Britain is at odds over the role of the BBC.
Those responsible at the BBC are used to the constant fire of criticism from the right-wing media and from the conservative government of Boris Johnson, who is still Prime Minister. This week, however, the world’s most famous public broadcaster got Tinder from one of its ex-stars: All too often, the broadcaster’s top give in to criticism from Downing Street, said Emily Maitlis, who presented leading BBC magazines before her departure in the spring . “An active agent of the conservative party” is now responsible for the supposed balance. The journalist also warned her ex-employer not to take a “crouching stance” on the issue of Brexit: “It comes across as a conspiracy against the public.”
What makes the criticism so explosive? Maitlis gave her speech at the Edinburgh TV Festival, which brings together key stakeholders. A lot of attention is therefore paid to their criticism. In addition, the presenter is one of the many prominent names who have left the BBC in recent months.
On the one hand, the considerable brain drain has to do with urgently needed savings. Minister of Culture Nadine Dorries ordered the station to undergo a brutal downsizing program on its 100th birthday of all days, frozen the license fee for two years, and made future funding dependent on specifications in the personnel structure. On the other hand, political dissatisfaction is widespread in the company. Both Chairman Richard Sharp and General Manager (Intendant) Tim Davie are close to the Conservatives. Like Maitlis, many have the impression that the top broadcasters are in common with those in power.
What’s up with the allegations? Maitlis’ criticism of the “wall of silence” on the subject of Brexit is well received, as it corresponds to the feelings of many Britons: the media and politics, not least the opposition Labor Party, have so far avoided discussing the consequences of the 52nd percent of the electorate in 2016 has now voted for the exit from the EU. These include a massive drop in exports to the EU and long queues at the Channel port of Dover, the interruption of important research collaborations and the low point in British-Irish relations caused by the dispute over Northern Ireland.
The director reacted piqued to the allegation of conservative influence. Robbie Gibb, somewhat melodramatically referred to by Maitlis as an “agent”, has been a member of the current 13-strong supervisory board (board) for a good year. The 57-year-old previously worked for the BBC for decades, most recently as head of politics, before serving for two years as communications director for Prime Minister Theresa May. His criticism of actual or perceived political correctness in the BBC’s journalistic approach is shared by many conservatives, including critics of the Johnson administration.
Hasn’t there always been political influence? On the one hand, the royal charter, which is issued every ten years, expressly places the broadcaster beyond direct political influence. On the other hand, the more or less good agreement with the respective government is one of the most important tasks of those responsible for broadcasting. Over the years, the Chairman and Intendant have resisted the insinuations of Royalty and Downing Street more or less well.
Tory Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher appointed a confidante as chairman in 1986 with the explicit aim of firing the chief executive; within a few months this task was completed. Around the turn of the century, Labor Prime Minister Tony Blair’s slobbering calls to the “rundown, overstaffed, highly bureaucratic, ridiculous company” were legendary.
Political occupations also occur again and again. For example, former Labor Cabinet Secretary James Purnell served as strategy director and head of radio department for seven years. The model of public service broadcasting, on the other hand, has been spared the systematic party-political occupation of important functions.
How is the institution positioning itself for the future? A new royal charter must be agreed by 2026 – a good opportunity for the Conservatives to rein in the giant. The hostility is also unlikely to change when Prime Minister Johnson’s successor is decided early next month. The favourite, Secretary of State Liz Truss, in particular, is in no way inferior to her previous boss when it comes to mocking remarks about the supposedly insubordinate broadcaster.
The challenge posed by US companies such as Amazon and Netflix, whose subscription series and films are particularly popular with young people, is at least as great. On the other hand, the audience of conventional TV stations is getting older. It doesn’t help that the British still consider their “Aunty Beeb”, as the station is popularly known, to be credible to 70 percent, far more than comparable institutions.
If the license fee stays at £159 a year per household, according to internal calculations, the media giant will need to save up to £1.4 billion by 2027. Davie has therefore introduced harsh austerity measures. According to the statement, 1,000 jobs should be cut as quickly as possible and the transmission volume reduced in order to achieve a savings target of at least £200 million a year.
The attempt to relocate more programs than before from the headquarters in London was also intensified. In doing so, the station management is responding to the express wish of the government, which always speaks of giving greater consideration to the neglected regions of the country. But Davie, like his predecessor Tony Hall, also acknowledges the feeling that important societal developments have been overlooked, not least the hostility towards the EU in many regions. Now the science and climate team is being relocated to Cardiff, Wales, which has resulted in an exodus of the team, which has worked well together for years.
From 2025 onwards, the cultural channels BBC4 and the children’s channel CBBC, which have previously been offered terrestrially, will only exist online. The news channels, previously divided between Germany and abroad, are being merged, which is accompanied by dozens of job cuts.
