The
dear old BBC is fast becoming synonymous with Bargain Basement Crud.
The standard of television over the festive period shows just how
much the quality has dropped over the years. Not only were old
programmes being repeated but even certain films and current
programmes were being show several times across the week. Is this
simply a means to fill the schedules or are the BBC now trying to
copy the approach used by many of the digital broadcasters.
In
the week before Christmas the BBC announced that they would be
pulling out of their contracted coverage of Formula One 3 years
early. This year they have also announced major changes to their
online coverage as well as plans to move BBC3 from terrestrial TV to
online only and reduced coverage of next year's tennis at Wimbledon.
Of
course, the BBC are not alone in finding the need to make drastic
cuts to meet their budgetary obligations. The loss of the Grand Prix
coverage is simply the latest in a significant list of sporting
events to be removed from terrestrial channels. In many cases these
sporting events have been picked up by the commercial broadcasters
who have been more able to finance the purchase of the rights to show
these occasions. For many years there has been no live cricket shown
on the terrestrial channels and this year live coverage of all
European football competitions moved from ITV to BT.
Even
in the hayday, when the FA Cup Final warranted a full day of
programming with simultaneous live coverage of the match on both BBC
and ITV, the BBC always came out on top in the ratings, with superior
quality commentary and analysis. Even with shared coverage of recent
World Cups few would argue that the BBC's coverage overall was better
than ITV's offering. I don't think it can simply be explained away by
the need for advert breaks. Personally I find that the coverage of
most sporting occasions comes across with more passion and authority
on the BBC than it does on its commercial rivals. It could be argued
that the coverage of cricket highlights on Channel 5 and the racing
on Channel 4 is an improvement on what was available on the BBC, but
you should also take into consideration the changes in technology
that have made this type of coverage successful.
I
don't begrudge any sportsman from earning a decent living from their
talents though I do question the ridiculous sums commanded by some of
the elite and the hype that goes into promoting these events. One of
the highlights of this year was the Rugby World Cup, hosted in this
country and televised by ITV. The tournament was terrific, especially
the performances of some of the lesser fancied nations but contrast
the hype and build up given this year's tournament to that of 15
years ago – Not every game is a grudge match, sport is there to be
enjoyed, it is not a matter of life and death, though sponsors seem
convinced that the only way that people will watch such a spectacle
is to portray it as such.
Maybe
this is one of the reasons that I feel that sport on commercial TV
has often fallen flat over the years; whereas the BBC have been able
to present an opportunity for a viewer or listener to be part of a
sporting event be it good, bad or indifferent, the commercial
stations feel the need to sensationalise or ramp up the excitement
whether it be justified or not.
In
recognition of the increasing obesity problems in the country the
government are seeking a push this year to encourage more people to
get active in sport, I am not sure that reducing the number of sports
shown on terrestrial TV will help their efforts.
Returning
to funding challenges faced by the BBC, it remains to be seen what
effect the cuts will have on their news output. For decades they have
enjoyed a reputation as one of the most reliable sources of global
news even where there are organisations better placed to provide a
superior quality service.
For
over 90 years the Met Office has provided the weather forecasting
services for the BBC, though their contract is not being renewed
since the BBC have been forced to look at cheaper alternatives from
next year, which may mean foreign companies providing the information
in the future.
Also
disappearing from the BBC's output will be 'The Voice', the Saturday
night flagship for the New Year. They originally paid £20m for the
right to show the programme in this country but have announced that
they will not be bidding to renew the contract which runs out after
the forthcoming series. This is hardly surprising since one of the
companies responsible for the making of the programme has recently
been acquired by ITV.
There
are those that say that the BBC should not be looking to make
entertainment programmes and should simply concentrate on their
public service remit. To these people I would suggest they refer to
the Royal Charter and Agreement granted to the BBC which is reflected
in their mission statement: To
enrich people's lives with programmes and services that inform,
educate and entertain.
The same mantra that Lord John
Reith was championing back in the late 1920s.
Just
glancing through the TV listings for the festive period
reminds you how diverse and successful the BBC's output has been over
the years. Morecambe and Wise,
The Two Ronnies, Dad's Army, Blackadder, Porridge,
Last of the Summer wine, One
Foot in the Grave and Dr. Who all turned up in one guise or another
on various channels, not just the BBC.
Considering that many of these
programmes are now over 40 years old it is testament to the creative
teams behind these programmes that their
appeal has endured.
Old,
black and white episodes of Steptoe and Son and the Likely Lads
routinely appear on the schedules of other channels. The sad fact is
that if you take these programmes, the films, the soaps and the
natural history documentaries out of the schedules, what are you left
with?
It
could be argued that talent shows such as Opportunity Knocks and New
Faces have been replaced by X-Factor, The Voice and Britain's got
talent – but has it really? What happened to the light
entertainment extravanzas. The closest you get to the old music hall
format is Live at the Apollo where one comedian follows on from
another with a 10 minute routine, what happened to variety?
It
is understandable that there have been cutbacks in the production of
costly shows but there now seems to be an over-reliance on simple
formulaic programmes filling the daytime schedules. Cookery
programmes, home improvements, panel shows, game shows and quizzes
are cheap to make since they follow a set format and are quick to
make. The BBC are as good at making these programmes as anyone else
but there seems to be a trend of these programmes crossing over into
the peak-time scheduling.
My
fear is that the opportunities for new writers and actors is being
eroded at a time when public interest in the theatre is on the
rise.
In the 60s and 70s programmes like The Wednesday Play and
Play for Today gave new writers
and actors a platform. Writers
submitting works for these series included Ian
McEwan, John Osborne, Dennis Potter, Stephen Poliakoff, David Hare,
Willy Russell, Alan Bleasdale, Alan Plater and Andrew Davies.
The producers included the
likes of Michael Apted, Lindsay Anderson, Ken Loach, Stephen Frears
and Mike Leigh. Thirty-minute Theatre also saw contributions from
Dennis Potter, Jack Rosenthal and John Mortimer. Quite
apart from some singular notable successes, several ideas were later
developed into spin-off series.
Between
1961 and 1975 the BBC also ran a regular series called Comedy
Playhouse, a series of half hour one-off comedy shows. The 120
episodes shown across the 16 series spawned 21 sitcom series
including Steptoe and Son, Till death us do part, All gas and
gaiters, Up Pompeii!, The Liver birds, Not in front of the children,
Are you being served? And Last
of the Summer wine.
Comedy
writers of the quality of
Galton and Simpson, Eric Sykes, Spike Milligan, John Sullivan, Dick
Clement and Ian la Frenais, David Renwick, Carla Lane, Roy Clarke,
Richard Curtis and Ben Elton, David
Nobbs, John Cleese, David Croft
and Jimmy Perry do not grow on trees.
Not all of them were instantly
successful though their pedigree now speaks for itself.
There
is no set lifetime for a comedy series and
longevity is not necessarily a measure of success,
only 12 episodes of Fawlty Towers were made, The
office (12), Reggie Perrin
(21), Some mothers do 'ave 'em
(22), Blackadder (24), The
Royle family (25), The good
Life (30), One foot in the
grave (42), Only fools and horses (64), Are
you being served? (69), Dad's
Army (80), The Liver birds
(86), Last of the Summer wine
(295).
Compared
to that Not going out presently numbers 54 episodes, Outnumbered
(34), Miranda (20), Citizen
Khan (27), Mrs. Brown's boys (27), The Kumars at no. 42 (53) and
Count Arthur Strong (13). I
couldn't give you a plot line from any of this list though I give you
plenty of them from shows in the previous list.
The
questions is in 30 or 40 years time will anyone be watching repeats
of Citizen Khan or Count Arthur Strong with the level of affection
shown to any of the fore-mentioned, who still regularly top the list
of all-time favourite comedy shows.
To
me, it is not simply a question of the quality of the writing but
also the casting. Nearly all of the great British comedy
shows have called on the
talents of established theatre actors whereas the modern trend seems
to want to produce comic vehicles for comedians which very rarely
seems to work. Michael Crawford and Nicholas Lyndhurst were both
child actors, Harry H Corbett, Warren Mitchell, Richard
Briers and Leonard
Rossiter were never comedians,
Ronnie Barker and
David Jason were
character actors,
Wendy Craig had been appearing
in films throughout the 50s and
all the Dad's Army cast came from a theatrical background.
The
demands of stand up comedy (being the constant focus of attention)
are different from a sitcom, which is often an ensemble piece. Very
few people can claim to have been equally talented in standup,
sitcom, comedy and straight acting. The only person who comes readily
to mind is Robin Williams. The only Brit I can think of who has
performed all 4 genres is Lenny Henry though his only claim to fame
in a sitcom was the Fosters, in the early days of his career. Alan
Davies could possibly tick all 4 boxes though his one outing in a
sitcom was dropped after the first series. Eric
Sykes is to my mind the most
complete package though I don't think he ever did perform standup
comedy, despite writing for many of the top comedians over the years.
Back
in the 60s the situation was just as tough as it is now, there were
only 2 (later to become 3) channels, equipment was heavy and
pre-historic by modern standards, the hours of output limited and
censorship demands strict. The BBC were even then subject to
financial constraints yet they still managed
to push the boundaries of what
was achievable by being innovative and taking chances. I
don't think it is that people are any less creative now simply they
are not being given the chance.
Some
of the sets in the 60s dramas may have been flimsy and the camera
angles may not have been as effective by modern standards but the
programmes were far more
entertaining than watching a couple from Middle Wallup browsing
around a boot fair for 'bargains' that they can sell for
a loss at an auction.
The
quest for instant success remains the Holy Grail in almost all walks
of life, whether it be the next wonder drug, the next Lionel Messi or
the next blockbuster movie. The desire is there but the commitment is
not. These things do not happen by chance, the
narrower your goal the harder it is to hit the target. This is
effectively what has been happening for the past 30 years.
How
many of the great shows of the past would have seen the light of day
in the present circumstances?
A
re-introduction of Play for Today, or its equivalent, has been
discussed in the past and
rejected. The cuts in budgets
are hefty and unwelcome but given that they cannot be stopped perhaps
this is the time to re-evaluate
and look to build for the
future. Allow producers to be
more experimental, encourage writers to be more creative, forget
about viewing figures for a moment and give actors and writers a
chance to learn what works and doesn't work on TV.
