MARGINAL COMMENT
By HAROLD NICOLSON
ON Sunday last I completed a five years' term as Governor of the B.B.C. Exactly one week will now elapse between my ceasing to be one of the rulers of the Corporation and my again becoming one of its incidental servants. Before the hand of reticence is again clapped over my mouth I propose to emit a short sharp yell of protest. My protests, unlike those indulged in by other ex-rulers or ex- servants of the Corporation, will possess no news-value at all. I shall refrain from abusing the Labour Government for not appointing, at the eleventh hour, a Select Committee which the Caretaker Govern- ment, with several months at their disposal, were too careless to think of. I am not going to discuss the comparative, merits of centralised or regional, of unified or emulative, broadcasting ; still less shall I embark upon the rough and almost uncharted seas of sponsored programmes. I have nothing useful or interesting to say about the relay system, the future of frequency modulation, or the proper relations between the Foreign Office and the European services. There is much which I could say about the eternal problem of accom- modation and I could write pages of commiseration on the theme of the congestion and shortage of studio-space with which the patient workers of the Corporation have to cope. The affection and respect which I feel for the Chairman, Director-General, Controllers, Governors, engineers and programme staff of the Corporation would deter me in any case from discussing the internal management of the B.B.C. All I can say is that the administration of the B.B.C. compares most favourably with that of other organisations, whether in White- hall or in Fleet Street, of which I have had continuous experience. My protest is in no sense directed at a Corporation with which I have had a long and not unprofitable connection, and from which I have a lively expectation of future benefits to come. It is a protest against the ungenerous treatment accorded to the B.B.C. by the British Press.
* * * *
I agree, of course, that monopolies tend to corrupt, and that absolute monopolies tend to corrupt absolutely. I agree that the attitude of the Press towards the B.B.C. should be one of constant and vigilant criticism. I have no complaint at all against those news- papers which attack the standards of the entertainment programmes, which protest against the tones of some of the inferior vocalists, or against the pernicious boosting by producers and band-conductors of each other and themselves. I have nothing but respect for the majority of radio-critics, whose articles are in general conscientious, well-informed and fair. The responsible weekly critics of the B.B.C. programmes provide the staff of the B.B.C. with valuable criticism and comments, are fully conscious of the immense difficulties which beset programme-building, make all reasonable allowances, distribute praise where praise is merited, and do in fact provide much healthy encouragement to those whose hard task it is to cope hour by hour with this enormous output. Not only clks these critics carefully study the balance of the programmes ; they actually listen in. It is not against them that my protest is directed ; I wish them well ; they are performing a useful and honourable function. My protest is directed against the general editorial and sub-editorial attitude towards the B.B.C. There is, I believe, a saying in Fleet Street, that "dog does not eat dog" ; and in fact I have often observed how rarely one newspaper attacks another for its inconsistency or mistakes. It may be the hunger engendered by this asceticism which tempts the dogs to join with such relish in pursuing the cat.
* * * *
I have noticed, for instance, that if a journalist gets into trouble over his coupons or his wife, no mention of this incident occurs in the rival newspaper. I regard such solidarity as admirable and moving. But if some obscure member of the B.B.C.'s enormous staff falls upon adversity, one is apt to find a head-line somewhere, " B.B.C. official charged." I quite agree that the B.B.C. staff should be, and often is, as pure as Caesar's wife ; but if Casar had possessed io,000 wives or grand-daughters, there would have been more than one Ovid to be sent to Tomi. Such trivial incidents do not, of course, bring permanent discredit upon the Corporation as a whole; but their repetition does suggest to the staff of the B.B.C. that the vigilance with which the Press quite rightly pursues the Corporation is not always an ideal vigilance. I admit that the more responsible newspapers seldom dig out from the dust-bin these tiny particles of discredit ; but even they display a strange unanimity in refraining from all credit-references to the B.B.C. or its activities. In the recent House of Commons debate upon broadcasting, for instance, there was hardly a. speaker who did not pay some tribute, and often a generous tribute, to the magnificent work done by the B.B.C. during the war ; these tributes were most meagrely reported. I appreciate the fact that there exists an acute shortage of newsprint and that credit-references are never news ; yet I have observed that even The. Times newspaper will,. in spite of its lack of Lebensraum, rarely omit even the most incidental or fatuous reference to its own columns or cgrrespondence. The staff of the B.B.C. are not, in thy experience, unduly sensitive ; but they are certainly overworked ; and it is dis- couraging for people who perform an intricate task with commendable efficiency to be surrounded by sullen seas of dispraisal with only one dew-drop here and there sparkling on a hidden leaf.
* * * * What is the reason for this latent, and sometimes overt, hostility? I cannot believe that it is due to a sense of rivalry, or to any of the minor jealousies aroused by assumed or actual competition. The British Press, as a whale, is far too sensible for that. I believe that it is due mainly to a dislike of privileged monopolies ; and I admit that such dislike is commendable and salutary. But it is also due to the fact that editors and sub-editors do not like the wireless, even as professional pianists do not care for the pianola. I have some sympathy with the irritation caused to busy men by the intrusion of the radio upon their lives. During their working hours they are too busy, and during their rare hours of ease too tired, to listen to the B.B.C. with any method. It is not possible for them, as it should be possible for any serious listener, to read the Radio Times and to mark in blue pencil those items which are designed for their own appreciation. They ,tgzn on the wireless only incidentally, and if they fall upon an item which was not meant for them, but was designed for some other type of listener, they become enraged. Instead of feeling pleased that the B.B.C., in its beneficence, should cater for a wide range of taste, they are displeased that the B.B.C. should, at that particular moment, not have catered for their own brand of taste. I admit also that the microphone,is apt to give even the most manly voice a tone of unctuous complacency which jars with much harshness upon tired nerves ; that is the fault of the medium rather than of the B.B.C.; for even at our larger railway stations the voices of the invigilators reach us in a form diluted from their natural purity, suggesting undertones of exhortation, menace, or dulcet self-satisfaction. I am not surprised that the editors, sub- editors, and proprietors of our great newspapers should dislike being patronised ; even Janus, our pater matutinus, has been known at moments to say cross rude things about the B.B.C.
* * * *
I do not want my yell of protest to end in a whimper. All my life I have been connected with organisations or causes which were unpopular, and I am nos-conscious of having suffered psychologically from the abuse which they or I received. But I have sometimes wondered whether it is their comparative efficiency alone which renders other quasi-monopolies (such as the Port of London Authority or the London Passenger Transport Board) immune to such constant objurgation. The B.B.C. survived the attacks of the Luftwaffe; when continental stations were silenced almost nightly, the B.B.C. in six years of bombardment was for only three minutes completely off the air. But it is easier to survive thunderstorms than to remain active in a damp climate ; and my admiration and my heart go out to the officials of the B.B.0;.who, discouraged perhaps but unperturbed, survive the constant climate of denigration in which they spend their arduous days and nights.
Previous page
