Oxford 19.1.06: BBC Governance and the PVT
Public Value Means
Value to the Public
Patrick Barwise
London Business School
1. What’s the problem we’re trying to address?
2. Net public value: what it is and isn’t
3. Initial evaluation of the BBC’s proposals
1. What’s the Problem We’re
Trying to Address?
(With a few quibbles) the BBC provides:
• Good range and quality of services, popular with the
public
• Good value for money and financial probity
• One of the most trusted media brands on the planet
• Independent of government
• Supports citizenship, education, culture, training, new
technology, etc
• Backbone of UK broadcasting for 80 years – a great
British success story
So What’s the Problem?
• Not perfect, eg Hutton, dumbing down (?)
• Governance requires difficult judgements about
scope, populism, etc
• Governors have lacked expertise, resources,
independence from management
• Lack of transparency, framework, objective evidence
• Inevitably losing share (in TV)
• Offends market fundamentalists (although chosen
60m times/day)
• Commercial and political vested interests (usually
calling for less competition)
2. Net Public Value: What It Is
and Isn’t
As defined and used in the 2004 review of the BBC’s
digital television services (1):
• Public value is the overall benefit to the UK public
• Includes short- and long-term, direct and indirect,
consumer and citizenship benefits
• Net public value is public value after allowing for
both the cost of providing the service and the
indirect effects of its market impact
(1) Independent Review of the BBC’s Digital Television Services, October 2004
(www.culture.gov.uk), p 19
Net Public Value is NOT
• A metric (ie an objective, quantitative measure): it
is a “structured, evidence-based framework for
making subjective judgements”
• A sophisticated technique, although these may be
used to analyse specific issues such as consumer
preferences or market impact
• A way of balancing benefits to the public against
disbenefits to other market players: the market
impact of a BBC service is included only to the extent
to which it indirectly affects the service’s net benefit
to the UK public
3. Initial Evaluation of BBC’s
Proposals
• About improving something that works, not replacing
something that doesn’t
• BBC’s main accountability is directly to viewers and
listeners (choice)
• Grade reforms already addressing problems with
Governors: Hutton, expertise, resources,
independence from management
• Service licences and PVT will provide transparency,
a framework, and evidence
• Easily the most sophisticated and transparent PSB
governance scheme in the world; should be given
time to bed in
Five Concerns
1. Won’t satisfy market fundamentalists or commercial
and political vested interests
2. Public voice: general consumer organisations
(Which?, NCC) not involved; VLV punches above its
weight but has limited resources
3. BBC purposes and service licences are too
complex: need to keep focused on what matters to
the public – good programmes (“inform, educate,
and entertain”)
4. Market Impact Assessment: need to follow this
through to its effect on net public value
5. Scope is inherently controversial at the margin (eg
local TV)
Finally – the PVT Cuts Both Ways
• From now on, the onus will also be on
the BBC’s critics to say why the public
would benefit from their proposals