DDon't let President Trump overshadow the real debate about the BBC. Of course, his claim for damages at least 5 billion dollars has dominated our thoughts about the corporation over the past few weeks, and so has its cause. But let's put this into perspective. It was a serious own goal and journalists make mistakes. The salvation in this case could be a line of script between the clips, and if an error is discovered, a very quick public confession. However, the BBC is right to stand firm on this issue. He apologized. And, unlike other broadcasters and institutions in the United States, it does not need the support of the president. This is a chance to demonstrate the BBC's independence. Keep fighting.
But we shouldn't let this cloud the debate about the kind of BBC we all want and need, and I hope that is what will dominate our conversations in the crucial year ahead. government green paperpublished in December, begins with a reminder of what, against all odds, the BBC brings to the country. “It’s not just a broadcaster,” the introduction says, “it’s also a national institution… if it didn’t already exist, we’d have to invent it.” Secretary of State Lisa Nandy is even more explicit: “I believe that the BBC, along with the NHS, is one of the two most important institutions in our country. While one is fundamental to the health of our people, the other is fundamental to the health of our democracy.” Viewing the BBC not just as a media organization, but as a cultural organization that helps define who we are, is crucial to next year's debate about what kind of BBC we want it to be. It should be seen as part of our social infrastructure.
I think people understand the importance of the BBC to our democracy in providing high quality, accurate and impartial news. It remains the most widely used and trusted news source in the country. It is often a place where people come to check whether something is true or not. And of course, on a global scale, we all benefit from BBC news services now reach around 453 million people every week.. This is an example of this country's soft power, which needs to be strengthened and not diminished as it is now.
But what is less understood – or perhaps even believed – is the BBC's role as the nation's storyteller. Streamers create drama, people often tell me, so why do we need the BBC? Well I was so glued to Slow horses, Down Cemetery Road or Adolescence like the next person. But the truth is that streamers like Netflix, Apple or Amazon commission content that will work internationally. And the total number of hours they devote to the UK does not count in the tens of thousands that public service broadcasters produce. It's interesting that the audience continues spend more time watching BBC TV/iPlayer per person per week on average, then they spend money on Netflix, Disney+ and Amazon Prime combined. In the first quarter of this year, the BBC reported five of the 10 most watched programs in the UK among all broadcasters and streamers. ITV had three and Netflix had two. And that is why the idea of public service broadcasting is still relevant.
I watched an extremely powerful documentary Our girls – The Families of Southport on BBC1, about three girls killed in a horrific attack last year, illustrates the enormous courage the families have shown in dealing with their grief, and their desire to build something lasting out of the horror. I don't believe a streamer could do this. You could say the same about Ludwig or based in Liverpool This city is ours. And BBC Radio 4's drama team, so often taken for granted and relatively unsung, is hiring writers old and new in droves to tell the stories that tell us who we are.
When I was at the BBC, we shied away from the argument that the organization also protected against market failure. Today I think it should be part of why the BBC exists. There are certain genres of programming that will never be successful internationally but reflect who we are. Programs about religion, art, music or shows that more gently reflect who we are, e.g. Countryfile or Repair shop. And I've lost count of the number of parents who have told me how much they value British content for their children, even when they were toddlers CBeebies or later, as teenagers with Bite size. And, of course, there are moments that unite us all: from the Cenotaph to Westminster Abbey and the Olympic Games.
BBC gives a cultural definition to more specific communities. When I was running the BBC, I spoke to people at Radio Cumbria, for example, who told me how their work helped define a community that is geographically very widespread, especially in times of crisis. These local services, whether in smaller areas or serving the countries of Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, are at their best telling the stories that matter to their audiences and highlighting the characteristics that make them who they are. Advancing this process is an important role for the BBC.
Overall, the BBC is the largest producer of stories about our islands, the people, places and communities that make up this diverse and creative nation. Of course it has value. The BBC is the largest investor in British programmes, investing around £4.9 billion to the UK economy every year, half of which are held outside London.
But the bigger question is how and where our culture is defined. After all, the only broadcasters that will have the UK as their primary target are the BBC and Channel 4. Next year, the debate over the BBC's charter will rightly concern funding, governance, reaching new audiences and a host of other issues. But let's not lose the idea of media as culture.
Let's enjoy what the streamers have to offer. But let's make sure we also have a properly funded BBC that reflects and celebrates who we are in all our rich diversity. And that in these divided times, we ensure that great programs and services that inform, entertain and educate are available to everyone, no matter who they are, no matter where they live.
