A leaked BBC document has criticised a government report into the corporation’s market impact by pointing out that making shows that are less successful and popular than Strictly Come Dancing would not be good for licence fee payers.
The BBC document suggests that the report commissioned by the government uses “flawed” analysis and “questionable” assumptions that put commercial impact above the need of the audience.
It goes so far as to suggest that the government report is simply a rehash of its rivals’ views. “Much of the report’s analysis seems to restate evidence included in ITV’s and commercial radio’s submissions to the charter review consultation.”
The Department for Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) report, written by management consultants Oliver and Ohlbaum and published in March, was particularly critical of BBC1, which it said had become “less innovative and less risk-taking”.
In a speech in March following the publication of the report, culture secretary John Whittingdale called for a “more distinctive” BBC. Over the weekend, the scheduling of hit shows such as Strictly and Great British Bake Off once again emerged as a bone of contention for providing overly competitive primetime programming. It was reported that Whittingdale would ban the BBC from going head to head with commercial rivals as part of the BBC charter review.
Whittingdale is due to publish a white paper within weeks that will set out a tougher regime as part of a new royal charter to safeguard the service for another 11 years. A source at the BBC said the public would be deeply concerned if it were forced to move programmes such as Strictly Come Dancing, Doctor Who and Sherlock from primetime weekend slots.
The BBC document, which is understood to have been sent to the DCMS ahead of next week’s white paper on the corporation, disputed many of the Oliver and Ohlbaum findings, particularly on distinctiveness and market impact.
If adopted in a government white paper on charter renewal expected next week, the BBC would fail as a universal service, it states, going on to say that the BBC’s weekly reach would fall from 97% currently to less than 90% if the proposals were adopted.
This would not make a “sensible basis for policy decisions about the future of the BBC” and its universal service, it concluded.
The DCMS-commissioned report was particularly critical of BBC1. In its response, the BBC stated: “The facts do not support the report’s claim that BBC One has become less distinctive. They demonstrate the opposite.”
Criticised for showing too much entertainment and not enough new shows during daytime, the BBC said the volume of entertainment on BBC TV had fallen from 1,249 hours to 1,139 hours since 2007, the start of the last charter period.
In peaktime on BBC1, hours of entertainment fell from 183 hours to 167 in the seven years to 2014. It also found that BBC1’s daytime schedule included 19 new titles compared with 11 on ITV.
The government report published in March concluded that broadcasting fewer populist shows on channels such as BBC1 and Radio 1 could benefit commercial rivals by as much as £115m a year.
The DCMS commissioned the assessment of the BBC’s “market impact and distinctiveness” to help it make “informed choices” about the way the BBC should operate in its next royal charter period from 2017, which suggests that it will influence the white paper.
