Official Report 531KB pdf
Item 3 is evidence from STV as part of our evidence-taking sessions on broadcasting in Scotland.
Yes. Thank you very much, convener. I will be brief. Apologies from our colleague Bobby Hain, who has been unavoidably detained in London and is sorry that he cannot be here—he was looking forward to it.
Thank you very much, Mr Clements. However, you did not mention Airdrie United or Shotts Bon Accord, so that is you in my bad books already.
I want to look briefly at the issue of digital switchover. In particular, are there any lessons for the rest of Scotland from the switchover in the north of Scotland?
Obviously, STV has been very much involved in digital switchover and rolling out the information and marketing to the Scottish audience. Are there lessons to be learned? Yes, there probably are. The more information is given out to the audience, the better. You probably realise that, with the switchover being imminent for the rest of Scotland, we have a strong on-air marketing campaign and information on all our websites. We have also set up a viewers’ inquiry line that is ready to take any calls from anybody who is interested in or worried about digital switchover.
Did having multiple switchover dates in different parts of the north create any issues? I know that the small island of Barra in my constituency had two switchover dates. Did the public in the north generally understand the switchover dates?
Digital switchover is quite a difficult concept for a lot of the audience. We hope that the procedures that we put in place were available whenever anybody needed more information or questions answered.
Has STV been involved in any way in the switchover help scheme, which allows more vulnerable groups to access technical assistance?
STV has been part of the wider group dealing with digital switchover, so we certainly contributed and offered any kind of assistance that we could in those instances.
Recently, you were instructed or advised by the Office of Communications as part of its public sector broadcasting review, that STV could reduce the number of hours of news that it broadcast during the day. What has been the impact of that on your news production both on screen and on your website? You may want to talk to us a bit about STV local, which is still in its formative stage, and say how you think that it is developing.
In most weeks we deliver more than the minimum amount of hours of news that we have to deliver for Ofcom. We must deliver four hours of news a week, but we normally deliver four and a half hours. We also have our continuing commitment to regionalisation of the news, so we have four microregions. In any one day, because of the split between the STV north programme and the STV central programme, both of which split into their two separate microregions, we deliver 70 minutes of original news content across Scotland. News is very important to the schedule, so we are happy to overdeliver on the minimum requirements. That overdelivery flows through to stv.tv, our online offering, as well as to STV local, which has now been launched in over 16 territories or towns and cities, from Buckie down to Edinburgh. In the north-east, we have started doing specific news bulletins for STV local—in particular, on STV local Aberdeen. A live news bulletin goes out at 11 o’clock and at 4 o’clock in the afternoon.
We also regard the other Ofcom requirement for non-news programming very much as a floor rather than as a ceiling. Over the past two and a half years, we have consistently outperformed that requirement.
You have spoken about improvements in having more localised news bulletins in the north in particular. Would you like to develop that in other parts of Scotland?
Yes.
What kind of response have you been getting from viewers, and what interest has there been in the websites for STV local? Have you been monitoring that? How many hits have you been getting?
We started the north-east bulletin only on Monday, so it is relatively new. It is a pilot that we definitely want to roll out on all the STV local sites. We regard STV local as an extension of STV’s unique selling point. The production of news for Scotland is certainly at the heart of STV’s tradition, and STV local can make a unique offering. Our 125-strong news team can give backing to our local sites, where they will work with the community editors who are based in the locality of each site. The 16 STV local websites have a community editor who is based in the area, and they are responsible for gathering local news and feeding it into the STV local site, which, in turn, may feed that local news into the national, on-air version of the news. We are keen to put in place a network of newsgathering that works both ways. If the north-east bulletin is successful, we intend to roll it out across all our STV local sites.
Convener, I am sure that you are delighted that North Lanarkshire and South Lanarkshire were among the first wave of websites.
The weather—or the big freeze, as we called it—was a good example of the relationship between local news and information on the one hand and STV the national broadcaster on the other, because we were able to feed local news that we got from our STV local websites about road closures and snow heroes, as we called them, through into the national programme. We also tried to change our on-air schedule as much as possible to incorporate special weather bulletins and travel bulletins. We got information out across Scotland through STV as well as gathering and giving information at a local level through STV local.
STV local in my part of North Lanarkshire has been pretty successful. Around the time of the adverse weather, Kenny McKay did a fantastic job of pulling together all the information about where roads were closed and which train services were running. That was vital information to people who were trying to get around. We have also had positive experiences of local stories being moved up on to the national news. Sometimes, they were stories that might not otherwise have had such coverage but deserved it.
One of the strong points about STV local and STV as a broadcaster is that we have the capacity to take giant peaks in traffic at any one time. Therefore, during the big freeze, STV local was able to cope with thousands of people coming online at once to try to get information. We were aware of other sites that did not cope as well with the amount of traffic that suddenly came their way, but we put in place a robust technical system for online content.
STV exceeds its quota of commissioned programmes, but its percentage is still less than the network average of 45 per cent. Is that a deliberate policy? Are you trying to produce more programmes in-house, do you plan to increase the amount of programmes that are commissioned from outside companies, or is your approach simply based on the best possible programmes filling your schedule? What is STV’s philosophy on that matter?
You are absolutely right: we want to deliver the best possible relevant and affordable schedule for our audience, so we have made a conscious effort to deliver that through a mixture of network programmes, commissioned programmes and some key acquisitions.
On the subject of production, members will know that, under the terms of trade, ownership of intellectual property is important to us. If we make programmes such as “Born Fighting”, we can sell them around the world. Obviously, that takes the story of Scotland around the world, and it is clear that a profit is made at the same time.
Obviously, you are very enthusiastic about “Born Fighting”, and I am sure that we are all looking forward to seeing it. Will you go down that road much more in the years to come? Do you see high-quality products being produced for an international market as well as the domestic market? Is that how you envisage additional revenue being generated, given that there is so much competition for advertising revenue, in order to be able to produce better programmes for the domestic market, for example?
I think that there will always be a slightly mixed economy. For example, we have just finished but not yet broadcast the second series about the Royal (Dick) school of veterinary studies in Edinburgh, which is a Discovery Channel UK pre-buy. We will show that first in Scotland, and it will be taken to a wider UK audience on a digital channel. We can achieve a better-quality product by putting our money together. We hope to sell that series internationally and to share in the exploitation of that with Discovery.
I do not think that everything has to be culturally significant things to Scotland, to be honest. People have a broad range of tastes. I am certainly not interested in always watching things that relate to Scotland. People have broad horizons.
Just two?
There are two main things, one of which is that, if one channel decides to put on a comedy programme, all the other channels will put on comedy programmes at the same time, or if one channel puts on a political programme, all the other channels will put on political programmes at the same time. I know that many people can record programmes and watch them later, but that is quite grating. I find it bizarre that that has happened for decades.
I am sorry, but what did you say about repeats?
STV shows a higher proportion of repeats at peak times than the UK network average. Around 13 per cent of peak-time programmes in Scotland and around 9 per cent in the UK are repeats.
Do you mean on the UK ITV network?
Yes, of course. I am sorry.
To be perfectly honest, I am surprised by that figure. We make up our schedule by taking 95 per cent of the network schedule, so if there are repeats on that, we will probably go with them. Any opt-outs—where we put in our own programming—would, certainly in the past 12 months, have all been new programmes that were either commissioned or acquired, so I am not sure why our proportion of repeats would be higher than the ITV network average. If you like, I will investigate and come back with an answer, but I am surprised at that.
To be fair, the figures that we have are for 2009, so the situation may have evolved in the opposite direction since then. I am sure that we will all be pleased if that is the case.
I think that it probably has. In the middle of 2009, we put in our content strategy, which involves dropping more network programming in favour of Scottish or relevant programming for our audience, so the situation will probably have changed quite dramatically.
What about the issue of scheduling? At a particular time, regardless of the channel, there always seems to be sport, politics or drama on, or whatever it happens to be.
It is very frustrating for our scheduling team, too, as Alan Clements and I were discussing on the way through.
Those were just examples. In other areas you get the same thing, such as movie against movie and drama against drama. It has been going on since I can remember. Is there not a way in which all the broadcasters can get together and try to reach some kind of arrangement to provide more diversity with regard to when programmes are scheduled?
There are two aspects to the issue. As I said, we take 95 per cent of the ITV network schedule, so to some extent—
You do not necessarily have much of a say.
Correct. There are difficulties with moving things around the schedule. There is no way that we can move “I’m a Celebrity ... Get Me Out of Here”, for example, which is a 9 o’clock live programme. It is the same with the big juggernauts such as “The X Factor”.
The only saving grace is the proliferation of +1 channels. “Taggart”, which we premiered in Scotland, played across the UK in the past six weeks. It launched against “Silent Witness” on BBC1 and the launch of “CSI” on Channel 5. If you are a crime drama fan, that must be the most frustrating thing in the world. Interestingly, however, ITV+1 was launched in that week, and 300,000 people watched “Silent Witness” and then turned over to watch the first episode of “Taggart” on the +1 channel.
One leading idea in our new vision for STV is STV anywhere. We are trying to make our content available wherever and whenever anybody would like to consume it through the STV player, our STV+1 channel and the STV channel on YouTube, which contains all our contemporary programmes as well as iconic programmes from the archive. We hope to deliver our content to our audience when and where they want it. As Alan Clements said, that might start to combat the battle of the schedules.
In 2009, STV decided to opt out of some ITV1 network material, particularly at peak times—the main issues relate to that. What were the reasons behind that? What was the overriding reason?
The overriding reason was that we wanted to deliver a schedule that reflected our audience. We could have taken 100 per cent of the network programming, but that would not have defined STV as a broadcaster that was relevant to and interested in its Scottish audience. We wanted to commission and find relevant programming for our audience.
The broader context is that the ITV network, which has always drawn its strength from its regionality in England and the other nations of the United Kingdom, has become more metropolitan in its outlook. For comparison, it would be great to take the committee to our headquarters at Pacific Quay and then to Norwich, Birmingham, Nottingham or even Leeds to see the devastation of those once-proud ITV regions.
Our move in the direction of changing the schedule and putting in our own programming has been justified by the fact that our audience share for the peak has beaten the network in 2010. Our audience is responding well to the changes that we are making in the schedule.
I accept the argument that there is a desire for increased Scottish content and to support the Scottish broadcasting community, but cost was also a factor in coming out of the ITV scheduling.
Yes.
What savings have been achieved through that and how important a factor was it?
The savings were a factor. We cannot deny that. We have always said that we want to deliver a relevant and affordable schedule, so savings have been a factor, but the strong lead is an editorial decision. We know that there will be some savings, but the decision is editorial first and foremost: what in the network schedule that we are offered do we think will not be of as much interest or relevance to Scotland?
You mentioned earlier that you wanted a schedule that reflected the audience. Decisions are not made solely on viewing figures, but what has the public reaction to the changes been? Perhaps the media discussed the matter as much as communities, but there are obvious examples of concern about programmes that came out of the schedules.
We conducted four major focus groups at the end of 2010 to find out in a one-to-one situation what our audience thought about our opt-out strategy. The four groups were in Glasgow, Edinburgh, Dundee and Aberdeen. The feedback that we got from them was that they did not see any deterioration in what came out of the telly in the corner. They knew about the opt-outs—they knew what they were not getting—but all that information came from the newspapers and, because of the way it was reported, they were not aware of what they got instead. They were not aware of the fact that, for the first time ever, “Taggart” was premiered in Scotland. The Scottish audiences got “Taggart” before anybody else; it was a world premiere in Scotland. Much of the other programming that we are putting in is UK premiere. The focus groups were unaware of the positive sides of the opt-out strategy. They were aware only of what they did not get—the negative side—and they got that information only from the newspapers. However, they were perfectly happy with the service that they got from STV. For us, that was a positive reaction. Coupled with the audience ratings, it justified our strategy.
How is STV doing financially at the moment? The relationship with ITV is quite important for you.
I am slightly stymied in answering that, because our results are out tomorrow, so we are in a closed period. You will know in 24 hours. We are not looking miserable.
I will ask about Gaelic, but I will give you the context for my question. The committee discussed broadcasting with Blair Jenkins recently. We discussed the digital Gaelic channel, the potential for a Scottish digital channel, how they might overlap or mix and the future of Gaelic broadcasting generally. He expressed his view that it has always been difficult for commercial channels—STV in particular—to cope with Gaelic, because there can be difficulty reconciling the commercial imperative with the requirement to fulfil the needs of the Gaelic audience, which is clearly a specific audience.
The current commitment is that we broadcast one hour of Gaelic a week. The material is supplied by BBC Alba. It chooses what it wants to put out and we have a commitment to broadcast it, which we do.
When is it broadcast?
Monday nights at 10.40.
In the co-production model that we discussed earlier, we have occasionally been able to bring in UK digital money. Unfortunately, it was for a series about Scottish serial killers, which we seem to specialise in. We made a Gaelic version and an English language version, which played on the Crime and Investigation Network. You get a better quality show because a number of people contribute finance to it.
Is the one hour an Ofcom obligation? How do you see STV’s commitment to Gaelic developing, particularly in the light of BBC Alba’s existence and potential developments on a digital network, if that ever transpires, or do you have a one-hour commitment and that is it, and you have no plans to change it?
We have a one-hour commitment until BBC Alba is launched on Freeview. We have been in discussions with BBC Alba this week about how we can help to launch it on Freeview. We are hugely supportive of BBC Alba, because we have always believed that it is the right way for Gaelic broadcasting to go, but it is difficult for a commercial channel to have Gaelic programmes in peak viewing times. I do not think that we will ever go back to the days when we transmitted Gaelic programmes at half past 7 or 9 o’clock, because a very successful dedicated channel now exists.
From a production point of view, it is about increasing and enhancing the relationship, so that we can do more and more co-productions with BBC Alba, in which case there will be an English language version and a Gaelic version and everybody will benefit from a bigger pot of cash.
There are no plans to make STV programmes more accessible in Gaelic or to use an online platform or anything like that. You have no plans to develop your own Gaelic service.
No, not at the moment.
I will ask about programme sponsorship. As you are well aware, a couple of years ago there was concern in some elements of the press that there was maybe a bit of, dare I say, party-political pressure on you to make certain programmes, and you had to have discussions with Ofcom on the matter. Can you update us on that?
In what sense?
An issue was reported in the press regarding whether you were under political pressure to have certain sponsorship and to produce certain programmes.
Which was found not to be the case.
It was found not to be the case, but can you update us on your discussions with Ofcom on the matter?
It is difficult to give an update on a situation that did not exist, if you see what I mean. There has been no further request for information from Ofcom.
None?
None at all.
Can you update us on how you wish to take sponsorship forward?
I do not think that it is sponsorship. Do you mean in terms of commercial sponsorship of programmes?
Yes. Obviously, a variety of people may decide that they wish to sponsor programmes or input to such sponsorship. Do you have any future sponsorship plans?
Any sponsorship or ad-funding relationship that we enter into is bound by Ofcom rules, which we continue to adhere to. The main finding with regard to the incident to which you refer related to undue prominence, not political pressure.
How often do you find yourselves having to be accountable for or facing questions on such issues?
We do not face questions on any regular basis. We have a very close relationship with the Ofcom offices in Glasgow and London. For example, our compliance officer has daily discussions with Ofcom on different—and, indeed, new—parts of the code. When the code changes we seek advice, and we also regularly contribute to Ofcom’s consultations.
So you have daily discussions.
As far as that particular incident is concerned, Ofcom gave its ruling; we accepted it and moved on.
I must make it absolutely clear, though, that the ruling was not to do with political pressure.
But there were some issues in that respect.
There were issues about undue prominence but, going back to a previous question, I do not think that it is for me to suggest that the press might have an agenda with regard to a commercial rival such as STV.
But the fact is that certain issues were raised and it was important that you were accountable.
It was critical.
I apologise for being slightly late this morning.
I am delighted to answer that question.
Is there any mileage in putting that argument to the Government again? Do you have any indication that it will look at the matter again in a couple of years’ time?
You may have seen that, about two weeks ago, Anas Sarwar MP had an adjournment debate on the issue. We continue to lobby on the matter. Reading through the parliamentary language, the indication was that it will be looked at again when the new communications bill is introduced at Westminster. It will not be looked at again in isolation before then, but it will be looked at in that context. We hope that the outcome will be much more favourable at that point.
Earlier, we touched on issues relating to the Scottish digital network. When Blair Jenkins appeared before the committee a few weeks ago, he talked about the impact and consequences of that. What are your thoughts and feelings about the proposal for a Scottish digital network and its possible impact on STV?
Broadly, it is an interesting proposal that has cross-party and full parliamentary support. We welcome any input into the Scottish creative industries. I have made the point that a rising tide lifts all boats. The establishment of a Scottish digital network would be a really significant investment. The committee came to the nub of the issue—who pays for it? We welcome and agree with Blair Jenkins’s view that it should not seek advertising, as that would not be a commercially sustainable proposition. I am sure that radio stations and newspapers across Scotland would also agree with that.
It is always good to get your bid in early.
Yes. Shy guys get no broth.
You will understand that we are a very shy committee.
That is an interesting question. I read Blair Jenkins’s evidence carefully, especially his point that it is really odd that there is no debate or discussion programme on Scottish politics. I am so old that I once worked on Scottish “Question Time”—you will remember that, pre-devolution, once a month there was an opt-out from UK “Question Time”. I also worked on “Words with Wark”, which was a debate and discussion programme. There was also “Axiom” on BBC Scotland and “Scottish Women”, in various forms, on STV. It is curious that we now have much more political activity in Scotland but not a show that identifies that. Where such a show would be scheduled is an interesting issue. If there were a Scottish digital network, that would be a natural place to have it. It is interesting that there is no debate show on BBC Scotland.
As a broadcaster, I point out that our coverage of the Westminster elections last year was extensive. We intend to do even more for the forthcoming elections. For the Westminster elections, we were live from half past 10 at night through to half past 5 in the morning as the results came in. We will be doing something similar in May. We will also have a six-week campaign, starting off with a four leaders debate at the beginning and a live four leaders debate on the night before the election.
I am sure that we are all really interested in reinvigorating democracy. You mentioned some of your plans for the future, particularly your immediate plans in the run-up to the election. We have talked about STV local and the production of programmes. Have we missed anything out?
It is really important that everyone understands the issue of STV developing into a multiplatform media company. As I said, stv.tv is one of the most popular sites in Scotland. We have a dedicated STV channel on YouTube, which has a global audience. We have 2,500 hours of material on YouTube, which includes many of our iconic titles from the past. We are constantly putting our news on to YouTube. “The Hour” goes on to YouTube every day. We are also delivering the STV message to all the ex-pat communities in Canada and Australia. We really are trying to put STV on as many platforms as possible in order to allow our content to go out to as many people as possible. You can get the STV player on your PS3. I am sure that you all use your PS3s pretty regularly in your bedrooms. “STV anywhere” is our mantra at the moment, which is important for a multimedia audience.
From a production point of view, our slogan is, “From Scotland to the world”. That is how we see it. We are immensely proud of what we have done, but it is only the first steps towards regenerating Scotland as a production base. There is a real strategic opportunity. I would like Glasgow to be a bigger media hub than Manchester. That is a real ambition for me. It is not only about the stories that we tell ourselves in Scotland; it is about taking those stories to a wider UK and international audience. If we do more of that, I will be a very happy man indeed.
That concludes our questions. Thank you very much for your attendance. The meeting will now be suspended to allow our witnesses to leave and to have a short comfort break.