Finding north
Dr Paxman's diagnosis
That speech again, all on one page (possibly) in a more palatable form
Last year, television executives at the MediaGuardian Edinburgh International Television Festival were treated to a MacTaggart lecture delivered by the ex-ITV chairman Charles Allen, who used the occasion to try and beg tea and sympathy from the audience for what he did during his tenure at ITV plc, though it would have helped if it was more factually accurate.
However this year's speech couldn't have been more different if you tried. Put simply, Jeremy Paxman made use of MacTaggart to deliver a lecture that simultaneously banged several nails on the head with such force that the sound of splintering wood could be heard throughout the festival and reverberated around the whole of the media industry.
It's true that under most circumstances such a speech is very likely to run the risk of being regarded as "old-school" or "irrelevant", but the current situation isn't exactly "most circumstances" as television in particular wakes up to the fact that it cannot go on regardless like it has done over the last ten or so years.
The underlying theme of trust - or lack of it - has potentially catastrophic consequences for the television industry in particular if it continues to be ignored, and there's no way that UK television can end up like the many parts of the error-strewn and bigoted UK tabloid print press, as is the case with US channels such as the infamous Fox News.
Perhaps the cleverest part of Paxman's speech is the way it combined various strands of debate in relation to the modern media landscape (the licence fee, documentary-making, journalism, etc.), and wove them all together into one coherent argument for an industry that's desperately searching for an identity after years of being directionless.
The media industry likes neat packages and easy answers, and although Paxman's argument often requires ways of thinking that are anything but easy for a profit-dominated industry, there's enough of a hint of desperation within the industry as a whole for it to at least contemplate some of the points that were raised within the speech.
Declining trust in television amongst its viewers is the last thing the sector needs at this point in time, which is fighting audience decline on several other fronts that have nothing to do with trust, namely competition from other media sources. Therefore loss of confidence both inside and outside becomes hugely damaging if remained unchecked.
The televisual medium is no longer the magic "rays of light" it was up until the 1950s. Nowadays you can instantly get a video clip online to a world audience using YouTube, and you probably know a friend of a friend who works as a runner for MTV or a student on a media studies course who has submitted a video clip to Channel 4.
Therefore the onus for the established broadcasting industry to remain objective, balanced and professional becomes even more important than ever, since there's always YouTube for watching unscripted and badly edited ramblings. Putting profit before ethics or judgement just ends up damaging profit and trust, as the industry has now belatedly learnt to its cost.
Paxman also pointed out the irony that the BBC could end up losing the battle for its existence for reasons other than trying to justify itself to various sectors of the licence fee-paying public. It's all well and good having all manner of different services for different age ranges and demographics but all that counts for nothing if any of the basic content is unreliable.
Recent and heavy cutbacks within news and current affairs has potentially made the BBC very vulnerable to further charges of inaccuracy, and having an untrustworthy BBC is potentially far worse for the corporation's future than having a "manifesto requirement" of specifically catering for 18 year-olds (the majority of whom are probably too busy to watch television at all).
To summarise, the BBC has become too distracted with issues other than making programmes and the commercial sector has been too distracted with fighting an audience decline that has partly been of its own making (step forward ITV) in recent years. And Channel 4 subsequently profited from ITV's decline but promptly lost credibility as a consequence.
Channel 4's schedule shakeup announcement usefully preempted the Paxman speech and may be in itself encouragement for others to at least consider options that may have been unthinkable even last week. What Channel 4 does as an encore will be very interesting, since it has now set a precedent that the BBC in particular cannot fail to take notice of as a consequence.
Also of interest will be what happens next in the relationship between Mark Thompson and the BBC Trust. Despite endorsements from the trust in relation to how the recent premium rate phone scandals (such as the Blue Peter competition) were handled, Thompson knows full well that his job is on the line if there's another perception of management failure.
This speech may also signify the end of the 'honeymoon period' for Michael Grade as he tries to restore both viewers and credibility to ITV plc's output. So far he has had a reasonable degree of success with the former but is still struggling to break even with the latter, though reality TV formats in general are now on borrowed time.
Light entertainment formats such as Britain's Got Talent and the X-Factor may give ITV some much-needed viewers but do hardly anything to improve ITV's standing as a credible broadcaster; at the moment they just reinforce the common perception that ITV generally just provides a light, frothy and ultimately throwaway form of entertainment nowadays.
It may be true that the earth hasn't stopped spinning as a result of all the recent quiz show fakery and premium rate phone line scandals (for which there could still be some high profile prosecutions since it's technically speaking fraud), but all of this adverse publicity has lifted the lid on an endemic climate of complacency that runs deep within the industry as a whole.
If nothing else, Paxman's speech will at least have triggered a welcome debate as to the future direction of the UK media industry, but its carefully constructed arguments based on what seems to be a rational opinion will be too hard for some within the industry to completely ignore, despite commercial considerations that may dictate otherwise.
The music industry may have very similar problems of its own, but that particular industry has always been an uneasy marriage of commercial considerations and artistic endeavour. It's about time that the broadcast media industry rediscovered its balance of artistry and commercialism, together with the BBC setting standards as opposed to merely following them.
