Thin

The BBC has handed in its homework in on Charter Review, and gets a B-. 100 pages of fine words (jeopardy x 4) buttering very few parsnips. 

Actual new things ? A plan to pilot 'citizen assemblies' to see what audiences want. More worryingly "The Board could also have a bigger role in commissioning or providing oversight to this work, ensuring that we are open about our decision making and how we have taken on board audience feedback."    Still, an improvement on the distinctively half-hearted current engagement of the Board in England, Wales, Northern Ireland and Scotland. 

On complaints, "we propose that the DirectorGeneral, as Editor in Chief, should retain the ability to fast-track significant editorial issues and ensure that editorial breaches are resolved expeditiously".  Usually in response to a social media storm followed by a newspaper-pile-on. "However, editorial complaints are an area where we seek continuous improvement, and we want to have an open debate about whether further changes are needed as part of this Charter Review"

On a long-term future, "The next Charter should remove a fixed expiry date but also recognise the fact that the BBC has no innate right to exist. Any decision on the future existence of the BBC should be supported by a public mandate and be subject to appropriate parliamentary scrutiny"

On a new process for determining the level of public funding; issue ducked. "There are several ways the funding process could be reformed in the UK to make it more transparent and independent, whilst also ensuring government has appropriate oversight over what is a significant amount of public funding..... We want to engage openly on these options and listen to others’ views." 

Bald on the World Service, with the implication that unless Government pays for it, it's over: "Funding of the World Service should move back to the UK government and include safeguards so that future funding is secure and stable to allow long term planning. Similarly, we think the UK government should revert to paying directly for the open-source intelligence services it receives from BBC Monitoring. A new funding model would give us the stability to stay ahead of fast-moving information threats. "

On platforms, "We are proposing that iPlayer could be opened to other PSBs (and their commercial services), with support for their business models (i.e. advertising or subscription), whilst keeping BBC public service content advertising-free. This could help ensure the UK retains a streaming platform that competes with global services and remains a first choice for audiences."

On money-making, they want explore integrating the "UK channels" of BBC Studios into iPlayer. And the paper warns that simply putting more archive onto YouTube won't bring in major funding. 

And the biggest duck of all ?  Wanting a new means of universal funding, but not making any positive suggestions.... "The current model cannot maintain the BBC’s public service mission for the future. When 94% of people use the BBC each month yet fewer than 80% of households contribute, reform is needed to deliver sufficient funding in a way that is sustainable and fair for all.

"It is right that the government is consulting widely on options, recognising the pressures on both the BBC and household budgets. But the Charter must present a solution. The BBC does not have a fixed view on the model, but it does on the principle"