Jeremy Hunt’s BIG IDEA of local TV across the UK doesn’t seen to have many fans does it?
Of those groups who might be expected to relish the chance to produce local, even hyperlocal, television content there appears to be a universal ‘no thanks’ in evidence.
On the one hand there’s community publishers and independents who want some support to produce local content – but primarily on cheap to produce web tv and rather than via the transmitter infrastructure proposed.
Then there’s the other world where mainstream media is being offered the ‘opportunity’ for multi-platform publishing but is struggling financially, risk averse and still seemingly licking the wounds of digital disruption.
Who is going to do this local TV?
One member of the audience at today’s Westminster Media Forum described the proposal as: “Channel 5 meets regional newspaper mutant half-breed” at an event where, as Robert Andrews posted on PaidContent earlier, “panelists lined up to unload their scepticism”
The debate around this issue dealt mostly with the big media end of the experience by giving a trot through of what Hunt’s proposal, the Shott report and Claire Enders have previously concluded on the issue.
But also represented at the forum were some men from the financial world and I listened carefully to what they had to say……which can be briefly summed up as, there’s no money in it.
Is there a sustainable business model without subsidy? No-one seemed to think so and one of the biggest regional publishers Johnson Press’ chief executive John Fry, even suggested that ‘subsidy’ was something of a dirty word, somehow devaluing any proposition by being “out of tune with current mood music” .
Is there revenue opportunity from advertising? Yes, but only if media orgs cannibalise their existing advertising to the new platforms. The money men didn’t seem to think there was enough new revenue to be pulled in – no shiny pony to ride after digging through the manure to use the most memorable metaphor of the day.
So, who is going to do this local TV?
Dim Sum Digital 
I’ve got lots to say about all this, but here are a few thoughts which spring immediately to mind.
Although I accept it will probably be necessary to keep some kind of local news going on Channel 3 if and when ITV gives up on doing it, my view is that local TV news should be two things: web-based, and consisting of video rather than “TV”
My overwhelming concern about Jeremy Hunt’s proposal for a “Channel 6” with a dozen or so city-based local services is that it will fail, both editorially and commercially.
It will fail editorially because big cities (Manchester, say) are still far too large for the sort of locally-focused news of most interest to potential viewers. If I live in Stockport, why do I care about a murder in Bury? Or an issue relating to council spending in Wigan? Chances are I probably don’t, which is why Granada Reports will only give those stories a brief mention before doing another human interest magazine-type item on somethingorother. Those are fine as far as they go, but don’t really help the government’s vision of local TV as something which can improve local democracy.
It will fail commercially, not necessarily because of an inability to attract advertisers (although that may be a problem), but because the services will be run like traditional regional news TV, and will therefore be relatively expensive. There will be studios, lots of equipment, the “talent” and all the rest of it.
I’d like to see hundreds if not thousands of hyperlocal video services (full disclosure: I run one on Saddleworth News in partnership with The Oldham College), offering, let’s say ten-minute bulletins every other day, every week or every month, for a very specific area. I’d like to see these services available using IPTV technology, so viewers can access it on their tellybox via the internet.
One major improvement to the culture of our industry that would help these services is a change to the incredibly wasteful approach of traditional TV news to content, using a 20-second clip from a recorded five minute interview, or just leaving the whole thing on the proverbial cutting room floor. Regional news journalists keep items and clips short because they are worried people not directly affected by the story (ie. most people) will switch off.
If you’re running a service aimed at a very specific local area, you could afford to run much more of that sort of content, because people are going to be more interested in the whole interview. Making much better use of content which is already habitually gathered then thrown away, is one way in which web-based local video services could run much more efficiently than the profligate regional news services which exist today.
As for making them pay, I’d urge everyone involved in this debate to put just as much focus on preserving the skills of local advertising sales folk, as they do on the skills of journalists. I believe there is a strata of advertiser, probably just below the car dealerships of local radio fame, which would be interested in local video. But it would be up to proper ad sales people to find them and sell it to them. Those skills are far too important and specialist for people to airily suggest that journalists should take on that role too.
And on the point about quality control, I’d suggest that local colleges and universities have to be closely enmeshed with future local video news services. That’s where the capacity is, that’s where the existing equipment is, and that’s where a lot of the skills are too. How it all might work is a subject for another day, but I believe media departments and journalism schools will have a vital role to play in whatever local TV landscape we find ourselves in when all this has been decided.
LikeLike
Thanks for such well thought out points – I wonder if there’s a way we could feed stuff into the official consultation somehow?
On your point about education partnerships, there were several j-schools represented at the forum today and they made their point about being part of the picture very firmly. Unfortunately the representative from the dept of culture had nothing to say on the matter so that issue will certainly need pushing in this consultation phase. I meant to include a link to it in the original post – it’s here; http://www.culture.gov.uk/consultations/7720.aspx Deadline is in April.
LikeLike
Thank you Sarah. I’ve already responded to the consultation actually! I also sent my thoughts to Ivan Lewis, the Shadow Culture Secretary, after I bent his ear about this issue during his by-election campaign visit to Saddleworth.
I appreciate the vision of hundreds or even thousands of hyperlocal video services isn’t something which could be brought about overnight, and indeed during the discussion on local TV at the Nations and Regions Media conference in Salford last week, many of the industry speakers talked about the “Channel 6” services as being a bridge to an IPTV future. However, I’m very worried “Channel 6” will prove to be such a failure, that IPTV future will never really materialise.
LikeLike