ITV warns it could stop being a PSB

[James Martin]

This is true. The much maligned 1990 act and 1991 franchise round ultimately was set up to prepare ITV for the competition emerging from satellite and cable television. It would be folly to suggest the 80s ITV model could have survived the multichannel era let alone the digital and streaming ones. Now the competition is from streaming services, and unlike in the 90s you're not tied to a contract to get that extra content. So whatever happens it has to leave Channel 3 able to be a fit and healthy player.

[ToasterMan]

Has anybody read the books What Price Channel 4 and A License to be Different?

Both books seem to cover how the indie producers sector in Britain arrived in the mid-80's, love to read them sometime

I find it strange how ITV was suddenly required to commission 25% of it's output to indie producers, when they already had a better track record compared to the BBC.

[Humphrey Hacker]

This is true. The much maligned 1990 act and 1991 franchise round ultimately was set up to prepare ITV for the competition emerging from satellite and cable television. It would be folly to suggest the 80s ITV model could have survived the multichannel era let alone the digital and streaming ones. Now the competition is from streaming services, and unlike in the 90s you're not tied to a contract to get that extra content. So whatever happens it has to leave Channel 3 able to be a fit and healthy player.

The Act did prove that there was room for another kind of network Sky's (and briefly BSB) pan-national genre specific channels provided an alternative to the cozy ITV system and Post 1993 was I feel the beginning of the end.

[James Martin]

This is true. The much maligned 1990 act and 1991 franchise round ultimately was set up to prepare ITV for the competition emerging from satellite and cable television. It would be folly to suggest the 80s ITV model could have survived the multichannel era let alone the digital and streaming ones. Now the competition is from streaming services, and unlike in the 90s you're not tied to a contract to get that extra content. So whatever happens it has to leave Channel 3 able to be a fit and healthy player.

The Act did prove that there was room for another kind of network Sky's (and briefly BSB) pan-national genre specific channels provided an alternative to the cozy ITV system and Post 1993 was I feel the beginning of the end.

I'd agree with that, but there's no way the old ITV was going to remain sustainable longterm.

[Humphrey Hacker]

This is true. The much maligned 1990 act and 1991 franchise round ultimately was set up to prepare ITV for the competition emerging from satellite and cable television. It would be folly to suggest the 80s ITV model could have survived the multichannel era let alone the digital and streaming ones. Now the competition is from streaming services, and unlike in the 90s you're not tied to a contract to get that extra content. So whatever happens it has to leave Channel 3 able to be a fit and healthy player.

The Act did prove that there was room for another kind of network Sky's (and briefly BSB) pan-national genre specific channels provided an alternative to the cozy ITV system and Post 1993 was I feel the beginning of the end.

I'd agree with that, but there's no way the old ITV was going to remain sustainable longterm.

True, it would have been impossible. ITV's future as 1 company was inevitable but I feel that it could have maintained a greater level of locality/PSB.

Having said that though and returning to now "local news" had changed in both what it is and where it comes from. It's not "regional news" such as Calendar its news that can be gleaned from websites and social media.For example where I live (and its probably true elsewhere) There is a Facebook page dedicated to news in my home town. ITV could never have done that.

[James Martin]

I think this is why the Local TV thing never took off. People just have other places to get their news from now.

[Stuart]

I don't think anyone would be knocking on Ofcom's door offering to set up a new regionally based national channel to replace ITV as the C3 contractor. That ship has long since sailed.

In the reality of the 2020s, perhaps Ofcom would just remove the contract, high EPG slots and gifted spectrum without feeling the need to advertise for a replacement service. People are used to seeing new EPG numbers, and new slots can be purchased.

However, an ITV free of PSB commitments becomes no different to other multi media providers such as Comcast, ViacomCBS, Netflix and Prime. They would become a 'juicy purchase' for one of the big international players because of their existing audience base and back catalogue.

Perhaps ITV shareholders are just hearing "Kerching!", and the opportunity to get their investment out of a crowded market.

[bluecortina2]

....In the reality of the 2020s, perhaps Ofcom would just remove the contract, high EPG slots and gifted spectrum without feeling the need to advertise for a replacement service. People are used to seeing new EPG numbers, and new slots can be purchased. ...

I think we can very safely assume Ofcom is absolutely wedded to the concept of plurality of PSB broadcasting in the UK and that’s never going to change. Personally I wouldn’t be at all surprised not only if ITV continued with its licences at Ofcom’s invitation but was also cross subsidised by the BBC licence fee - but of course that is complete unfounded speculation on my part.

[James Martin]

Like a regional tax?

I can't see that happening when the license fee itself has something of a question mark over it, or at least it did before that thing that cancelled everything happened.

Might be an interesting compromise though and ensure plurality of PSB news.