THE General Synod has expressed “deep concern” about the reduction of religious programming on television, but drew back from formally asking the BBC and OFCOM to explain themselves.
“I love the BBC . . . and was proud to work for the Corporation for many years,” said Nigel Holmes (Carlisle), opening the debate on his motion, which called on the BBC and OFCOM “to explain why British television, which was once exemplary in its coverage of religious and ethical issues, now marginalises the few such programmes which remain, and completely ignored the Christian significance of Good Friday 2009”.
While the output of BBC television had doubled over the past 20 years, the hours of religious broadcasting on television were fewer and generally scheduled at less accessible times.
BBC Radio had a stronger and healthier religious output compared with television. He said that he would conclude only that it was down to the viewpoint of individual channel controllers.
Inside the broadcasting world, the pressures and pace of change combined with an easy disregard for the specialist understanding of religious backgrounds, knowledge, or sensitivity. The emphasis was all on ratings and audience appeal; and yet Mel Gibson’s The Passion of the Christ suggested how passion could both communicate and make man. Son of God, The Passion, A History of Christianity, and Around the World in 80 Faiths had all built audiences, while Songs of Praise would be marking its 50th anniversary next year.
When the former BBC governors initiated a study of religious coverage five years ago, “their report was impressively supportive of strengthening coverage in news of current affairs as well as in programmes.” A year later, the governors were abolished, and that report had apparently been forgotten. He very much hoped that the head of Religion and Ethics, Aaqil Ahmed, would be prepared to engage with the Church in order to help him in his task.
The Muslim Council of Britain, however, had written to Mr Holmes about the debate, and had said that their perceptions of broadcasting chimed more with his than with those expressed by Mr Ahmed in the Church Times and The Sunday Telegraph.
The Bishop of Manchester, the Rt Revd Nigel McCulloch, paid tribute to Mr Holmes for his “prophetic track record in calling us to focus on the issue of how television portrays Christianity”. The Bishop felt that his amendment broadened that debate. Public-service broadcasting had been “under corrosive attack” during the past six years. The recession and the proliferation of media had exacerbated that, and “slashed advertising revenues” had led to “huge pressure” to put ratings above all else.
The BBC was less shielded from such pressures than people thought. “We need to speak into the debate about the future of television that is visionary rather than protectionist.” The dialogue did not need to be adversarial. “We do have to cherish what we’ve already got.”
Religious programming was “a very serious issue”. The Church also needed to “shape” TV’s output of televised worship and the main religious festivals. “This is about the importance of portraying worship. . . I think that reflecting an activity shared by at least three million people in the UK each month should be seen as part of that duty.”
Prebendary Stephen Lynas (Bath & Wells) said that he had once received a “gong”, the Peter Freeman Prize, for an act of worship on ITV, an hour-long service at St Matthias’s, Torquay. That would be unheard of nowadays.
Quoting the interview with Mr Ahmed in the Church Times, he said that the task was to get broadcasters to fall back in love with the output: once they were happy with the output, they would put it back on prime-time television.
He appealed for engagement. “How will you and your parish church engage with broadcasters?”
The Archdeacon of Norwich, the Ven. Jan McFarlane (Norwich), speaking as the diocesan director of communications, and in support of the amendment, said that both the BBC and the Church of England were “grappling with what it means to reinterpret our historic mission in a rapidly changing world”.
Colin Slater (Southwell & Nottingham) said that he had had “a life-long affair with the BBC consummated by 42 years at the microphone, as I still am. . . When some of us criticise what we think is one of the greatest institutions in our country, we do so with all the enthusiasm of a favourite son or daughter.”
But the BBC could not have it both ways. It could not be both right last year not to broadcast anything religious on Good Friday, and right this year when it was going to do so.
The Bishop of Worcester, Dr John Inge, said that religious programming must be a “cornerstone” of the provision that the BBC made to help people to understand themselves. There was a perception that the religious programmes were boring, but it was not necessary for broadcast worship to be boring. “The Church has a role to play to help the public understanding of religious affairs.”
Christina Rees (St Albans) said that the executive and editorial structures at the BBC had become much heavier-handed in recent years, and the budgets for programmes had fallen while salaries had risen. Programme-makers were complaining that they had to make bricks not only without straw, but without clay as well. But the Church could not expect the BBC to raise the profile of faith: “That is our job.”
What the motion expressed was very unlikely to have any effect on the BBC, said the Ven. Jonathan Boardman (Europe). “I have always considered encouragement the best way to help under-achievement.”
Programmes about ethics did not need to be specifically religious. He did not want a return to the “syrupy” religious programmes of his childhood. He urged the Synod to support Bishop McCulloch’s amendment.
Dr Philip Giddings (Oxford) was surprised at the one-way traffic of the debate, with its “Don’t upset the BBC.” If the explicit reference to the BBC was taken out of the motion, the Corporation would be let off the hook. The effect of deleting virtually the whole of Mr Holmes’s motion would be to give a “warm signal” to the BBC. It was not going to be overly moved by polite, gentle criticism. “Stick to your guns,” he urged the Synod.
The Revd Jonathan Alderton-Ford (St Edmundsbury & Ipswich) said that the Church had to stop whining about programmes that only Christians would want to watch, were they not at church. The Synod should be as concerned about cutbacks in news as in religious coverage. He commended the amendment as a reminder of a broader story and a bigger task.
The Revd John Chorlton (Oxford) had good experience of BBC interest in religion, and teasingly told Mr Holmes to repent: “Don’t vote for your own motion.” The BBC needed to change its mindset about Christianity: “Point a finger at the BBC: it’s to them we pay our licence fee.”
The amendment was carried.
The Archbishop of York, Dr Sentamu, said that the Synod did not need to carry a motion in order to do what Mr Holmes was asking. Just send a message directly by way of the usual channels, he urged.
Canon Gavin Ashenden (Southern Universities) said that, with diminishing audiences, BBC local radio was under a shadow, and was in danger of losing resources. When the local radio station had asked itself who were the largest number of people who would listen, the answer had been Christians.
He said: “The media are hungry for us. The radio platform is there for the asking.” But, on the whole, the local community was not standing up for the challenge. It was essential to engage with local radio.
The amended motion was carried by 267 votes to 4, with 2 abstentions. It read:
That this Synod:
(a) express its appreciation of the vital role played by those engaged in communicating religous belief and practice through the media, at a time of major changes within the industry; and
(b) express its deep concern about the overall reduction in religious broadcasting across British television in recent years, and call upon mainstream broadcasters to nurture and develop the expertise to create and commission high-quality religious content across the full range of their output, particularly material that imaginatively marks major festivals and portrays acts of worship.