It began with the Communications Act in 2003, which, among other things, stipulated that intellectual property rights should remain with the creators and makers of audio-visual productions.
Governments like to engage themselves in media policy. Every new cabinet wants to get involved on this sexy subject. It is striking that in the Netherlands, little attention is paid to the future in this field: through a maze of committees, the focus is mainly on looking back at everything that went wrong in the past. And when it comes to making decisions of any importance - such as the investment obligations of streamers - the result is, to put it mildly, underwhelming.
The way things are done in the United Kingdom differs significantly. The creative sector in that country has experienced unprecedented growth in the last twenty years. It began with the Communications Act in 2003, which, among other things, stipulated that intellectual property rights should remain with the creators and makers of audio-visual productions. This, combined with the investment drive of multiple broadcasters, led to an unprecedented boom in audiovisual content production.
The government's policy was also stimulating and successful in the digital creative field. Shoreditch - a neglected area in the eastern part of London ten years ago - was developed as a hub based on the government's long-term vision and attracted many creative, digital companies. The neighborhood now thrives, much like the long-established television stronghold Soho.
The Johnson government deviated from this stimulating policy and pursued an ultraconservative, politically charged course. Johnson wanted to substantially reduce funding for the BBC and sell Channel 4. Striking, because it is precisely these two organizations that pour a significant amount of money into the British creative sector. Fortunately, with the fall of this government, these initiatives were also discarded, allowing both the BBC and Channel 4 to refocus on what they excel at: developing creative, high-quality programming in collaboration with the highly successful independent production sector.
The Sunak government is picking up the thread again and will make significant investments in the British creative sector. Sunak is introducing a new 'moonshot' goal, aiming to grow the British creative sector by fifty billion pounds! The program aims to create one million jobs in the British creative sector by 2030. The old tradition of thinking big is being embraced again. Interestingly, this development is widely supported by both Tories and Labour. The British creative sector has risen to become the second largest in the world.
The Netherlands can learn a thing or two from that. Our audiovisual sector was put on the map a quarter of a century ago by visionary entrepreneurs like John de Mol and Joop van den Ende. In their wake, a highly successful creative sector emerged. However, the Dutch government has repeatedly failed to give this position a boost through concrete and stimulating policies. We look backward rather than forward, impose weak investment obligations on streamers and have no sense of the 'big picture.' We have become small-minded thinkers.
In the 1960s, the United States fell behind in the space race with the Soviet Union. Yuri Gagarin was the first human to break through the Earth's atmosphere, a monumental achievement. Unable to accept this, the United States - through President John F. Kennedy - established the goal of landing the first person on the moon within a timespan of 10 years. The rest is history and the wording of such a distant, grand objective became known as the 'moonshot goal.'
Stating such a goal is even more important when things are a bit difficult. That was the case with Kennedy's example and is the case for many public broadcasters in Europe. The sentiment in politics is generally unfavorable, budget cuts are commonplace, and digital competition is capturing viewership share. Young people are increasingly unable to find public broadcasters, and consequently a significant strategic crisis has emerged. This is the situation in Scandinavia, Germany, the United Kingdom, and in our own country. Let alone the situation in Poland and Spain.
So, there is a crisis in public broadcasting in Europe, precisely at a time when polarization is increasing, and misinformation is rampant. Especially during such times, it is crucial to prioritize neutral reporting and foster a sense of community. Excellent leadership is invaluable in such circumstances. And it's not the first time that the BBC has set an example during such times. Tim Davie, the excellent Director-General of the BBC, spoke at a Royal Television Society event last month. His argument centered around the fact that the future of the United Kingdom is at risk in democratic, social and cultural terms. He saw three roles for the BBC in countering this threat. Pursuing truth with no agenda by reporting fearlessly and fairly. Backing the best British storytelling by investing in homegrown talent and creativity. Lastly, bringing people together by connecting everyone to unmissable content.
That's what you call a moonshot goal! Because what follows from this? The BBC must serve its 'customers' from every platform, at all times. BBC Three will be closed as young people will find BBC content online, via iPlayer. New services are being developed, such as BBC Verify: the future major fact-checker. Interventions will be made in the BBC organization to make all this possible. And finally, the BBC will also explore whether a new, better funding system than the archaic licensing fee can be developed.
Isn't it wonderful? In the United Kingdom, significant changes are being developed from a strategic perspective. In the Netherlands, we only see politically motivated cost-cutting measures within the public broadcaster, neglecting the pursuit of deliberate strategic advancement in the media sector. I rest my case...
Na een loopbaan bij de commerciële (SBS) en publieke (KRO-NCRV) omroep belandde Rijssemus bij producent IDTV, onderdeel van het Britse All3Media dat hem uiteindelijk richting Berlijn dirigeerde om ook de Duitse markt te veroveren. "Dat had ik niet verwacht, moet ik zeggen", aldus Rijssemus lachend. "Ik dacht: ze vragen me voor Amerika, of een bedrijf ergens in de UK misschien."
Wat trof Rijssemus aan en is Duitsland nog steeds 'de heilige graal'? "Je moet de balans vinden: hoeveel energie geeft en kost een baan je?"
Hoe kwam deze student fiscaal recht en economie uiteindelijk in de mediawereld terecht en waarom wilde hij namens RTL zo graag Videoland overnemen? “We hebben daar veel van geleerd en ook heel veel fouten gemaakt, met name een deel infrastructuur totaal nieuw moeten bouwen”, blikt Habets terug. “Toen we 40.000 abonnees hadden, bleek het platform niet meer aan te kunnen…”
Inmiddels opereert hij vanuit München op de Duitse markt en past ook daar zijn ervaring toe met “het omkatten van een televisie- naar een streaming first-bedrijf.” Habets romantiseert zijn internationale carrière niet: “Je moet eerlijk zijn naar jezelf en het doen om de juiste redenen, anders wordt het gewoon een baan.”