Distribute licence fee revenue throughout broadcasting sector

THE bosses at RTÉ must be very happy with Interim Report of the Forum on Broadcasting which has just been published.

Only in one respect is the report radical: by departing from its own terms of reference. Whereas it was instructed by the Government not to examine "the adequacy or otherwise of the current RTÉ licence fee", the forum has done the exact opposite. It gives a ringing endorsement to the case for a license fee increase, and implies that the fee should be index-linked to prevent its value being eroded over time.

There is better news for RTÉ. The forum accepts the status quo of dual funding, under which the State broadcaster gets both TV licence and advertising revenue. And it dismisses the suggestion that the independent sector should receive a portion of the licence fee in exchange for public service broadcasting.

While the report is not binding on the Government, it will be welcomed in Montrose because it proposes all gain, and very little pain, for RTÉ. Its dominant position as the public service broadcaster is given the thumbs-up, and none of its vested interests are disturbed.

The forum makes a pretence of demanding accountability. It says the State broadcaster should henceforth be regulated by a new Broadcasting Authority of Ireland, not by the RTÉ Authority.

RTÉ should agree a charter with the Minister for Communications, to include clear statements of purpose and criteria for monitoring its performance. It should account transparently for its use of public funding and it should publish a business plan.

RTÉ heads won't mind any of these proposals. It has already started down the road of financial accountability by cutting costs and shedding jobs.

And it knows that it must try harder when it comes to showing what exactly the public's licence fee is being spent on.

As for the charter, the report speaks vaguely of content, impartiality and the application of public sector funding, and says future licence fee increases should be linked to implementation of the charter. But there are no specifics, and no examination of how the State broadcaster has performed to date under the heading of impartiality, for example.

RTÉ is already subject to Section 18(1) of the 1960 Broadcasting Act, which requires it to present news and current affairs in an impartial manner, but this requirement is regularly flouted. After the divorce referendum, it was found to have acted unfairly by screening a disproportionate number of party political broadcasts calling for a Yes vote. Instead of accepting this decision, it joined forces with the Broadcasting Complaints Commission in an (unsuccessful) effort to overrule the court's decision.

This defensiveness about its own conduct often fuels on-screen bias. When, last week, Prime Time staged a studio discussion of the forum report, there was no opponent of a TV licence fee increase on the panel. And a few weeks ago RTÉ screened Telling Your Stories, a documentary about its own programming output. It was one long rant for more resources, but no serious reflection on issues of balance or value for money.

Ironically, RTÉ's own guidelines call for broadcasting that "generally reflects the mores, and respect the values, of the society in which it operates, acknowledging its standards of taste, decency and justice". But its real attitude can be seen from the fact that it has never bothered to create an internal structure to ensure it conforms with this ideal.

The Forum on Broadcasting has nothing to say about this in its philosophically bankrupt report. Nor has it anything new to say concerning complaints from the public. It just recommends that we should continue to have our autonomous (and anonymous) Broadcasting Complaints Commission.

When did you last hear about a ruling from this commission? Did you ever hear an apology on TV or radio as a result of a complaint upheld by the BCC? Did you ever hear of a journalist criticised, much less suspended, for bias, or of RTÉ being fined for unprofessional conduct on the part of any of its producers or presenters? You haven't. Because the Broadcasting Complaints Commission has no power to do these things. And because of that, there is the potential for some journalists at RTÉ will continue to rig panels, skew questions and ignore obvious facts whenever it suits their agenda.

Had the forum chosen to define public service broadcasting, things might have been different. By adopting Lord Reith's maxim that such broadcasting should "educate, entertain and inform" it could have considered RTÉ's performance under all these headings. It could have asked, for example, why RTÉ is dominated by so many Dublin voices, and whether the station can possibly educate and inform people while it ignores the experience and perspectives of rural Ireland to the extent that it does.

It could have examined whether decentralisation away from Dublin would save money and help "reflect the cultural diversity of the whole island of Ireland" which the 2001 Broadcasting Act requires.

The forum could have asked whether it is right for RTÉ to pay salaries of up to half a million euro to some of its top broadcasters. Should public money be wasted in this way just to keep certain big names working in Montrose? While these talented people are undoubtedly popular with the public, and good for audience ratings, nobody has ever suggested that they confer any public service benefit. A hundred other broadcasters could fill their shoes and we wouldn't be any worse off.

In fact, the public would continue to enjoy these personalities even if they defected to the independent sector, and RTÉ would benefit as well. It would lose its addiction to the celebrity culture, and instead of putting on the same tired old performers, it could more easily nurture and showcase new talent. Which is one of the things public service broadcasting is supposed to be about.

Public service broadcasting in this country will not improve as long as RTÉ is the sole recipient of the licence fee. The current situation lets the independent sector completely off the hook. While Today FM, TV3 and others are required by the Broadcasting Commission of Ireland to produce a certain quantity of news programmes, they produce nothing at all in the area of quality drama or religious affairs to name just two areas of public interest. As they see it, their main obligation is to their shareholders, not to the public.

As a result, RTÉ faces no competition when it comes to election coverage, history programmes, the arts, science, spirituality, health, education and consumer affairs. If they had to vie for resources to make these programmes, we would have a much greater spread of voices and viewpoints.

We would have less bias because station bosses would be afraid of losing contracts. And we would have higher quality television and radio from the independent sector.

Just possibly, an increased licence fee would be a good idea. But let it be distributed throughout the broadcasting sector according to the various types of programmes which deserve funding. Let's have an independent body which decides who gets what, according to the previous year's programming, the number of home-produced shows, and the standards of objectivity and good taste shown by the applicant stations.

If we retain the RTÉ monopoly we get a lose-lose situation. The State broadcaster will continue to be complacent and at times unprofessional in serving the needs of the public. While the independent sector will do the bare minimum, serving up a profitable diet of sex, sport and soaps, instead of TV and radio which enhances the quality of people's lives.

What a waste of our airwaves that would be.