United Kingdom Parliament
Publications & records
Advanced search
 HansardArchivesResearchHOC PublicationsHOL PublicationsCommittees
Select Committee on Foreign Affairs First Report


11  BBC World Service

Performance in 2006-07

281. The BBC World Service sent us a memorandum for this inquiry, as well as draft finance and PSA pages from its 2006-07 Annual Review. Like the British Council, it has also sent us memoranda over the last year explaining its ongoing work in regions relevant to our inquiries. We are grateful for this evidence.

282. In the financial year 2006-07, the Service received £239.5 million in grant-in-aid from the FCO for its public diplomacy activity.[458] Its memorandum highlighted a number of projects which it had undertaken over the last financial year, including Generation Next, a week of programming across all 33 language services for under 18s; School Day 24, which linked up schools across international conflicts and divides; India Rising, which explored the winners and losers of India's economy; Ghana at 50, which celebrated the nation's independence anniversary; Iran in focus, a week's programming in Iran; and Iraq week, which marked the fourth anniversary of the invasion.[459] The memorandum also drew attention to BBC World Service Trust receiving recognition for its Darfur Lifeline project in Sudan and its Draw Your Place on Earth children's programme.[460]

283. The BBC World Service is required to report a number of PSA measures to the FCO. These mainly measure performance by audience size, reach and awareness using independently-produced surveys to capture statistics, although the Service also has to report performance against the criteria of objectivity and relevance.[461] Nigel Chapman assessed the Service's overall performance as follows:

There are things that we could do better, and there are parts of the world where audiences have gone down […] However, where we have focused our energy, which is around the middle east, the wider Islamic world and Asia […] it is a pretty well universal story of an improved impact, which is a very laudable achievement. Any organisation that could come along and tell you that would have to take a reasonable pat on the back for its performance over the past 12 months.[462]

284. Overall, we agree that the BBC World Service performed well over the last financial year. Its total audience figures increased by 20 million a week to record levels of 183 million.[463] Regionally, weekly audience figures were well above target in Africa and the Middle East and in Asia and the Pacific.[464] There was also a 1 million increase in the Arabic Service audience, a 1.5 million increase in Pakistan, a near doubling of audience figures in Bangladesh, record levels in the US and a new audience in the Democratic Republic of Congo. In Iran audiences remained steady, despite difficulties with audibility.[465] The Service scored more highly than its nearest international radio competitor on the percentage of the adult population aware of it and the percentage who listened to it weekly in all the surveyed countries, with only two exceptions.

285. The BBC World Service also performed well against its targets for online audiences. Its international facing news sites attracted 704.3 million page impressions in March 2007, compared to 546 million in March 2006, well above the target of 600. It also reached its target for the number of interactive forums by key language.[466] The Service's memorandum explained that it was "building partnerships with major portals to showcase its work better and increase traffic" and that this had proved particularly effective in competitive markets, such as Latin America, and in China where access to BBC news websites was blocked.[467]

286. On the criteria of objectivity and relevance, the World Service scored more highly than its main competitors in all surveyed countries for objectivity and relevance.[468]

287. However, there were areas where there was a decline in performance. The audience in Africa increased overall, but English language audiences for some parts of Africa dropped back, leading to a decline from 42 million to 38 million in the global English radio total.[469] Nigel Chapman told us that this decline was due to the failure of a partnership with a local company:

In the past we had quite a major partnership with a company called Ray Power in Nigeria, but when we surveyed again this autumn, the programmes were no longer on the air and we had therefore lost something like 1.5 million listeners in Nigeria.

He added that the Service had "not focused hard enough" on making its Africa schedule coherent and that it also needed to "focus more energy" on marketing its English output in the continent.[470]

288. Audiences also declined in Latin America and parts of Eastern Europe, such as Romania and Ukraine, leading to an overall decline in the Americas and Europe from 22.1 million to 17.9 million.[471] The BBC World Service's memorandum stated that this was due to the development of markets in those regions.[472] Nigel Chapman also told us that the Service had had some problems with its key partners.[473] We asked Nigel Chapman how he planned to increase audiences against these difficulties. He replied:

Only by finding different and better partners. Direct, short-wave listening in those markets is negligible, so it has to be through third parties, to some extent through internet connectivity but mainly through radio stations carrying our content. That means that our business development people have to work really hard to find alternative means of distribution.[474]

289. The BBC World Service also has a target for shortwave audibility. It missed its quality rating target of 80 by one point, with low audibility (73) in Europe. Its Annual Review suggested that this was due to sunspot activity being at the minimum of its 11-year cycle. This meant that lower frequencies had to be used, causing congestion on these limited bands which could affect audibility.[475] On its target for capital cities with BBC World Service FM presence, the Service increased the number by one to 151, missing its target of 152.[476]

290. We asked Nigel Chapman whether he thought the BBC World Service's PSA targets were appropriate. He replied that they were "broadly" right since they matched up "volume and impact":

You need to know how many people use the services, but the targets also measure well what people think of those services. We can then cut and dice the content into more niche segments, so that we can see whether, for example, within a capital city we are particularly effective with opinion formers and people of influence. […]

Nigel Chapman had one caveat, which was that it was more difficult to measure the impact of the web. He told us that the Service would therefore be working harder on developing measurements for the web over the next two or three years.[477]

291. We welcome the BBC World Service's performance over the last financial year, in particular its record audience figures, achieved against increasing worldwide competition. However, there are areas where improvement is required, including scheduling and marketing in Africa and partnerships in Latin America and parts of Eastern Europe. We recommend that in its response to this Report, the FCO update us on the Service's progress on these areas. We also recommend that the Service keep us informed of any new targets it develops for measuring the impact of the web.

Distribution

292. The BBC World Service's memorandum reported that its output was available on 15 different platforms or technologies. New FM relays had come into operation in Helmand and Kunar provinces of Afghanistan, five of which were solar-powered to enable them to air independently of local supplies. A transmitter on Ascension Island, which served large parts of Africa, would also soon be wind-powered saving £500,000 annually.[478] The Service's largest expenditure on distribution was on the Content Delivery Programme, a series of projects to replace and enhance the existing distribution system. The Service told us that it spent a "significant" amount of the £28.5 million on capital expenditure in 2006-07 on this programme.[479] Alison Woodhams described the benefits of the Programme as: "better coverage", "increased resilience", "greater flexibility" and "more localisation and […] tailoring".[480]

293. We asked Alison Woodhams whether the BBC World Service had a framework by which it could measure the performance of the programme. She replied:

We will be able to measure a number of local stations that are taking different content, or a bigger variety of content, as a result. Where we have rolled it out, we have already started to do that. We will then be able see whether audiences have changed.[481]

294. We conclude that the BBC World Service's investment in improving its distribution system is to be welcomed.

INDIA

295. In our South Asia Report, we drew attention to the reporting restrictions in India on international companies broadcasting news on FM and urged the Government to set out the representations it had made to the Indian government on this issue.[482] The Government told us that the BBC World Service had raised the issue at the highest levels, but that the High Commission had not done so and had not been approached by the Service to make such representations.[483] In its memorandum to this inquiry, the Service told us that partnerships with Indian media group MidDay had enabled it to reach the growing Indian FM market.[484] However, Nigel Chapman added:

[…] unfortunately, the thing we really want, which is a relaxation in relation to news content—that is, geopolitical news and current affairs; politics, if you like—is not on anyone's agenda in India. The Indian stations are not even allowed to carry news about India […]

[…] it is perverse, in the sense that they have opened up the media market in India for television, so there are plenty of 24/7 television stations around […], but radio is a protected species, and it is All India Radio, in particular, that is a protected species, because it is the only one that is allowed to broadcast news.

296. Nigel Chapman suggested that the restrictions remained in place because the authorities were concerned about the high impact of radio in rural areas.[485] He warned that this way of thinking had a "risk of damaging the Indian radio industry significantly, because people will increasingly turn to television, which they can easily get." [486]

297. We recommend that the FCO should support the BBC World Service by also making representations to the Indian government about removing restrictions on FM broadcasts. We also recommend that both the FCO and BBC World Service should make representations to All India Radio about the potential weakening of radio as a medium if it is not liberalised.

RUSSIA

298. The BBC World Service has lost FM services in Moscow and St Petersburg leading to a decline in audience of 1 million. The Service's memorandum stated that it had developed a partnership with Voice of Russia for a joint FM radio station, Bolshoye, "without issues so far".[487] However, in August 2007, Russia's media regulator ordered Bolshoye radio to remove the Service's content or face being shut down.[488]

299. Voice of Russia is the international arm of the Russian state broadcasting network. In evidence to the Global Security: Russia inquiry, we received a memorandum from a Russia citizen who had worked for the Service for 14 years, who argued that the BBC World Service was "inevitably" putting its reputation for impartial news at risk by forming such a partnership. The memorandum also claimed that BBC Russian Service's reporting on Russia was "often weaker than the main BBC News".[489]

300. The Service told us that it had received complaints about its editorial policy, but that these emerged from a group of London-based Russian exiles and had been "found to be of no substance".[490] Nigel Chapman told us that the Service had been "painstakingly through the observations and criticisms in the letter, but the team could find no justification for them. […] The quotes are extremely selective, and the comparisons are not contemporaneous." He added:

[…], if the Russian service is so soft on the Russian authorities, why did the Russian authorities come down extremely hard on our partners in St. Petersburg and Moscow? Why did they do that, if we were so lily-livered and lacking in substance and fibre in relation to coverage of Russia?[491]

The Service's response to its correspondence with the complainants also argued:

The audience of the BBC Russian Service] has a much better understanding of Russian stories than a British domestic audience would generally have, and therefore it is expected that the way in which the Russian Service team covers the stories would have different levels of context and detail to that of domestic news outlets.[492]

We have published copies of this correspondence with this Report.

301. We conclude that we can find no evidence to support claims that the BBC Russian Service was weaker than the main BBC news. However, we also conclude that the development of a partnership with the international arm of a Russian state broadcasting network puts the BBC World Service's reputation for editorial independence at risk. We will consider the BBC World Service's operations in Russia further in our Global Security: Russia Report.

CHINA

302. In China, short wave broadcasts continue to be subject to persistent frequency interference, with BBC news online services also rigorously blocked. Only 0.1% of the Chinese population listen to the World Service in any language.[493] Our East Asia report reported on the problem of jamming and urged the Government to make strong representations to China about this issue.[494]

303. The Service has now decided to reallocate its resources in China, announcing changes in February 2007 to improve coverage of domestic Chinese issues and to broadcast programmes at times when they had most impact.[495] Nigel Chapman further explained:

[…] it is about making a proportionate level of investment in broadcasting for China […] we are going to maintain a strong presence, but it is proportionate. There is no point in putting out repeats of programmes on short wave that no one can access. It is just in the end a waste of resources.[496]

304. We agree that it is sensible to focus resources in China on those media that are less subject to jamming. However, this must not be treated as a signal that the UK is giving up on persuading the Chinese government to make media more accessible. We reiterate our recommendation in our East Asia Report that the Government should make strong representations to China about this issue.

Efficiency savings

305. The BBC World Service's memorandum reported that over the past decade it had made greater efficiency savings than the targets set by the Treasury.[497] It achieved £9 million of efficiency savings during the last financial year.[498]

306. In 2006, the Service closed ten of its language services on radio in order to release a further £10 million of funds for reinvestment.[499] In our Public Diplomacy inquiry, we concluded that this was "regrettable" and recommended that the Service, in consultation with the FCO, should "review regularly its language services for impact and financial value but do its utmost to preserve and extend its language services upon which so many depend for its trustworthy news and information".[500] This year the Service told us that it was "likely to reduce the scale and scope of its non-news and information English programmes and re-examine its language services once again, with the view to reducing output in areas of low impact and declining audience need."[501]

307. We asked Nigel Chapman about this further possible reduction. He told us:

I do not close the door on further changes, but I do not think that they will be on the scale of the past. However, we have to judge all that against the 3% savings target that the Treasury is insisting on, which everyone that is part of the process has to meet across the three years of the spending review.[502]

308. We questioned Nigel Chapman on the potential conflict between making efficiency savings and retaining high quality outputs. He replied:

I am not a salami slicer by temperament; I do not believe in making everybody save the same. If you do that to organisations, you end up with everything being less good than it needs to be and with no focus and concentration. One of the success stories of the World Service, in the past 10 years in particular, has been a greater sense of focus and energy on critical markets. As a result, we are doing the best that we have ever done in most of those places. […] the other way is just to hollow out everything at the same level, and that is not a good strategy in my view.[503]

309. We agree. We recommend that any decision to close further language services should be driven by declining audience need and reduced impact, and not by an arbitrary savings target.

Strategy for the future

310. In October 2005, the BBC World Service announced a significant strategic shift as part of its 2010 strategy. This included plans for an Arabic TV service (discussed further below), language service closures and increased investment in interactive services, FM transmission facilities, overseas news bureaux and marketing.[504] In our Public Diplomacy Report, we commended the Service's decision to invest in digital services and argued that extra investment in new media would "be vital in the future if the Service is to see a growth in audiences".[505]

311. The Service's memorandum to our inquiry explained that a fundamental part of its strategy was to move from a radio broadcaster into a multimedia network.[506] It argued that radio would continue to be the best way of reaching large audiences in much of Africa and rural Asia for many years, but that in developed markets more people would look to television for news. The Service was also responding to the increasingly bigger role played by broadband internet, mobiles, text and video services, launching broadband video news in six languages, as well as English, and new sites for downloading content to mobile devices.[507]

312. We asked Nigel Chapman what his vision was of the media the World Service would be using in the future. He replied:

In five years' time, in many markets it will not even be radio and the web; radio alone will continue to be powerful. I am thinking of large parts of Africa, lifeline services for the Burmese and parts of Central Asia. In other markets there will be a full panoply of tri-media activity, of which Arabic will definitely be one, Farsi will be another, and I suspect that there will be two or three others by then. There will be some people in the middle who still have a radio and have some new media services alongside that. I do not accept the notion that watching or listening to a linear stream of content will suddenly go out of the window in five years' time and that everyone will access content through the web as their only source. […]

He therefore argued that it would not be sensible for the Service to put all its "eggs into the broadband basket",[508] nor to invest heavily in putting cameras into the Service, although this would be a "definite possibility" in the future.[509]

313. Nigel Chapman further explained that internet activity was likely to include partnerships with major portals for cross-promotion.[510] This had already been done very successfully in south America where "every major portal […], has some well-displayed BBC content on it and that drives new users to us […] like a great shop window for our content and is a big factor in why those sites have done rather well."[511]

314. We asked Nigel Chapman how this increased use of other media like the internet would fit with the BBC's other services. [512] He answered:

At the end of the day, what audiences care about is that it is the BBC. They do not differentiate that much between the BBC World Service, BBC World or bbcnews.com. It is the BBC that matters; that is the brand. We have to present to audiences a coherent face—a coherent, joined-up set of opportunities for them to consume our services, which I think are broadly pretty good.[513]

315. We welcome the BBC World Service's strategy to move from being a radio broadcaster into a multimedia network. However, this will require a joined-up approach with the rest of the BBC's services. We recommend that in its response to this Report, the FCO set out what consultations it has had with the Service about this new strategy and what measures the Service is taking to ensure clear editorial lines and a coherent mix of services.

316. Another key aspect of the World Service's strategy is the planned Arabic Service. The memorandum explained that preparations to launch BBC Arabic Television in the autumn are "well on track", with its staff planned to be the first to occupy the new Broadcasting House Centre.[514] We asked Nigel Chapman how preparations for its launch were progressing. He told us that they were currently "on time and on budget", but that the critical time would not be until July - September 2007.[515] We asked him how the BBC World Service would ensure the Arabic Service had consistent editorial lines with the rest of the BBC's services. He replied:

First, all the services from the BBC—television, radio or any kind of service internationally and nationally—have to subscribe to the BBC editorial guidelines. There is no difference between the guidelines for Farsi and Arabic television and those for BBC World.

Secondly, the content generated by Arabic TV, particularly in terms of news gathering in the Middle East and the wider Islamic world, will be rather valuable to the BBC. Therefore one of the really critical things is to ensure really good co-ordination between BBC World, the BBC as a whole and the material generated by those television services. We are putting that into place, physically and editorially, so that we can make sure that we do not let excellent material in one place not be seen in another.[516]

We discuss the funding of the extension of the Service further below.

Comprehensive Spending Review 2007

317. Submitted in June, the BBC World Service's memorandum made clear that it was at a crucial stage in negotiations on its CSR07 bid. It told us that it was focusing on two key areas of investment for 2008-2011. These were: building services to regions of geopolitical insecurity; and enhancing interactive digital services to engage with new influential audiences.[517] It was asking for an overall increase of RPI (Retail Price Index) plus 1.3% of its 2006/07 baseline of £246 million. The Service argued that if it were asked to meet the 3% cashable savings per annum set out in the Chief Secretary to the Treasury's CSR07 guidance, it would have to find at least £19million per annum by 2010-11 and stated that it carried a particular risk of inflation as the majority of its cost base was made up of staff and related costs.[518]

318. When we began our inquiry, the £15 million annual funding for the daily eight hour satellite Farsi language television service announced by the Chancellor last year had yet to be formally allocated. As part of the CSR07 negotiations, the Service was also continuing to ask for £6 million to extend BBC Arabic television to a full 24/7 service. The memorandum stated that this extra funding was very important "for the long-term credibility" of the service.[519] Nigel Chapman told us:

[…] I think there is a total unity of purpose between ourselves and the FCO about that priority. It is, alongside Farsi, the highest priority of the bid and the case for it is very strong. I think that everybody accepts that.

[…]If you remember, the cost of the 12-hour Arabic service, which is £19 million a year, has already been found from the restructuring and reprioritisation of the eastern European language services and some money that was held back from the outcome of the spending review of 2004, so we are already effectively funding over two thirds of the cost of Arabic television from existing resources. That is as far as I can go. If we are serious about this project—and we need to be, for all sorts of very good reasons—the service needs to be 24/7 and needs to be funded accordingly.[520]

On 25 July 2007, in his statement on new counter-terrorism measures the Prime Minister confirmed funding for the BBC Arabic and Farsi TV channels.[521]

319. The Service's memorandum also listed other planned new investments for which the Service wanted an extra £10 million. These included: £4 million for BBC television in Urdu for Pakistan through partner channels, £2 million for African English television service with local partners, and £4 million for other media developments, including expanding broadband video for key languages, enhancing the Global Conversation and using digital technology to connect UK diaspora communities with their countries of origin. On the investment for Urdu television, Nigel Chapman argued:

[…]It would have a huge audience because of the BBC's brand and effectiveness in Pakistan, although not just in Pakistan, because it would, obviously, be available via satellite and terrestrially via partner stations. So there is an appetite for it, and in the context of what is going on in Pakistan at the moment, there is a very strong case for that sort of development.[522]

320. The Service was also seeking up to £9million in one-off funding to help meet rising redundancy costs.[523] Nigel Chapman told us that this was because most of its costs were around people and that it would therefore have to carry out redundancies to meet the Treasury's 3% a year efficiency targets. He argued:

The Treasury is saying in principle that it will fund up to 50% of the restructuring costs that are brought about by cashable savings, and the World Service should be treated in the same way as the Foreign Office, the British Council or anybody else in that respect. In the past, we have not asked for that, because we have been able to absorb costs in our existing resources, but we have got to the point now where we cannot do that. […].[524]

321. The BBC World Service received the following financial settlement in CSR07:

Figure 3: CSR07: BBC World Service baseline and additions
£million
Baseline Additions
2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-2011
BBC World Service 246 1926 25

Source: HM Treasury[525]

Figure 3 shows that the BBC World Service's budget increases over the three year CSR07 period from £246 million to £271 million, an average real terms increase of 0.5% per annum. The CSR reiterates the Prime Minister's commitment to increased investment to fund the Arabic and Farsi television services.[526]

322. We welcome the confirmation of £15 million annual funding for the Farsi language television service and an extra £6 million to extend the BBC Arabic television service. We also conclude that the BBC World Service should have received additional funding in CSR07 for its planned new investments and redundancy costs and recommend that in its response to this Report the FCO set out what the outcome was of the Service's discussion with the Treasury on this point.


458   Foreign and Commonwealth Office, Departmental Report 2006-07, Cm 7099, May 2007, p 109 Back

459   Ev 140 Back

460   Ev 140 Back

461   BBC World Service, Annual Review 2006/2007, p 26 Back

462   Ev 148 Back

463   Ev 140 Back

464   BBC World Service, Annual Review 2006/2007, pp 26-27 Back

465   Ev 140 Back

466   BBC World Service, Annual Review 2006/2007, p 28 Back

467   Ev 140 Back

468   BBC World Service, Annual Review 2006/2007, pp 26-27 Back

469   Ev 140 Back

470   Ev 149 Back

471   BBC World Service, Annual Review 2006/2007, pp 26-27 Back

472   Ev 140 Back

473   Ev 148 Back

474   Ev 148 Back

475   BBC World Service, Annual Review 2006/2007, p 29 Back

476   BBC World Service, Annual Review 2006/2007, p 28 Back

477   Ev 150 Back

478   Ev 140 Back

479   Ev 140 Back

480   Ev 152 Back

481   Ev 152 Back

482   Foreign Affairs Committee, Fourth Report of Session 2006-07, South Asia, HC 55, paras 296-297 Back

483   Foreign and Commonwealth Office, Response to the Fourth Report of the Foreign Affairs Committee Session 2006-07, Cm 7142, para 107 Back

484   Ev 140 Back

485   Ev 151 Back

486   Ev 151 Back

487   Ev 140 Back

488   "BBC radio ordered off Russian FM " BBC News Online, 17 August 2007 Back

489   Memorandum to be published in our forthcoming Global Security: Russia report. Back

490   Memorandum to be published in our forthcoming Global Security: Russia report. Back

491   Ev 151-152 Back

492   Ev 155 Back

493   Ev 140 Back

494   Foreign Affairs Committee, Seventh Report of Session 2005-06, East Asia, HC 860-I, paras 436-438 Back

495   Ev 140 Back

496   Ev 151 Back

497   Ev 140 Back

498   Ev 140 Back

499   Foreign Affairs Committee, Eighth Report of Session 2005-06, Foreign and Commonwealth Office Annual Report 2005-06, HC 1371, Ev 42 Back

500   Foreign Affairs Committee, Third Report of Session 2005-06, Public Diplomacy, HC 903, para 126 Back

501   Ev 140 Back

502   Ev 153 Back

503   Ev 153 Back

504   Foreign Affairs Committee, Eighth Report of Session 2005-06, Foreign and Commonwealth Office Annual Report 2005-06, HC 1371, Ev 42 Back

505   Foreign Affairs Committee, Third Report of Session 2005-06, Public Diplomacy, HC 903, para 183 Back

506   Ev 140 Back

507   Ev 140 Back

508   Ev 150 Back

509   Ev 150 Back

510   Ev 149 Back

511   Ev 149 Back

512   Ev 153 Back

513   Ev 153 Back

514   Ev 140 Back

515   Ev 153 Back

516   Ev 153 Back

517   Ev 140 Back

518   Ev 140 Back

519   Ev 140 Back

520   Ev 147 Back

521   HC Deb, 25 July 2007, col 845 Back

522   Ev 147 Back

523   Ev 140 and Ev 47 [Ms Woodhams] Back

524   Ev 148 Back

525   HM Treasury, Meeting the aspirations of the British people: 2007 Pre-Budget Report and Comprehensive Spending Review, Cm 7227, October 2007, Table D15, p 236 Back

526   HM Treasury, Meeting the aspirations of the British people: 2007 Pre-Budget Report and Comprehensive Spending Review, Cm 7227, October 2007, Table D15, p 234 Back


 
previous page contents next page

House of Commons home page Parliament home page House of Lords home page search page enquiries index

© Parliamentary copyright 2007
Prepared 19 November 2007