Broadcasting With Handicaps
Neither the last week's White Paper on the Beveridge Report, nor the earlier White Paper of l946, which last week's quotes with approval, nor indeed the Government's policy on broad- casting- generally shows any great evidence of consecutive thought. But thought itself seems to have become dislocated where the question of political control of broadcasting is con- cerned. For the very passage in the 1946 White Paper which was singled out for notice asserted that the independence of the Cor- poration in day-to-day management was the policy best calcu- lated to " remove from the party in power the temptation to use the State's control of broadcasting for its own political ends." And yet the policy of the Government, as it stood before Thurs- day's debate, was to proceed to set up national Broadcasting Councils for Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, the majority of whose members should be drawn from county councils and major urban local authorities. This last provision was always inexplicable. It is also according to the Government's view, as stated in 1946 and deliberately singled out for restatement last week, pernicious. It is hardly surprising that the B.B.C. has protested. Nor, unfortunately, is it surprising that the protest has been linked with the old, faulty arguments for a programme monopoly. The awkward fact is that the arguments against State control of broadcasting are very similar to the argumetts against control by a private monopoly. There are no final safeguards against the misuse of power. But it may be conceded that the danger of its misuse by party politicians—even local and pro- vincial ones—is much greater than the danger of misuse by the B.B.C. As to the recommendation that the B.B.C. should only retain 85 per cent. of the licence fee, the Government is once again plainly in the" wrong, and the B.B.C. once again has got its counter-arguments tangled. The argument that the Corporation will be forced to borrow money which the listener will have, in effect, already contributed is confused and unnecessary. The argument that the Government proposes to misappropriate 15 per cent. of the licence fee is straighten and better. Even if the Corporation received 100 per cent..it might still have to borrow, and it is better to borrow openly for capital development than to confuse capital with current expenditure.
Previous page
