Impartial Media?

 Saturday. 6.05 a.m. It's a completely different sort of day, on the weather front, compared with yesterday morning. It is mild and snow free. It hardly seems possible things could change so drastically, but that is what the weather in this country is like changing virtually hourly.

6.35 p.m. After the row caused by Gary Lineker, the BBC football pundit who made some comment about the Government's immigration proposals, which contravened BBC impartiality rules, many of the usual football programmes on BBC1 have either been cancelled or cut short. As someone who isn't a football fan, I find the fact that virtually all of BBC1 on a Saturday is taken over by football totally unacceptable. It has to be the most boring sport ever invented and when they have any sort of programme on the subject, they have talking heads who waffle on and on endlessly about the game. So, as far as I am concerned, they can keep him off our screens for as long as possible.

Sport seems to get more than its a fair share of screen time on television, on all channels. Whenever there's a big football game, it can often displace other programmes and it's not just the actual game which takes over, but we have to endure hour after hour of droning 'so-called' pundits rambling on and on and on. So, while we have all this sports stuff, why is there nothing about the arts? We used to have a raft of art magazines on television, Omnibus and Arena on BBC channels and on ITV, 'The South Bank Show.' You could hardly move for adaptations of stage plays on television on BBC1 during the 1960s and 1970s. On a Sunday evening on BBC1, 'Play of The Month' showed adaptations of world theatre, such as Ibsen, Shaw, Shakespeare and many more. No doubt they didn't get very high audience ratings, but at least the BBC wasn't churning out endless soaps, game shows and reality television shows. Or shows with 'so-called celebrities in them. 

The arts seem to be sidelined in many areas of life. The government treats the arts as something that shouldn't be taken seriously, particularly in education. It should cover a wide range of pursuits, not just fine arts, but also music and drama. But it most definitely should be taken seriously, because drama and music particularly lead to jobs which are important to the economy of the country. You only have to consider theatre, with big West End productions drawing sizeable audiences. Then there are the subsidiary employment activities which are important to the theatre, such as costume design and making, set design and building, lighting, and management, both backstage and front of house. This then leads on to cinema, with similar subsidiary employment in front of and behind the camera. Photography, set design, editing and so on. This, too, with television. Never more so, with the growth of streaming services such as Netflix, Disney + and Britbox. And, of course, traditional television services such as BBC, ITV, Channel 4 and 5, all producing not just drama but other genres of programming.

As regards the arts on television, why are art programmes hidden in the schedules? If BBC1 or BBC2 has an arts magazine, it's almost always aired in a late-night slot. Very rarely would it be shown earlier in the evening, say, 7p.m. Even when ITV had 'The South Bank Show', it would be shown around 10.30 p.m. on a Sunday.