New Owner Could Cut Paralympic Games Coverage From Channel 4, Says Former President | Channel 4

According to a former CEO, Channel 4’s successful mission to make the Paralympic Games an event on prime-time television could be overturned by a new owner if the government sells the public broadcaster to the highest bidder.

Channel 4 plans to broadcast a record 1,300 hours of Tokyo Games coverage, nearly three times the amount the BBC managed with its Olympic coverage, solidifying its position as the world’s leading Paralympic broadcaster.

However, this year’s record-breaking engagement, which includes the unprecedented decision to tear up Channel 4’s regular schedule to broadcast 17.5 hours of the Paralympic Games each day, could well mark a highlight of coverage as the broadcaster makes in the face of privatization.

The channel’s ability to provide such extensive coverage, which includes transforming the More4 channel into a “home of team sports” and offering 14 live broadcasts on a dedicated Paralympic website, is due to the fact that ‘she doesn’t need to profit from the Olympics.

Channel 4 was established by Margaret Thatcher’s government in 1982 as an editorial independent broadcaster to provide a culturally stimulating alternative to BBC1, BBC2 and ITV. It is owned by the state but is commercially funded, around 90% of the revenue comes from television advertising and as such is not required to generate profits or pay dividends to shareholders.

“The way Channel 4 was created gives it the ability to do things that probably wouldn’t be done by another broadcaster,” said Lord Burns, who was chairing Channel 4 at the time the broadcaster rushed to poach them. BBC Paralympic TV rights. “The Paralympic Games were made for a TV channel like Channel 4, with people who can take risks, people whose mandate demands something different.”

If Channel 4 is sold as a result of the current government consultation, which is led by Culture Secretary John Whittingdale who also oversaw the last privatization attempt five years ago, a new business owner is unlikely continues to fund unprofitable programming on such a scale.

In 2012, Channel 4 recorded a loss of £ 30million, followed by a deficit of £ 15million in 2016, both attributed to costs associated with broadcasting the London and Rio Olympics.

“The government expects Channel 4 to continue to invest in unprofitable mission delivery initiatives like the Paralympic Games – and to work with hundreds of independent production companies – but hopes all of them can be implemented for another 40 years by a profit-maximizing entity that is or can be owned and controlled by foreigners, ”said David Abraham, Managing Director of Channel 4 from 2010 to 2017.“ If there is indeed sums, they certainly do not add up.

Among the potential contenders for Channel 4 are national rival ITV and US giant Discovery, which owns a mix of pay and free channels, including Eurosport and Quest, which was identified as the most likely buyer in a report released at the time. of the last privatization campaign. in 2016.

Five years ago, Discovery paid 1.3 billion euros (£ 1.1 billion) for pan-European rights to the Olympics until Paris 2024, a move designed to boost its subscriber base to the pay television. A subsequent sublicence agreement with the BBC resulted in coverage of Tokyo – and then Paris – being reduced from over 3,000 hours to just 500 hours.

Discovery aired nearly 3,500 hours of coverage in the UK, but viewers needed a subscription to watch it all, which around two-thirds of homes don’t have.

The loss of free coverage gave rise to complaints from viewers to the BBC. And two former BBC Presidents Lord Grade and Sir Michael Lyons, as well as the company’s former sports director Roger Mosey, have said Olympic Games television rights should be better protected to ensure coverage of events of national importance is not removed from free-to-air broadcasters.

“I think it’s unlikely that another broadcaster will make the Paralympic Games Channel 4-wide,” Burns said. Certainly not with the same determination and the same investment. It is a more commercially risky activity.