In 122 AD, the Emperor Hadrian initiated the building of a large wall, a boundary from the Tyne to the Solway Firth. Until the last century, historians considered it a defensive tactic against aggressive Scots barbarians, but it is now also considered to be part of Hadrian’s border-enforcing policy, to recognise the frontiers of empire, and govern up to those frontiers. What this really allowed the Romans to do was maintain a peaceful empire, the effects of which were so incredibly long-reaching as to still be evident today.
Why bring it up? Well, history is my benchmark for judging pretty much everything (commence hackneyed phrases such as ‘those who misunderstand history are doomed to repeat it’, or some other such platitude…). And right now, I want to talk about 6Music, like I said I would in the previous post.
As you probably know, the BBC has recently proposed some incisive cuts in order to free up a shedload of money (several hundred million is a figure I keep bumping into) which would be better invested in quality programming. Those who listen to Radio 1, watch a lot of BBC 2 and 3, and keep up with Eastenders, won’t notice a jolting difference in the schedules, thanks to consistently high ratings. From my understanding, what will be slashed is the budget to buy American programmes (so a possible end to constant Family Guy repeats on 3), web-presence (by a quarter), sports coverage (though certain items like Wimbledon and 2012 Olympics are safe), some teen content and some digital radio output.
On paper, this is fine. The BBC has often received harsh criticism that their empire is too large, so effectively ‘walling’ it doesn’t seem like a bad idea. Unless you are an avid fan of one of the soon-to-be-axed services – which I am. It’s widely speculated that these cuts are down to a possible Tory win in the election, when Cameron might choose to clamp down on the wide-reaching BBC. I don’t know about that, but I do know that the BBC will suffer if some (not all) of these cuts go ahead. In a blog today, Mark Thompson, BBC Big Cheese, said this:
We will refocus licence fee investment around five clear priorities: the best journalism; inspiring knowledge, music and culture; ambitious UK drama and comedy; outstanding children’s content; and events that bring communities and the nation together. We will focus on the areas which most clearly build public value and which are most at risk of being ignored or under-invested in by commercial players.
The BBC will live or die by the quality of its programmes and content. We will retain an unswerving, unwavering, unflagging focus on quality. To ensure we do, we are committing to unprecedented investment in high-quality, original UK content. We will do this in part by reducing the cost of running the BBC and reducing spending on programmes from abroad. Carefully selected acquisitions are valued by audiences but our priority is original, UK content.
And unlike Hadrian, he is a massive hypocrite. He goes on to say that the BBC exists to provide a different service, that ‘enriching people’s lives’ with their bloody good content is their priority. I’ve paraphrased, but you get the point. What Mark Thompson’s cuts actually propose are the opposite of this. The BBC provides so many poor-quality services in direct competition with other freely available content that to claim to strive for high-quality is laughable. Parts of the BBC already encompass this drive for outstanding programming, such as 6Music, BBC4, 5live, and certain aspects of the terrestrial programming. However, BBC1, the channel the BBC ‘lives and dies by’, is in direct conflict with ITV every single Saturday night.
It boils down to what license-fee payers are prepared to put up with. I watch very little on the Beeb, although it has provided some of the greatest content I’ve ever enjoyed. Where would factual telly-land be without David Attenborough, Jeremy Paxman and Patrick Moore? And what about the recent adaptations of Emma, and Cranford? Not to mention the Doctor Who franchise. And radio-land, with its Lauren Laverne, Adam and Joe, Gideon Coe and Marc Riley? Absolutely stellar, in my book. But that’s precisely it: in my book. MY book. This is what I pay my license-fee for. Well, that and the fact that the adverts have gotten nicer.
So is it fair for people who don’t listen to 6music to subsidise it? Not really, but I don’t watch Strictly Come Dancing, Casualty or Bargain Hunt, and I can confidently assume that they’re safe.
The problem is that 6music costs £6million to run, has a very small listener base, and the before these cuts were proposed on 20% of the British population had actually heard of it. As a digital-only station, with little promotion and the odd rubbish choice of host (George Lamb, everyone’s still looking at you), it seems like it was designed to fail. The plan seems to be to shift some of its programming to a re-vamped Radio 2, but this puts real music fans back where they were in the 80s and 90s, waiting for dusk and the likes of John Peel.
The problem is putting the genie back in the bottle. It’s understood that this is a pretty difficult thing to do, especially politically. I am absolutely sure that it’s also an impossible cultural move. If I’m at home alone all day, I’ll switch to 6 about halfway during Keaveney’s show and stay until 7ish, when I generally seek out company and food. If I’m driving, I bemoan not having a digital converter for my car radio. Nothing sounds worse that Fearne Cotton, especially when you know the alternative could be Lauren Laverne. And finally, Adam and Joe’s comedy is the perfect way to start a Saturday morning.
6music perfectly embodies the BBC’s mission statement, to inform, educate and entertain. SO yeah, totally get rid of it, as long as you don’t ditch Snog, Marry, Avoid…
You’re no Hadrian, ginger-beardy-baldy Mark Thompson.
