New Leadership Appointment Comes As BBC Confronts Crucial Charter Renewal And Future Uncertainty

He resigned last year in the wake of revelations about the editing of a Panorama documentary about Donald Trump and board disagreements over how it should be handled.

Brittin’s appointment comes at a critical moment, as the broadcaster prepares to renew its royal charter. This is the constitutional basis for the BBC’s existence, which sets out its mission and public purposes. It is traditionally renewed once a decade to make sure the BBC keeps up to date with political and technological changes.

Because the renewal process is run by the government of the day, it can involve difficult conversations with ministers who – while acknowledging the BBC’s independence – can insist on major changes. Despite some challenging political environments, each charter renewal has generally resulted in an evolution from previous years. The BBC has moved from radio to TV, from analogue to digital and online.

But this time around feels more existential. In a world dominated by American streamers and online platforms owned by tech billionaires, the government has proposed a range of options for the BBC’s future that raise fundamental questions, in particular about its funding and governance.

The culture secretary, Lisa Nandy, announced the government’s intention to make the charter permanent to avoid the risk of political interference. Following a period of consultation, the government will publish firmer proposals in the autumn, with the new charter signed off by the culture secretary early next year.

This was a significant victory for the BBC, which argued for a permanent charter in its own response to the government consultation. It also called for changes to how appointments are made to the BBC board, to avoid any suggestion of government influence. This was perhaps influenced by the circumstances of Davie’s departure.

There are three key pieces of context that make this review so important.

First, it is quite possible that the broadcast signal will be switched off in the next charter period. The government is now considering options for the distribution of TV, which will require upgrading existing infrastructure if the current terrestrial system is to continue into the 2040s. Given that households are moving to broadband via smart TVs and other devices, broadcasters have expressed a clear preference for an earlier switch-off to avoid the cost of running two distribution systems.

At that point, the BBC ceases to be a broadcaster (except perhaps via radio) and becomes a public service content provider. It will have to compete not just with powerful streamers like Netflix, but with platforms like YouTube. A tech background like Brittin’s will arguably help the BBC in this new competitive environment. But he will need an experienced deputy with the kind of journalistic background required to deal with the (inevitable) editorial controversies that the BBC will face.

Second, the notion of a TV licence fee has become increasingly anachronistic in the digital world. There is greater pressure – especially in a cost-of-living crisis – for a more progressive payment system that takes better account of ability to pay.

The government has ruled out a German-style household tax and funding through general taxation, but not advertising or the idea of top-up subscription (where a “premium” is charged for content beyond a basic tier). It is also considering a reformed licence fee.

Third, the current political environment is more volatile than it has been for decades. Nigel Farage has made his contempt for the BBC abundantly clear, as well as his party’s determination to cut its funding by half. The charter renewal is an opportunity to insulate the BBC from longer term attempts to undermine or dismantle it.

Protecting the BBC

Critics may want to see a downsized BBC. But in a media world dominated by US-based tech billionaires and entertainment behemoths – and where disinformation poses serious risks to democracy – the broadcaster is more necessary than ever.

It is not only the most trusted news brand in the UK, but provides billions in investment to Britain’s creative industries. And, it is a vital element of Britain’s soft power in an unstable geopolitical environment.

The new charter must therefore guarantee the BBC’s independence. No parliament can tie the hands of its successors. But the next charter can ensure there are obstacles to any government determined to inflict damage on the BBC.

Nandy’s announcement of a permanent charter is an important first step, guaranteeing the BBC’s long-term existence. While it would of course be seriously weakened by a major funding cut, the institution itself would survive and could be revived by a subsequent government.

That permanent charter could be accompanied by a much more independent process of appointing a chair and non-executive directors, to insulate the BBC from political influence. A recent report from the British Academy, examining how other countries manage their public broadcasting systems, drew attention to Germany’s model. There, an independent body is charged both with protecting the independence of German public broadcasters and independently setting the level of funding.

A second area of fundamental reform would be a funding system that provides for universal payment, but is not linked specifically to television and makes some allowance for ability to pay. An evolution from the current licence fee – one possibility floated by the government – would provide the BBC with a more secure and sustainable funding base, along with options to provide discounts for struggling households.

The BBC’s future is now in the hands of a government that appears to appreciate its continuing importance to Britain’s cultural and democratic life. We will soon find out whether this government is up to the job of a much-needed radical renewal.

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.