How much of what we see and hear on RTÉ should be made by RTÉ and how much should be made by the independent production sector? This is one of the questions raised by the Broadcasting Authority of Ireland in its five-year review of public service media funding.
Currently, the statutory minimum that RTÉ must spend on independent commissions is just below €40 million a year, while it spends about another €10 million on non-statutory commissions. It spends roughly four times as much on in-house productions as it does on independent commissions, and about half as much on overseas acquisitions.
RTÉ has indicated that half of any additional funds generated by the household broadcasting charge could go into the independent production or co-production pot.
But both the BAI and Crowe Horwath – the accountancy firm that wrote the initial report for the review – seem a lot keener on the case for more outsourcing than RTÉ.
The broadcaster’s internal analysis disputes the idea that more external production would achieve better value for money. Crowe Horwath, however, suggests a greater use of external production and a corresponding scaling back of in-house programme-making “may provide RTÉ with the opportunity to reduce its costs more significantly over time”. It goes further, adding that more independent productions could benefit RTÉ’s “creative position”.
The BAI has now recommended to the Government that any additional public funding granted to RTÉ “should be deployed to the greatest extent possible through the independent production sector”.
It has also agreed with Crowe Horwath that a study of “the real relationship between the costs of in-house and independent production” is necessary.
If RTÉ in-house resources were scaled back in their entirety, it would eventually resemble British public service broadcaster Channel 4, which buys in all of its programmes.
Such a complete power-strip is off the table – the BAI promises that its proposed independent cost-benefit analysis is not a prelude to RTÉ’s conversion into what is known as a “publisher broadcaster”.
Exxon, Providence differ over Dunquin
There was a clear difference between the statements issued yesterday by ExxonMobil and Providence on the results of exploratory drilling in the Dunquin licence, in which both have a stake.
Exxon was blunt: We found water, some residual oil, we’re plugging the well and leaving. Providence, on the other hand, went into much greater detail, ultimately describing the results as encouraging for the Porcupine Basin, where Dunquin is located.
Key for Providence appears to be the fact that Exxon found residual oil, essentially the remains of a reservoir that drained away sometime in the past because some distant seismic event broke the rock that kept it in place.
Its technical director, John O’Sullivan, pointed out that this was recognised as a risk for the specific area where Exxon drilled, but said that it may not apply in other sections that could also contain oil or gas.
It is not the case that Providence is over-egging the cake. It is simply that the two are coming from different perspectives. ExxonMobil is a global petrochemical giant which last year made profits of €45 billion.
Providence is a small local, exploration company that plans to invest $500 million on exploration around the Irish coast over the next few years, a share of it in the Porcupine Basin, where it has stakes in other licences, so a positive outcome from Dunquin is important.
However, its problem is that while it might believe that the results warrant further exploration, it is stuck with whatever its partner decides. Exxon is the operator, it clearly does not believe that continuing to drill in Dunquin is worthwhile, so that is that. There is little Providence can do about this.
An intriguing line in its statement indicates a clash between the Irish company and its partners, which include other international players, Eni and Repsol. It says: “There are no current plans for any further well data to be released due to its potential commercial sensitivity.”
Google shows it's still wedded to Ireland
Luxury Dublin hotels with conferencing facilities should thank their lucky (five) stars that the Foundry, Google's new SME research and meeting centre in Dublin due to open in September, is not open for general bookings.
The online giant has long-since moved beyond lava lamps and foosball tables when it comes to building out its Dublin base. The Foundry, around which The Irish Times had a sneak preview yesterday, brings the concept of small-scale conferencing facilities in Dublin to a new level.
Where else in town would you find a facility with a 13 metre wide video wall into which you can plug your laptop to make a presentation? Or a “Green Room” with state-of-the-art broadcasting facilities allowing you to stream your conference live on the web? Or breakout rooms with bean bags?
The impressive 360-seat auditorium with its dedicated production facilities looks like some sort of futuristic television studio. If the Foundry was in the market for business meetings, Dublin’s conferencing hotels wouldn’t stand a chance. Instead, they will get the spin-off benefits of the extra 15,000 corporate visitors Google will now bring to the city annually.
Apple has led with its chin on the “Double Irish” corporation tax avoidance debate, taking most of the flak in the global press. Google, too, has come in for its fair share of international criticism for its tax policies , via its Irish operations.
The company is clearly anxious to be associated with more positive news concerning its Irish base – the Foundry is proof of that. It is also keen to show that it is committed to Dublin and willing to invest here further.
All of which will be music to the ears of the Taoiseach, Enda Kenny, who will cut the Foundry’s ribbon in September.
