Ofcom’s decision to make no changes for now to the rules covering the amount of advertising on ITV 1, Channel 4 and Channel 5 is a huge surprise.
The regulator had been minded to allow the channels to show as much advertising as other commercial broadcasters.
In other words, there could have been a full 12 minutes of ads in every daytime and evening hour rather than most of them.
It is highly unusual for Ofcom to change its mind after revealing what it was minded to do.
So what changed?
ITV, STV and Channel 4 wanted the freedom to show more ads. Channel 5’s owner Paramount reiterated its opposition.
One concern has been that the scheme could lead to more small channels closing.
But the views of sceptics and opponents had not changed in the past few months.
Nor was it somehow a revelation that changes to the ad rules would principally mean changes to the amount of advertising during the “news hours”. But how much would viewers have lost?
By my calculations, it is possible the ITV Lunchtime News might have lost 90 seconds. Ad breaks in the 10pm hour could have led to scheduling changes but would not necessarily cut the overall duration of News at Ten.
The biggest change would have been the potential for an extra 6 minutes and 30 seconds of ads during a typical evening in the 6pm hour.
But it’s only 19 months since ITV voluntarily doubled the length of its early evening news programme.
ITV would still have delivered on its statutory obligations on news.
On Monday, Channel 5 had 11 minutes 30 seconds worth of ads in the 5pm hour during which 5 News is shown. Would a 30 second cut in the duration really have caused that much concern?
The principal effect could have been on Channel 4 News as far as I can work out.
Every argument Ofcom highlights was known about beforehand and scrutinised. There was never going to be unanimity of opinion.
There is a legitimate argument to be made for a holistic approach, looking at changes to ad rules along with broader changes to the licensing of ITV and Channel 5. But, again, that could have been said months ago.
By taking things so far, there is the risk that Ofcom could be accused of leading stakeholders up the garden path. It could have dismissed or delayed the case for change much sooner.
Meanwhile the value of commercial PSB licences continues to decline – the gifted airspace and EPG prominence are less important than used to be the case.
The government has even raised the possibility of allowing the three channels to shift PSB obligations on to their digital channels and online services.
Of course, many of us may not like the thought of more ads but there are commercial realities to consider – paying for PSB obligations and sustaining original British productions. It’s worth noting the channels would not have been under any obligation to increase ad time.
It is no bad thing to see Ofcom turn down a commercial move favoured by some broadcasters – at least it shows that the body is no lapdog.
But I would not blame ITV or Channel 4 for being disappointed.
And any viewer who supports the move, may want to ask how licence obligations will remain sustainable in the longer term.
Acknowledgements