WHO WON THE TV ELECTION AND WHY?

15/06/2010

See the video here

From Sky’s dramatic, ‘Bloomberg’ style news coverage to the BBC’s celeb filled boat on the Thames, The Media Society’s debate on ‘Who Won the TV Election and Why?’ brought to the table an engaging discussion on the UK’s first television election.  Panellists Craig Oliver, the BBC’s general election editor, John McAndrew, producer of Sky’s election debate and deputy head of Channel Four’s News and Current Affairs, Kevin Sutcliffe, created an insightful mix of opinion.

A brief overview of the election programmes highlighted the stark contrast in coverage as Channel Four’s satirical take on the elections hosted by the provocative Jimmy Carr ran like sandpaper against Sky’s information-centred graphic approach.

After the initial intrigue over the cost of each channel’s coverage (with a rumour about the BBC’s election boat costing over £70,000 neither confirmed nor denied), discussion lead on to who was first with the results. Though ITN came out on top, it was criticised by Craig Oliver for ‘cheating’ by broadcasting the results before declaration had been made, with Oliver later vowing that the BBC would never lower its ‘gold standards’ by predicting results.

What quickly became apparent was the difficultly in forming a fluid debate on news coverage that was so vastly different in style and objective. This in turn led to critical analysis of the techniques used by each channel rather than a debate on who achieved the best results.

Whilst Channel Four received criticism over its largely male ‘cast’, it seemed that neither the BBC nor Sky got it right on the graphics front, with BBC’s choice of clarity over style denounced as ‘too simple’ and Sky’s red, blue and white backgrounds likened to ‘salvaged BA tail wings’.

A missing piece in the debate that certainly would have heated up discussion was the input of an ITV editor, especially as ITV’s coverage came under fire from Sutcliffe for failing to give the viewer’s choice through ‘its poor show’ and ‘lack of competition’.

Criticism fell on all editors for not managing to convey Labour’s surprising success despite the party’s loss. Managing to secure so many Scottish constituencies and enjoying victory in an unforeseen number of local elections should arguably have received more coverage than it did on the night.

Although the BBC took the lead in the ratings battle, Channel Four certainly came out on top for originality whilst Sky led the way on the technology front with their high definition coverage and iPhone apps.

There was general agreement that there was an unprecedented range of choice handed to the viewers, allowing those who criticised the BBC for being the ‘Classic FM of political reporting’ to tune in to Sky’s technology driven, 24 hour news rush, and providing those that wanted neither a studio based nor information dominated programme with the opportunity to switch to Channel Four’s alternative mix of younger, sharper Jimmy Carr-style coverage.

In terms of who won in the race to produce the best election news programme, it seems that this year it is very much down to personal choice, a freedom that can be enjoyed by all.     

Jenny Purt