[ad_1]
Roll, roll, the post-Covid UK clearance sale has begun. This leave was a bit expensive and top-notch immunization programs are not cost-effective, so it’s time to whip the family’s money. Fancy a Renaissance masterpiece, Mr Oil Sheikh? Or maybe a stately home for you, Russian oligarch? And what American recount investment fund can I interest in this museum? I mean, yeah, these gems of our cultural heritage belong to the nation and are not strictly under ministerial control, but we’re going to change the rules and sell the lot.
It’s absurd. Really. The idea that a government wants to get rid of cultural assets, 100% owned by the people of this country, which do not cost taxpayers a dime but which stimulate investment, jobs and can help recovery. And yet, that’s exactly what the proposed sale of Channel 4 entails. It may not be bricks and mortar, but the diffuser is part of the British cultural landscape.
Established under the government of Margaret Thatcher, it has a unique operating model designed to deliver “distinctive and high quality programming” owned by the public, to serve the public, at no cost to the public.
As a Conservative, I fail to understand why ministers would want to raffle off an entity that is the living embodiment of much of the government’s agenda. From Global Britain to Leveling Up and Building Back Better, Channel 4’s rules and mandate seem tailor-made to meet each of Boris Johnson’s favorite buzzwords.
The Prime Minister pledged to put in place an upgrading program, which would free the areas “left behind” from the restrictions of the past to get ahead economically – thereby attracting private investment and skills. . Channel 4 works with more than 300 independent production companies each year – from across the country – to fill its channels. More than half of all content comes from outside London and, with its national headquarters in Leeds and creative and sales centers in Glasgow, Bristol and Manchester, it has invested over £ 12bn in the UK’s creative economy, creating thousands of jobs in just the kind of places this government wants to reach.
In addition to ordering unique and innovative programming now, Channel 4 is committed to contributing to the development of the talents of tomorrow. So when, last year, the Prime Minister promised to offer a “guarantee of opportunity” which would give “every young person the chance of an apprenticeship or an internship” to revive the economy after the Covid- 19, he could have had few. better examples in the industry than the broadcaster. Ten thousand people have obtained apprenticeships or internships, participated in skills workshops or joined training programs sponsored or delivered by Channel 4 in recent years. From engineering to screenwriting, production to investigative journalism, no matter where or where a young person is from, C4 has been effective for the creative sector, just as this government wants to do in all areas. sectors.
And, like Global Britain, the UK consistently tops all of the “soft power†rankings compiled over the past decade. It’s not just the economy that puts us there – or we would be in fifth and sixth place every year with France depending on fluctuations in the GDPs of the two countries. No, it is our cultural and educational production that is essential. British films and programs are exported all over the world. “Made in Britain” is a broadcast quality charter and better publicity for our nation than any tourist board campaign. When The Father won Best Actor and Best Screenplay at this year’s Oscars, it was the 36th and 37th Oscars that Film 4 brought back to the UK, once again reaffirming the UK’s place. on the world cultural map.
This week, Culture Secretary Oliver Dowden launched the consultation on the sale of Channel 4 in a document stating that the government “believes that private ownership of Channel 4 and that a change in its remit could allow it to prosper in the decades to come “. What intrigued me was the implication that he isn’t thriving now. It is not a sick ship. Its traditional TV audience is growing year on year, while streaming has exploded with a 30% increase. The economic analysis estimates its gross added value at one billion pounds per year. Channel 4 has been particularly successful in attracting a hard-to-reach audience – the proportion of its viewers aged 16 to 34 being double that of either BBC One or BBC Two.
It’s also not likely to generate huge government revenue from the sale – Channel 4 doesn’t own any of its own content, which is owned by the production companies that created it. Therefore, there is no lucrative back catalog that investors can buy. Maintaining the commitment to support a model that invests across the UK would lower the price even further while changing that mandate threatens to bankrupt many taxpayer production companies.
When it comes to value for money, supporting private business, upgrading and projecting Britain to the world, I support Margaret Thatcher’s model of a nation-owned Channel 4 and book for it, without costing the taxpayer a dime. And the same goes for any Conservative government.
[ad_2]
