I am sure that the rest of my team will agree we have enjoyed this extensive and interesting topic. We look forward to seeing how the public service broadcasting spectrum will change in the near future…

The report warns of  the danger that under the new PSB regime being negotiated  by Ofcom and the DCMS, international coverage will decrease.  It also claims that many broadcasters do not have strategies in place to stop this from happening. In his report Mr. Harding argues the need for more, not less, international coverage since so many global issues such as finance, climate change and migration now affect all of us.

In my first post I expressed similar fears for the fate of international coverage in the digital age. So I was pleased to read an article today that had something positive to say about digitalization and public service broadcasting.

Radio and TV Montenegro (RTCG) has launched a new digitally equipped editing studio thanks to a multi-million Euro project set up by the European Union.  The EU is helping the country with its transformation from analogue to digital technology.

Montenegrin President Milo Djukanovic (R) interacts with Internet users during an online chat-session. (REUTERS)

The EU is hoping that by improving the Montenegrin public broadcasting service this will lead to a more open and democratic society. The better the quality of news programmes provided by the broadcaster the better informed Montenegro’s population will be. Providing the station with a modern, computerised newsroom will allow the RTCG staff to generate a much higher quality of programming.

The EU will be providing a total of €3 million in assistance. Ambassador Leopold Maurer, the Head of the EU Delegation to Montenegro, was there to celebrate the launch.

“Montenegro’s strategy is in line with the European Union in this area. Public service broadcasting is one of the key elements of the so called “media democracy” which promotes a mass media system that informs and empowers all members of society, and enhances democratic values,” Ambassador Maurer.

And as you can see from this video the station was in need of a little refurbishment.

Welcome to News at Ten with Mary Nightingale and Steve Scott and Bob from Barry island, Mrs Smith from Newscastle, 13-year-old Jay from Surrey and Rover the Golden Retriever from Bristol.

Is this how the news should be introduced?

When you watch the news, hear the news, view the news, where is it coming from? News broadcasters often feature many videos and  photos from the public to add to their news stories. But is this watering down the news? Or is it enhancing people’s interpretation of the news?

Famous examples of citizen journalism…

Above is the wreckage of the Airbus passenger plane which ditched into the Hudson River in New York. The first photos and video collected of the accident were collected and sourced via citizen journalists or in other words people there who saw it happen.

Here is footage of the plane skidding the water which was captured by a US Coast guard: BBC News

- Other examples included the London 7/7 bombings and probably the most rememberable pictures and videos are those of the planes going into the Twin Towers.

All these catastrophic events have a similarity, they are all fluke, spontaneous events. A skilled journalist with ethical training would only have got there after the initial events had happened. Of course citizen journalists contribute to many other kind of stories but most often the best photos and video by members of the public are when people are in the right place at the right time.

So how do the BBC view the citizen journalism?

I asked Tim Hubbard, Weekend Editor at BBC Cornwall whether broadcaster, primarily the BBC, rely on citizen journalists?

Not only Tim celebrates and encourages citizen journalism.  It is a trend which is being taken more seriously across the BBC. A recent article in The Guardian  discusses how citizen journalist network Global Voices is currently working closely with the BBC. The Beeb will engage with blogging posts from the network, while Global Voices’s managing editor, Solana Larsen, will get involved in news production in the BBC’s newsroom.

Ivan Signal, executive director for the network emphasises its significance:

The idea that citizen journalism is somehow opposed to, or in conflict with, traditional journalism is now clearly past. It’s evident that both exist in a symbiotic relationship with one another, with many opportunities to collaborate on the creation of news, storytelling and distribution of content.

The BBC realises that in the 24 hour news appetite we have today they have to build good relationships with citizen journalists, who equally play just as vital a role with supplying the news to the public.

So to leave the last word to Tim Hubbard, how does citizen Journalism affect journalism?

But to leave a question for discussion, what about the ethical regulations we have learnt from our course at University College Falmouth. Without it, would we have written the same bulletins and stories? No. So is it safe to gather images from people who are unaware of what can and cannot be shown on the web, tv or heard on the radio?

I asked him what the most popular news stories are on BBC Cornwall’s website, and whether he thought they were necessarily the most newsworthy. This was his reponse:

As we’ve already blogged about the future of audiences, i’ll keep this post short. But it is concerning that the photo galleries are more popular than the news stories. It just makes me wonder if news has a secure future if we’re shifting towards this digital age, where it’s all available online.

There’s growing concern that what journalists consider to be newsworthy isn’t always the same stories the audience would choose to read. It’s this idea of audiences selecting the stories they are interested in and building their own news agenda.  

You only have to look at the most read stories on the BBC News website to see they’re not always what we as journalists would choose as our top story.

The Digital Economy Bill, presented to the House of Commons on 16 March 2010, will expand Channel 4’s public service broadcasting remit over its other televisions channels including E4, More4, Film4 and online services.

Britain's Prime Minister Gordon Brown delivers his speech during the Digital Britain Summit in London. (REUTERS)

According to the Commons Culture, Media and Sport Select Committee this expansion will make Channel 4 more like the BBC.

However, unlike the BBC, Channel 4 has up until now generated all its revenue commercially.

Last year there was debate about whether the BBC’s £130m-a-year switchover surplus should be used to reinvent Channel 4 or help get broadband in every home in time for the Olympics.

OFCOM published its report Putting Viewers First, after its second review of public service broadcasting, recommending that the surplus be used to give Channel 4 leverage in striking a deal with BBC Worldwide or Channel Five to secure its commercial future.

However, Lord Stephen Carter suggested in his Digital Britain report that the surplus should be used to help bring broadband to every home in the UK in time for the London Olympics.

This report lead directly to the Digital Economy Bill which will require Channel 4 to provide public service content on a range of media.

At the same time as Channel 4 is being expanded the Culture, Media and Sport Committee has also claimed that the channel appears to be failing to fulfil its original public service broadcasting remit.

Currently the publicly owned broadcaster’s schedule is being dominated by imported US comedies such as Frasier, Friends and Will and Grace.

Channel 4 currently spends only £153m of its total expenditure of £516m on ‘PSB genres’ such as drama, education and the arts

So this begs the question as to why a Channel 4′s remit is being expanded when it is failing to meet its original one?

A zero audience figure! Now that is madness.

It apparently costs the BBC 100 million pounds per year to fund the channel. It begs the questions, why is this happening and what should be done about it?

Is the Welsh language is slowly dying out?

Are the programmes shown simply not good enough?

Are most Welsh people getting their entertainment from other sources?

I don’t know. I suspect it’s a combination of all three.

Having worked at a Welsh production company, it doesn’t seem like it’s always a lack of good quality programming. They have a few long running series on S4C and they were over the moon at having some of the highest audience ratings that the channel gets – 40,000 viewers. But they are being paid somewhere in the region of £20k per show, so even this translates to about a 50p spend per viewer – an unbelievably high figure. Imagine the cost per viewer for some of the poorly rated programmes, let alone the zero rated ones.

So what should be done?

It seems a shame to ditch the channel all together, but maybe the content to be changed slightly so that during the most poorly rated parts of the day, it could sync with Channel 4. In fact, I’m not sure whether this already happens?

The channel is often used as a great way into broadcast productions for many start up indies in Wales, so could this be developed? Could non-Welsh programmes be shown more frequently, so that English, Scottish and Irish indies could use it as a break through platform. The digital switch over has meant that it would be easy to get the channel over the whole country.

On this same vein, it could be used as a local cultural channel across all areas of the UK, whether to show island life on the Isles of Scilly or Salmon fishing in the wilds of Scotland. But would this dilution be even more detrimental to viewing figures?

The current system is certainly not sustainable, so in today’s world of tight budgets and cost cutting, something has to change. There will almost certainly be an outcry from all sides when it does, but change it has to.

It’s easy to see why soaps have such a vital role in society though. Characters have dealt with a range of issues such as incest, rape, infidelity, domestic violence, adoption, HIV, sexuality, teenage pregnancy. The list is endless. As times have changed and technologies have progressed, the storylines and issues covered have become more adventurous. Here are just a few examples:

To demonstrate further, Eastenders’ Stacey Slater has recently discovered she has bipolar disorder, the same condition her mother has had for many years. The writers and actress Lacey Turner worked closely with charities including Mind and Manic Depression Fellowship:  The BiPolar Organisation to research the storyline so they could reflect the issue as accurately as possible.

And they did.  One woman even claims the storyline helped her to get a diagnosis after she recognised some of the symptoms in her own behaviour.

Soap operas reach all age groups and are a fantastic opportunity for public service broadcasters to inform the audience about such issues. Families sit down to watch soaps like the BBC’s Eastenders and ITV’s Coronation Street together, so they can create a platform for discussion. Additionally, younger audiences can be targeted through programmes like Channel 4′s Hollyoaks, which has dealt with equally hard-hitting issues in its time.

Public service broadcasters have a responsibility to inform their audiences. They do so through their portrayal of real life issues but also by offering helpline information at the end of any episode containing such a storyline.  

They are constantly stretching the boundries in terms of the issues they cover and will continue to do so as long as there are topics that need covering. There are always new issues emerging. For example, Australian soap Home and Away has recently aired a human trafficking storyline.

It will be interesting to watch the role of the soap opera adapt to the digital age. To use Eastenders as an example, they have already run a spin-off show “E20″ which could only be viewed online. Their website incorporates polls, blogs, discussion boards. So the BBC is already adapting its programming to keep up with the changing role of the audience.

This got me thinking – interactive audiences could be a thing of the future but apparently they already exist. The BBC has already launched an interactive soap The Cut, for its teenaged audience. The idea is that the viewers contribute ideas for storylines and give feedback on each episode. Having not heard an awful lot about the show, it will be interesting to see how successful the BBC’s attempts to keep up with the digital age really are.

As I was called up to attend a humanitarian disaster with ShelterBox. I’d use the skills that I’d gained from my broadcast journalism degree and see if I could get news back to the UK faster and more comprehensively than would otherwise be possible from traditional broadcasters.

- I’d take a compact but HD professional video camera with me to get footage that could be edited and uploaded to an FTP server. I’d also be able to bring back video in high quality to make an ancillary news package that isn’t so time dependent.

- I’d take a twitter enabled mobile phone and twitter as an aid worker throughout the whole period.

- I’d also be available as much as possible to give telephone interviews.

- I had intended to email back a few written reports of events as they happened along with some photos, but I ended up going with a journalist, so I left that to her!

Uganda IDP Camp

I’ve now been in Uganda for five days. The results of my little experiment are already clear to see.

- Twittering from the point of view of an aid worker is going very well. After a few initial technical hitches, it is now as simple as if I was in the UK. It has been by far the easiest means of communication, allowing me to give the most up to date news with little disruption to my work.

It’s limitations are also evident. It is difficult to tell such a huge story in 140 characters. There is so much to say and so many angles that I could follow. The details that may be of great interest to consumers are so easily left out. It can also be expensive. Using a mobile phone to send texts from Uganda is likely to be over 50p per text. Probably more.

- Telephone interviews have been easy. There is the problem of cost again, but it does mean that I could get a much more comprehensive view of the situation back to the UK with the least amount of time in the remotest of locations. There are sometimes problems with a delay on the line and the quality of the connection may hamper the usability of some of the interviews.

- My colleague has been able to file written news reports with her paper with little trouble. We have also managed to get some photos back with little trouble both via email and via multimedia text message.

- The use of the video camera to make and send back a news package was the most interesting test. A test that I suspect was doomed to fail long before I even left. It’s not that the technology isn’t there, it’s just that I don’t have it! The collection of footage has been easy. The new camcorder is very simple, light weight and compact. It also produces very high quality footage that will easily be of broadcast standard. The problems that I have faced have been with editing the footage. My laptop simply doesn’t have the power to edit HD footage. But even if it did, the internet connections that I have been able to find are not fast enough to upload a package of sufficient quality to broadcast on TV and only just for the internet.

However, it will certainly make a news package worthy of broadcast, but only on my return to the UK, when I can use a higher powered editing PC.

The other problem that I have found is that even though the camera I have taken is very compact and light weight, it is still a whole extra bag to carry with me and it is a very expensive bit of kit to be carrying around. If I were on a deployment where I had to take all of my stuff everywhere I went, it would have been a real problem.

So what would I do next time?

Well almost the same. I’d twitter from the scene of the disaster, I’d give as many phone interviews as possible. I’d send back as many photos and stories as possible via email.

As for the video option. I really think that this is an opportunity waiting to happen for ShelterBox. The fact that their response teams are often the very first people into disaster zones across the world gives them the edge in terms of news gathering possibilities. It’s great for news outlets and it’s great in terms of PR for ShelterBox. But I think I’d sacrifice on the quality a little and take the smallest pro-sumer camcorder available that had as much manual control as possible. I’d also take a high quality microphone and a much higher quality laptop, with professional editing software such as Avid or Final Cut Pro. If I were to go to a country where I knew that I wasn’t going to be able to use a suitably fast internet connection I’d take a compact Bgan satellite kit or consider taking extra memory cards that I could courier back to the UK. Getting news back in a timely manner is simply imperative.

Events such as the one I’m attending at the moment – landslides in Uganda, would often be overlooked. And to some extent this is still the case. Of course there is still the short column in the newspapers that was picked off the international news wires, but the sheer scale and drama that can only be portrayed using pictures and audio is lost.

So what has changed?

Well of course the internet has led to huge amounts of citizen journalism. Pictures can traverse the globe in an instant, people can provide ongoing updates with blogs, but I think it’s the physical technology that has been the biggest factor in changing the worlds access to a bigger breadth of news.

Higher quality, low cost and compact video recording equipment has revolutionised not only what can be filmed, but also who can film it. In many places, an every day citizen may have a camcorder which is only just off traditional broadcast quality, and easily high enough quality for broadcast on the internet. It has also meant that incidental news capture has seen a huge rise in occurrence.

Incidental news capture?

Yes, I made up this term, but I think it best describes how people are filming one thing and ‘accidentally’ capture a significant news event. Of course the most obvious have to be the fire on the Concorde aircraft that crashed in France, but also the Hudson River plane crash. Events that would traditionally have gone uncaptured, are now available for the world to see.

Then there is the footage that people get because of the situation that they find themselves in. Take the 7/7 bombings in London. People realised that it was such a huge event, that even though they were on the bombed trains, they got their mobile phones out and started recording the events as they unfolded, from a location that was totally inaccessible to any camera crew.

And then there is the planned attendance of news events that may not warrant a ‘large enough’ news story by people who have other reasons for attending. PR footage if you like. This is where I’m trying to develop a niche. Traditional news quality footage and updates from the ground, but funded by the charity that I work for, filmed in any free moments that I have, when I’m not doing my job delivering aid.

So I set about an experiment to see what news I could get back to the UK from the Ugandan land slides in the shortest time frame available. I’ll report how this went in my next blog.

Blue Peter cast 1993

Children’s television can often bring back fond memories of rushing back from school to watch CBBC, CITV or many of the digital channels such as the Disney Channel, Nickelodeon and Cartoon Network. But has the golden age of British children television programmes long died a death. How many new children’s television programmes can you name which are British? Many are now repeats or, very often, are imported American programmes. Also the output of terrestrial children’s television is decreasing. 

People often push children’s television to the side and forget it is an important fixture of public service broadcasting for the younger audience.  Over the past few years campaigners have stressed the lack of home-grown children’s programmes. 

 House of Lords Commitee of Communication

In January, the BBC Radio Four Today programme discussed children’s television.

Listen here – The Today Show Monday, 25 January 2010  

Lord Norman Fowler, head of the House of Lords Committee of Communication spoke on the show after publishing the The British Film and Television Industries Report. It said: 

In the five years leading up to 2008, the volume of first-run originated children’s programming fell from 1,887 hours per annum to 919 hours[64]. Reasons include re-focused PSB requirements, increased commercial pressures, greater restrictions on advertising in and around children’s programming and significant changes in children’s consumption of media[65]. 

Production of British children’s television has halved in a space of five years. Ofcom said that the reduction in the volume of first-run originated children’s programming is particularly acute for “older, school age children, and particularly in the areas of drama and factual programming”. 

CBBC, the children television service provided the BBC has recently cut many of its older children’s programmes. Grange Hill was dropped from its schedule in 2008 after thirty years. Biker Grove was dropped in 2006 and The Really Wild Show in 2006. Grange Hill and Byker Grove both dealt with topics which affect older children such as drug abuse, sexual relationships and self harm. They were also popular shows and critically acclaimed. The Really Wild Show won Baftas for best children’s programme. 

The Digital Economy Bill placed a requirement on Channel 4 to make “relevant media content that appeals to the tastes and interests of older children and young adults”. Andy Duncan, told the report that Channel 4 “would be very happy and willing to take on additional responsibilities towards the older children’s group in particular.” This would decrease the demographic of BBC and ITV, allowing them to concentrate more on their primary children and young teens audience. 

ITV 

CITV was axed from ITV1 in 2007. Now It only shows programmes on its digital channel. What are some likely reasons? 

1. Cannot compete with satellite/cable competitors 

2. As ITV struggle to with budget cuts and advertising rates decrease, cutting children’s programming probably seemed to be the choice which affected the smallest audience percentage. This would have also affected the output of British made children’s productions. 

BBC 

Anne Wood, Creative Director of Ragdoll Productions, said the “Director General of the BBC has cut the children’s budget—and many others—to the bone in the interests of saving money. 

Campaign Groups 

Anne Home is chair of Save Kids TV.  She says 

children today see a huge amount of the world, particularly of the American world, and relatively little of their own. 

Their website describes how they “aim to persuade politicians and the UK Government to acknowledge the cultural and educational value of children’s television, and to protect it from destruction.” 

So what is the future? 

Lets consider what Colette Bowe, Chair of Ofcom, told a House of Commons Committee[66]: 

we are sleepwalking into a situation where we do not have UK-generated content of a high quality for our kids. I believe that would be a very bad outcome.  

Pubic Service broadcasting is being cut in regional news, children’s television and British documentaries. Hopefully we will see a resurgence…