Channel 4 and the Celebrity Big Brother Dabacle

Channel 4 was created in the 1981 Broadcasting Act. Its programming remit, which has remained largely unchanged, was cemented in the 1990 Broadcasting Act, with the station required:
[to] contain a suitable proportion of matter calculated to appeal to tastes and interests not generally catered for by Channel 3 and that innovation and experiment in the form and content of those programmes (should be) encouraged.
The service was also to offer “distinctive character.”
Today, if you visit its website, you’ll see that it’s primary purpose according to the 2003 Communciations Act:
The public service remit for Channel 4 is the provision of a broad range of high quality and diverse programming which, in particular:
(a) demonstrates innovation, experiment and creativity in the form and content of programmes;
(b) appeals to the tastes and interests of a culturally diverse society;
(c) makes a significant contribution to meeting the need for the licensed public service channels to include programmes of an educational nature and other programmes of educative value; and
(d) exhibits a distinctive character.

On this morning’s Today programme (Real Audio), Channel 4 chairman Luke Johnson wasn’t prepared to say anything. So when Channel 4’s chief executive Andy Duncan appeared at a live press conference in Oxford (where he had been scheduled to speak as part of a media conference), all eyes and ears were on him as events surrounding the current edition of Celebrity Big Brother grew ever larger.
And of course he defended the programme. Two of the contestants had been spoken to he said, and we’d be able to see this tonight ourselves. What? Last night’s ratings not big enough Andy?
Whilst issues of racism or bullying are absolutely the kind of issues that a public service broadcaster such as Channel 4 should be covering as they’re incredibly relevant in today’s society, is it fair that a “contestant” in a “game show” is abused? Yes, these truths do need to be confronted. But this isn’t some kind of fly on the wall documentary; this is taking place in a television studio in an environment concoted purposefully, almost wholly for entertainment purposes.
Is there racial abuse going on in the “house”? Probably. Is there bullying going on? Almost certainly. Are some of the contestants going to be demonised on leaving the programme? Certainly. I’m not watching the damn programme, so I can’t comment from an enormous position of knowledge. However, I’ve seen the same clips lifted for news items. Selective, perhaps, but then the whole conceit is based around selective editing with “story editors” and producers putting “packages” together for the edification of viewers.
Yes, the 30,000+ complaints to Ofcom has been based around organised protests. Even Ofcom makes it easy for you with a direct link from their main Complaints page. But that’s not to belittle the genuine feelings of thousands of people in this country.
I expect that that the hyenas will be out tomorrow evening for the eviction, baying for blood in a display that brings to mind what it must have been when public executions took place regularly at the Tyburn gallows. That kind of sight is as gruesome as a “posse” of News of the World readers (is that the correct collective noun?) attacking a paediatrician mistaken for a paedophile, or the people who stand around outside the Old Bailey to shout contempt when a serial killer is on trial.
What is clear is that Davinna McCall is thoroughly ill-equipped to handle an interview in the circumstances we now find ourselves in.
In a self-serving piece of publicity, the Carphone Warehouse pulled their sponsorship of the programme this afternoon. Whilst I’ve no doubt that Charles Dunstone really does find the recent turn of events in the programme sickening, as, I’m sure, many of his employees do, let’s not forget that the programme’s notoriety in recent years has built upon shock tactics. So he knew what he was letting himself in for when he agreed to the sponsorship. Still, this will at least give Channel 4 a little more pause for thought as they probably lose millions of pounds as a result. And I trust that the brand won’t return as a sponsor when the regular series starts up again, as it surely will, this summer.
We’ve had domestic violence and racism now. So what’s next Channel 4?
[LATER] The premium rate voting lines for Big Brother are all for pure profit. As a commenter on the Media Guardian Organ Grinder notes, this just stirs people into voting for Shilpa the contestant at the receiving end of all this. So more cash for Channel 4 and Endemol, the producers of this programme (I don’t know precisely how the revenue is split – please let me know if you do).
I suggest that the profits at least get diverted to some kind of race relations or bullying charity. [UPDATE] They now are being donated to the charity chosen by the eventual winner. And they’re getting rid of the crowd element of the eviction.
[LATER STILL] One thing that really annoys me over this whole ridiculous incident is that Channel 4 is singularly failing in coming forward to openly talk about what it has aired in the last week. I’ve just watched the network’s own excellent news programme, and the channel was unwilling to put someone up to talk about the issues. That’s an unconscionable failure – they absolutely have to be willing to defend their actions. It’s not for government to determine what’s aired fortunately, but this does mean that someone has to step up and face the criticism. Think of everything that the BBC has faced over the years. At least the Director General or Chairman was always willing to step up and take the flak if need be. Andy Duncan may have feebly faced a press conference earlier, but he, or someone equivalent, should have faced Jon Snow on the Channel 4 News tonight. I, and every other viewer, expect nothing less.
You know, I’m really annoyed that I’m writing all this about such a trivial and worthless programme. There really are more important things in the world going on.


Posted

in

Tags:

Comments

One response to “Channel 4 and the Celebrity Big Brother Dabacle”

  1. Adrian Fitch avatar

    Despite more important things going on in the world, nearly eight million people watched Jade’s eviction on Friday night, and Channel 4 said yesterday that 82 per cent of those who phoned in had voted to throw her out. I expected higher and am suprised that 18 percent of voters supported Jade’s racism and bullying.