BBC managers have their rewards, but are they just?

The BBC is adept at manipulating the press. That is how it came to have two bites at the PR cherry this week. Through leaks it tried to isolate the news of quite unjustified rises of 18 per cent and more in the salaries of most of its top executives from the good news about its highly effective programmes and channels, funded by the licence fee. The basic point about the BBC is that it is having a tremendous creative run, but it is all thanks to public funds, and improved stewardship.

The BBC is adept at manipulating the press. That is how it came to

have two bites at the PR cherry this week. Through leaks it tried to

isolate the news of quite unjustified rises of 18 per cent and more in the

salaries of most of its top executives from the good news about its highly

effective programmes and channels, funded by the licence fee. The basic

point about the BBC is that it is having a tremendous creative run, but it

is all thanks to public funds, and improved stewardship.



The multi-channel era has seen satellite channels pushing upwards by a

fifth in one year to take 12 percent of total viewing. But the BBC’s

television audiences at 44 per cent are rock solid. In the past three

years the combined BBC1 and BBC2 audiences have not dipped, while ITV’s

eight point lead over BBC1 crumbled. It seems obvious that those truly

deserving big pay rises labour just below the top tier: they are the

creatives with the wit to conjure up Only Fools and Horses or EastEnders

Let’s hear it for Alan Yentob, now restored as director of television, and

the heads of departments who struggle to produce a stunning array of hits

programmes.



It is lamentable the chairman Sir Christopher Bland can justify the rises

by reeling off comparisons with private sector operations, when the truer

comparison is with worthy public servants. For instance, head of the civil

service Sir Robin Butler’s 1997 salary of pounds 157,000 (compared to

Birt’s pounds 355,000) springs to mind.



After reading the annual report I’m struck by how frequently the BBC’s

commercial Worldwide side fails to deliver. Profits are down one-third, it

is still negotiating for an American cable deal, the satellite services

BBC World and BBC Prime still make losses, links with the Discovery

Channel are still not signed, while the deal with Flextech, giving away

BBC rights to its back catalogue for up to 30 years, is untested.



The BBC was proud to take a loss, closing its Arabic service last year

rather than suffer Saudi censorship. But why it ever ventured into the

deal in the first place remains unanswered.



This commercial naivete is also exposed by the governors’ admission that

the BBC nearly came a cropper with overt sponsorship of the Prom in the

Park. It also failed to reduce the 13 per cent of licence fee evasion.



I’m not saying the BBC shouldn’t be evolving. But it is a hybrid body

still 95 per cent dependent on public funds. That is why its top brass are

thrilled by a document co-authored by top City economist Gavyn Davies

arguing it needed an up-rated licence fee, to exploit digital

opportunities.



To pretend that the BBC’s top management deserve to be rewarded along

private sector lines is wrong. They’d shrivel up in a place like

BSkyB.



They create the framework - not even the products - out of our money.



They are public servants, not media magnates.



Have you registered with us yet?

Register now to enjoy more articles and free email bulletins

Register
Already registered?
Sign in

Would you like to post a comment?

Please Sign in or register.