The Broadcasting White Paper

The government has published its Broadcasting white paper which sets out plans to privatise Channel 4, regulate streaming services and protect public service TV with a right to appear on certain platforms.

Radiocentre has released a statement calling for DCMS to ensure that prominence rules are promptly legislated after it failed to guarantee the same protections for radio operators on smart-speakers.

The white paper also outlines further deregulation of commercial radio:

We will - as soon as parliamentary time allows - introduce measures to remove outdated character of service requirements such as music formats and reform the current rules on where local radio programmes are produced, while at the same time strengthening requirements for its vital local news and local information services, including measures which allow for the protection of local news on digital platforms.

While it’s a view that’d ruffle a few feathers on radio forums, and networks have some fine regional presenters, I don’t see how three hours just for the South of England - stretching from Kent down to Dorset - benefits anyone (unless the local revenue it generates outweighs the cost of making it).

Regions of this nature are a "media bubble" concept that ordinary people wouldn’t call home.

In Scotland and Wales, for example, I can see how these shows may have genuine cultural value - but operators should be free to make a decision themselves citing their own research.

How can it be right that local FM is bound by rules that stem from those first imposed fifty years ago when, today, they face an unprecedented level of unregulated/less regulated competition?

Oh, and get rid of those ridiculously petty ownership rules whereby Global & Communicorp or Nation & Bauer etc can’t just share a single regional programme even within approved areas - what purpose do they serve?!

I support the protection of quality, balanced, multi-platform local journalism, especially in this age of social media misinformation.

While newsgathering and production is best left to dedicated individuals on the ground, based within the licence area (no need for premises), on-air bulletins themselves are able to be presented centrally.

For the community sector, there’s a proposed rethink of current restrictions:

While we want to maintain community radio’s model of delivery through community based, not-for-profit companies or charities, we want to look again at the restrictions on advertising revenue that prevent some community radio stations from fully monetising their content. We also want to ensure that there is a much wider availability of community radio services, such as through Ofcom’s digital licensing process, as part of the Government’s broader levelling up agenda.

At the moment, CR ad revenues are either capped at £15k (if there’s overlap with a small locally-based commercial station - now few and far between) or, in most cases, anything more than that amount has to be balanced with income from other sources.

Perhaps good news for well-formatted outlets with a clear proposition and USP.

TalkTV - "from the TalkRadio studio"

Politics aside, TalkTV is incredibly slick with the polish you would expect of News Corp and a masterclass in launching a channel of this nature.

The sets and GFX are impressive (although the LIVE looks like a road sign, it might be a grower and the close-up zoom is too fast). A few viewers have complained of poor quality on Freeview as it’s in SD.

It’s a good step up from the visualisation of talkRADIO over the last couple of years whereby output was simulcast on YouTube and other platforms.

So far, only three hours Mon-Fri comes from bespoke TV studios (and a few weeknight repeats) with the radio output simulcast at all other times and billed as "TalkTV, from the TalkRadio studio".

I don’t understand the confused messaging when the visuals are branded TalkTV and the radio imaging is branded TalkRadio. Each could be seamless. When do you ever hear This Morning presenters declare "you’re watching ITV"?

Some idents say "TalkRadio and TalkTV", some just say "TalkRadio" and some just say "TalkTV". The strapline is "The Home of Common Sense" on radio but on TV it’s "Straight talking starts here". Presenters say "TalkTV" but visuals say "from the TalkRadio studio".

So that’s cleared up any confusion about branding...

It’s possible they’re planning to go with TalkTV on all platforms, given that’s their main focus, in which case I can understand retention of TalkRadio branding until the current RAJAR quarter concludes (for recall - it’s being surveyed as TR).

But why not just use splits? Presenters don’t need to namecheck - let idents do the talking!

Still, they’ve managed split ads (unlike another channel that operates similarly but just fills radio breaks with trails). YouTube doesn’t allow third party ads so online it’s just a promo reel.

Government presses ahead with Channel 4 privatisation

A leaked email to staff at Channel 4 says the government will shortly announce it has decided to proceed with the proposal to privatise the broadcaster.

It comes after Nadine Dorries, the DCMS Secretary implementing this policy that wasn’t in the Conservatives’ manifesto, inaccurately stated it receives taxpayers’ money.

Under the current profitable "win-win" model, its revenues go straight back into new independently produced programming. A new owner will need a viable business with a smaller budget and team as well as produce its own programmes.

Even looking from the government’s point of view: sure, fewer public service broadcasters means fewer challenges to politicians (although Channel 4 News has always been produced by ITN which also makes ITV News and 5 News) - but putting jobs and small businesses in jeopardy is not very "conservative"!