Live and unleashed: Justin Timberlake, about to rip half Janet Jackson's bra off on American TV, February 2004. Photograph: Rhona Wise/EPA
There has been much fuss over the fact that this year's Brits will be broadcast live, for the first time since a fiasco of unprepared presenters and over-refreshed guests in 1989. A fear of transmitting awards ceremonies as they happen was confirmed when Julian Clary made an obscene joke about Norman Lamont when handing out a comedy gong. In America, a similar caution descended after Janet Jackson's nipple slipped out live on American television.
It would be surprising, though, if the Brits are literally transmitted oath for oath and flash for flash, with no possibility of editorial intervention. Most broadcasting billed as "live" actually isn't. Question Time, for example, is recorded "as live" in front on an audience ("taped live" is the contradictory American euphemism for the same process), so libellous or inflammatory material can be removed if necessary. Most apparent actuality coverage has a "delay", of a kind originally introduced for contentious live phone-ins.
For technical reasons, digital pictures are already very slightly behind the live action, a phenomenon observable to anyone in a bar or restaurant at a sport ground where both the pitch and a television screen can be seen.
On some occasions, the gap is lengthened further to give the producers the option of withholding the pictures if an atrocity or political demonstration were to occur, although such censorship is usually achieved simply by switching camera angles. Sports viewers are well used to the dissonance which occurs when the live crowd are clearly jeering or cheering a streaker or protester who we can't see.
Why, though, given the possibility of being heavily fined for transmitting inappropriate material, are producers - including those of the Brits - so keen to make their shows as live as possible?
The answers are simple: economics and adrenaline. Live transmission brings economies of scale: the show is over on the night, with no need to book space and staff for the often laborious process of editing. But, most importantly, guests usually perform with more edge and energy if they know there's no chance of a retake. I've presented many live radio and TV series which would occasionally, for logistical reasons, need a pre-recorded edition. Famously fluent live broadcasters start fluffing their lines because they know it won't matter.
But the paradox is that the buzz of live broadcasting comes partly from the knolwedge that you could say or do literally anything and no-one could stop you. The difficulty for broadcasters, in an increasingly regulated and litigious world, is that they can very rarely risk that buzz. If the producers of The Brits are allowing themselves no safety-net at all, they are far braver than most.
