Category: Culture

  • Oliver Dowden – 2021 Article on the Broadcasting Landscape

    Oliver Dowden – 2021 Article on the Broadcasting Landscape

    The article written by Oliver Dowden, the Secretary of State for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport, on 23 June 2021.

    Think of the last TV show you recommended to a friend. In my house, we’re hooked on Spiral, the French police procedural. In the office, all the talk is about Mare of Easttown.

    Whatever your choice, I’ll bet you didn’t switch on your TV and watch it live, alongside millions of others. When Line of Duty drew record-breaking live viewing figures earlier this year, it was a rare exception to the new broadcasting rule. Traditional viewing habits are dead. We now live in a world of smart TVs and streaming sticks, catch-up and on-demand; of that nightly dilemma between Netflix, BBC iPlayer, or Amazon Prime.

    It’s a golden age for TV – and I want to keep it that way. But to do that, we need the healthiest broadcasting landscape: one that is diverse, free and pluralistic. One where streamers can keep churning out brilliant shows, while traditional public service broadcasters retain their place at the centre of the UK’s media ecosystem.

    Right now, UK broadcasters are holding their own. Production studios are packed. The BBC and Channel 4 have put out two of the most critically-acclaimed shows of recent years, I May Destroy You and It’s A Sin.

    But our broadcasters can’t do it alone – and they certainly can’t compete in a digital world while operating under analogue rules.

    So in the Autumn, I plan to bring forward a White Paper on the future of broadcasting, and how we can make it fit for the 21st century.

    First, we need to level the playing field, and address one blatant disparity forcing traditional broadcasters to compete with one hand tied behind their backs. Every “linear” broadcaster – BBC, Sky, etc. – has to comply with stringent content and audience protection standards.

    You might assume the same is true of video-on-demand services like Amazon Prime and Disney+. You’d be wrong. Of course, some have done an admirable job of introducing their own procedures – such as Netflix’s voluntary age ratings partnership with the BBFC. But this is all on an ad-hoc and inconsistent basis.

    So this summer we will consult on whether it’s time to set the same basic rules for video-on-demand services as we do for traditional broadcasters.

    The White Paper will also set out proposals on how we make sure public service broadcasters are given sufficient visibility – aka “prominence” – on different online platforms, and ensure viewers can continue to find and access original and high-quality British content.

    Amidst all this TV upheaval, it’s time to consider the long-term future of one broadcaster in particular: Channel 4. When Channel 4 joined the airwaves in 1982, there were just three other terrestrial TV stations, and there was a lively debate about how to put the latest available set of bandwidths to best use. The main reason Channel 4 won that competition and was set up as a publicly-owned, commercially-run station was to provide greater choice.

    Four decades later, choice is no longer an issue. Commercial satellite and digital terrestrial TV had already pushed channel numbers into the hundreds before the big online streamers exploded onto our screens.

    Channel 4 has delivered on its remit since being established, and has done an excellent job in managing the recent market upheaval.

    But this is 2021, not 1982 – and the broadcasting landscape has changed beyond all recognition.

    I want to make sure Channel 4 thrives for another 40 years, and so I believe it’s time to seriously consider changes to its current public ownership model. That model severely restricts Channel 4’s ability to access capital and compete with commercial broadcasters by investing in technology and programming.

    In order to secure its long-term success, this summer I will consult on the sale of Channel 4 – and I will be proceeding on the basis that an alternative ownership model (but one where it keeps its public service remit) may be better for the broadcaster, and better for the country. Private investment would mean more content, more jobs – and a more sustainable future for Channel 4.

    In an era of fake news and huge technological change, we need trusted and respected media providers more than ever. We’re taking steps to make sure they keep their place at the heart of British broadcasting, whatever the future holds.

  • Jo Stevens – 2021 Comments on the Government’s Broadcasting White Paper

    Jo Stevens – 2021 Comments on the Government’s Broadcasting White Paper

    The comments made by Jo Stevens, the Shadow Secretary of State for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport, on 23 June 2021.

    Channel Four has a unique role in British broadcasting as a company owned by the British public which ploughs its profits into commissioning new programming, creating jobs and discovering new talent.

    The Government, having wasted billions on crony contracts and vanity projects, are now looking for a short term-cash boost by selling off one of our great British assets to the highest foreign bidder. They are selling Britain short.

  • Oliver Dowden – 2021 Article on Protecting Journalism

    Oliver Dowden – 2021 Article on Protecting Journalism

    The article by Oliver Dowden, the Secretary of State for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport, on 20 June 2021.

    What makes a healthy democracy? The strongest and most progressive countries share lots of qualities, but they have two vital things in common: a free and diverse media and the right to dissent. This week, a vocal Twitter minority went after both.

    GB News had barely begun broadcasting when pressure group “Stop Funding Hate” tried to stifle it, piling the pressure on advertisers to boycott Britain’s newest current affairs channel for spreading “hate and division”. It came in a week when we had already witnessed free journalism under assault with the despicable harassment of BBC journalist Nick Watt.

    It seems GB News’ biggest crime – or rather “pre-crime”, as it’s called in the dystopian Minority Report when people are proactively punished for wrongs they haven’t committed yet – was to signal that it might not always agree with the media consensus. When he launched the channel, veteran broadcaster Andrew Neil vowed that GB News would not be “an echo chamber for the metropolitan mindset”, and that it would “empower those who feel their concerns have been unheard”.

    Rightly so. A free media is one that has a diverse range of opinions and voices – and as I said earlier this week, GB News is a welcome addition to that diversity. We need outlets and commentators who cover the range of the political spectrum; who can speak truth to power; and who are willing to challenge dogma or orthodoxy.

    I’ve no doubt plenty of people will disagree with some of the things GB News commentators have to say – just as plenty of people disagree with the things they see and hear on the BBC, Sky News or any other media outlet. But if you don’t like those ideas, switch over – don’t silence. We shouldn’t be blocking people from the conversation simply because we disagree with them.

    That is exactly why, when we were developing legislation to boost online safety and tackle social media abuse, I was determined to make sure it couldn’t be used to stifle debate. Every country is grappling with this – but I believe the UK has struck the right balance and carved a path for the rest of the world to follow with our Online Safety bill, which we published in draft form last month.

    That bill will protect children online and help stamp out the vile social media abuse, including racism and misogyny. Crucially, though, it also includes strong safeguards for free speech and the freedom of the media.

    There will be a new requirement for social media companies to protect freedom of expression. The largest social media platforms will need to be clear to users about what they allow on their sites, and enforce it consistently. That means they won’t be able to arbitrarily remove content – and if a user feels they have, they’ll have a new right to appeal. Right now if content is removed there is no recourse to review or in many cases even get an explanation as to why material has been taken down. Our bill will enhance the protections in place.

    We’ve also got special safeguards for journalistic and “democratically important” content. News publishers’ content won’t be in scope – whether it’s on their own sites or on other online services. Journalists will also benefit from increased protections when they post on social media. The largest platforms will also have to protect political opinions on their sites, even if certain activists or campaign groups don’t agree with them.

    Those are the grounds of a functioning democracy. Sadly we can no longer take them for granted. Across the West, our values of tolerance and freedom of expression, for which previous generations have fought and died, increasingly risk being undermined by a small but vocal minority. For them, these are not absolute, but relative, concepts, ready to be bent to silence dissent from their world view. We will not stand by and allow that to happen.

  • Sadiq Khan – 2021 Comments on Fan Zone in London

    Sadiq Khan – 2021 Comments on Fan Zone in London

    The comments made by Sadiq Khan, the Mayor of London, on 17 June 2021.

    I am delighted that we are able to continue thanking our key workers and community groups by welcoming them to the Fan Zone at Trafalgar Square for England’s remaining group games. The opening weekend of the tournament was a huge success and I felt truly privileged to watch the match alongside Londoners who have given so much for our city over the last 16 months.

    My mission over the next three years is to put the dark days of the pandemic behind us and to deliver a better and brighter future for all Londoners. Despite the need to maintain social distancing for longer than planned, I’m confident that the remaining weeks of Euro 2020 will still provide a vibrant celebration and economic boost to the capital.

    I urge anyone not fortunate enough to get a place in the public ballot to continue to watch the matches at home or in a Covid-safe environment.

  • Jo Stevens – 2021 Comments on Those Booing the England Football Team

    Jo Stevens – 2021 Comments on Those Booing the England Football Team

    The comments made by Jo Stevens, the Shadow Secretary of State for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport, on 14 June 2021.

    It beggars belief that a day after the excellent win against Croatia, senior government ministers are still trying to provoke a fight with the England football team.

    Ministers should get on with their jobs and get behind the home nations.

  • John Whittingdale – 2021 Speech on the Safety of Journalists

    John Whittingdale – 2021 Speech on the Safety of Journalists

    The speech made by John Whittingdale, the Minister for Media and Data, in the House of Commons on 10 June 2021.

    I beg to move,

    That this House has considered the safety of journalists.

    I very much welcome this opportunity to debate what is, as you have rightly said, Mr Deputy Speaker, an extremely important subject. It is the second such debate we have had in the space of two weeks, as we recently debated World Press Freedom Day. I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Folkestone and Hythe (Damian Collins) who has been an assiduous campaigner on this topic and who chairs the all-party parliamentary group on media freedom.

    The safety of journalists is of critical importance, as journalists play a vital role in ensuring that democracy functions properly and in contributing towards a free society. The role that journalists play in exposing corruption, holding power to account and informing the electorate of the truth is absolutely central to a democratic, free society. Investigative journalism plays a critical role and we will all remember examples, such as the exposure of the thalidomide scandal, the corruption that riddled FIFA, the Panama papers and even MPs’ expenses.

    Such journalism shone a powerful light into areas that needed to be exposed. That is particularly important at the moment. The need for the provision of trusted and reliable information is absolutely critical, and has been over the course of the last year, at a time when fake news has been so prevalent and it has been all the more important for people to be able to turn to trusted journalism for reliable reports of the truth.

    For that reason we regarded it as vital to support the media during the pandemic. The media came under significant economic pressure and we were able to provide support to local newspapers and radio, and recognised the important role that journalists play by affording them key worker status.

    While the role of journalists has never been more important, it is the sad truth that it is also increasingly dangerous. I pay tribute to the organisations that regularly highlight the harassment and intimidation of journalists that takes place in far too many countries.

    Reporters sans frontières, which is responsible for the world press freedom index, has recorded that 50 journalists were killed in the course of their duties last year. The deadliest countries in the world are Mexico, Iraq, Afghanistan, India and Pakistan.

    Justice for Journalists monitors the treatment of the press in the countries of the former Soviet Union. It lists 84 journalists currently held in detention or imprisoned. The most recent and most shocking example of a journalist being illegally detained is that of Raman Pratasevich, whose flight was forced to land in Belarus and who has since been held, with significant concern about his future wellbeing.

    The Committee to Protect Journalists has identified 1,404 journalists who have died since they started keeping records in 1992. I pay tribute to the courage of those journalists around the world who are operating in extremely dangerous environments, particularly a number of British journalists who are on the frontline of conflict or reporting in authoritarian regimes. As we did two weeks ago, we remember Marie Colvin of The Sunday Times who was killed alongside her French colleague as a result of being deliberately targeted because of the job they were carrying out as journalists.

    The UK has taken a lead in campaigning for the safety of journalists. We established the global conference on media freedom in July 2019 and I pay tribute to my right hon. Friend the Member for South West Surrey (Jeremy Hunt) who led that initiative. We continue to co-chair the Media Freedom Coalition, which now comprises 47 member countries.

    We have used our presidency of the G7, which is coming to its conclusion over the course of this weekend, to continue to highlight the importance of the protection of journalists. Indeed, we have included that in the communiqué that was issued by the Foreign Ministers, which has a number of paragraphs setting out exactly why it is so important that journalists should be afforded protection.

    We established the global media defence fund, to which the Government are contributing £3 million over five years, and I am going to be speaking tomorrow at the Council of Europe in support of the resolutions being passed there highlighting the protection of journalists.

    However, we are also conscious that if we are to be able to campaign on this issue, we need to set an example, too. The UK currently ranks 33rd out of 180 in the press freedom index, which represents a small improvement but it is nothing like enough. For that reason, the Government established, a year ago, the National Committee for the Safety of Journalists, which I co-chair along with the Minister for safeguarding, the Under-Secretary of State for the Home Department, my hon. Friend the Member for Louth and Horncastle (Victoria Atkins). That committee brings together representatives of the police, from the National Police Chiefs Council, the Police Service of Northern Ireland and Police Scotland; the prosecuting authorities—the Crown Prosecution Service and the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service in Scotland; the Society of Editors; the National Union of Journalists, and some of those campaigning organisations such as Index on Censorship and Reporters Without Borders. As a result of the committee’s establishment, we published in March the national action plan for the safety of journalists, whose aim is to increase our understanding of the scale of the problem and enhance the criminal justice system response, so that in future there will be new training for police officers and a police officer in every force dedicated to investigating complaints relating to the safety of journalists. It will give greater resources and advice to journalists, agreed by their employers, and there will be a commitment from the online platform to do more. Finally, greater efforts will be made to improve the public recognition of the value of journalists. Last week, we published our call for evidence, to try to establish hard facts on the scale of the problem. It closes on 14 July and I hope very much that anyone who has experience will make a submission to it, but we have already received 200 responses which make it clear that online threats and harassment are indeed widespread and that this is a significant problem, which we need to do more to address. The committee will continue to meet to review the plan, but we are determined to ensure that the UK is as safe an environment as possible for journalists to carry out their job. We will also continue to campaign to raise the importance of this issue in every country around the world.

  • John Whittingdale – 2021 Statement on the Regulation of Betindex

    John Whittingdale – 2021 Statement on the Regulation of Betindex

    The statement made by John Whittingdale, the Minister for Media and Data, in the House of Commons on 7 June 2021.

    Further to the statement of 20 April outlining plans for an independent expert review of the regulation of the Football Index gambling product, we are today announcing the full terms of reference for the review and further details.

    The Secretary of State for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport, my right hon. Friend the Member for Hertsmere (Oliver Dowden) has appointed Malcolm Sheehan QC to lead the review. He will provide an independent expert account of the actions taken by the Gambling Commission and other relevant regulatory bodies, and consider the lessons to be learnt for the future. He will have access to all the necessary information held by Government and regulatory bodies to conduct the review.

    As outlined in the terms of reference which we have also released in full on www.gov.uk, the review will cover the period from the granting of BetIndex’s gambling licence in September 2015 to the Gambling Commission’s suspension of that licence on 11 March this year. It will principally report on the actions of the Gambling Commission in assessing, licensing, and monitoring the operator, responding to concerns and delivering its objectives. The review will also consider how the Financial Conduct Authority responded to questions from the Gambling Commission and how it considered whether the product amounted to a regulated activity under the Financial Services and Markets Act.

    It is important that former customers continue to have a voice. The Administrators should have already contacted every former customer so they can submit a claim if they think they are owed money or compensation from the company. Customers will be kept informed through the administration process, including on any opportunities they may have to vote on next steps. The Gambling Commission will also continue to consider information it receives from individuals about the actions of Football Index where it pertains to its ongoing regulatory investigation into BetIndex’s licence. While the Call for Evidence closed on 31 March, former customers can also continue to provide information to DCMS about the Football Index case to inform the Gambling Act review. Hundreds of individuals have already done so, and where relevant to the Terms of Reference for the independent review we will pass those to Malcolm Sheehan QC.

    This independent review is expected to provide a report for publication in the summer, and will include recommendations as needed across the full range of questions set out in the terms of reference. Its findings will form part of the evidence informing the Government’s ongoing review of the Gambling Act 2005, which was announced in December 2020. This independent review is entirely separate from the Gambling Commission’s ongoing regulatory investigation and the administration proceedings, and will be done in such a way as to avoid prejudicing either of those processes. A copy of the terms of reference will be placed in the Library of the House.

  • Ben Kensell – 2021 Comments on Norwich City’s Football Club Sponsor

    Ben Kensell – 2021 Comments on Norwich City’s Football Club Sponsor

    The statement made on 7 June 2021 by Ben Kensell, the Chief Operating Officer for Norwich City Football Club, following the appointment of a controversial sponsor.

    BK8 will undoubtedly be a new brand for City fans, however, they’re a well trusted name across Asia. The Premier League has an accumulative TV audience of over three billion and is broadcast into over a billion homes – a huge proportion of these Premier League fans are based in Asia.

    Supporting BK8 in marketing to this global Premier League fanbase equally affords us as a club the opportunity to further our own exposure and commercial efforts into those markets.

    Both the club and BK8 are committed to supporting the ongoing review into betting and sports sponsorship. The club continues to adhere to both an internal code of conduct, as well as the policies and guidelines put in place by the Betting & Gaming Council, when carrying out marketing campaigns with betting and gaming brands.

    The industry continues to provide a valuable source of revenue to the club that makes a meaningful difference to our wider objectives as a club.

  • Iain Stewart – 2021 Comments on the 2025 City of Culture Bidding Process

    Iain Stewart – 2021 Comments on the 2025 City of Culture Bidding Process

    The comments made by Iain Stewart, the UK Government Minister for Scotland, on 29 May 2021.

    The UK City of Culture competition offers a wonderful opportunity for the winning city to make its mark on the UK’s cultural landscape.

    Through raising a city’s creative and cultural profile and drawing in visitors, winning this prestigious title can also provide a real social and economic boost.

    It would be brilliant to bring the prize to Scotland for the first time and I’d strongly urge Scottish towns and cities to get involved.

     

  • Simon Hart – 2021 Comments on the 2025 City of Culture Bidding Process

    Simon Hart – 2021 Comments on the 2025 City of Culture Bidding Process

    The comments made by Simon Hart, the Secretary of State for Wales, on 29 May 2021.

    A thriving arts and culture scene has long been at the heart of a successful Wales and will remain so as we recover from the pandemic.

    The UK City of Culture competition represents an opportunity to not only bring significant financial investment and regeneration benefits, but also to boost Wales’ established reputation as globally-recognised creative hub.

    I encourage towns and cities across Wales to get involved in the competition, to champion hidden talent and promote local art scenes so that we can continue to highlight the unique cultural and artistic talents of Wales.