Channel 4

Latest updates: Labour's shadow culture secretary says move to privatise Channel 4 will hurt jobs and creative industries.

Ultimately, it was decided that the benefits of a cash windfall to the government were outweighed by the scale of the detrimental impact on the independent TV sector. That was led by the then culture secretary John Whittingdale, who is also overseeing the government’s latest push towards privatisation. However, ITV has been lobbying Whitehall about the possibility of a “national champion” takeover, designed to take the political fallout of yet another buyout of a UK “crown jewel” by a foreign owner.

The government is facing a backlash from senior Conservatives over its plan to privatise Channel 4, as Boris Johnson was warned that Margaret Thatcher would ...

Well, if that’s spent effectively, that will be a good thing.” Senior Tory backbencher Tom Tugendhat told Times Radio he was “pretty doubtful” about controversial the move. And I think it would be a shame to lose that.” A spokesperson for the broadcaster said it was “disappointed” with the decision but would “continue to engage” with the government to ensure Channel 4 “continues to play its unique part” in Britain’s creative life. It’s the same agenda as attacking the licence fee.” Ms Byrne said Ms Dorries “doesn’t know very much about the broadcasting sector”. The former Channel 4 news boss also said Ms Thatcher “invented Channel 4 in order to invent the independent production company sector which has made billions for this country”.

The British government has decided to sell Channel 4, the publicly-owned but commercially funded broadcaster founded nearly 40 years ago as an edgy ...

"It holds a cherished place in our broadcasting landscape and we want that to remain the case." We want Channel 4 to flourish and thrive in the face of a rapidly-changing media landscape," a spokesperson said. However, she added that ultimately its ownership was for the government to propose and parliament to decide.The Department for Culture, Media and Sport said the culture secretary had come to a decision and was now consulting with ministerial colleagues."

Get all of the latest TV news from NationalWorld. Providing fresh perspective online for news across the UK.

High-profile politicians and media figures have slammed the UK government's plan to privatize It's A Sin broadcaster Channel 4.

“This is particularly important given that the organisation is only two years into a significant commitment to drive up its impact in the UK’s Nations and Regions.” Channel 4 released a statement saying it was disappointed the government had made its announcement without “formally recognising significant” public interest concerns. It isn’t too late for the government to think again.” It doesn’t cost the tax payer a penny,” she tweeted. Wrong decision by the government.” Why do they want to make the UK’s great TV industry worse?

Mr Knight, chair of the influential Commons Digital, Culture, Media and Sport Committee, said the government's decision represents "a big risk".

The money is irrelevant - equivalent to four days national debt interest - so it must be used to support skills in creative sectors. If this is in the media bill I will support the government. "So to sum up.

The U.K.'s planned privatization of Channel Four Television Corp. is unlikely to be quick sale, and faces political and competition hurdles amid a pullback ...

The government is considering changes which would make Channel 4 -- whose privatization was disclosed to management on Monday -- more appealing to investors. The company could be allowed to raise capital and increase its borrowing under a new owner, as well as produce and keep the rights to its own shows, something it’s not currently permitted to do, according to a person familiar with the sale process.

Ruth Davidson, Damian Green and Jeremy Hunt among those calling on the government to reconsider.

It will cost jobs and opportunities in the north and Yorkshire, and hit the wider British creative economy.” Green pointed out the channel was founded by a Conservative government, with part of its remit being to boost Britain’s private sector television sector: “The sale of Channel 4 is politicians and civil servants thinking they know more about how to run a business than the people who run it. Ministers have suggested they could spend the proceeds to boost creative training and independent production companies, essentially funding their levelling up agenda. It doesn’t cost the taxpayer a penny. It’s one of the reasons we have such a thriving [independent] sector in places like Glasgow. This is the opposite of levelling up.” Another Tory who criticised the proposed sale was the father of the house, Peter Bottomley, who said it was “bad for the diversity of television, bad for viewers and bad for independent producers”.

ITV has emerged as an early front-runner to buy the broadcaster, though any deal may face competition concerns.

Those big streaming giants can simply go to the production companies to make the content, rather than buying Channel 4.” “TV is now a global game and content is the key ingredient for success. Amazon, Netflix and Channel 5 owner Viacom are mentioned as other potential bidders, though they may be put off by the public broadcasting requirements.

Channel 4 launched with Countdown in 1982 and has gone on to forge a path as a platform for breaking boundaries, thanks to shows such as Big Breakfast and ...

Channel 4 is obliged to offer news, current affairs, documentaries, all kinds of programmes which are made with a very distinctive British voice. Russell T Davies, the creator and writer of It's A Sin, has previously said privatising Channel 4 would be a "great crime" that would result in programmes like his hit series not being made. Privatisation will be the death knell of its creativity and fierce independence." "A programme like It's A Sin would struggle to get programmed on a privatised Channel 4," he said. The government has argued that the broadcaster's long-term future needs to be secured amid concerns for its survival in the streaming era, with Culture Secretary Nadine Dorries saying its ownership is holding it back. As a channel that has pushed boundaries, will a sale lead to it losing its edge?

We'll send you a myFT Daily Digest email rounding up the latest Channel Four Television Corp news every morning. Launched by Margaret Thatcher almost 40 years ...

In its 40 years on air, Channel 4 has played a crucial role in nurturing talent, bolstering indie film and commissioning important stories.

Outside of investigative journalism and destroying social taboos, one of Channel 4’s greatest successes has been in the arena of British comedy. After a few weeks, it was viewed in its entirety more than 6.5 million times, making it the most binge-watched show to stream on Channel 4. It is vaguely reminiscent of the short-lived Wank Week, a season of TV programmes about masturbation set to launch by Channel 4 in 2007. In a taste of what was to come, the first show aired on the channel was Countdown, soon to become a beloved British staple. If you’ve recently found yourself slipping back into the grungy sartorial tones of the Noughties, you might have Channel 4 to thank for that too. Millions tuned in on a Thursday lunchtime to watch his housemates confront him around the dining table on day 35. Another show unafraid to cover various taboo subjects rarely seen on British TV, such as eating disorders and incest, it quickly became a staple in the British soap opera landscape. 1998 saw the launch of Film4, Channel 4’s film branch. That was until stockbroker Nicholas Bateman decided to spice things up in the house, lying to his housemates and manipulating their nominations with secret handwritten notes. And in its 39-year history, Film4 films have produced 144 Oscar nominations and 37 wins. Now, in a move that has been branded as “cultural vandalism”, the Government is pushing ahead with long-discussed plans to privatise the public service broadcaster. The move has also been criticised by Labour, with Lucy Powell, the Shadow Secretary for Digital, Culture Media and Sport tweeting: “Nothing screams a rudderless government more than this.

Even allowing for the UK broadcaster's tendency to hoard cash, only the boldest private equity buyers would be interested.

The decision to sell off Channel 4 looks like it will play out the same way as most of the Government's other vaguely culture war-y stuff: generate lots of ...

The sale of Channel 4 is basically fine, but uninspiring. A straight sale is simply a different form of reflexive Thatcherism; it gives the impression of action, and raises some cash, without ministers having to make any substantial decisions about how public service broadcasting should work or what it should compass. He goes on, at fairly damning length – a view which perhaps explains why he is less fearful than others about the impact of privatisation on the broadcaster’s operations.

Sky, ITV, Discovery and Paramount may be interested if the terms are right – and none of them would want it in the hands of any other.

Instead, it is of most value to rival broadcasters – such as Sky, ITV, Discovery and Channel 5’s parent company, Paramount – none of which would want to see it fall into the clutches of the other. “ITV and Sky/Channel 5 are worried that they will lose pricing leverage because of a loss of scale. Even when making the case for privatising the channel, government sources have been happy to admit that Channel 4 is currently in a strong financial position. Analysts believe that a profit-hunting new owner would still be able to make hefty cuts to Channel 4’s programming budget, which would ultimately affect the quality of on-screen content, while fulfilling the letter of the law on public service broadcasting requirements. “The government has to decide what it is selling. This is the antithesis of a golden ticket for private equity investors, who want to cut costs and boost profit margins.

Analysis: why ministers are risking political capital pushing ahead now with privatisation plan is unclear.

John McVay, the organisation’s chief executive, said: “Selling it off now risks reducing the opportunities for independent producers and reducing the amount of programming commissioned outside London – levelling down, not levelling up.” That’s despite Channel 4’s bosses, the independent television production companies who make its shows, and a significant number of Tory politicians all insisting that the channel is financially sustainable. The other stated reason is that ministers and officials have concluded that while Channel 4 is currently a success, its continued reliance on revenue from traditional television broadcasts means it is ultimately doomed without a deep-pocketed backer.

Prospective buyers will see a clear tension between public service obligations and making profits.

The risk in privatisation is that Channel 4’s clear and obvious current benefits – diversity in programming and regional spending – get lost without a corresponding gain. In its current incarnation, Channel 4 is surely fulfilling the role better than any minister could hope to do. But ITV faces its own challenges in adapting to the age of streaming and one suspects any interest on its part would primarily flow from the defensive instinct to avoid fresh competitive headaches. These analyses also tend to contain a strong strain of regret that the UK doesn’t have a streaming operation capable of giving the Americans a run for their money. He said Channel 4’s “next, and most enduring, contribution to the UK media landscape may be to keep some of its distinctive remit but as part of adding useful scale to another UK-based operator”. Let’s try to take the government’s case for privatising Channel 4 at face value.

A Tory MP has questioned if the British government's plans to forge forward with the privatisation of Channel 4 are “revenge”, adding that many Tories ...

If this is in the media bill I will support the Government. Finally, these are my views not those of the committee more generally.” It doesn’t cost the taxpayer a penny. Privatisation – even for some wrong reasons – can work for C4 but must be part of a thorough overhaul of all public service broadcasting. The money is irrelevant – equivalent to four days’ national debt interest – so it must be used to support skills in creative sectors. He wrote “...it’s crucial the Government protects the prominence of all public service broadcasting through the new media bill, in order to give the likes of a new privatised Channel 4 a head start. In a string of tweets, Julian Knight addressed what he said was the “elephant in the room” as he tweeted: “Is this being done for revenge for Channel 4’s biased coverage of the likes of Brexit and personal attacks on the PM?