What Led To The Introduction Of Itv Media Essay

What Led To The Introduction Of Itv Media Essay British broadcasting has come a long way in the past fifty years, from a monopoly held by the British Broadcasting Company (BBC) to the huge diversity of channels we now have, from not only terrestrial television, but also Sky and cable. The genres of the programmes on these channels are now so diverse that there is rarely a point in time when somebody cannot find something on television. From the birth of television in 1936 and up until 1955 the BBC had held the monopoly over broadcasting, at first, only showing 6 hours a day of programmes deemed suitable by traditionalists, like Sir Lord Reith who at the time was the Director-General of the BBC, for the public. It was in 1955 that the first big change in broadcasting came about with the introduction of ITV which broke the monopoly and thus by the same token led to greater competition within the market. In this essay I will discuss what important factors and issues with the BBC led to the introduction of the commercial channel ITV a nd later, Channel 4; and how it caused unlikely alliances, disputes and controversy. At the BBCs creation it was deemed appropriate that it should be a public service broadcaster, while this meant that it would be isolated from commercial pressures it also meant that it would need to have alternative funding; this came in the form of the television license fee which was basically a broadcast receiving tax. As the BBC was funded by the Government via a tax they had to provide an impartial service which had to conform to its Royal Charter of 1927; among other things it said that the BBC had to: Sustain citizenship and civil society, promote education and learning, stimulate creativity and cultural excellence and represent the UK, its nations, regions and communities [3]. After the WWII, the BBCs monopoly began to be questioned, this lead to a growing aversion towards paternalism and a yearning for freedom of choice. Subsequently, after a change in power in late 1951, the Conservative party decided to publish its own ideas for the breaking of the BBC monopoly. They suggested: In the expanding field of television, provision should be made to permit some element of competition when the calls on capital resources at present needed for purposes of greater national importance makes this feasible. In essence this was the first step in the creation of ITV. Unlike the BBC, ITV was to be funded via the sale of slots in its broadcasting timetable for advertisers (another option was to allow sponsorship; however, the regulator thought this was not appropriate). The nature and quality of the advertising was, however, stringently controlled by the regulators and no more than 6 minutes of adverts were to be shown within any given hour. One of the main factors in the introduction of ITV was to increase consumer choice. Up until 1952 there was only one channel to watch and so you had either the option of watching the one programme that was on at the time or not watching television at all. This was at a time that the country was feeling more confident, workers wages were increasing and the first whiff of prosperity was filtering across the country. Individual identity was starting to be questioned, one could argue that this was partly due to the American influence of TV and radio; whether it was the gritty US hero films, the songs of Buddy Holly and Johnny Cash or just the feeling that the US had everything bigger, better, richer and possibly, to use a more modern expression, more trendy. The introduction of ITV not only doubled the number of programmes people could choose from but also led to higher quality programmes being directed. People liked this increased choice and freedom to make their own decisions; as Frede rick Ogilvie, a former Director General of the BBC, stated Freedom is choice And monopoly of broadcasting is inevitably the negation of freedom no matter how efficiently it is run [2] The reason for greater quality of programmes was the increased competition after the creation of ITV. For ITV to receive the maximum amount of revenue from its advertising it needed to have a high proportion of the public watching its channel. While this required a lot of initial investment to create the programmes in the long term it would provide more than enough advertising revenue to cover this cost. This also, although maybe subtly, influenced the BBC. While at first glance it may seem that the BBC and ITV have different revenue streams and are therefore not direct competitors, the BBC had to keep up with the increasing quality of the ITV programmes. This was not because, unlike ITV, they needed to increase revenue but because if they were not seen to have programmes of a similar or greater quality than ITV then soon the general public would start to question the television licence fee which could have led to the end of the BBCs funding and indeed the end of the company itself. Another criticism of the BBC was that they only really catered for the population inside London which was exposed in the report of 1951. This report shocked many people as it was written by MP Sir William Beveridge. People expected him to side with the BBC as he upheld many traditional values, like Lord Reith. He suggested that it should set up national commissions for Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland [1]. Beveridge, however, didnt agree with the introduction of commercial television, after seeing how the advertising worked in America he deemed it obtrusive and objectionable à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦Ironically it was the Beveridge report that spurred the conservative government in 1951 to move forward with plans of commercial television as his report encouraged, the conservative MP Lloyd Selwyn to do a follow up report, in which he agreed with many of Beveridges points, he was for the introduction of commercial television. Selwyn along with many other business men saw the potential investm ents that could be made in commercial television; they believed that many benefits would come from advertising their products as it would reach millions. This self-profit idea didnt go unnoticed and caused some controversy, one even said At what point are the MPs representing their constituencies and web are they speaking as directors?à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦ Initially it was planned that ITV should be made up of three separate franchise regions: London, the Midlands and the North, each of which would be occupied by more than one contractor. This would lead to competition not only between the combined ITV force and the BBC but also between the different contractors. However, there was a failure on the governments behalf, due to not allocating enough frequencies, this was unable to happen. Instead to still keep competition high the ITA decided to split the franchises on a weekday/weekend basis. People were fed up of the American commercial nature of ITV and how all of its shows strived for ratings rather than quality and so there was a committee set up to investigate the state of broadcasting in the 1960s. It was called the Pilkington report and its function was to clean up the vulgarity of ITV. The report praised the BBC and allowed the introduction of a second channel, BBC2. In a way the Pilkington report was like going back in a way in broadcasting history, it took on the paternalistic role, that the public so hated about the BBC. Eventually people accepted ITV and the BBC working together and the competition grew much less fierce. People had decided what shows they did and didnt like and would pick and choose between the two, this was known as the golden age of television which lasted nearly twenty years. Between 1960 and 1962 The Pilkington Committee met to consider the future of broadcasting in Britain. This was at a time of increasing hostility towards the relatively newly formed commercial broadcaster, ITV. At the time the committee published their report it was unsurprising that ITV came under particular criticism. The committee found ITV broadcasted programmes of a trivial nature. This was most probably a not a reference to the actual subjects discussed but to the actual style and presentation of these subjects. This report led to the introduction of a second BBC channel, BBC2, in 1964. In 1980 the Broadcasting Act was passed which commenced the process for the creation of a fourth channel, Channel 4, which began broadcasting on 2nd November 1982. While for some time there had been a belief that a second commercial broadcaster would be launched after ITV, it was expected that this would come sooner than it did. It is most likely that the biggest reason for the delay, for almost three decades, was politics. Summed up it was a clash of beliefs between the expansion of the commercial character of ITV and the public service approach of BBC. I believe one of the main reasons for the introduction was because times were becoming more liberal and there were many creative directors and producers who wanted to make interesting cultural and controversial shows. These people, no matter how good their programmes were, were unable to get them shown on the BBC or ITV either because the content was too risky or it would not have pulled in a big enough audience to satisfy the advertisers. However, the market researchers at the time saw the need for a channel that would represent minorities and address hard hitting topics; it was also believed that these programmes would help discourage racism and discrimination. The other thing that made the government back the introduction of Channel 4 was that all of the programmes were going to be independently made by different production companies all over the country, and that initially the existing commercial companies would fund them. Over time Channel 4 began commissioning the programmes it self. Also the Conservative government led by Margaret Thatcher was incredibly supportive of the idea of entrepreneurship and so this was another reason Channel 4 was backed. It was however the Labour Government that finally got the channel up and running; they wanted the channel to tackle political issues without feeling the pressure from higher individuals to tone down. In conclusion, the history of terrestrial television was a hard struggle. To reach the level of freedom of content that we see today, whether, it is scenes of a violent or sexual nature in programmes like BBCs The Tudors or channel 4s dispatches series even the Question time with Nick Griffin, all of these broadcasts whether you agree with the content or not, are there for viewing with our own discretion, and a far cry from the paternal monopoly that the BBC held for so many years. Ultimately the reason for the introduction of these channels was to increase consumer choice which as a Democratic country was wanted by the people. It was this demand for consumer choice that brought us to the hundreds of channels that we see today. Out of this spawned the huge competition between channels that will be never-ending, with programmes such as Strictly Come Dancing scheduled at the same time as the X Factor. Referances [1]Kevin Williams Get me a Murder a Day! a history of mass communication in britan, Arnold 1998 chapter 8 [2] Quoted by Crisell An Introductory History of British Broadcasting, p77. [3] a statement from the BBCs public service remit

Black Plague Essay -- essays research papers

Living in Europe in the middle of the 1300’s would have been heartbreaking and dreadful. Not only were the living conditions very poor but there was an unknown disease that was wiping out a large percentage of European population. One cannot imagine the fear of wondering whether you or someone you loved was going to catch this deadly disease. No explanation would make a person feel safe from catching it or dying with it. The people of Europe just lived their lives as best they could realizing that nothing they do could ever stop this. They did not have the power to stop this it was far too beyond them. This unknown disease is known as the Bubonic Plague.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  The plague was passed among many rodents by fleas. Most of the rodents were rats. Fleas living on the rat‘s blood would eject the disease into the rat causing it to die quickly. When there were no rats left around, the flea would search for a new host, such as a human. When an infected flea bit the human the bacteria multiplies quickly causing death within a few Days. One a person obtains this disease they can easily spread it among other humans by bacilli coughed or sneezed in to the air or by human fleas.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  The plague had struck other parts of the world before it was first reported in Europe. The disease had been found in China and throughout India around 1332. Nomadic horsemen may have carried the plague westward between China and the Black Sea, where it apparently spread into Russia. Rumors had spread to Europe about the strange and terrible things happening in the East. Europeans began fearing this plague not knowing of its origin or cause. Eventually, the same unusual things started to occur in Europe and the plague was then reported to be in Europe.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  As the bubonic plague spread across Europe it was called many names. Italians were dying by the thousands so they called it the Great Death. The Spanish called it Moroccan Fever, while Moroccans called it Mountain Fever. Most Europeans called it the Italian Fever or Italian Pestilence. It was not until later when the plague was called the Black Death. Black in Latin means dreadful, unlucky, and gloomy. This and because of black spots on the skin of many plague victims led the people to associate the word black with the plague. There a... ... servants or even people they loved. Poor people living in crowded, dirty towns and cities fled from those who came down with the disease. Wives abandoned sick husbands; parents deserted their diseased children. The sick were left to die and the dead was left unburied. Things in Europe were getting worse by the day. Until the day that so many died off that the few left were healthy.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚     Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Before the plague, Europe had been severely overpopulated and almost in a great economic depression. Most of the land that could be farmed on had been abused. This made it difficult to grow food. After the plague ran its course food shortages grew even worse. Many of the survivors were reduced to eating cats and dogs. Some went too more extreme by eating their own children. The plague had seemed to solve the problem of population but it made worse the food and economic situation.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Life for these people went on but was not enjoyed. Changes were to come but it seemed to take forever. Fear, horror, and death was known well by most of these people and the sorrow and despair for these people will never be forgotten.

Hamlet: Women of the Shakespearean Era

Hamlet: Women of the Shakespearean Era Women in Shakespeare’s plays are, for the most part, looked at as weak characters. There were only two main female roles in his famous play Hamlet. The two female roles in the play are Queen Gertrude, Hamlet’s mother, and Ophelia, Hamlet’s love and daughter of Polonius. These women are always being told what to say and do. They never speak up for themselves, and that creates trouble for them in the end. In William Shakespeare’s play, The Tragedy of Hamlet, Prince of Denmark the women are manipulated by the men, which causes Gertrude and Ophelia to die tragically.The double standards for women in this play are extremely common and many men everywhere use them. For example, the double standard that men can sleep around and women cannot. Laertes tells Ophelia that she should not give up her innocence to Hamlet because he has not saved himself for her and their love is not real, yet Laertes is not pure himself. This is ki nd of a ‘do as I say, not as I do† type of situation. Most double standards demonstrate that, males can do whatever they please and females get in trouble for most things.To be more specific, Gertrude and Ophelia were both told to talk to Hamlet so Polonius and Claudius could listen in and find out certain things about Hamlet. Ophelia was even forced to reject Hamlet when she loved him. Also, the women in the play are not free to marry whoever they desire. For example, when Gertrude married Claudius it was not really her choice to do so. The first time they disobey the men in this story is when things start to go bad. Ophelia ends up going crazy and drowning, and Gertrude drinks from a poisoned cup of wine and dies.David Bevington had quite a few things to say on the female roles in this play. He refers to Ophelia and Gertrude as â€Å"instruments through which Claudius attempts to spy on Hamlet† (Bevington 301). This is true because they listen to Claudius and do whatever he asks of them. Also, he says that Hamlet makes it known that the women are weak. Hamlet says, â€Å"frailty, thy name is woman† (I. ii. 146). This play shows that women have a manipulative side to them. Many forms of trickery occurred to Hamlet when he had not done anything wrong to the women.Ophelia makes it seem like she does not love Hamlet and gives him back his love letters to her at one point in the play. This entire play is just pure madness from the beginning all the way till the last act and scene. The females get caught up in the middle of the drama, and that is why they have the bad reputation we have. Joseph Campbell described to us in an interview about why women are portrayed how they are. He says that women have been seen as weak since the beginning of time.Most of the time it is because women are smaller and more fragile than the men are. You never see women doing anything for themselves, and if you do it is on a rare occasion. That is why women ar e portrayed and treated how they are. Work Cited Bevington, David. â€Å"Introduction to Hamlet. † Hamlet. William Shakespeare. Evanston: HarperCollins Publishers, Inc. , 1992. 301. Print. Campbell, Joseph. â€Å"The Hero’s Adventure. † The Power of Myth. Interview by Bill Moyers. Wellspring Media, Inc. , 2005. DVD. Shakespeare, William. Hamlet. Evanston: McDougal little, 1997. Print.

About the Reconstruction Era (1865â€1877)

The period of Reconstruction took place in the southern United States from the end of the Civil War in 1865 until 1877. The era was marked by intense controversies, which included the impeachment of a president, outbreaks of racial violence, and the passage of Constitutional amendments. Even the end of Reconstruction was controversial, as it was marked by a presidential election which many, to the present day, contend was stolen. The main issue of Reconstruction was how to bring the nation back together after the rebellion of the slave states had been ended. And, at the end of the Civil War fundamental  issues facing the nation included what role former Confederates might play in the US government, and what role freed slaves would play in American society. And beyond the political and social issues was the matter of physical destruction. Much of the Civil War had been waged in the South, and cities, towns, and even farmlands, were in runs. The infrastructure of the South also had to be rebuilt. Conflicts Over Reconstruction The issue of how to bring the rebellious states back into the Union consumed much of the think of President Abraham Lincoln as the Civil War came to an end. In his second inaugural address he spoke of reconciliation. But when he was assassinated in April 1865 much changed. The new president, Andrew Johnson, declared that he would follow Lincolns intended policies toward Reconstruction. But the ruling party in Congress, the Radical Republicans, believed Johnson was being far too lenient and was allowing former rebels too much of a role in the new governments of the South. The Radical Republican plans for Reconstruction were more severe. And continual conflicts between the Congress and the president led to the impeachment trial of President Johnson in 1868.   When Ulysses S. Grant became president following the election of 1868, Reconstruction policies continued in the South. But it was often plagued by racial problems and the Grant administration often found itself trying to protect the civil rights of former slaves. The era of Reconstruction effectively ended with the Compromise of 1877, which decided the highly controversial election of 1876. Aspects of Reconstruction New Republican controlled governments were instituted in the South, but were almost certainly doomed to fail. Popular sentiment in the region was obviously opposed to the political party which had been led by Abraham Lincoln. An important program of Reconstruction was the Freedmens Bureau, which operated in the South to educate former slaves and give them assistance in adjusting to living as free citizens.   Reconstruction was, and remains, a highly controversial subject. Southerners felt that northerners were using the power of the federal government to punish the south. Northerners felt the southerners were still persecuting freed slaves through the imposition of racist laws, called black codes. The end of Reconstruction can be seen as the beginning of the period of Jim Crow.