´óÏó´«Ã½

One Vision - speech given at the Edinburgh International Television Festival 2005

Sunday 28 August 2005
Printable version

Check against delivery

Ìý

Good morning. Many thanks for coming along for this early morning session.

Ìý

I was talking to former ´óÏó´«Ã½ ONE Controller Peter Salmon the other day and saying that I'd got the 10.00am Sunday slot and he said, 'It's obvious why the organisers have put you there.' I said, 'Why's that?' and he said, 'To make sure everybody gets out of bed.'

Ìý

It feels particularly early to me because I was up late last night doing something I never thought I'd do – going to a performance of the Edinburgh Military Tattoo, which we broadcast on ´óÏó´«Ã½ ONE yesterday.

Ìý

I remember the Tattoo from my student days when I would come to the Edinburgh festival with a comedy revue. Not because we went to see it. Quite the opposite. It wasn't for people like us. We were students. The Tattoo was for people from another race altogether – older people with their children, families, people with anoraks and thermos flasks.

Ìý

I was staying in a flat in Ramsay Gardens at the top of the Royal Mile. This was in 1977. I remember one day bumping into Robert Bathurst, later of Cold Feet and My Dad's The Prime Minister, as he was coming out of the flat.

Ìý

'Have you heard about Elvis?' he said.

'Which Elvis?'

'Elvis Presley?'

'What about him?'

'He's dead.'

Ìý

He walked on. It didn't seem that big a deal. Elvis was old and out of date. His audience and the audience for the Tattoo were, in a sense, one and the same, ie they weren't us.

Ìý

Well, we all grow up. I rather enjoyed the Tattoo. I like Elvis. In the intervening 28 years my tastes have changed, developed, broadened, become more tolerant, more mainstream, you might say, more ´óÏó´«Ã½ ONE in fact.

Ìý

Anyway, while I was preparing for this speech I thought I'd look up the ´óÏó´«Ã½ ONE schedules for 1977 and see what I would find. And I was pleased to see on Monday 29 August, there it was – at 10.40 the Edinburgh Military Tattoo. We were televising it then, and we're televising it now.

Ìý

These were the long-forgotten days when programmes would start at odd times – 6.35, 7.15, 8.20, 9.05. Imagine that today – schedulers would faint.

Ìý

Also playing that evening from 8.20 to 9.05 - The Best of The Two Ronnies. Now there's a funny thing, because we've had that in 2005 as well, in the form of the Two Ronnies Sketchbook. And very successful it was too.

Ìý

What does this tell you about ´óÏó´«Ã½ ONE? Twenty-eight years and nothing much has changed? Not exactly.

Ìý

In that same week in 1977 you'll find a schedule dominated by American acquisitions – Cannon, The Waltons, The Rockford Files, The Osmonds, The Wonderful World of Disney – all playing in peak, and among the originations…

Ìý

Well, there's Seaside Special, and Pop at the Mill, and Billy Smart's Circus and even Miss United Kingdom 1977. Nothing much there for the governors to mention in their annual report.

Ìý

And what about the news? Maybe this was a golden age of ´óÏó´«Ã½ news? Apparently not. In that week in 1977 there were, in total, 130 minutes of national news in peak-time; the comparable figure for this week is 335 minutes, two and a half times as much.

Ìý

But back to the Tattoo - it interests me that it's been proceeding quietly and without fuss for all these years.

Ìý

What does it tell us about ´óÏó´«Ã½ ONE? It tells us that ´óÏó´«Ã½ ONE thinks long-term. Its relationship to its audience is one that's nurtured over significant periods of time. It's not chained to the zeitgeist. It has a long attention span.

Ìý

It also tells us what's important to say about a mainstream channel: ´óÏó´«Ã½ ONE isn't trying to reach all the people all the time. I don't suppose that the Tattoo appeals to today's 20 year olds any more than it appealed to me back then in the summer of punk, but that doesn't mean it isn't worth doing.

Ìý

The Tattoo is an archetypal regional programme, and a regional production from ´óÏó´«Ã½ Scotland, dating back to a time when regionality was barely discussed and certainly wouldn't have dominated our consciousness as it does today.

Ìý

And it's one of ´óÏó´«Ã½ ONE's regular events. I think ´óÏó´«Ã½ ONE is unarguably the channel that audiences come to for the big occasions, whether we're talking big football matches or Royal weddings and funerals, or Live8.

Ìý

But the ´óÏó´«Ã½ ONE calendar has always been threaded with returning events, from Sports Personality of the Year to Eurovision, from Comic Relief to the FA Cup.

Ìý

They're part of what defines the channel and the Edinburgh Tattoo, in its modest and unostentatious way, takes its place alongside those.

Ìý

So will a ´óÏó´«Ã½ ONE Controller be standing here in another 28 years – in 2033 – able to say that he or she has been to the Tattoo the night before and that it's still playing on ´óÏó´«Ã½ ONE? Well… who knows?

Ìý

Taking over earlier this year I was acutely aware that by the time I'll have finished my spell in charge, the world will have changed for good. We're moving inexorably into a fully digital age.

Ìý

´óÏó´«Ã½ ONE is going to have to navigate its way into a new landscape where all bets are off. We don't know what the EPG will look like, or how viewing habits will settle down.

Ìý

´óÏó´«Ã½ ONE, once an only child, now has to compete for attention in a noisy and crowded playroom. Digital channels, online, on-demand – these and many other services are rushing in and making their presence felt.

Ìý

And the ´óÏó´«Ã½, like any parent, is lavishing attention on its newer and younger offspring.

Ìý

According to some people, the game is almost up for so-called terrestrial channels, and maybe even for the idea of channels full-stop. Within a few years we'll access programmes like we access music on the iPod.

Ìý

The ´óÏó´«Ã½, indeed, will be doing a content trial along these lines starting next month. The idea of 'appointment to view' will be an anachronism. It's not the channels, stupid – it's the programmes. I'll create my own schedule, thanks very much.

Ìý

Well, perhaps. Personally, I think viewers' relationship with channels is more complex, more durable than that, and that as the digital age evolves they will turn out to be more important than ever. They'll be our guides, our signposts.

Ìý

Channels like ´óÏó´«Ã½ ONE – and there aren't that many – have history and heritage. They mean something, and they're not making any more of them. Everyone in this room has an instinctive sense of ´óÏó´«Ã½ ONE, of what it stands for, of characteristics that have been developed and honed over many years. They're not going to go away tomorrow.

Ìý

Yes, we may have 400 channels to choose from, but we won't want to sample them all. We want to make choices. We have favourites.

Ìý

And the challenge for ´óÏó´«Ã½ ONE is to make sure we're one of the favourites for everyone – on whatever platform our programmes are delivered. Not necessarily your absolute favourite, because if your big passion is hang-gliding then Hang-gliding TV may be the number one channel for you, but your favourite mixed menu, original programming full service provider.

Ìý

That's a big prize, and one that will help ´óÏó´«Ã½ ONE withstand any number of technological shocks. But one thing I'm sure of – it will only achieve this if it consistently and consciously displays ambition. Play safe and we won't get there.

Ìý

In our Statement of Programme Policy for ´óÏó´«Ã½ ONE we say this - '´óÏó´«Ã½ ONE aims to be the UK's most valued television channel, with the broadest range of quality programmes of any UK mainstream network. We are committed to widening the appeal of all genres by offering the greatest breadth and depth within them. We will cover national and international sports events and issues, showcase landmark programmes and explore new ways to present specialist subjects'.

Ìý

I endorse all that, and I think that there are some interesting choices of words within that statement that are worth focusing on.

Ìý

Take 'quality'. When I was growing up and would watch television with my father – now aged 95 – he took it for granted that the ´óÏó´«Ã½ represented quality, so much so that if we were watching a good programme on the other side he would turn to me after a while and say in a surprised tone, 'This is on ITV, you know'.

Ìý

Of course it might seem thoroughly uncontroversial to say that quality matters, but to some people quality exists in one corner of the broadcasting stage, and popularity in the other.

Ìý

There's a certain mindset in television that says 'if you're looking for something interesting, look towards ´óÏó´«Ã½ TWO – ´óÏó´«Ã½ ONE's there for a different reason, to cater to the mass audience, which isn't people like you and me, but they're important – they pay the licence fee, and if there's not enough of them we won't get a new licence fee, so let's not neglect them, but let's not challenge them either – let's give them what we think they want'.

Ìý

In my vision of ´óÏó´«Ã½ ONE, this is completely wrong. The licence payer funds ´óÏó´«Ã½ ONE more than any other ´óÏó´«Ã½ service, so what should we give them in return? The best channel.

Ìý

This means striving for the best production value, the best story-telling, the best talent. It's something we can almost take for granted these days in, for instance, our specialist factual programmes.

Ìý

In almost my first week in the job I was presented with a proposal to make an enormously ambitious series, Origin of the Species, by the Natural History Unit.

Ìý

This will be a series with the breadth of ambition of the best that ´óÏó´«Ã½ ONE has done – it's The Blue Planet and more. When will it be on air, I asked? 2009, I was told. Fair enough. It's a long time to wait, but if it's something that goes further, digs deeper, tells us more, casts its net wider – let's do it. That's what we're here for.

Ìý

That quality of ambition which needs to be a ´óÏó´«Ã½ ONE hallmark is there in some of our best and most innovative drama – look out this autumn, for instance, for our modern interpretations of Shakespeare. They’re outstanding.

Ìý

And in the new year, watch out for two new contemporary films from the remarkable Stephen Poliakoff.

Ìý

But we need to make sure that ambition reaches all corners of the schedule. We want more that gets you on the edge of your seat, less that leaves you slumped on the sofa.

Ìý

We have so much airtime to fill, so many slots to commission for, that sometimes I think we revert too easily to the familiar. Occasionally you look at a ´óÏó´«Ã½ ONE show and say to yourself, 'it's there because it's there because it's there'.

Ìý

Second point – 'the broadest range of quality programmes of any UK mainstream network'. To me range is crucial, and becomes increasingly so in a digital age. In multi-channel television most offerings will be themed. The number of channels that offer the full menu will, proportionately, be fewer and fewer. ´óÏó´«Ã½ ONE needs to be the leading example.

Ìý

This isn't by any means the easiest course to steer. In a competitive world the temptation to focus a big channel on a smaller number of genres that get the biggest audiences is very strong. But the dangers are enormous.

Ìý

Allow audiences to lose the habit of seeing this or that genre on your channel and, when you come back to it, they may not follow. One of the effects of allowing one particular genre to over-dominate schedules is that, slowly and progressively, the diet can go from varied to monotonous.

Ìý

And as ratings and share slip, there's nowhere to go but to increase the amount of that genre again.

Ìý

Here's a list of the genres that currently feature on ´óÏó´«Ã½ ONE – current affairs, documentaries and contemporary factual, features, natural history, science, history, arts, religion, events, sport, drama, music, comedy, entertainment, factual entertainment, news. If there are fewer when I've done, hold me to account for it.

Ìý

The range of audiences ´óÏó´«Ã½ ONE serves is as important as the range of genres it offers. We talk about ´óÏó´«Ã½ ONE as a mainstream channel, and indeed it is one of the few channels that rightly aims to entertain a mass audience, that is inclusive, that doesn't believe anyone should feel left out.

Ìý

But the reality is that television viewing is more fragmented than ever, more often personalised, the individual in the bedroom rather than the family in the sitting room.

Ìý

As Mark Thompson said yesterday, 'Broadcasting and personalisation used to be opposite terms: no longer'.

Ìý

That is a tide that can't be held back, but the consequence is that when ´óÏó´«Ã½ ONE unites the audience it is all the more satisfying and memorable.

Ìý

One of the joys in the ´óÏó´«Ã½ ONE schedule earlier this year, and one that happily was just happening when I arrived, was Doctor Who. I loved it.

Ìý

Within days of its first broadcast I had adopted its theme tune as my mobile ring-tone – and what more modern way could be there to express your appreciation of a TV series?

Ìý

As a parent I had the intense pleasure of having Saturday afternoons dominated by my children asking every couple of minutes 'When does Doctor Who start?' and of hearing my six year old threaten to exterminate me if it didn't begin immediately.

Ìý

But what's great about Doctor Who isn't nostalgia for the past – it's the future. Here's ´óÏó´«Ã½ ONE connecting with young audiences and starting them on the same journey through changing ages, outlooks and tastes that many of us embarked upon many years ago.

Ìý

There are parts of ´óÏó´«Ã½ ONE where we serve – over-serve, some would say - the heartland audience, which is getting older. I don't want to neglect them and nor do I want ´óÏó´«Ã½ ONE to join the stampede in focusing primarily on 16 to 34 year olds.

Ìý

We haven't got advertisers breathing down our neck. We're not trying to shift product. But as I look at ´óÏó´«Ã½ ONE today I think we should try more often, more determinedly, to broaden our appeal to a younger audience. We need to find programmes that appeal across the board.

Ìý

In an age where many people feel that tastes are diverging, we need to find the point where they converge. It is tempting to assume that the shared experience is in terminal decline, but the urge to be part of a bigger audience, and the satisfaction that we derive from it, is a strong one.

Ìý

In a time-shifted world, live events – Live8 is a good example – assume a greater importance than ever. Next year we'll be covering the World Cup in Germany. Will it have less impact than, say, the World Cup of 1966 when there were only three television channels to choose between? Not at all.

Ìý

My third point about ´óÏó´«Ã½ ONE – talent. A TV channel is many things – a signpost, a brand, a trusted guide – and one of those things is that it's a platform for talent. How can we get the top talent to work on ´óÏó´«Ã½ ONE? This to me is essential.

Ìý

It's partly about the family of on-screen talent – strong already, but always needing to be refreshed, expanded, needing to reflect a modern, diverse Britain, needing to appeal to all sectors of the audience.

Ìý

It's also about the absolutely critical supply of off-screen talent. One of the questions I've been asking since I arrived is, are the doors of ´óÏó´«Ã½ ONE wide open to producers, performers, writers, directors, the creators of ideas and formats? They need to be.

Ìý

John Birt wants to see more scholars on television. Well, on behalf of ´óÏó´«Ã½ ONE I say – bring them on!

Ìý

In my old days as an indie I saw myself as a seller and the channel controllers as buyers. It's funny how quickly your perspective changes. As a controller it's your job to sell. To sell the programmes and the schedule and the channel itself to audiences and to the creative community.

Ìý

Sometimes, from the outside, the ´óÏó´«Ã½ looked a bit like a walled city, with its own culture, its own language, its own economy.

Ìý

I don't know if this was ever a fair perspective, but one thing I’m sure of – if ´óÏó´«Ã½ ONE is to thrive creatively any remaining walls need to be knocked down. We need to be open to everyone.

Ìý

I want ´óÏó´«Ã½ ONE to be a channel authored by talent, welcoming to talent, sponsoring talent. The ´óÏó´«Ã½'s history in this area is a pretty good one, but as the world changes the stakes get higher and the competition fiercer.

Ìý

Take comedy. My background is in comedy and reviving comedy on ´óÏó´«Ã½ ONE is one of our highest priorities. But first we've got to convince talent that ´óÏó´«Ã½1 is the right place to be. They've never had more options, and some of the newest and most compelling ones have been created by the ´óÏó´«Ã½ itself – ´óÏó´«Ã½ THREE, for instance.

Ìý

In a DVD-dominated world, when the commercial rewards that relate to television comedy are often far greater than the rewards that comes from making it in the first place, why choose ´óÏó´«Ã½ ONE? Not only because it offers the biggest platform, but the best and most exciting environment.

Ìý

Again it comes back to the issue of striving for quality. There's no question in my mind that where ´óÏó´«Ã½ ONE secures the high ground, it secures its future. Take the current debate about repeats. Repeats have a bad name, though it ought to be said that over the years some of our best-loved programmes wouldn't have achieved the status they have without judicious and well-placed repeats.

Ìý

But in a modern world there are many outlets for second and subsequent runs of programmes, and of course PVRs and the growth of on-demand services will increasingly devalue the sense of what a repeat is.

Ìý

But can we make ´óÏó´«Ã½ ONE a channel entirely of originations? Many people would like us to. Michael Grade said as much recently. The answer is yes, potentially, but two hurdles stand in our way.

Ìý

The first is straightforward enough – funding. The ´óÏó´«Ã½ is going through difficult and traumatic changes with the aim of channelling more money onto the screen, and that should make a real difference.

Ìý

But we estimate that to make ´óÏó´«Ã½ ONE peak-time repeat free by the end of the decade would cost the best part of £100m per year in additional funding. That's a lot to ask for.

Ìý

There's a second hurdle, though, which is less quantifiable but just as important - our ability to create enough ideas and find enough talent.

Ìý

There would be no prizes for saying that ´óÏó´«Ã½ ONE is repeat-free if what we produce to fill the airtime neither aims high enough nor succeeds often enough.

Ìý

We fill up more airtime, with more new programmes, than ever before – seven days a week, 52 weeks a year. Our daytime service is highly successful and a market leader – on its own it is hungrier for ideas and home-grown production, I would argue, than ´óÏó´«Ã½ peak-time was 30 years ago.

Ìý

Let me move on to talk briefly about some of the key genres that make up the ´óÏó´«Ã½ ONE mix.

Ìý

Drama is probably where most strides have been made in recent years to modernise and to appeal to new audiences.

Ìý

To go back one more time to this week in 1977, I found to my astonishment only one hour of original drama on ´óÏó´«Ã½ ONE – or rather less than an hour – 50 minutes - The Onedin Line, at 7.15pm on Sunday.

Ìý

These days, apart from the four hours per week that make up EastEnders, Holby City and Casualty, you can routinely expect to see at least another four hours of original drama on ´óÏó´«Ã½ ONE.

Ìý

Not that the numbers mean anything in themselves – it's the content that counts - it's in shows such as Hustle, Waking The Dead and Spooks, as well as in the reinvigorated Doctor Who, that we see drama shedding the skin of an old-style ´óÏó´«Ã½ ONE and appealing to new and different audiences.

Ìý

Nowadays, when we look at America and American audiences we find that it's in drama that the big impact is made. ABC has been the most successful network in the past year in reversing the long-term decline in network audiences, and that's been based on bold, risky drama commissions.

Ìý

America is also where some of the most ambitious drama of the past has happened, programmes that tried to change the world – Roots, Holocaust. If there's anywhere that we can attempt this sort of scale of ambition in this country it's ´óÏó´«Ã½ ONE.

Ìý

What's the drama equivalent of Origin of the Species? I don't even mind waiting till 2009 for it.

Ìý

In entertainment, there's a big and never-ending challenge. In his MacTaggart speech John Birt broadly gave entertainment a thumbs up, but we certainly can't rest on our laurels.

Ìý

We live in an age when a lot of emphasis is placed on the public value that the ´óÏó´«Ã½ creates, and it's easy in this environment to lose sight of that third plank of the ´óÏó´«Ã½'s original mission – to entertain.

Ìý

But entertainment needs to be at the core of ´óÏó´«Ã½ ONE. It's also one of the hardest and most challenging genres to succeed in. We've had some striking successes such as Strictly Come Dancing, we've innovated with shows such as Hard Spell that combines entertainment and learning, but they leave us wanting more that's new, successful and different.

Ìý

Within the factual genres, there's no doubting the strength of ´óÏó´«Ã½ ONE in specialist factual and natural history programmes, and we also have outstanding examples of drama documentary such as the recent Hiroshima and the forthcoming Derailed, but truly modern new forms of documentary and popular factual have in some ways eluded us and, in the early evening in particular, we make too much that is ordinary. We need to raise our game there.

Ìý

There are too many docusoaps on ´óÏó´«Ã½ ONE – well-made programmes, which are often watched by sizeable audiences – but in an increasingly interactive age in which the audience wants to own and influence its programmes to a greater extent than before, the relatively passive experience of watching a docusoap has lost the impact it once had. Like all genres, it needs to evolve and respond to modern tastes.

Ìý

A recent series, A Picture Of Britain, showed that there's an audience for the arts on ´óÏó´«Ã½ ONE – David Dimbleby's series took nearly five million viewers on a voyage round Britain focusing on the works of landscape painters, poets and authors – a tough sell you might think in peak-time, and its success all the more satisfying as a result.

Ìý

Shortly after I arrived the ´óÏó´«Ã½ more widely had a big success with its Beethoven week, and as the incoming Controller of ´óÏó´«Ã½ ONE I was surprised to find that ´óÏó´«Ã½ ONE didn't feature in it at all. It ought to have done.

Ìý

There must be room for the aspirational and the inspirational if ´óÏó´«Ã½ ONE is to be the ´óÏó´«Ã½'s flagship offering.

Ìý

I've already mentioned the extraordinary growth in news on ´óÏó´«Ã½ ONE over the past 30 years. I'm lucky enough to arrive at a time when our news bulletins are on a high.

Ìý

Interestingly, the recent success of news can in some ways be traced directly to the change to 10.00pm from 9.00pm – a bold and opportunistic move that you might have hesitated to follow through if you'd thought about it for too long.

Ìý

We should look at other places in the schedule where we can rearrange the furniture to give the room a fresh look. As well as news, current affairs occupies a secure place in our peak-time schedule.

Ìý

Only a few weeks ago a 9.00 Panorama special, Undercover Nurse, played to an audience of nearly five5 million, giving lie to the idea either that current affairs is marginalised or that it can't, when covering the right subjects in an innovative way, appeal to a mass audience.

Ìý

And one of the least-sung but most intriguing parts of the schedule is between 6.30pm and 7.00pm when our regional news programmes, when taken together, regularly attract up to 30 per cent of the audience.

Ìý

This has led me to ask, can we take this further? Are we reflecting a hunger in audiences for programmes which celebrate the nations and regions that is greater than we'd even realised? Can ´óÏó´«Ã½ ONE find new ways to reflect the huge variety of Britain today, the way we live, who we are, our identity and our sense of belonging?

Ìý

Look at ´óÏó´«Ã½ TWO's recent series Coast, which managed to reach places we'd never been before. What a tremendous series that was.

Ìý

If the result of much of what I'm saying is that we will take ´óÏó´«Ã½ ONE further away, over a period of time, from its traditional rival ITV1, then so be it. There's nothing in the ´óÏó´«Ã½'s Charter that says that ´óÏó´«Ã½ ONE is locked in a twin-headed struggle with ITV1, and it undersells itself if it only judges its success in those terms.

Ìý

I see ´óÏó´«Ã½ ONE becoming, over time, more distinctive, not less, diverse, ambitious, open to talent, hungry for ideas, willing to take audiences to new places, or to revisit familiar places in new ways, competitive of course, but not populist for the sake of populism, never afraid to fail but always keen to succeed.

Ìý

I also think we need to acknowledge areas where we've got work to do. Take comedy drama. This autumn we've got a new series from David Renwick, one of our most cherished writers, Love Soup.

Ìý

But one swallow doesn't make a summer and I'm keen that we do more in this area which should be a natural ´óÏó´«Ã½ ONE strength.

Ìý

We're planning in 2006 to launch a comedy drama playhouse season where we premiere new shows with major talent. They won't all work, but I'd rather be trying something new than shying away from the challenge.

Ìý

Reality's another genre that's vexing for ´óÏó´«Ã½ ONE. You might think from all that I've been saying that I won't be steering ´óÏó´«Ã½ ONE in that direction, but I'm not closing the door on anything.

Ìý

At its best, reality television forges a new relationship between the viewer and the programme-maker, where audiences are engaged with what they see, influence the outcome, care passionately about the characters, sample the programming across a range of platforms, feel a form of engagement that you just don't get from other genres.

Ìý

One of the last series I was involved with in my last job was The Apprentice, a quintessentially ´óÏó´«Ã½ TWO show – but where is its ´óÏó´«Ã½ ONE equivalent? It would be great to find.

Ìý

Much of what's interesting in modern television, indeed, defies conventional classification. Any particular genre – drama, for instance - doesn't exist in a vacuum but reflects and feeds off other genres. Isn't Lost based on a reality show? And drama increasingly infiltrates factual genres, where the drama-documentary is forever growing and mutating.

Ìý

By the same token, ´óÏó´«Ã½ ONE doesn't exist in a vacuum. It's part of the portfolio of ´óÏó´«Ã½ channels and other ´óÏó´«Ã½ interactive and online services.

Ìý

The relationship between broadcast and online, the role of learning and knowledge, the emergence – hard to predict in detail, but certain to come – of on-demand as a key way of viewing programmes, the vast range of possibilities that red button technology can lead to - all these point to a much more complex ´óÏó´«Ã½ ONE that is rightly defined as a flagship ´óÏó´«Ã½ service, but also plays a complementary role in the overall ´óÏó´«Ã½ offer.

Ìý

The well-known journey of Little Britain from Radio 4 to ´óÏó´«Ã½ THREE to ´óÏó´«Ã½ TWO to ´óÏó´«Ã½ ONE is a perfect example of the portfolio of channels in action, and recent events such as the Africa Lives season and Organ Donation week show the added reach and impact that the ´óÏó´«Ã½ can achieve when it unites its different channels and media to make something bigger than the sum of its parts.

Ìý

The truth is that, as you survey the landscape as the incoming controller of ´óÏó´«Ã½ ONE, there are challenges facing you in all directions – and opportunities too. That's as it should be.

Ìý

If you're investing the best part of a billion pounds a year of public money in a service, you don't expect it to be easy and you expect the bar for success to be set pretty high.

Ìý

I've now been doing this job for three months and the brickbats haven't started flying at me, but I know they will. Week in, week out, there will be the relentless pressure on performance.

Ìý

A ´óÏó´«Ã½ ONE controller who talks about quality and range knows only too well that, lurking in the background, are the more sober realities of ratings and share.

Ìý

It would be nice, wouldn't it, if we could liberate ourselves from the tyranny of ratings. After all, we all know as viewers that ratings measure the number of people who are watching something at any one time. What they don't do is measure the quality of the experience.

Ìý

I was reading a book of articles and pieces by Alan Bennett recently, Writing Home, and came across something he'd said at a memorial service for the ´óÏó´«Ã½ producer he'd worked with over many years, Innes Lloyd. Together they made some of TV drama's classic one-offs such as A Question of Attribution.

Ìý

Writing about him, Alan Bennett says – 'In all the years we worked together he never once told me what my viewing figures were or even mentioned them; to have done so would have been a concession to a view of television for which he had no time'.

Ìý

Well, the past is a foreign country. We won't get back there and I'm not even sure we ought to. But not everything has changed.

Ìý

Elsewhere Bennett says this about his producer – 'Tolerant, various, prodigal, fearless, and passionate – his standards are – or were – those of the ´óÏó´«Ã½ he served so faithfully for 26 years and to see those values fought for, reinstated and celebrated again would be the best memorial to this steadfast, gentle, generous man'.

Ìý

Well I'd be happy to associate all those values with ´óÏó´«Ã½ ONE. I don't think they need reinstating because I don't think they've ever gone away.

Ìý

One of the things I've been most struck by in my short time at the ´óÏó´«Ã½ is the creative determination of my colleagues to create outstanding work, not for commercial or financial reasons but for its own sake.

Ìý

My sense is that, far from losing the plot or dumbing down, those public service virtues of commitment to quality, range and excellence are alive and well at the ´óÏó´«Ã½.

Ìý

Not everyone will agree with this and somebody who may well not is the person who's about to question me, Emily Bell. I'm a big fan of Emily's but I don't always agree with what she says.

Ìý

Talking about my predecessor, who I happen to think did an outstanding job of revitalising the channel, she wrote in Broadcast - 'It would be hypocritical to laud Heggessey's achievements without mentioning that I bloody hated just about everything on ´óÏó´«Ã½ ONE for the past five years – from the badly written, whiny inevitability of Eastenders to the unremittingly asinine slate of drama and comedy'.

Ìý

Fair enough, Emily. So to finish, here is a 60-second tape of just some of the stuff coming up in the autumn that you won't like and, after that, I'm all yours….

SPEECHES BY YEAR: