Channel poor?

Channel 4's new leader, Mark Thompson, is determined to move upmarket and back to the original remit. But can he balance the books? Lucy Rouse reports

The publication of Channel 4's annual report at the beginning of the month – complete with an introduction from the broadcaster's newly appointed chief executive, Mark Thompson – has given a timely insight into what the new leader wants C4 to become. The fine detail of Thompson's vision for C4 will come later in the year, when he gives the prestigious MacTaggart lecture at an annual TV festival in Edinburgh in August. By that time Thompson will have been in the C4 job for seven months. But already there are signs that he intends to distinguish his era as C4's fourth chief executive from that of his immediate predecessor, Michael Jackson. Thompson, it seems, will spend the 20th year of C4 taking the broadcaster back to its remit.

Ironically, Thompson succeeded the same Michael Jackson when he became controller of BBC 2 in 1996. When he did so, Thompson took BBC 2's share from 11.2 per cent to 11.6 per cent of total viewing, against stiff competition from the other channels. He has a reputation for success and won't want to fail in the bigger job of running C4 plus its various spin-offs: E4, the FilmFour channels, a horse-racing joint venture called At the Races, which will spawn a channel this year, and a raft of other commercial entities including websites.

Thompson says his priority is great programming with "C4 values". But he faces a massive challenge in realising a purist vision of the C4 remit – to be innovative, to be distinct from other channels and to serve minority groups of TV viewers – and it's something he did not have to worry about at the publicly funded BBC.

He must deliver great programming that measures up to the C4 remit, while satisfying advertisers and continuing to secure the 85 per cent of the broadcaster's £734m revenue that comes from TV adverts and sponsorship. That sort of commercial success doesn't necessarily come from low-rating, worthy documentaries or cutting-edge satire. It's a quandary that has sent previous C4 bosses off in pursuit of ratings and laid them open to accusations that the core channel no longer does what it was set up to do – to have programming that is radically different from other channels'. One example of the trend for ratings-chasing was C4's decision in the 1990s to broadcast the Ibiza Uncovered series – a sex-and-booze romp through the clubbing capital of the world, originally made for Sky One.

Thompson has already shown signs of importing into C4 some of the "new" BBC ethic of the famously competitive BBC director general, Greg Dyke – particularly in drama, where, if a programme works, the corporation, and BBC 1 in particular, orders lots more of it, not just a further six episodes. Drama is a priority for BBC 1, but C4 airs far less drama than entertainment, education, sport and feature films. Even so, under Thompson's watch, the channel has made the biggest commitment of its 20-year history to returning drama by commissioning a 10-episode third series of Teachers.

More needs to happen, and it's clearly unfair to judge a new chief executive on the basis of less than three months in the job. But Thompson will be aware that last year was not a great one for break-out hits on C4. Programmes that have made the headlines and won awards – such as Ali G, Smack the Pony and Queer as Folk – all originated more than two years ago.

Above all, Thompson wants to ensure that "the channel's values are consistently represented throughout the schedule," says a source close to Thompson. "That's not to take a stick and beat the team over what's been going on before. Inevitably, in a pressured, competitive environment, all broadcasters can take the safe or familiar option, which they know will rate."

But the source is quick to add: "It's important to deliver 16-to-34-year-old audiences." Here, the pragmatic Thompson has already proved realistic about the need, even the necessary evil, of developing commercial activities that may appear to conflict with C4's public-service obligations but help to fund the broadcaster so that it continues to invest in programming – such as the £6m drama Shackleton – that wouldn't otherwise get made.

While introducing the C4 annual report, Thompson emphasised the need for "commercial strength" at the broadcaster, saying it was "essential" that the broadcaster maintained 4 Ventures, the division that houses all C4 commercial activities. 4 Ventures was arguably the single biggest achievement of Jackson, and Thompson wants to see it break even as quickly as possible. But that does not mean there are sacred cows. The FilmFour business may be dismantled and brought closer to the main channel.

Jackson was happy to be a competitor to the BBC, but a supportive one. He did not oppose the relaunch of the digital channel BBC Choice as BBC 3, for instance. Thompson, despite having left the BBC only a few months ago, has opposed the BBC 3 plans along with the rest of the C4 management, saying the new channel would threaten C4's advertising revenue. Thompson is also thought to believe – now he's outside the corporation – that the BBC should be differently regulated in future and treated more like the other broadcasters and have its arcane board of BBC governors curtailed.

The wall-to-wall scheduling of Big Brother from the end of this month suggests that everyone at the broadcaster is aware of the amazing ratings power that that show, now in its third series, can have on both C4 and E4. But rather than being accused of exploiting such a popular (and ultimately vacuous) programme, Thompson may be able to square it with what he says is "the broad and positive ambition to be innovative and experimental, which is set out in the channel's remit."

And there's a simple reason why Thompson is so keen to talk about the C4 remit. C4 must renew its licence to broadcast for another 10 years from January 2003, and there are policy dangers lurking around the corner. C4 is a statutory body, although most of its viewers wouldn't know it, and it could one day be privatised. It could also have to pay the government – as ITV companies do – for the privilege of using spectrum to broadcast. The Government is considering just such a move, which would cost C4 tens of millions of pounds a year, as part of the communications Bill it published last week.

Thompson wants to persuade the Government that neither a spectrum tax nor privatisation is in C4's long-term interests. While at the BBC, he didn't manage to convince ministers that the corporation should be allowed to launch BBC 3. So can he win an argument about protecting C4's public status and spectrum privileges while at C4? If nothing else, a focus on the C4 remit and programming looks the best way to try.

Lucy Rouse is the editor of 'Broadcast' magazine