New rules to protect ‘distinctively British’ public service broadcasting’

[Newshound47]

Without wishing to delve into politics...

Canada has had very strict rules on Canadian-made content for many, many years - radio stations are required to play at least 40% Canadian music (so anything written and/or performed by a Canadian, and/or recorded in Canada); TV channels typically have to make sure that at least 55% of what they show (though this figure changes depending on the channel - film channels, for example, can get away with 30%) throughout the year is made in Canada (though I believe repeats of existing programmes can count towards this). While I doubt they will introduce anything that strict here in the UK, it is (I think) interesting to see how similar rules are already implemented elsewhere.

What’s the definition of Canadian for tv and film purposes? There is a lot of American set content that is made in Canada - does that count as Canadian even thriugh it’s funded by American companies.

[XIII]

This sounds very similar to the quota that Australian TV has where a decent percentage of content has to be Australian made. Neighbours has survived on both 10 and 11 because of it.

[Solari]

Without wishing to delve into politics...

Canada has had very strict rules on Canadian-made content for many, many years - radio stations are required to play at least 40% Canadian music (so anything written and/or performed by a Canadian, and/or recorded in Canada); TV channels typically have to make sure that at least 55% of what they show (though this figure changes depending on the channel - film channels, for example, can get away with 30%) throughout the year is made in Canada (though I believe repeats of existing programmes can count towards this). While I doubt they will introduce anything that strict here in the UK, it is (I think) interesting to see how similar rules are already implemented elsewhere.

What’s the definition of Canadian for tv and film purposes? There is a lot of American set content that is made in Canada - does that count as Canadian even thriugh it’s funded by American companies.

It has to have been at least partially funded by a Canadian company - American-Canadian co-productions qualify as Canadian content ('CanCon'), but stuff that happens to have just been filmed in Canada doesn't. For example, The Tudors qualified as CanCon, as it was an Irish-Canadian co-production, whereas, say, The Handmaid's Tale doesn't, as it's merely filmed in Canada. News and current affairs does count towards CanCon, so a lot of the legacy commercial networks use that to count towards much of their quotas.

This sounds very similar to the quota that Australian TV has where a decent percentage of content has to be Australian made. Neighbours has survived on both 10 and 11 because of it.

Funny, that - I'm pretty sure Neighbours is only still running because it gets good ratings here. It was shunted off to 11 (or 10Peach, as it's now known - think a sort of Australian E4) a decade ago and has remained there since.

(Funny story about that - in 2011 10 decided to make a big show of beefing up its news output, and replaced its 6pm hour, which had hitherto consisted of The Simpsons and Neighbours, with more news. It failed miserably, and after about a year they ended the experiment. The Simpsons moved back to its 6pm slot on the main channel - but not Neighbours.)

[Steve in Pudsey]

Isn't the normal way of doing this to offer a funding initiative with criteria about the kind of productions that qualify?

Worth noting that John Whittingdale was relieved of his role as Minster for Data and Media in the reshuffle today.

[XIII]

It has to have been at least partially funded by a Canadian company - American-Canadian co-productions qualify as Canadian content ('CanCon'), but stuff that happens to have just been filmed in Canada doesn't. For example, The Tudors qualified as CanCon, as it was a BBC-CBC co-production, whereas, say, The Handmaid's Tale doesn't, as it's merely filmed in Canada. News and current affairs does count towards CanCon, so a lot of the legacy commercial networks use that to count towards much of their quotas.

The Tudors wasn't made by the BBC, it was an Irish-Canadian co-production for Showtime and CBC.

[Solari]

It has to have been at least partially funded by a Canadian company - American-Canadian co-productions qualify as Canadian content ('CanCon'), but stuff that happens to have just been filmed in Canada doesn't. For example, The Tudors qualified as CanCon, as it was a BBC-CBC co-production, whereas, say, The Handmaid's Tale doesn't, as it's merely filmed in Canada. News and current affairs does count towards CanCon, so a lot of the legacy commercial networks use that to count towards much of their quotas.

The Tudors wasn't made by the BBC, it was an Irish-Canadian co-production for Showtime and CBC.

Noted - have corrected my post. Thanks.

[eyeTV]

Interesting that the minister mentioned Project Kangaroo which was rejected by the Competition Commission that would have allowed BBC, ITV & C4 to integrate their VOD services together back in 2008 and how this was a missed opportunity.

Is there anything to stop the PSB's creating such a platform now? There really should be a single platform for all the PSB's as the best way to showcase British content in the streaming age.

[Brekkie]

Well they basically have with BritBox.

[eyeTV]

Well they basically have with BritBox.

But that's mainly for archive. I mean integrating iPlayer, ITV Hub, All4, whatever 5's is called. Rather than browsing across 5 different apps and services.

Britbox could have been a paid add-on for that platform.

[TIGHazard]

While I doubt they will introduce anything that strict here in the UK, it is (I think) interesting to see how similar rules are already implemented elsewhere.

I guess the reason I posed the question "what programmes are problematic?" earlier is that looking at BBC One, BBC Two and ITV today on a typical weeknight, I can't see a single programme that isn't made in the UK (perhaps one nature documentary aside). On the other channels, Channel 4 does rely quite heavily on the US sitcoms in the mornings and Channel 5 has Neighbours and Home & Away (as has been said) but that's it - and I'm actually quite surprised.

I'm not sure what the problem is - I seem to remember far more imports shown on the PSBs years ago. Maybe it's just formalising keeping the status quo?

I suspect stuff like Death in Paradise is what they mean. British funded, filmed in the Caribbean.

[Flux]

This sounds very similar to the quota that Australian TV has where a decent percentage of content has to be Australian made. Neighbours has survived on both 10 and 11 because of it.

I personally have no problem if the rules they proposed are that programmes or films need to be made in Britain. Other countries do it, and it isn't unfair to expect that British-funded films and TV shows give back in some way to the country's economy by being produced there. The issue here is with this concept of content needing to be “distinctively British”. IMO That's a completely different thing, and leans into controlling creativity. It's not about where something's made, it's about how "British" its content is. That's really not something anyone is in a position to police - least of all the government who are holding up the Carry On films as a prime example of what they're after.

[XIII]

The PSBs usually exceed their quotas from Ofcom, I'm sure things like Small Axe and Sitting in Limbo would be fine and brought up as an example of great British drama rather than a safe cosy drama.

[Newshound47]

The PSBs usually exceed their quotas from Ofcom, I'm sure things like Small Axe and Sitting in Limbo would be fine and brought up as an example of great British drama rather than a safe cosy drama.

Well they both cover British history which would use the definition given for Derry Girls.

If everything has to be Distinctively British then Death in Paradise will have to finish. I can’t imagine that being popular.

[Newshound47]

This sounds very similar to the quota that Australian TV has where a decent percentage of content has to be Australian made. Neighbours has survived on both 10 and 11 because of it.

I personally have no problem if the rules they proposed are that programmes or films need to be made in Britain. Other countries do it, and it isn't unfair to expect that British-funded films and TV shows give back in some way to the country's economy by being produced there. The issue here is with this concept of content needing to be “distinctively British”. IMO That's a completely different thing, and leans into controlling creativity. It's not about where something's made, it's about how "British" its content is. That's really not something anyone is in a position to police - least of all the government who are holding up the Carry On films as a prime example of what they're after.

It will get very complicated - surely Ofcom are not going to be judging if a drama is too non British or not. That would be very controversial.

[Flux]

The PSBs usually exceed their quotas from Ofcom, I'm sure things like Small Axe and Sitting in Limbo would be fine and brought up as an example of great British drama rather than a safe cosy drama.

Well they both cover British history which would use the definition given for Derry Girls.

If everything has to be Distinctively British then Death in Paradise will have to finish. I can’t imagine that being popular.

But would it? It tells the story of a British man as a fish out of water dealing with crimes in another country. It’s his story, and he reacts to it all in a distintly British manner with swathes of traditionally British humour in the script.

Now, I’m not saying that’s true - but here’s the big flaw in what they’re proposing. Who’s to say DIP, by my elevator pitch above, isn’t distinctly British?

It’s a stupid idea porposed by outdated and inward looking politicians without a clue of how (or why) things will actually work in the real world.