the ultimate control of the State and its government -- should be the only television outlet for news and current affairs is surely worrying for democratic debate.

Under its new ownership, TV3 has tried harder and the station gives Vincent Browne's eccentric (and often very entertaining) panel discussion four outings a week. It could do more, had it the money.

RTE is no longer alone in serving the public interest. While it regards itself as the national broadcaster and follows a public service remit, others are willing and able to do the same.

Radio provides the perfect example of how competition benefited the public in the provision of choice in news and current affairs. My own radio programme -- The Last Word on Today FM -- operates in the most competitive time of the day, between 4.30pm and 7pm, against Radio One and Newstalk.

We are nose to nose with Radio One -- with leadership in the listener numbers going backwards and forwards -- even though RTE radio benefits indirectly from the TV licence not only in sharing costs, but especially from the free promotion given to it on RTE TV.

However, we enjoy a massive lead in audience under the age of 44. This proves that younger people are interested in news and current affairs if they are presented to them in the way they want without 'dumbing down'. There is no reason why TV should not be the same.

TV3 is now lobbying for some limited access to the licence fee to help it meet the expensive costs of providing quality news and current affairs output. RTE, not surprisingly, wants to keep all of the licence fee money and it is likely to request more of it when it next goes to Communications minister Eamon Ryan.

Share

At present, TV3 has a very limited claim on a tiny portion of the licence fee, the 5pc that is diverted to independent producers under the auspices of a special fund run by the Broadcasting Commission of Ireland. However, RTE has managed to snaffle the bulk of that, too.

RTE has argued that TV3 is owned by a foreign investor who is merely looking to make money. That is true, but RTE cannot deny that it operates commercially, too. It seeks to maximise its share of the audience wherever possible -- often by positioning programmes at the same time as major TV3 events in an attempt to dilute its competitor's share -- and has the financial advantage to be able to do that.

TV3 has tried a damn sight harder under new ownership in recent years since the departure of the tight-fisted Canwest as the controlling shareholder. A British investment firm called Doughty Hanson has authorised investment under chief executive David McRedmond and, for the first time, TV3 is offering a genuine choice of Irish-produced programmes.

It may not be to everyone's taste -- especially those of the critics -- but then, neither is much of what RTE does. The main thing is that TV3 offers choice to the people who pay licence fees. Is that not a good reason for the licence fee to be distributed in a fairer fashion?

Clare Duignan (RTÉ): -

LAST Friday in this paper Matt Cooper wrote a column entitled 'TV3 offers you real choice but RTE gets gifted your money', which argued that TV3 should be given a greater share of your TV licence fee. Mr Cooper felt if the licence fee were carved up among different broadcasters then Irish TV viewers would get better programming across the different channels.

I don't agree. Irrespective of individual tastes, high-quality television of any type -- entertainment, sport, news and current affairs or drama -- is very expensive to make. In 2007, RTE Television spent €182m on home-produced programmes. This was funded by you, the licencepayer, yet a hugely significant proportion was also funded directly by RTE from commercial revenues. In all, more than 6,300 hours of indigenous programmes were shown by RTE in that period.

Profits

That equates to more than 17 hours a day, on average, of programmes either made by RTE or produced for RTE. This included more than 783 hours of home-produced children's programmes, more than 811 hours of sport, and 1,307 hours of Irish-made and often award-winning factual programming.

And I haven't even mentioned RTE news and current affairs, which broadcast 1,226 hours of bulletins and related output in 2007. Different broadcasters have different motivations, but it is clear that at the heart of RTE's television offering is an unwavering commitment to public service.

TV3 and Setanta exist primarily to generate profits for their owners and investors. There's nothing wrong with this. To return a profit they have to make programmes that people want to watch. But there should be no ambiguity about what their primary ambition is. They exist to make money.

RTE's mission, and indeed TG4's, is different. Yes, we have commercial interests to supplement the licence fee revenue, but this revenue is reinvested: we are both non-profit public service broadcasters owned by the Irish people. We operate in accordance with clear statutory obligations. We are dedicated primarily to the service of the public. We have no share-holders, and all profits are reinvested in the organisation.

Mr Cooper is arguing that both these types of organisations, the TV3s and the RTEs/TG4s, despite their entirely different governance structures and ambitions, should share the finite licence fee revenues. Mr Cooper isn't clear about how much he would like to see allocated to the different broadcasters, but the effect would be to reduce the amount of licence fee revenue available to RTE and TG4.

In 2007 the licence fee represented 44pc of RTE's total income. We used it to support two TV channels, three of the four radio channels (RTE Radio 1, RTE lyric fm, and RTE Raidio na Gaeltachta), two orchestras, two choirs, a string quartet and a national transmission network overseen by RTENL (and which services TV3 by the way). RTE.ie, the nation's number one website, and RTE 2fm, do not take a penny of the licence fee.

I wonder what RTE services Matt Cooper would like to see axed to provide licence fee support to TV3 or Setanta?

Perhaps he thinks we should not make home-produced dramas such as The Clinic or Whistleblower? Or should we cut back Prime Time Investigates programmes? Maybe RTE should axe home-produced children's programming, or our subtitling services for the hard of hearing, our Irish language programmes, Arts Lives and Hidden History strands, the Aertel service, our multi-denominational Sunday services or coverage of more than 35 minority sports each year in addition to mainstream sports?

Or does he want to see us scale back on cross-media initiatives such as the www.rte.ie/1918, Beckett-100 or RTE's 1,500 hours of Olympics coverage?

Should we cut back on the work of RTE libraries in preserving the audio-visual archive of the nation? Should we look again at our commitments on radio to classical music, multi-cultural programming, new and original music production, radio drama, daily quality news and current affairs, or education and outreach programming?

How does Mr Cooper propose to support these essential components of any decent public service to viewers and listeners if the licence fee is to be re-divided? I doubt that he thinks that TV3 should support these minority areas, and nor necessarily should it.

Of course RTE should be as closely scrutinised as possible, provide value for money, and be accountable to licence fee payers, but to reduce its funding base for reasons of ideology or frugality would be short-sighted.

Undermined

Our legislators must balance public provision with private competition across an industry of converging technologies and diverging missions. But in doing so they must not lose sight of the bigger picture. If RTE, the standard bearer of quality broadcasting in Ireland, is undermined, then so too is the general standard.

For years TV3 has primarily broadcast UK programmes from its sister network ITV. If they now feel for competitive reasons it is necessary to invest in home-produced programming and develop credible news and current affairs coverage to compete for viewers with RTE, then surely the licence fee is giving real value for money by raising the bar for all broadcasters?

If Mr Cooper is really interested in diversity, then perhaps the current model of funding is the one that works best. It provides the most accountability to licence-fee payers and it supports RTE in the provision of a quality, independent public broadcasting service. I believe that RTE's services enrich this country in so many ways, ways we may only fully discover when they have gone and it is too late to bring them back.

barneyeile

Elmo wrote: »

The following articles come from the Evening Hearld: -

Matt Cooper(TodayFM/TV3 presenter): -




Clare Duignan (RTÉ): -

Matt Cooper all the way on this one. If RTE get public money then there should be no ads allowed. It is anti-competitive as well. If they allow ads then the license fee should be abolished. The best way to do this is to have a fund from the government that any Irish channel can access in the name of public broadcasting. That would mean RTE and TV3 competing for advertisements equally and it also means the more highbrow programmes get access to the fund when needed. Everyone's a winner!

Elmo

Matt Cooper all the way on this one. If RTE get public money then there should be no ads allowed. It is anti-competitive as well. If they allow ads then the license fee should be abolished. The best way to do this is to have a fund from the government that any Irish channel can access in the name of public broadcasting. That would mean RTE and TV3 competing for advertisements equally and it also means the more highbrow programmes get access to the fund when needed. Everyone's a winner!

TV3 have had 10 years to fully compeat with RTE. TV3 are not owned by the Irish People why should TV3 get money towards their so called "Public service" programmes. They earn 60,000,000 euro in advertising revenue and as pointed out by claire dugan they don't have to support 2 TV channel, 4 radio service, RTE's Network and 4 musical group.

TV3 wouldn't be interested in making programming since the departure of CanWest TV3 have refused to commission shows out side of the Sound and Vision fund, bar one this year and a few "News Specials". TV3 is there to make money they have no real interest in the public.

Why not let a new private company be set up to take a portion of the licence. Why should TV3 get it?

Matt Copper goes ruins his argument by stating " it says it is trying to ensure there are no redundancies, which might strike some people as odd: your licence fee is being used to subsidise people in possibly unnecessary jobs instead of paying for programmes that you want. "

And then stating "TV3 is now lobbying for some limited access to the licence fee to help it meet the expensive costs of providing quality news and current affairs output. "

TV3 lobbying for limited access to prevent the loss of jobs and revenue from their News output which by the is the only really thing TV3 produce.

Remember TV3 didn't bring us 2 new TV show in 2006 what they did was to replace the 6:30 news with Xpose and 11 News with Nightly News. They changed the format.

barneyeile

Elmo wrote: »

TV3 have had 10 years to fully compeat with RTE. TV3 are not owned by the Irish People why should TV3 get money towards their so called "Public service" programmes. They earn 60,000,000 euro in advertising revenue and as pointed out by claire dugan they don't have to support 2 TV channel, 4 radio service, RTE's Network and 4 musical group.

TV3 wouldn't be interested in making programming since the departure of CanWest TV3 have refused to commission shows out side of the Sound and Vision fund, bar one this year and a few "News Specials". TV3 is there to make money they have no real interest in the public.

Why not let a new private company be set up to take a portion of the licence. Why should TV3 get it?

Matt Copper goes ruins his argument by stating " it says it is trying to ensure there are no redundancies, which might strike some people as odd: your licence fee is being used to subsidise people in possibly unnecessary jobs instead of paying for programmes that you want. "

And then stating "TV3 is now lobbying for some limited access to the licence fee to help it meet the expensive costs of providing quality news and current affairs output. "

TV3 lobbying for limited access to prevent the loss of jobs and revenue from their News output which by the is the only really thing TV3 produce.

Remember TV3 didn't bring us 2 new TV show in 2006 what they did was to replace the 6:30 news with Xpose and 11 News with Nightly News. They changed the format.

Whats wrong with wanting to make a profit anyway? The point is that the playing pitch is uneven! If you set up a business and then found out your rival is being subsidised then you might be a little angry. Scrap the fee and make RTE apply for the Broadcasting fund like everyone else. In relation to the various things that RTE claims to support them maybe a slimmed down and more competitive RTE might be the answer. Most of it is unnecessary fat. What does RTE want an orchestra for for example, it is unnecessary. 2fm could be done privately, RTE 2 should be sold off. They use the fee to outbid TV3 for American imports for flip's sake! Is that a good use of the license fee?

Elmo

Whats wrong with wanting to make a profit anyway?

Nothing but when most of your profit goes to investors and you choose to make your staff redundant because your investors have to get a big dividend so that they can make a profit on the sale of your business then there is an issue IMO. TV3 have been buying in the cheapest TV for the last 10 years, they have removed other channels compeating with them for ITV shows, RTE cann't get a look in. Remember they are making 60,000,000 a year.

The point is that the playing pitch is uneven! If you set up a business and then found out your rival is being subsidised then you might be a little angry

They knew that from the get go, they knew the Irish industry, they have earned allot of money during the last 10 years. Yet they have yet to produce anything worth remembering. I mean did you notice their 10 year celebrations??????

In relation to the various things that RTE claims to support them maybe a slimmed down and more competitive RTE might be the answer. Most of it is unnecessary fat. What does RTE want an orchestra for for example, it is unnecessary.

Well they have an orchestra, and it gets the Dept of Arts http://www.arts-sport-tourism.gov.ie/ away with not having to spend money on such unnecessary fat. It's not like RTE actually want an orchestra its been dumped on them.

2fm could be done privately, RTE 2 should be sold off. They use the fee to outbid TV3 for American imports for flip's sake! Is that a good use of the license fee?

As I have said TV3 and ITV have a very very cosy relationship which could be considered anti-competitive. RTE does not out bid TV3 for American Imports as the EU found out, TV3 don't go near RTEs imported show, when they started they had a deal with Fireworks another canwest company which let them keep costs down. RTE spend 25,000,000 on Imports they make alot more back in advertising as do TV3.

According to RTE 2FM is done commercially on the bases of Advertising and helps them to support RnaG which does not carry any advertising. But you are correct either 2fm changes or it should be sold off.

RTE TWO has The Den no private company will go near that service with such a high number of Children's programmes. TV3 as a national channel just won't do Children's TV.

barneyeile

I think Noel Tracey the former government minister agrees with me. He has suggested something similar to what I have said today. He will be talking to Matt Cooper today on the radio about it. Listen in! He is on at 5:50pm

mike65

Listening that dope right now (talking about RTE mocking politicans on the Late Late!, how dare they?)

Mike

barneyeile

mike65 wrote: »

Listening that dope right now (talking about RTE mocking politicans on the Late Late!, how dare they?)

Mike

To be honest, listening to him on the radio he is doing a good job mocking himself!:P He is ballsing up his own argument which has some good points to it although giving a third of the license fee to TG4 is stupid!

Elmo

barneyeile wrote: »

I think Noel Tracey the former government minister agrees with me. He has suggested something similar to what I have said today. He will be talking to Matt Cooper today on the radio about it. Listen in! He is on at 5:50pm

Okay! So Today FM put out a show with Noel Tracey a FF politican in conversation with Matt Copper a TV3 employee. That's not going to be half bias.

To be honest, listening to him on the radio he is doing a good job mocking himself! He is ballsing up his own argument which has some good points to it although giving a third of the license fee to TG4 is stupid!

And then he balls up his and your argument!!!!

Did he plan to take the exchequer funding of TG4 away from them? Then 1/3 of the license fee would have to replace what they have just lost but then they just become RTE.

TBH Barney I will be disagree with you on this one. TV3 is a private organisation. If it losses or earns money it should be no concern to the Government. If the government does give TV3 money then every Radio station in the country also deserves funding.

You have to remember that Matt Copper is talking about the license fee going toward TV3's news and current affair coverage not other programming.

We get the punters with no effort required, a quote from The Evening Hearld today.

RTE's coverage is thought to have cost in excess of €250,000, with presenters and reporters at various locations around the States.

However, TV3 Head of News Andrew Hanlon says that his station will be claiming victory: "The cost of taking the CNN broadcast was a tiny fraction of what RTE would have spent and we still managed to attract 76pc of their audience.

From RTE.ie
http://www.rte.ie/news/2008/1106/rte.html

How was RTE coverage of the Budget less balanced then that of either TV3, TG4 or other Independent media outlets.

Noel Tracy is talking out of his arse.

mcwhirter

Can't really compare Tv3's news with RTE's though. Tv3 don't even show news on a weekend now, other than a short bulletin.

Elmo

mcwhirter wrote: »

Can't really compare Tv3's news with RTE's though. Tv3 don't even show news on a weekend now, other than a short bulletin.

I think what TV3 are getting at is that there news and current affairs is a public service and therefore should be funded by the licence rather then by independent funds. The Indo Radio service would have to look for the same amount of money for there News and Current Affairs also. Basically public paid for Indpendent News services. INN, TV3 and Communicorp would end up get much of this 1/3 of the licence fee.

I wouldn't compare TV3 news with RTE news either.