The Board of Governors is responsible for ensuring the BBC delivers value for money in return for the Licence Fee. They want to hear what you think about the programmes and services you get from the BBC.
On Thursday 13 July around 130 members of the public had the opportunity of questioning members of the BBC's Board of Governors and representatives of Senior Management at the AGM held at The Forum, Norwich. A panel, consisting of the following Governors - Michael Grade (Chairman); Anthony Salz (BBC Vice-Chairman); Deborah Bull; Jeremy Peat and Ranjit Sondhi (BBC Governor for the English Regions) - took questions on a wide variety of subjects.
You can read an account of the questions asked and the responses below. Alternatively you can watch the debate as it happened using the webstream links.
Watch the webcast Watch the webcast with subtitles and signed interpretation
Programming (films)
Programming (watershed)
Programming (political coverage and editorial control)
Sport
Impartiality and independence
Access to Digital services
Radio reception
Licence fee
Presenters' salaries
Bad language
Programming (quality)
Energy efficiency
Trails
Local services
Weather
Impartiality (coverage of the Middle East)
Programming (young audiences)
Programming (Films)
AUDIENCE MEMBER:
My question which, as I' ve put to the complaints procedure on the internet eight months ago, I only just got a so-called reply the 16th of June, but the basic crux of the matter is, why is the BBC television a racist institution and by qualifying that, I can do, because in my view, the way to put over a country ' s culture is in the film output at peak times. 98% of the film output at peak times on BBC One, Two, Three and Four are American. It's actually forcing the American ideals, culture on people in this country. We ' re reminded time and time again we're a multicultural society. There's 46 languages spoken in Norwich alone.
JANE HILL (Presenter):
Alright, Robert, just to interrupt there, you started off by saying "racist." Did you mean racist in the sense of which we all here understand it or are you actually making the point that, frankly, there is too much American programming on the BBC?
AUDIENCE MEMBER:
There is definitely too much American film output at peak times. There should be, from all over the world - can I just mention this? Because it would break the ignorance about how other people in other cultures live, which breeds fear, which breeds violence. Now, we all agree on that.
MICHAEL GRADE:
Can I try to offer a response? First of all, I would be very interested to hear, maybe not at this meeting, but afterwards - the detail of your complaint, because eight months to get a response is absolutely unacceptable, and we can perhaps take that up afterwards, and I'll get some details on that, because I'd like to know - I would like to ask my colleagues back at the BBC why it took eight months to reply. So there's a problem there. Don't worry. We'll deal with it. And that was through the MP. On the question of American material, there are occasionally American movies, which are very popular, with licence fee payers, for example, big family movies at Christmas and so on. I would have to say that the BBC's reliance on American imported material on BBC One and Two has reduced quite dramatically over the last ten years. When I was working full time in television, the BBC had Starsky and Hutch, Dallas , goodness knows what else, all running in peak time. That doesn't happen today. There's a lot of American imports on Channel 4, very successful ones, very popular ones. ITV has come back into the market. Channel 5 and Sky run a lot of American material. The BBC spends less today on American material than it ever has done in its history, it seems to me. So I'm not quite sure where you're getting this from. What I would say is that it would be nice, I think, to see more world cinema. BBC Two and BBC Four - not on a consistent basis, but from time to time take the pick of foreign language movies, foreign movies and run them for the delight of licence fee payers. But in terms of British films, the BBC has just announced - the Director-General recently announced a deal to invest subject to the licence fee settlement - but - to invest in British film and for the BBC to play its part. We have so many talented writers, Directors, producers and actors in this country from all over the UK that the BBC does have a part to play, and I would agree with you that more British films on - on BBC television would be welcome. And that is part of the Executive's plans going forward. But I don't recognise the idea that the - that BBC One and Two are full of American - full of American material. I just don't recognise that.
AUDIENCE MEMBER:
Well, can I just add that it's not only the American idealism coming through in the film culture which is being repeated, repeated, repeated, and the same films are on time and time again. It's also in - part of the news broadcasts as well. I'll give you a good example. Three months ago, two English soldiers in Iraq got blown up. That was what was reported on BBC One news. On ITV News, the same was - on Channel 4 News, it was the two soldiers who had been blown up, but in the same bomb, 60 innocent Iraqis. It gives a different spin to the whole story.
MICHAEL GRADE:
I understand.
AUDIENCE MEMBER:
And that type of thing is happening time and time again. If America sneezes, that's ten minutes of a half-hour news. Now, that shouldn't be right.
Programming (Watershed)
AUDIENCE MEMBER:
The watershed - I am not quite sure who this is ready to protect, but if it's up to 14 to 16-year-olds, 9.00 is a waste of time. I think it should go to 11.00, which would give you two more hours to put something in so we have got a decent laugh. How many people here tonight cannot have a damn good laugh in the evenings? They have done their day's work. They have come home for entertainment. You don't get it, unless you want to see somebody fannying about in a house somewhere doing their own thing. I think it's about time we had more money spent on entertainment, and with the other two hours, it would give time for family entertainment. Also, of course, if you brought back the old Hughie Green idea where everybody has a chance instead of just the singers - I am talking about singers now who have to sing like someone else. For God ' s sake, give them their own idea for singing.
MICHAEL GRADE:
I think there is a misunderstanding about the watershed. It's a signal to viewers that they may see, not necessarily. It's not a signal that all hell can break loose on the air waves at 9.00pm. It is a signal that you may see more adult material after 9.00pm. It's a signal to parents that they need to take care if they have young children watching in front of the television at 9.00pm. It is then up to the parents to make the decision as to whether or not they let their children watch. It's not a... It's designed as a clear signpost to enable parents to manage what their children watch. They can be absolutely secure that before 9.00pm, any material on BBC television is entirely suitable for young children.
JANE HILL:
Sir, you are shaking your head. Do you feel that doesn't answer your question?
AUDIENCE MEMBER:
It doesn't work, because so many parents are so busy watching things themselves.
MICHAEL GRADE:
Well, we can't run peoples' homes.
AUDIENCE MEMBER:
You can. Put it at 11.00pm.
MICHAEL GRADE:
Also the majority of licence fee payer houses don't have children in them.
JANE HILL:
Do other people in the audience have an issue with the watershed? Does anyone think that the gentleman is making a valid point?
AUDIENCE MEMBER:
I think the gentleman has a very valid point. I feel embarrassed. Sometimes when I am sitting with the wife and there is foul language coming out on the television, it's embarrassing a lot of children are still out on the street. Not going to bed before 9.00pm.
MICHAEL GRADE:
If they are out on the street, they are not watching television.
AUDIENCE MEMBER:
They are not even going to bed at 9.00pm. They have televisions in their own room. You must take responsibility.
MICHAEL GRADE:
I have a seven-year-old child, I take responsibility. I know he is not watching television after 9.00pm under any circumstances. Also, if there is a programme with bad language, or some explicit scenes of some kind or another, there is always a very clear warning on the front of the programme.
JANE HILL:
I am curious whether you feel your question is a BBC specific question?
AUDIENCE MEMBER:
It's a broad question across broadcasting. I will talk to you after, if you are hanging around.
Programming (political coverage and editorial control)
AUDIENCE MEMBER:
I have a question for you. It's regarding the BBC's political coverage. For many people we have been rather disappointed that despite the expansion in the BBC across their many channels, there seems to be few opportunities for members of the public to debate some of the key issues of the time. For example, we have already touched on it, the Iraq war. But there are other issues as well. Terrorism, devolution, there is the up and coming issue of an English Parliament. Whilst the BBC does have editorial programmes and content, it's very heavily managed by our own journalists. Often you find examples of your journalists speaking on behalf of elected politicians. He said to quote Andrew Marr the politicians weren't able to speak effectively enough. I feel there should be many more chances to grill the people we elect and have opportunities to say what they feel. Bearing in mind that the largest political party is none of the above, are they going to improve this situation?
RANJIT SONDHI:
I think this is a question for not just for the English regions but the entire BBC. You know yourself that your own regional news programme is one of the most successful out of all of the English regions. It has a reach that is much greater than ITV news for instance. Also radio covers a lot of news as well. I think the BBC recognised it needed to change the way in which it was putting out news. It moved out of as it were, out of the studios into the streets. And tried to connect up with people in a radically different way. So that it gave up on interviews MPs and started going to the public for their news and views. I think it worked to a great extent. It shows in the Politics Show and Inside Out and so on. There is very little of those I know. But that is how the thing is structured at the moment. But you also have BBC Online, where an enormous amount of debate takes place. It is an awful lot of coverage. With the advantages of digital technology, you are able to access political views and coverage from other parts of the English regions as well. In a sense, we are moving towards a different kind of political programme. We need to extend that if we can. We need to do things like Question Time that is precisely the place where we can have views from members of the public, where we need to hold governments to account and also very big quangos to account. I think in the English regions, I know this from the coverage of last year's that we ransom experiments to see how good the BBC is on holding local institutions to account. City councils, National Health Service Trusts, other bodies like that. That really need to explain to the public directly how their money is being spent. I don't know whether you want it add something about the national situation?
MICHAEL GRADE:
I think audiences do enjoy the unpredictability of people in authority, the people who govern us, being grilled by members of the public. I think that is... You know, through election campaign, through leadership election campaigns, through local election campaign, there are many opportunities. The BBC is very very good in prime time, not tucked away in after midnight, but in prime time, at creating events where politicians are grilled by members of public, just as in a sense, you are grilling us today. That is the way of the future. Nevertheless, journalists, highly trained journalists do represent what they believe to be the questions that are on the public's mind. And in the same way that a QC is the expert at cross-examining a witness in a court, it's the journalists who are the experts on behalf of the public of grilling MPs. But there is, there should be as much space as possible for events where. What was the great. Who was someone from Bristol who challenged Margaret Thatcher on the turning of the Belgrano? Mrs... There is a prize for whoever can remember. I can't remember. Who remembers Mrs . from Bristol . She challenged Margaret Thatcher. Anyone remember that? That was a classic example. I don't think any journalist, BBC or ITN or everyone, would have had the nerve that Mrs Someone, fill in a blank, had. She shook the Prime Minister to the core. That was one of the great democratic moments of British television. People remember it. I wish I could remember her name. I am so sorry. Pat, you should remember her name. A whole row of news executives and we can't remember.
AUDIENCE MEMBER:
On the opening day of the Test match against Pakistan, can I beg you to bring back the Test match on BBC so we can watch it without having it interrupted by advertisements. I may not look like it now, but I used to be a county player.
MICHAEL GRADE:
Were you a bowler or a batsman?
AUDIENCE MEMBER:
I used to bowl an out swinger.
MICHAEL GRADE:
Well, have you just bowled us one. Jeremy, do you want to have a go?
JEREMY PEAT:
The reason that that Michael has directed me is he knows that I have been following the Test score. It's quite a good outcome. I am glad they got their centuries before the close. Even though the BBC is not showing to my regret as well the Test match on television, at least we do have uninterrupted coverage on the radio, on Five Live Extra as well as on Radio Four Long wave. And I think the website. I think it's fabulous. Have a look. I think the commentary on that website is very, very good standard. We kept up to date through the day with what is going on. So, yes, the lack of television cricket on free to air television is a disappointment to me as a great sports fan. The fact that it's available on radio and on uninterrupted is good news. Website is first rate. When it comes to the television coverage, one of the big issues is cost. Sports rights are increasingly expensive. There is a great deal of hyperinflation in the sports rights market. It's a question for Mark Thompson as to how best to extend your licence fee when there are so many demands upon that pot of money in the very challenging era we face. So personally I would love to see cricket back on terrestrial. Personally I would love to see cricket back on BBC. But this is a matter of judgment, on the costs, judgments on how best to make use of limited funds. And thank goodness for excellent radio and an excellent website.
MICHAEL GRADE:
I would add that the peculiar circumstances of last time the Test match contract came up for bids. You would recall that it was Channel 4 who had the contract. They won it away from the BBC. To be absolutely honest and frank, they did an absolutely fantastic job on modernising television coverage of cricket. I think Channel 4 showed the BBC how cricket should be covered. In a sense, cricket was Channel 4's speciality. When the contract came up for renewal I think the BBC made a right judgment at the time not to bid up the price against Channel 4, a colleague, a fellow public service broadcaster, free to air. We fully expected them to win and to bid up the price against someone who is doing it, so well we would have been very unpopular for doing it. What we hadn't calculated was that at that point Channel 4 weren't very keen on it. In an auction situation you can't talk to the other bidders. That would be anti-competitive. We were very surprised. I wasn't here at the time, Mark Thomson the Director-General wasn't here at the time. So I think there was a miscalculation there. Also, everyone was led to believe that the people who controlled the Test match contract, I don't think, is it the TCB or the ECB? ECB. They had said Lord McLaren had said to the Secretary of State at the time, they didn't want to be listed as one of the events that had to be on free to air television under legislation. But the Government could rest assured that cricket would always be on free to air television. That didn't happen in the end and that conversation turned out to be not worth the paper it was written on. I think the British viewers are the poorer for it. The question on your mind, then, is will the BBC bid for test cricket to try and get it back when the contract comes up again. That is a question for the Director-General who happens to have caught my eyeline. He will tell you. It's his business, not mine.
MARK THOMPSON (DIRECTOR-GENERAL):
Good evening everyone. There is one other factor to add, which is that for reasons I understand, the game of cricket wanted to get the maximum possible amount of money for television rights. In the end, they believed they could get that by going to pay television. There are dangers for cricket in doing that. This happened with with rugby. It disappeared on to Sky for some years. They realised they were losing interest among the public. A lot of rugby has come back on to free to air and the BBC has a strong position and we are glad to have rugby back. So, we will definitely look at Test match cricket for television and radio and the web. But I have to say, we have to go into that conversation being realistic about how much money we should spend it on the other half of the equation is really asking the sport of cricket to look hard at what is the best for cricket in terms of getting interesting cricket around the whole country. And making sure enough young people are focusing on cricket as well. We hope if that happens we can make an attractive offer.
AUDIENCE MEMBER:
Following on from an earlier question - does party politics constrain the BBC and the way it's funded or in what it does?
MICHAEL GRADE:
The Governors over 80 years, whatever they may or may not have achieved, they have certainly retained the independence of the BBC from any kind of political interference. Quite often, that independence has been maintained in the face of some quite fierce attacks from political parties of all persuasions. But the BBC - I hope this gathering would agree that the BBC's independence, whilst often threatened, has never - has never been conceded. And at every point - every deliberation all through Charter review, the Governors have been very careful in the drafting of the Charter and the drafting of the agreement that accompanies it to make sure there is nothing in there that could possibly be used as a lever by politicians to try to exercise the control they would all LOVE to per size over the BBC, as we are such an important outlet for news and current affairs. So the BBC, if it is not independent, is not worth a tuppence of anybody's licence money, and the group you see here and all the people who preceded us have fought hard. I always say the BBC's a bit like China. It's been invaded many times, but it's never been conquered. And that's true over the years going back to Churchill and the General Strike, through the Suez crisis and many other testing times, but the BBC's independence is what fundamentally the British people wish to see retained, maintained and fought for at every opportunity! And believe you me, everybody on this panel, and the people we represent, are dedicated to that end.
JANE HILL:
I am going to move it on because I mentioned we had quite a lot of e-mails in advance, people who quite simply couldn' t be here tonight. This question really reflects an awful lot of the correspondence we had both by e-mail and telephone. "As a TV licence payer I am fed up with seeing a TV service advertised on the TV, namely Freeview which I can't receive." There are technical reasons he can't receive it. He also lives somewhere where you're not allowed to have a satellite dish fitted because it's a Grade II listed building. There are a lot of comments about digital, the fact you all pay for it, we all pay for it. But of course sometimes, unfortunately, in some parts of the country there are people who can't receive it or don't want to receive it for various reasons. Are there a couple of people- so many people whose hands are up - who might be tempted to ask a question about the digital future, and it's such a large future of the BBC and broadcasting generally. I am just going to move down here if I may, sir.
AUDIENCE MEMBER:
I am heavily involved with developing internet software, and of course, very digital stuff there. You put a lot of material on the - on the internet now. And kind of in tandem with what you were saying with that last question - of course, there are people here that don't have access to the internet as well, so the question is much the same: a lot of people are paying for a lot of this content and not having access to it, in some cases because they can ' t and in some cases because they don't wish to. But the question, I suppose, is how does the BBC see itself going forward, particularly with internet services?
MICHAEL GRADE:
Could I ask Deborah to answer that?
DEBORAH BULL:
Well, I think the first thing to say is we, as the BBC, are embarrassed, as we should be, that not everybody can receive all of the output, and it's something that's absolutely at the top of the agenda. At the minute, nationwide and also in the east, there's about 74% coverage. It's about the national average in this area, which is exactly 26% less than we would like it to be. There - at the minute, Freeview is reaching 74%. The answer lies in two things, one quicker than the other - satellite technology. Now, sir with the Grade II listed building - that's probably not going to be an answer. Cable probably is the only answer for you. But Freesat technology, which the management are absolutely working on pushing through - that's a one-off payment for a satellite dish, no subscription, slightly more cost than a Freeview box at the moment, but that'll probably come down as the technology develops - that is going to answer the question in the short term. Of course, the long-term answer is turning off the analogue signal in 2012 which will mean the digital penetration will reach across the country. So there's a bit of a delay. I mean, I think your question about broadband and internet technology is really interesting, and I think we're sitting, you know, very much between cultures here of - of, if I may say, the sort of younger generation for whom that's bread and butter and normal business and people like our lady cricketer here, who I think don't have the internet. So I think we're at an incredible transition time both culturally and technologically speaking. And partly on the point that Deborah raised there, I have to say we have also had a couple of e-mails on that point saying the BBC web site is advertised all the time - bbc.co.uk. I say it in my job 20 times a day. I mean, it is a huge part of what the BBC does, and it's a very, very popular web site. We know that but there are people out there who don't have access to a computer, to the internet.
MICHAEL GRADE:
Sorry, can I? There's a difference. People who don ' t have the internet, it's their choice not to have it. There is no inhibition because of where the transmitters are or where you live that you can ' t get the internet. Anyone can get the internet if they want to be connected at all different kinds of price levels. But the case of the digital television services is what Deborah and the Governors are deeply concerned about, because that - there is an inhibition because of geography, topography, transmitter configuration that there are people who are quite willing to buy a Freeview box, but it's a waste of time because it won't get the signal. And that's where the Freesat will come in, and we ' re working as fast as we can to get a Free Sat offering which will be a one-off buy the box and the dish, no subscription, that's it, a one-off payment, and you'll get many, many different channels, not just the BBC, plus local radio, and for people in north Norfolk, you'll be able to get your regional news not from Hull, but you'll be able to get it from Norwich, which is, I know - is there anyone here from north Norfolk? You get your local news from Hull, don't you? Where do you get your - where do you live, sir? Sheringham? Well, that ' s north Norfolk . You get it from Norwich ? Anybody get their news - is it King's Lynn that get it from - anybody from King s Lynn? You get it from Hull, don' t you?
AUDIENCE MEMBER:
We get Yorkshire, yes. But I wanted to make a point about the - the reception that we do get in King's Lynn which is very poor. For years we have had poor reception. We have had to buy masted amplifiers, and we have had to put up with the poor signal. But the problem is that as each new service comes out, we're also last in the queue. We don't get Freeview. We don't get digital radio, and yet we pay exactly the same licence fee as all those people who might be called the chattering classes in London who get the lot. This seems dramatically unfair.
MICHAEL GRADE:
It is.
AUDIENCE MEMBER:
Now, as a customer, I have a relationship with other businesses whereby I can go to Trading Standards. I can use the Sale of Goods act. I can use all sorts of devices to get service. With the BBC, I cannot do that. I have been in correspondence with various parts of the BBC, and eventually, I'm told that the licence fee is only for me to use a receiver. It doesn't relate to the service I receive.
MICHAEL GRADE:
That's the legal position.
AUDIENCE MEMBER:
It's... It seems extremely unfair.
MICHAEL GRADE:
Yeah, that's the legal position. The answer to all your problems is - believe me - is Free Sat. That is the answer to all your problems, and that will be resolved as quickly as...
AUDIENCE MEMBER:
But that comes in 2012.
MICHAEL GRADE:
No, it doesn't. The Freesat, we hope - we're waiting for our partners to join us. We're waiting for consents from the DCMS. There are all sorts of hoop we was to go through, but we are hoping, which the Director-General told the Select Committee last Tuesday. We are hoping that the Freesat option will be available to you, will be launched, at the latest, in the autumn of '07. Meanwhile, you could get an Freesat dish from Sky, which will give you most of these services. You have to pay for the dish. You have to pay for the dish. Don't pay a subscription. Sky, they keep fairly quiet about it, but you can get a Free Sat offer from Sky.
AUDIENCE MEMBER:
For the set-top box?
MICHAEL GRADE:
I'm sorry?
AUDIENCE MEMBER:
You have to pay for the set-top box. That's £200 that people in London don't have to pay.
MICHAEL GRADE:
150. It's gone down a bit.
AUDIENCE MEMBER:
But it's still an unfair situation.
MICHAEL GRADE:
It is. Absolutely agree. Believe me. We are working hard to solve it.
RANJIT SONHDI:
Can I add one more thing? One more fact perhaps to console you a bit. I think - in this region, I think 73% of the population has access to digital TV, which is right up there with the national average. So it's - it's not too far behind the rest of the UK.
AUDIENCE MEMBER:
I am in the 27%.
RANJIT SONDHI:
I understand, of course, absolutely.
AUDIENCE MEMBER:
Radio reception in north Norfolk is absolutely dreadful. We like to listen to Radio Norfolk, and morning, noon and night, the radio reception is absolutely dreadful. It's going back to the days of Radio Luxembourg , where you have the burbling. You move the aerial about and the radio about. When can we expect to get decent reception, please?
MICHAEL GRADE:
I'm going to ask the expert on this who is sitting in the front row, Caroline Thompson.
CAROLINE THOMPSON (BBC DIRECTOR, STRATEGY):
First of all, I should just say that on the television reception problems, we are, as the Governors were saying, very conscious of them. There is a limited amount we can do. You have the misfortune to live in an area where the signal spreads a lot into Holland , basically. So we have very severe restrictions set not by anything to do with Britain but by an international agreement on the power we can transmit. That's why if you live particularly in north Norfolk, you end up with some persistent problems. The good news is we have recently will a team at a new international conference negotiating with - with other countries including Holland about getting a new configuration of spectrum allocation, and that should really help us going forward, and particularly when we get to digital switch-off in 2011 here, you will get a very strong digital signal because we can do that without affecting the signal in Holland. So I am sorry about it. But the reason why you have had persistent problems for many years is because of that. On the radio signal, I will pass to my colleague here from BBC East, who I think will know the detailed answers for you. But again, on radio, we're working hard, particularly on getting better DAB coverage in this area. We are hoping later on in the summer to operate a open and new transmitter at Great Massingham, I think it is which will give us over 80% coverage for the digital radio signal, which is a much better quality signal than you're able to get on FM and does, of course, also give you some extra services, so that should help with radio, but on the detailed issues, I will hand to the even greater expert than me.
DAVID CLAYTON (EDITOR, RADIO NORFOLK):
Thank you very much. David Clayton, Radio Norfolk. For our 25th birthday back in September, the BBC gave us a brand new FM transmitter at West Runton on 95.6. We'll talk afterwards because I am curious that that's not a good enough signal because we have had lots of reports it is very good. Perhaps we can talk afterwards. But that was a great birthday present. We'd like to thank the BBC while we're standing here for it. Thank you.
AUDIENCE MEMBER:
I am a little bit concerned about the level of licence fee. Are there any plans in place to reduce it? And if, so why not?
MICHAEL GRADE:
Good question. Are you a journalist?
AUDIENCE MEMBER:
I am a blogger.
MICHAEL GRADE:
There has been a two-year process under the heading of Charter Review where the BBC has consulted licence fee payers. The Government has consulted licence fee payers to find out what it is you want from the BBC over the next ten years. And in that - the end of that debate, many of the ideas - most of the ideas that the BBC has suggested as a result of our consultations with the licence fee payers have been extremely well received by the licence fee payers. And the things that you want are things like fewer repeats in peak time on BBC One and BBC Two. You want more great comedy. You want more of the wonderful drama - range of drama that the BBC produces. You want more regional and local and nations programming. There are lots of things you want. And that we want to give you, and we want to give those to you at the lowest possible cost. And that's a debate that's going on presently with the Government. We have been very open. We published our licence fee bid, which was for seven years and to cover our own costs of digital switchover, which are quite substantial, was an annual seven-year settlement of RPI plus 2.3%. This would mean in real terms in today's money, assuming sort of - fairly steady rate of inflation that in seven years' time the licence fee would be the equivalent of around £180. All the research we have done suggests that if we were to charge that, if we were able to charge that and deliver all the services that you want us to deliver, licence fee payers would regard that as good value. That is what our research and the Governor's research suggests. The job of the Governors is not to get as much money as possible for the BBC. That is not what we should be doing. Nor what we are trying to do. We are trying to meet what you tell us you want at the least possible cost. It is unlikely, given your ambitions and your expectations from the BBC. We have heard tonight, you want more British programming, more British filming, more cricket, more transmitters, more entertainment. The word "more" Keeps cropping up. It's unlikely that, we know we can't deliver the existing services for less money than we are doing. In that bid, it's as low as we can possibly make it, given what we would like to do for you, which you are telling us you want us to do. In the costs of that, 70% of the cost of what we are proposing for the new charter will be met through efficiency savings inside the BBC. So we are trying to keep the costs as low as possible. There will be a settlement with the Government, the Treasury will be crawling all over our numbers and everyone else's money. At the end of it, the Government will make the decision on your behalf as to where to set the licence fee. Our ambitions are not simply expansionist ambitions at the BBC. They are plans to extend our services in ways you tell us you want from us. That costs money.
DEBORAH BULL:
I think Michael said it, but to be clear. It is the Government that sets the licence fee. The BBC makes a bid based on the thing you want from it, but it is up to the Government to set the amount.
AUDIENCE MEMBER:
A brief comeback. I like the BBC and long may it continue. I do think some of you are a little bit overpaid. Perhaps you could save some on the licence fee, if you paid Jonathan Ross a bit less. I can do his job for £1 million a week!
MICHAEL GRADE:
There are two issues here. One is the pay to talent. Which is a matter for the executive. Other issue is executive pay which has got a few headlines in recent time, for which the Board of Governors are responsible. Would you like to me to deal with the issue of executive pay? I am going to ask the Vice Chairman to deal with that.
ANTHONY SALZ:
We have heard a lot about what you expect from the BBC. I think it is clearly our responsibility to try and give you what you expect in terms of fantastic programmes and fantastic services and at an appropriately good value cost. We are very conscious of that and clearly what we pay our senior executives is a part of that. What we are focused on is since you want excellence from the BBC, it is also making sure that we can - in the people part of BBC - have excellent people. We are in a competitive environment as far as media is concerned, and we do have to have regard to what the opposition will pay to keep the people they want to keep or hire. It is a special organisation, providing a public service. We are in practice able to pay some of our excellent people somewhat less than they would get elsewhere. That balance is part of our responsibility and is definitely important to us. It's quite a complicated judgment when it comes to it. You mentioned Jonathan Ross and you are not the first to do it today. Do you accept that there are market forces here and that Channel 4 and ITV were prepared to pay him an awful lot more?
AUDIENCE MEMBER:
I think the market will decide the rate of pay. I think I you have gone over it. As regards Jonathan Ross, I would do it for £1 million a year. You are paying him too much.
MICHAEL GRADE:
Would anyone watch you?
AUDIENCE MEMBER:
Of course they would.
AUDIENCE MEMBER:
Would the BBC consider installing swear boxes in all their offices and studios in order to pay for these new services?
MICHAEL GRADE:
The management, has in effect put a swear box, certainly into radio where they have instituted following some recent poor examples of taste exhibited on Radio One. They are as I understand going to institute a system of fines for Radio One presenters who ignore their responsibilities to keep the airwaves refreshed.
JANE HILL:
We did get a few comments along the lines of what the gentleman is suggesting, a lady from Nuneaton in Warwickshire asks- particularly referring to Eastenders - is it on at an appropriate time of day given the level of bad language and violence?
MICHAEL GRADE:
I can't remember in my two years as Chairman of the BBC any complaints that have come to the Board of Governors about a breach of the watershed on Eastenders. Perhaps the Director-General, or perhaps the Director-General might answer that. I am not quite sure to what you are alluding.
JANE HILL:
Unfortunately it is just an e-mail comment and she didn't give any further details. I think she is suggesting that Eastenders is on too early given the nature of the storylines.
MARK THOMPSON:
My view is, Michael is right. Although we get some complaints, we haven't had the kind of complaint which comes to the Governors or to my knowledge a serious breach of the watershed in the last couple of years. Eastenders is a programme which deals with quite serious issues. One of the good things about it is, it does deal with serious issues. And sometimes it can provide help and information to the public to do with family life and various illnesses and so forth. It often has hard-hitting storylines. We do try very hard to make it acceptable in terms of language. Often there is a lot of emotion in Eastenders, but we don't use the F word. We are strict about pre-watershed language. Also we try and make sure in the storylines if there is a suggestion of violence, again this is a programme that lots of teenagers and children do like to watch as well as older people. I have to say, overall, if we are to move Eastenders, I think there would be a national revolt. People like it where it is. We have to bear in mind, most people like it where it is, not the lady here. It's watched by many millions of people every night. Over the last year, the appreciation for Eastenders - we measure and ask people are they enjoying it has been going up. At the moment, most of the audience think it's on form.
JANE HILL:
I think it's neck and neck with Coronation Street .
AUDIENCE MEMBER:
All I have heard tonight is please can we have our BBC back. All I have heard is it's been hijacked by technophobes, scholars, the Islington forum and everything. I represent a lot of old people that sit in nursing homes, don't wish to know how to knock down a house, cook a tea...they have done all of this. They don't need it. The other thing is they can not afford a computer. I don't have one because I don't wish to have one. But lots of them can't. So therefore, doing away with all of the phone numbers they use to participate, especially in local radio and Look East. Only reason I got this is they flashed it up by accident, so I could apply for the ticket, they are feeling disenfranchised. I have never heard the word 'broadcaster' amongst any of you. It's journalist. We seem to have been taken over by the written journalist who will have the expert opinion of a scholastic expert from somewhere or he is working for the Guardian. Therefore they are getting free access to your competitors when you read the headlines the next morning.
MICHAEL GRADE:
What would you like to see more of?
AUDIENCE MEMBER:
Broadcasters knowing how to broadcast. You have a superb one at the moment. You should wrap him in cotton-wool.
MICHAEL GRADE:
Who is that?
AUDIENCE MEMBER:
He's called Sir Charles Wheeler. Get him to come out and teach your journalists not to be bombastic, get the information and be a gentleman of this time. Get him to plug into the late Alistair Cooke.
MICHAEL GRADE:
Do you like David Attenborough?
AUDIENCE MEMBER:
I do. But he is a BBC man. He started down there and got up to the top. But he had been schooled by the initial of the BBC. We get people like Andrew Neil, he has been the editor of the Times, he does a programme on politics, puts people off politics. We get a Daily Politics show, we get a Politics Show on Sundays. They say a lot, but tell us nothing. What I am hearing tonight is it's getting like Wogan's Question Time or Any Answers.
MICHAEL GRADE:
Which services do you really enjoy? The radio? Which of the radio stations?
AUDIENCE MEMBER:
Four.
MICHAEL GRADE:
You like Two?
AUDIENCE MEMBER:
If it wasn't for the disc-jockeys thinking they are bigger than the music, yes, some of them. One I don't bother. Five Live is quite good. When you try to get through to the management it's always up to the editor. I have never been on BBC Five Live, because you never get a call back, because you are asking the wrong question. Therefore you are not getting a democratic representation I don't think, of the great British public. All you get is a lopsided tunnel vision, jaundiced view from the scholastics, the journalists, the professors who are in all of these universities and have never done a day's work in their life.
MICHAEL GRADE:
If I may say so, I think that is an extremely eloquent reminder to all of us that the licence fee is paid by everybody and that we must not in our excitement to embrace the new world of digital technology and all of the whizz-bangery, that may come or when you get it, it doesn't work in my case. It's an eloquent reminder to us, the Governors, and indeed the management that there is a huge constituency out there, that you represent, who have to be served and deserve full value for the licence fee. If I may say so, I think that was a timely reminder.
RANJIT SONDHI:
Can I just say, all of the research says, I do not speak as Professor of sociology, all the research says that the society is diversifying. They are expressing a whole range of tastes and interests and that the broadcasters need to respond to this challenge. Just as you would like a set of programmes to your taste and interests, so do other groups are according to age, background, religion. Request their set of programmes also. It is a real challenge for a broadcaster to be able to narrowcast in the future world. To be able to give something of worth to everybody. They can't please everybody all the time, but they can produce something for each section of the society all of the time. Would you accept that?
AUDIENCE MEMBER:
Sorry. It seems to be bordering on nepotism. You have got sub-editors and journalists running the news programmes who then go and ask an opinion of another sub-editor of a flavour of the month journalist who is going to give him the right answer. You cannot get a politician on the television until you furnished the questions you're going to ask him first so you can't get him on the hot plate. Poor Lady Thatcher did. She got a blasting. Well done to that person. But you can't get a normal man on the street - I can't get a position here to go in and ask the questions on the radio or anything. I know what I want to ask these politicians, but it doesn't get asked. So I don't agree with you, sir. I'm sorry. And it gets, like, a bit galling when you have been brought up through the War with the BBC with all the information - disinformation by - and all of that lot. We were brilliant and respected. Who was listening? Not those who were given the easy nod and moving on. And it's the same system tomorrow.
MICHAEL GRADE:
Thank you very much.
AUDIENCE MEMBER:
I have been listening to quite a lot of discussions here, particularly about the four channels. I think there is a real danger the quality will suffer, but I think the quality's getting spread a bit too thinly, and I certainly sense a celebrity culture creeping into the BBC, which I personally don't think is a very good idea. I like to think that the BBC stands for quality and has standards, which they should uphold. We're even getting celebrity things on the main BBC News. Well, these - the celebrity thing isn't news. People riding around on horses, so-called celebrities - has no interest for me, and I ' m sure has little interest for a lot of this audience in here.
AUDIENCE MEMBER:
Most of the quality programmes are on after 11.00. Occasional dramas are quite good. But a lot of the interesting what I call quality programme is not in the mainstream time between 7.00 and 9.00. That's when it sort of panders to this celebrity status.
MICHAEL GRADE:
Which channel do you watch the most?
AUDIENCE MEMBER:
One and two. We haven't got three or four. We can't get it.
MICHAEL GRADE:
No, no. OK. I'm really disappointed that your judgment of the whole of the output of BBC One and Two is coloured by Only Fools on Horses. I think that's a little unfair. I haven' t seen the programme myself. I understand it's to raise money for Sport Relief, so it's in a good cause. But if it's a rotten programme that doesn't justify it. I haven't seen it. I am not making a comment, and I would never comment on individual programmes publicly, but I think it's a shame to take the kind of celebrity culture that has infected newspapers, all the commercial channels and say that the BBC is swept along with that. It's quite often that there is a story about a celebrity that - that is genuinely news. You know, it's not news that Posh Spice has gone shopping. I don't regard that as news, and I hope that the newsroom at the BBC wouldn't regard that as a news story. But I can imagine stories where - stories about David Beckham and Mrs Beckham might well actually have been worthy of space on the national news, so I think you're being a little unfair. I mean, I think Planet Earth, I think Bleak House, I think Doctor Who, I think Strictly Come Dancing, I think a lot of these programmes are exceptionally distinctively brilliant programmes. Not everything is up to that standard. But that is the nature of television. There is so much television. Some of it is not bound to be the very best. I'm really sorry that you think that.
AUDIENCE MEMBER:
There are a lot of good programmes. But there is a "but" and it is changing. It is changing. The last two or three years I think it has been particularly noticeable. And I think the BBC has been one of the best broadcasting organisations in the world. And I'd like it to continue being like that I don't want it to slip. I don't want your standards to slip.
MICHAEL GRADE:
I can assure you that the Director-General and his team - and they've only been in place now for barely two years as the new team running the executive side and the editorial side of the BBC, are absolutely determined in every editorial investment decision they make to raise the BBC's sights, to raise the BBC's ambitions to be at the cutting edge of innovation and quality and distinction. It takes time and it takes money, but I do believe as a viewer now - I'm not speaking as Chairman of the BBC - as a licence fee payers and as a - as someone who has been a professional in broadcasting for over 30 years - I'm now an amateur and part time and a non-executive, if you like. I have to say it is my judgment that the quality overall of BBC programmes is beginning to improve overall quite markedly. There's still stuff in there that, you know, perhaps shouldn't be there that's still there. But there's a lot of weeding going on every year and a lot of programmes are going - copycat programmes, more lifestyle programmes. There aren't going to be more lifestyle programmes on the BBC unless they are really exceptional.
AUDIENCE MEMBER:
I would just like to say I'm very impressed with the BBC. I'm extremely pleased with the programming output, and I'm especially pleased to see BBC One, BBC Two, Three and Four because believe you me, watching idiots in a house night after night - is not entertainment, not for me. And basically, I...
MICHAEL GRADE:
Are you talking about your home or are you talking about Channel Four?
AUDIENCE MEMBER:
No, I am talking about - in my house, yeah! Big Brother - keep that off the BBC. And as you said, personally, I find the programming innovative. Thank you. And very informative. Keep it up.
MICHAEL GRADE:
Thank you very much. Thank you, sir.
AUDIENCE MEMBER:
Is the increasing diversification of programme content fuelled by the development of new media and the imperative of individual choice a threat or an opportunity for the BBC bearing in mind its commitment to quality and its role as informer?
JEREMY PEAT:
There's a point I wanted to make earlier which I'd like to make in relation to this question, which is one of the things that I think concerns me and concerns the Governors generally - and I'm sure the Executive of the BBC - is that in the changing world in which we live with just not new means of accessing media, but also diversified interests, actually attracting younger people to watch television, to watch good quality public broadcast television is becoming, I think, increasingly difficult. And one of the things we've got to watch is that we appeal to the younger people, attract them into what I believe are the right quality programmes that will add public value. And in order to do that, we've got to make sure that what we provide through the BBC is available through different channels, and also that we provide programming that attracts them and at the same time develops their interests in the BBC more generally. So yes, it is a huge challenge to us to have the dramatic increase in the number of channels. A lot of them not of high quality, but they're there, and they're our competitors in some ways. It's also a challenge to have so many different ways of accessing information and material, and so we've got to make sure even if not everyone goes through the web, that if that is a channel that's being used by young people increasingly that we've got to make sure we have access through that route just as we have through radio and television. If mobile phones are being used for accessing media in the future, we've got to make sure that BBC is aware of that and takes account of that and gets involved in that if it helps to make sure that the public value that we are delivering is delivered across the audience and that we don't have young people who miss out on the opportunity that are there through what the BBC can provide. So it's a massive challenge for us, the diversification of channels, the diversification of access and I think particularly so far as the younger generation is concerned we have got to approach that.
AUDIENCE MEMBER:
Firstly, again, very impressed with what the BBC does provide for a wide range of audiences. As a young person - I have just literally turned 18 - I have found the BBC web site particularly helpful with schooling, education and just keeping up with day-to-day life whilst doing those things. I think that's something they do very well.
MICHAEL GRADE:
I can feel a "but" coming.
AUDIENCE MEMBER:
No, no there's but, fortunately. The question I was going to pose to yourselves is with this week's release of the energy report how are you as a big corporation factoring that into account in the years to come? How are you going to be sort of budgeting for that whilst trying to grow the business in the way that you are?
MICHAEL GRADE:
Well, it's a huge concern. I think - I think the only - there's two - what is it they say? There's two certainties in life, death and taxes? I think there's three certainties now, a shortage of energy and therefore higher costs of energy. And we're in the same boat as everybody else in trying to manage those costs as best we can. It is a serious problem for all of us, for individual households and for big businesses, big corporations like the BBC. Those energy costs are going to rise. How we control them, I have no idea. That's a matter of public policy, and we'll all exercise our choices at the ballot box in due course.
MARK THOMPSON:
Just to say briefly already a high proportion of the BBC's energy comes from renewable source, over 90%. As we upgrade our buildings, we're trying very hard to make sure they're as environmentally efficient as they can be, but I think like many good organisations we've still got a lot more to do, particularly around a carbon, but also looking at becoming even more energy efficient so we can spend less money on energy and more money on making programmes.
AUDIENCE MEMBER:
Hello. I too would like to say that BBC programmes on the whole are really good. I've watched television all over the world, and nothing can beat the BBC. But the one thing that really irritates me is the amount of promotions and the repeat of the promotions. I know the reason that you have to have these things to fill the gaps, because you're selling TV programmes all over the world. We know that because we see it everywhere we go. But surely, do we have to have the same promotion hour after hour? I mean, the World Cup was a very good example. We knew the World Cup was on. Did we have to keep being told about it?
JANE HILL:
We did get an awful lot of e-mails on this subject as well, I have to say.
MICHAEL GRADE:
There is undoubtedly across all television a lot of what we - the jargon is "clutter" on the screen. The BBC is the least offender, I think on average we're between a minute and two minutes in the hour of trails for BBC services. We think we have a duty to the licence fee payers to tell them what the choice is, what they've paid for, where it's available and how it ' s available. If you watch the commercial channels, I think ITV are now up to nearly nine minutes in the clock hour of commercials, plus trails for their own programmes. There is a lot of clutter. And we - I think we get a lot of the blame for that even though we are not guilty. On the issue of the repetition of the same trailer over and over again, I don't know why we do it. It's counterproductive. And I can see the Director-General shaking his head in agreement. I'm sorry. And I think that point has struck home.
AUDIENCE MEMBER:
I live and work here in Norwich. My question's about local services really, local BBC services. Because I and many people that I speak to, actually, in the area feel that this sort of demographic that the BBC local services here speak to is quite unbalanced, and when I say that, mine that it appears there's very little, particularly perhaps in the radio services for anyone aged 0-50.
MICHAEL GRADE:
I think that's very, very good question.
AUDIENCE MEMBER:
Well, I think - I understand that Radio Norfolk, for instance is very successful at communicating to those people, but I just wondered whether that is in the interest of being a public service.
MICHAEL GRADE:
It's a tremendously good question. I want to see if the management have got a good answer, and we're listening very carefully. Perhaps Pat Loughrey, who is the Director of Nation and regions for the BBC? I hope this answer is going to be good, Pat, no pressure.
PAT LOUGHREY (BBC DIRECTOR, NATIONS AND REGIONS):
I am afraid it isn't necessarily going to solve your issue, because the local services are part of the BBC radio portfolio. They are specifically targeted to that part of the audience which is over 50. They are, however, part of a wide range of local services. Part of which is websites, local television news which is very popular, not just in this region. Where we do provide different services, it's incredibly important that the older section of the audience have a local service that is relevant to them and engages them. That is what BBC local radio does. We don't do that at the expense of the rest of the audience, I am afraid that is targeted to people over 50. I hope, however, that the rest of the audience don't feel excluded from football commentaries for example. For the significant speech and news shoulders morning, midday and evening, where weather and travel news are there for the whole audience. The bulk of the schedule meets the needs of that increasing demographic which is over 50.
AUDIENCE MEMBER:
I would like to, to ask you Ranjit on an area of quality programmes which I think you have neglected. That is regional quality programmes. As you know, we have lost Anglia. We don't have anything now. Another issue which never gets full coverage is water. What are you doing about water? Not you, BBC, but what are we doing about water? A third one is affordable housing.
RANJIT SONDHI:
Let me start off and then pass on to perhaps Andy Griffee who is the controller for the English regions to finish it off properly. I think actually, the English regions are well served by news and current affairs programmes, produced in the region by very good journalists and programme makers. What we don't have very much of is non-news programmes. I think we have had some wonderful examples like Coast with an opt out and various other examples. We can do a lot more of that. I would like to know what the BBC's plans are in that area of development, where the regional and the network programmes come together to produce something that is universally appreciated. I would like to find out more about that. I do take your point about regional appetites. Let me make it quite clear. ITV companies are unfortunately for reasons of economic logic moving out of regionalness, leaving a kind of gap. I think the BBC should never forget that it should be everywhere were the licence fee payers are. So it needs to be present in every single region of the mainland, especially when other broadcasters are pulling back from that.
JANE HILL:
Let's get a word from Andy Griffee, Controller of English regions.
ANDY GRIFFEE - CONTROLLER, BBC ENGLISH REGIONS:
I think you describe three important issues there, which are very high on the agenda of all of our television, radio and online teams in this region. They are issues, for example, on Radio Norfolk, I know there was a special chunk of programming devoted to the water issue and phone in off the back of it to discuss the issues raised. Those are key issues that we deal with on Look East, on Inside Out and indeed on the Politics Show. That dedication to continuing series of regional politics and current affairs is something we are very proud of and something that ITV is increasingly moving away from. There are all kinds of other opportunities to make the kind of - all kinds of other opportunities to make the one-off special programmes, you are also describing. We had one a year-and-a-half ago about costal erosion this region. We will look for opportunities to make those one-off landmark programmes as well.
AUDIENCE MEMBER:
My question is more parochial: about local radio, and specifically about radio Norfolk. Although Radio Norfolk, I find it forms a very good service, for instance, yesterday they stressed the fact that local schools were covering dialect. My real point is that the presenters on Radio Norfolk themselves don't bother to find out how the local names, many of the local villages are pronounced. They are actually spoken wrongly. If you say it loud enough and often enough people believe that is how it should be pronounced.
MICHAEL GRADE:
If there are so many dialects do all of the local people pronounce the names themselves? Or are there different pronunciations?
JANE HILL:
He is talking about Wyndham, not Whymondham.
AUDIENCE MEMBER:
Certainly names are always pronounced right. Happisburgh where people take the trouble to do it right. There are others when they don't.
MICHAEL GRADE:
There is no excuse for BBC local radio to get this wrong. It's against everything that local radio stands for that the presenters are so unfamiliar with the region they can't pronounce the names of the people and places correctly. There is no excuse for that..
PAT LOUGHREY:
There is no excuse for getting it wrong. We have more locally born presenters on Radio Norfolk. Sometimes there are disputes about things. I have done phone phone-ins when we have debated things for hours. There is an acceptable one. Hunston or Hunstanton? Shall we debate?
AUDIENCE RAISE HANDS
PAT LOUGHREY:
I think we have identified the problem.
AUDIENCE MEMBER:
I am a member of the Norfolk gliding club. As with many of minority sports, this country has bred world champions. Two weeks ago we had two gold, two bronze a team award in the world championships in Sweden . Over the years we have held international, regional competitions. On most occasions for the last five years, I have e-mailed your website on the weather section on the internet to invite your morning broadcasters to come along and deliver your weather forecast from our site. Because, we depend very much on weather. All we have received is an automatic response from the system saying it will be considered. Nothing has ever been followed up. Taking one point further on. It was mentioned earlier on about the weather graphics, sadly the weather graphics that we now are presented with have been dumbed down and we no longer get the isobars and the weather fronts we used to be able to green information from. Occasionally when someone think there is a weather situation coming of interest, we are given them, but on no regular basis. I think it's a real sad omission from a fundamentally good weather forecast.
MICHAEL GRADE:
Do you have access to the web?
AUDIENCE MEMBER:
Yes, I do.
MICHAEL GRADE:
I am a sailor. I am a very keen sailor. Not around these parts, it's too difficult. I would never put to sea on the basis of a televised weather forecast. I would go to sea on the basis of the shipping forecast or the BBC weather chart which has all of the synoptic charts and pressure you would need. I wouldn't go up in the air with you on the basis of an ordinary main channel broadcast weather forecast. That I can tell you.
AUDIENCE MEMBER:
The thing is when you see the progression of fronts you don't get it with explanation. You see it on there. If you are not completely conversant with metrology you...
MICHAEL GRADE:
Then, you shouldn't go gliding if you are not familiar.
AUDIENCE MEMBER:
Some of us do need that added interpretation to get the full value from it.
Impartiality (Coverage of the Middle East)
AUDIENCE MEMBER:
I am a great fan of the BBC. Especially Radio Four. What really upsets me is the coverage of the Middle East . I still don't think it's fair. I know you have had a recent settlement on that. But it is not fair. I have a specific example. I will be quick. Yesterday on the BBC News 24 didn't say to begin with that the Hezbollah militants crossed into Israel and captured two Israeli soldiers. That was not the first news. The first news was Israel's reaction. That is not fair.
MARK BYFORD (BBC DEPUTY DIRECTOR-GENERAL):
The first thing I would say about Middle East coverage is we give it an enormous amount of time and effort to get it right. It is one of the most challenging stories we have. As well as the Governors commissioning the independent review you were talking about, to ensure we are as impartial as we possibly can, we ourselves as the senior editors give a lot of time to how can we make it better? Firstly we recognise there should be more context setting for the general audience to understand the history and to understand the context of the given story. We have brought in Jeremy Bowen who is a Middle East editor to give that context. Firstly we are going to cross-promote. We know in news we can't say on the Ten O'Clock News tonight, covering 28 minutes, 12 stories, cover the whole of the history. We can cross-promote to the website which has fantastic historical and fact guides around the Middle East . On the specific, if that is what we did, but not on News 24, then that may be a mistake. It may be right because the story has moved on to give Israel's reaction. But if that was the first and main line we had, we may have got it wrong. We won't have done it in bias. I know you are saying that was the essence of the story. Depends what time it was and whether it was moving on in the original. Certainly, I was watching the coverage in my office, because we had been interested in the story. That was the line that we had, that made it in. If it moved on we may have got it wrong in that instance.
Programming (younger audiences)
AUDIENCE MEMBER:
I am a representative of the Thetford Youth Council. There are programmes on after 9.00pm, I think would be interesting for people like myself and of my age to watch. For example, I believe it's called Honey I am Killing the Kids. I know it sounds rather destructive. I can' t watch the whole thing, because I am in bed before that finishes. But it's to do with children of my age and often younger so surely that should be on at a time that we should be able to watch it.
MICHAEL GRADE:
What time do you go to bed?
AUDIENCE MEMBER:
Myself...ranges between 9.00pm and 9.30pm.
MICHAEL GRADE:
What time do you get up?
AUDIENCE MEMBER:
About 6.45am.
MICHAEL GRADE:
May I ask how old you are?
AUDIENCE MEMBER:
13.
JANE HILL:
Someone obeying the watershed - doesn't happen very often!
MICHAEL GRADE:
I don't know if that is the average age that children go to bed.
AUDIENCE MEMBER:
According to my school friends no.
JANE HILL:
Sleep is important.
MICHAEL GRADE:
It is. The older you get the more inevitable it gets. Do you have a video recorder or...
AUDIENCE MEMBER:
I do, yes, but I find once I've recorded something, I never take the time to watch it afterwards. The thing is especially this programme, Honey I'm Killing the Kids it's about the situation of the kids today - their eating habits, their lifestyle and how it's affecting their later life.
MICHAEL GRADE:
I think the ability to watch programmes that - at times that are suitable to you has never been easier, and it's getting even easier. There is a seven-day archive availability coming up shortly for those who have got broadband. You'll be able to dial up any programme for the last seven days and watch it when you're awake in the few hours of the day that you are awake.
AUDIENCE MEMBER:
Which is plenty enough.
MICHAEL GRADE:
Yeah. Do you think you can watch television that and eat at the same time, because it will save you - I think you and I should have a conversation after about managing your time, so you can get to watch these marvellous programmes that you keep recording and not watching. That would be nice.
