Is private TV better TV?

Press, 4 March 1983, Page 15

Is private TV better TV?

Review

Hen Strongmanl

There was some decidedly unusual timing on last Sunday’s television. A debate was broadcast on the important topic ’’That private television means better television.” It was held on the evening before parliamentary legislation on the matter, an evening in last October, five months ago. Why wait until now to show it? Would private television have waited that long” It was a very boring debate, the speakers, other than Michael Noonan, lacking sparkle. The only moment to remember was when Sue Miles attacked public television with the description of “the bland leading the bland.” The debate, then, made for poor viewing and was not a good advertisement for public television. So, perhaps it is better to leave the debate and simply comment on the issues. To start with, it would be unfair to judge private television by ’’Good Morning!”, although for their

sakes, it is a pity they began at the bottom. However, this does mean that private programmes can only improve, they could scarcely do otherwise.

No. the best way to judge private television is by what we see from abroad. Some of it is good. "Brideshead Revisited" being the obvious example. But much of it is mindless rubbish, however popular it might be — "The Young Doctors" and ’’Dallas" being equally obvious examples. The important point to note is that we probably see the best (most popular?) of overseas private television. A wet Wednesday evening on midwinter Australian television does not bear thinking about. Even if one admits that private television can sink very low. one might still say "So what?" if it promotes competition and widens choice. But that is the problem it is likely to promote competition by driving public television to produce its own

mixture of sensationalism and visual muzak in order to fight the battle of the ratings. That it can do so. we know already — "On the Mat." But at 6 o'clock every evening we might have our very own “Young Freezing Workers" as an exploration is made of the passions that ripple beneath the overalls. No doubt "Good Morning!" will improve this year, with its new presenter and having learned how better to display its private televisual parts. But I’m betting that it will still not be good. As it is, there is some excellent creative talent in TVNZ, which should be fostered and encouraged. The chances are that the commercial interests

of private television will do the reverse and lead much of the talent along the primrose path of compromise. It seemed likely that this polemic against private television would be endorsed by the remainder of Sunday evening's viewing. However, honesty compels the admission of mixed support. "Number 10" puts us back into the usual Sunday romp through the never-ending intricacies of British history. Richard Pasco made a fine-voiced Disraeli and was given some impressive lines to deliver. But it was hard to think of him as a zestful, womanising, if wasting, 73 when he looked more like a debauched 45. Even so. “Number 10" was enjoyable and one sat back thinking that this is just the sort of thing that the Beeb does best. Then came the credits and it was Yorkshire Television, part of the independent chain. Argument torn to shreds? Not at all. Yorkshire TV .is a little different from the rest and

consistently makes the sort of programmes suitable for Sunday evening serious viewing. It is probably all those industrialists, pouring in money in order to be accepted as cultured beings. Fortunately. the play which followed - "A Pocketful of Dreams" - was from the BBC. It proved, among other things, that Michael Elphick is not just "Private Shulz." He could become one of the great comic actors, but he needs a better vehicle for his talents than this play. It was reasonable but somehow did not let him shine enough. So, it was not possible to use Sunday evening's full offerings to support the argument against private television; I won’t mention "Country’ Calendar.” that would be unfair to the opposition. No. a look through the overseas programmes for a week, coupled with the thought that we probably see only the best, should be the clincher.