ITV licence renewal: a far cry from the process of the past

ITV looks set to confirm within the next few days that it has renewed its channel 3 licences.

The broadcaster has about another fortnight to do so.

Last week its Scottish counterpart STV quietly confirmed it had agreed its new 10-year licence from Ofcom.

What’s interesting is that this licence renewal process has scarcely merited public interest.

There was, at least, some public discussion over the last renewal in 2013.

It led to the reversal of some cuts in regional output introduced by ITV a few years earlier – notably the reintroduction of a dedicated news service for the Border region and local programmes for the Scottish part of its area.

Given the lack of public comment, it would appear ITV is not discussing any major changes to its regional news provision.

It will be interesting too to see whether the existing volumes of non-news output are kept in Wales and Northern Ireland.

There may be slight tweaks of course.

It became apparent during the consultation on whether to allow more advertising on Channel 3 that it could lead to shorter news programmes. 

Might the new licences refer to the actual volume of output rather than the scheduled slot durations?

That way the question over the actual amount of news is already settled – ahead of the increase in the volume of advertising which ITV and Channel 4 both want.

The other question, which is linked to the Media Bill going through parliament, is whether all ITV’s public service commitments will need to be met on Channel 3.

Would the broadcaster have the flexibility to meet some of them on its other channels or ITV X?

Would the UTV Podcast – which is now in-vision – count towards ITV’s statutory requirement for Northern Ireland? Or would it still be seen as an additional service provided by choice?

Those who yearn for the franchise rounds of old are mistaken. 

The ITA/IBA was allocating the scarce right to use a restricted resource and could exert huge power as a result.

The 1968 and 1982 shake-up was painful for the losers – especially companies like Southern which simply lost to the promise of something better. 

Still the regulator believed it was important to prevent complacency and allow new people into the system.

Little good though came of the shambolic 1991 franchise auction.

If ITV and Ofcom somehow failed to reach an agreement, ITV would simply carry on elsewhere – a different slot on the EPG, different capacity on Freeview.

Any subsequent new operator for the third channel would be setting up a whole service from scratch.

The concept is, of course, ludicrous and would be in nobody’s interests.

But it’s sad the public has not been involved in discussions over whether ITV’s existing service could be modified or improved.

A few questions which the public could have been asked:

• Is the regional map correct? Or is some of it a legacy? For instance should Bluebell Hill go to the London region and should the South Lakes be with Border or the North West?
• Should the regional bulletins during Good Morning Britain continue? Or could the resources be used on enhancing some 6pm programmes?
• Is regional news provision adequate in some areas? Or is it skewed towards the bigger population centres?

Ofcom consults on planned changes suggested by a licensee. But wouldn’t it be nice to see it look proactively at whether something could be better?

The value of a Channel 3 licence is declining so there is less and less scope for Ofcom to require ITV to do things which are not in its commercial interests.

But the extension to the 6.30pm news shows that improving a public service can also make commercial sense.

If a broadcasting service belongs to the public – and not simply its shareholders – the public should have had a voice in the discussions on its future. 

Or are the public simply seen now as customers who can go elsewhere if they’re unhappy? Not citizens who are also stakeholders.

Acknowledgements