Written evidence submitted by Channel 4
Submission to the DCMS Select Committee Inquiry into Reality TV
Executive Summary
Channel 4
Channel 4 welcomes the opportunity to respond to the DCMS Select Committee Inquiry into Reality TV.
Channel 4 is a publicly-owned, commercially-funded public service broadcaster. Our not-for-profit status ensures that the maximum amount of our revenue is reinvested in the delivery of our public service remit. As such our commercial success is intrinsically linked to our creative and public service impact.
As a publisher broadcaster, all of Channel 4’s programmes are made by independent production companies. We invest hundreds of millions of pounds into the UK creative landscape and working with hundreds of production companies across the country.
Channel 4 has a remit to be innovative, diverse and distinctive. Channel 4’s detailed statutory public service remit includes requirements to support and stimulate well-informed debate on a wide range of issues, to reflect the diversity of the UK, as well as requirements to challenge established views and promote alternative perspectives.
Channel 4 is also required to cater for young audiences with specific remit requirements to appeal to older children and young adults. Our remit to be alternative and different manifests itself in content that speaks to young people about things and in a way that engages them with contemporary issues.
Channel 4 and other UK PSBs continue to be significant investors in original UK content - £2.6 billion on first run UK originated content in 2016. Despite audience fragmentation, PSBs continue to play a key role in bringing the nation together through thought provoking dramas such as The Virtues, Kiri and Brexit: The Uncivil War; heart-warming shows like Old People’s Home for 4 Year Olds and First Dates and our ground-breaking coverage of the Paralympic Games.
Reality television is a term that is frequently used but has no formal definition, so an important starting point for this inquiry is establishing what is meant by this term. A definition must identify the specific elements which make reality TV unique - and in need of particular consideration in relation to contributor care - whilst at the same time capturing the range of programmes and formats which are generally considered to fall into this category.
Based on our experience in developing the regulations around children’s participation in television programmes, Channel 4 defines reality TV as a type of programming involving contributors who are usually (but not exclusively) members of the public, who are removed from their ordinary day-to-day lives for a period of time and put into an environment or situation which is constructed for the for the purposes of making the programme.
For the purposes of this inquiry, this definition recognises that certain programme formats - in which members of the public are put into a constructed environment, removed from their usual routines and support systems, and, particularly in the case of our biggest shows, subject to considerable media attention - generate specific challenges around contributor care which require appropriate consideration and management. This type of programme makes up a very small part of Channel 4’s scheduling, and includes shows like The Circle, Hunted, The Island, SAS: Who Dares Wins and Shipwrecked.
As our commitment to contributor care extends far beyond these two types of reality TV programme, our response also considers a number of constructed popular factual programmes involving contributors, such as The Great British Bake Off, First Dates, The Undateables and Old People’s Home for 4 Year Olds, which we deem relevant to the questions posed by the inquiry. Whilst these are not reality TV programmes, they navigate significant challenges around informed consent and duty of care and provide valuable examples of best practice.
Our response does not consider observational documentaries or news programmes, although extensive contributor care arrangements also exist for these types of programming. Nor does not consider scripted programmes involving actors.
Channel 4 and contributor care
The Ofcom Broadcasting Code imposes a number of rules and responsibilities on broadcasters in relation to their duty of care towards potential contributors to programmes, as well as to viewers. These include requirements around informed consent, fair treatment, and the avoidance of unjustified offence to viewers. They also have specific guidelines on how these rules should be applied in relation to minors – before, during and after production. These were developed with significant involvement from the broadcasters, PACT and a range of experts. Ofcom can sanction broadcasters for any breaches of the Code.
Channel 4 takes the duty of care as set out in the Broadcasting Code very seriously and we are committed to meeting these requirements by ensuring that (1) contributors are fully informed of the nature of the programme and the potential consequences of participating (2) as far as possible any potentially adverse situations which contributors may encounter are anticipated and appropriate processes are put in place to deal with them and (3) in any adverse situation, contributors are properly supported throughout production and post-broadcast.
As a publisher broadcaster all of Channel 4’s commissioned programmes are produced by external production companies, so whilst we are subject to the licence obligations and take legal responsibility for compliance with the Broadcasting Code, it is the companies making our programmes who have the primary relationships with contributors and therefore take on the day to day responsibility for ensuring appropriate contributor care is being provided and reporting any problems back to Channel 4. This means that for Channel 4 contributor care is always delivered in partnership with our suppliers.
In order to achieve this, we require all production companies making shows involving contributors to understand what is required of them and put appropriate protocols in place. The Channel 4 Producers Handbook sets out the requirements of the Broadcasting Code, highlighting the duty of care owed to contributors on factual programmes and the importance of considering from the outset what contributor care arrangements should be in place before, during and after production. We work in close partnership with each production company and a range of relevant experts to make that judgement and develop the right package of pre-production assessment, support and aftercare protocols for each individual programme.
The protocols for our shows are developed in partnership with the production company, the Commissioning Editor, Channel 4 lawyers, and a range of experts relevant to the particular programme. They are tailored to the individual show and they are living documents that evolve with that show, being reviewed and tweaked regularly to ensure they remain as robust and comprehensive as possible.
When assessing the appropriate level of contributor care in relation to a particular production, we not only draw on the prior knowledge and experience of the production company, Commissioning Editor, Programme Lawyer, and the wider Legal & Compliance and Commissioning teams, but we also often utilise other external sources of expertise. This has included specialist clinicians, psychologists, psychiatrists, experts in the care of the elderly, experts in child care and education, trauma specialists, occupational health specialists and experts in security and health and safety. Expert social media guidance is also provided to contributors.
In some cases, bespoke working groups of professionals are assembled to guide the production company. For example, on Old People’s Home for 4 Year Olds a group consisting of experts in geriatric care, occupational therapy, and child education and welfare was created.
The Channel 4 Commissioning Editor and our Legal and Compliance team must assess and approve the final contributor care protocols for each show before production begins. Production Finance Managers also routinely check programme budgets to ensure that adequate levels of resource have been allocated to meet the levels of pre-show assessment, care and after-care set out in the protocols. Production companies are then required to keep the Channel informed of any issues, and how they are being dealt with, as and when they arise. A close and trusting relationship between the Commissioning Editor and Exec Producer, and a shared understanding that contributor care is of paramount importance help to underpin this system.
We continually review our protocols and processes in light of developments in best practice, to ensure that they remain comprehensive and robust. The protocols are assessed and updated ahead of each series, but if necessary can also be updated mid-series in light of new learning or developments in best practice. This process of regular review is particularly important in the context of a rapidly changing TV and media landscape and our approach has necessarily evolved with the rise of social media and the shift towards more viewing on-demand. To ensure our approach has kept pace with these changes, earlier this year we undertook a broad review of contributor support and aftercare on a range of our programmes. This is informing our ongoing approach. In particular, Channel 4 is working to ensure that the individuals who oversee our contributor care arrangements are kept abreast of current developments in best practice when making their assessments, and we are looking at how we can go further by introducing workshops with relevant experts such as psychologists, social media safety experts, experts on child safety/care of the elderly etc. We also facilitate training for production companies to support the sharing of best practice among our suppliers. We believe these are important ways to continue to drive improvements in contributor care arrangements.
Developing bespoke duty of care protocols for our programmes
The individual nature of each programme means it is important to take a bespoke approach to every element of contributor care whether before, during or after production. However, although the exact protocols and packages of support will each be different for each programme, for constructed or reality programmes involving contributors they will routinely include the following:
Within this, press and social media training and support have become a key element of contributor care on many high profile shows, with clear specialist contacts provided for contributors when needed to make sure they feel supported during and after transmission.
Developing and providing the right support for contributors involves looking at programmes on a case by case basis, considering the specific nature of that show and the individual needs of its contributors. This includes but is not limited to: level of exposure and attention which a show generates for contributors; whether or not contributors are removed from their ordinary lives, routines and support structures; the length, and intensity of a contributors involvement; whether the show involves any particular physical or emotional challenges; whether contributors have particular needs as a group or as individuals, and whether a show is shot in advance or has a live element.
Depending on the nature of the programme, elements of these protocols include an appropriate level of psychological assessment of contributors; support during filming and transmission which may include an on set psychologist and regular check ins; clear and consistent points of contact for contributors; detailed monitoring and recording of the support provided and any issues arising; crew training in recognising signs of psychological distress; robust procedures for escalating concerns; expert guidance on dealing with press and social media; and post-transmission aftercare and follow up regimes. On occasion care packages are put in place to shelter contributors from the immediate attention that broadcast can cause; sometimes arrangements are made to move a contributor’s location around the time of broadcast.
Each of these elements and the way in which they are delivered is created for the individual programme and an understanding of the needs of the contributors who are chosen to be involved, and the potential areas of risk within that specific programme.
Some programmes may need more detailed or unusual arrangements than others, for example SAS: Who Dares Wins requires a Trauma Awareness Protocol as well as particularly extensive psychological monitoring. 24hrs in A&E not only employ a dedicated six-person patient liaison team whose sole job is to look after patients throughout the process, but also, given the nature of that particular show, a dedicated staff liaison team whose sole purpose is to look after clinical staff throughout the production, transmission and post-transmission. The Undateables crew includes a unique ‘Care Bear’ role who is an ongoing point of contact and support for all contributors past and present, and, given the nature of the show they prioritise continuity and have used the same clinical psychologist for every series over seven years.
A very high-profile series like The Great British Bake Off where contributors are involved for a number of weeks and gain significant public attention, will likely need considerably more focus on press and social media training than a show like Location, Location, Location. A high profile, reality programme like The Circle, which involves contributors leaving their day-to-day lives to enter a carefully constructed environment which involves a degree of artifice, conflict and unpredictability, and also has a live element, will need extensive, wide ranging and detailed protocols to manage all of these elements. Even First Dates and First Dates Hotel require different, bespoke protocols that reflect their different formats and requirements of contributors. Beyond the format, the needs of contributors are also key, with shows like First Dates The Restaurant that Makes Mistakes and The Undateables all requiring different approaches to contributor support which are rooted in their contributors needs. A bespoke approach enables us to consider all of these elements in order to make a carefully balanced assessment of the risks involved and create a package of measures designed to manage these risks.
Whilst it is important to ensure that appropriate standards are adhered to across the board, we do not believe that a one size fits all approach is either possible or desirable. Enabling a bespoke approach, and drawing on a range of relevant expertise, allows programme makers to manage appropriate levels of risk and make a wide range of formats involving a diverse range of contributors. It is important that any regulatory measures do not inhibit broadcasters and programme makers ability to manage a certain level of risk in a way that is tailored to an individual programme or deter the development of programmes involving certain formats or contributors. This could have an unintended and detrimental impact on the diversity of UK broadcast output, and in turn the UK broadcasting and production ecologies.
Delivering against contributor care protocols
We make it a contractual requirement on the independent production companies we commission to ensure that their staff have read, are familiar with and comply with the individual arrangements for the programme, as well as the guidelines set out in our Producer’s Handbook.
The package of measures which is developed and agreed is set out in the final protocol and supporting documents ahead of production. These protocols and wider documents are often extensive, detailing the core elements of each programme’s approach. For one show which requires particularly detailed procedures the ‘Programme Bibles’ run to 60 pages and different versions exist for a number of different roles in the production.
Alongside these written protocols, there is often a great deal of wider work to create a culture that embeds contributor care as a fundamental priority and equips each and every crew member to deliver on that priority. Formats like Made In Chelsea, First Dates, The Great British Bake Off or The Undateables simply would not work without the secure, trusting relationships they build with their contributors. Love Productions, who make The Great British Bake Off take great pride in the friendly, supportive atmosphere they create and the positive feedback they have had from applicants, contributors, and their families. This is an integral part of the show, and the experience of not only contributors but viewers. For these shows, and many others, top-class contributor care is not only a moral imperative but also a commercial one and its central importance is recognised and extolled by everyone from the Commissioning Editor and Exec team down.
Pre-production and in-show support
Delivering on contributor care starts right from the beginning of the casting process, from outreach through applications, phone calls, auditions and, of course, psychological assessments, which routinely play a key role. In all genres of programme which involve contributors, informed consent is also a key part of contributor care and we have worked with experts to ensure we get this right, including in more complicated cases – for example when making programmes like Dementiaville or The Restaurant That Makes Mistakes which involve contributors living with dementia, shows like 24hrs in A&E which involve filming contributors in moments of medical crisis, or on programmes like Kids on the Edge which involve vulnerable young people. In some circumstances the duty of care can also include withdrawing contributors from a production or allowing a contributor to withdraw their consent should circumstances change.
During filming appropriate support is provided by designated individuals and/or teams within the production company, as well as by psychologists and other experts where appropriate. Alongside this, regular logging and record keeping are an important element of protocols, with many shows maintaining daily “welfare”, ‘happiness’, ‘duty of care’ or ‘cause for concern’ logs which document support provided, questions, concerns or other issues. Where necessary productions also hold regular duty of care meetings where these logs are reviewed. Issues arising are to be flagged to senior staff on the production and to Channel 4.
Reality TV shows in which contributors are removed from their daily lives and routines and immersed in a new, filmed, environment for an extended period will involve particular risks for contributors which need to be managed. For example, the production company behind The Circle have identified the psychological importance of off-camera breaks, ‘down-time days’ and a certain level of routine for contributors, working these elements into their filming structures and welfare processes.
Post-filming and post-transmission aftercare
Protocols also involve processes to support contributors both after filming and after transmission. This package of post-filming and post-transmission care is also developed according to the needs of each individual programme. Depending on the nature of the show it may involve processes for enabling contributors to view episodes, briefings on social media, press and PR with allocated specialist contacts to answer queries in these areas, regular contact with a key member/s of the production team, advice on managing their future careers and finding an agent, and access to a psychologist post-filming and post-transmission as needed. At times a certain number of sessions with a psychologist will be mandated as a condition of taking part in the show, for example The Island are now introducing this after their latest review of their protocols.
Due to the nature of the show, reality programme SAS: Who Dares Wins involves particularly extensive psychological debriefing and follow up for all contributors to monitor for any delayed signs of trauma, an Acute Stress Reaction or PTSD.
As long as there has been no cause for concern, at the appropriate point there is usually a gradual winding down of contact with contributors over an extended period. However, some shows including Made In Chelsea and The Undateables have continued to provide a point of contact on a more ongoing basis. The length of time for which contact continues will naturally vary depending on the nature of the programme and the contributors’ role, however for key reality based shows we will now be ensuring that producers maintain proactive contact with key contributors for at least a year following broadcast and offer appropriate professional support to them over this period.
Typically, production companies will have asked contributors to sign release forms permitting uses of the programme outside the UK (consistent with their ownership of secondary rights). Producers need to accommodate changes in situation and respond where further transmission may adversely affect contributors and to put in place particular steps in relation to repeats of programmes. For Channel 4 repeat broadcasts for example on The Undateables contributors are contacted whenever an episode or clip in which they appear is being shown, in order to ensure that they are prepared and comfortable. This is not a legal requirement, as the production company have release forms allowing worldwide distribution in perpetuity, but rather something the company sees as a key element of contributor care. These checks take place routinely across all genres. We have dealt with situations in other programmes where much further down the line circumstances have changed for a contributor or their family, so we have ceased repeats of a number of episodes of our shows where we felt that the airing of a repeat might cause distress. Normally these requests would come via the contributor’s contact at the production company, but should it be at a much later date when the contributor is no longer in touch with their prior contact they are also able to make contact via the Channel 4 Viewer Enquiries number.
In all areas of contributor care, both before during and after transmission, a key part of Channel 4’s oversight is ensuring suppliers have processes to make sure that any issues are routinely flagged with senior executives and Channel 4 representatives.
The importance of diversity in programme making
At times it is important to work with contributors who will require greater risk management and more extensive contributor care protocols. We are committed to ensuring a diverse spectrum of contributors, showing a wide range of stories and perspectives, and delivering on our duty to fully reflect the UK. For Channel 4 this is a key part of our remit to reflect the diversity of the UK, challenge established views, stimulate debate and promote alternative perspectives as set by parliament. Any intervention which prevented us from commissioning certain programmes or working with certain types of contributor would inhibit our ability to deliver against this remit. Furthermore, to unduly restrict the involvement of certain people - for example those who have previously suffered from a mental health condition - from taking part in a TV programme would not only be discriminatory, but by limiting the range of stories and experience shown on television, and the empathy, understanding and conversation those stories have the power to generate, it would be detrimental to both viewers and society as a whole.
Balancing these two obligations – to fully reflect diversity when exercising freedom of expression whilst also managing risk to contributors is key. There are some people for whom taking part in a programme could be detrimental, and robust casting protocols - including the regular use of psychological assessments – are often vital to avoid casting anyone in a programme that -despite contributor care protocols - would put them at risk of real harm. However, it is also crucial that mechanisms for ensuring contributor care do not unduly restrict the types of people who can take part in TV shows – for example by encouraging a prohibitively cautious approach to including people with vulnerabilities. Programmes like First Dates, The Undateables, SAS Who Dares Wins, or The Restaurant That Makes Mistakes all present different, but significant challenges around contributor care which we have successfully worked with production companies, and relevant experts to overcome. These programmes show that the challenges around working with contributors with particular needs are not insurmountable and the public value of tackling challenging issues, promoting inclusion, breaking down stigma, and showcasing a diverse range of contributors each with their own life experiences and, to an extent, vulnerabilities, is of real importance.
Beyond the diversity of some of our participants, more broadly it is vital that further regulation does not have an unintended ‘chilling’ effect on the kinds of programmes that we make, or a dismissal of the value of reality TV as a whole. Indeed, our evidence shows that these kinds of programmes have the potential to create significant public service impact.
For example, we commission research looking at how some of our programmes affect audience attitudes and behaviors. This includes research into to a number of reality TV and constructed factual shows such as The Circle, Gender Quake, Bride and Prejudice, Seven Year Switch and The Undateables. A snapshot of our findings includes:
The progamme was also praised by a number of mental health charities, including Mental Health First Aid England, who said, “Naked Beach is a ground breaking programme that shows us we all have the opportunity to feel beautiful inside and out. It is a refreshing antidote to the world of photoshopped imagery which far too many people measure their self-worth against. Anyone who’s ever had a negative thought about their body should watch this programme.” The show has since been used to create a series of free, downloadable teaching resource for PSHE lessons on body image for teenagers and is expected to be used in 200+ schools in the academic year 2019/2020.
Engaging viewers, and particularly younger audiences, with a wide range of issues and perspectives through a variety of innovative, appealing formats is key to Channel 4’s role as a PSB. It is also key to the sustainability of public service broadcasting in the future. This makes it all the more important that any measures to further ensure the duty of care is met are focused in remit and do not unintentionally lead to a chilling effect on this type of content, for example by deterring potential contributors or requiring prohibitive levels of additional compliance resource
Conclusions
Channel 4 is committed to continually driving creative improvements. However, it is also important to recognise that there are some limitations to what broadcasters and production companies can do alone. Whilst some production companies have mandated contributor sessions with their psychologist, it is very difficult for production companies to force contributors to take the support which is provided or offered, particularly post broadcast. Furthermore, whilst production companies can provide training and support around dealing with press and social media attention, and work to prepare contributors as fully as possible for what follows after transmission, the disparity between the regulation of broadcasting and other forms of media means contributors have little protection or recourse should they be the victim of intrusive press attention or online abuse. Whilst it is entirely valid to be looking at the measures broadcasters and production companies can take to ensure the welfare of contributors, this is only part of the picture. Facebook and other social media providers have an important responsibility to address online abuse targeted at reality TV contributors and we hope this is something the Committee will consider as part of their inquiry.
This increasingly uneven playing field in terms of regulations is a wider question that runs through many areas of the Committee’s work. Broadcasting is one of the most tightly regulated elements of the creative and media industries and any steps to regulate the industry further should be carefully evaluated in terms of their impact on the wider broadcasting ecology. It is important that measures to ensure the duty of care is met to do not overly restrict editorial choices in terms of the types of programmes that can be made or the diversity of participants on these programmes, as there is a clear public value in programmes which reflect the diversity of the UK, breakdown stigma and promote greater understanding, inclusion and empathy. What’s more, such restrictions will likely hinder the PSBs ability to compete creatively and commercially in an increasingly competitive market.
Earlier this year Channel 4 undertook a broad review of contributor support and aftercare on a range of our programmes. Having done so, we believe that our general approach to these issues, of carefully thought through and crafted bespoke arrangement is right, as opposed to a generalised ‘one size fits all’ approach. However, we do not claim perfection and are constantly learning from our own and the experience of others operating in this field with the aim of ensuring that the next Channel 4 show in this category reflects behaviours that we believe are best in class. In our experience, the best way to ensure continued improvement in contributor care policies is to review these protocols and policies regularly in light of developments in best practice and according to the needs of contributors.
We also believe that it is right for production companies, in partnership with the broadcasters, to be responsible for ensuring compliance with the duty of care on their shows, with Ofcom able to sanction broadcasters where the Broadcasting Code is breached
Any further policy or regulatory intervention should ensure minimum standards are adhered to and support the spread of best practice across the industry, whilst ensuring our broadcasting system can continue to thrive both commercially and creatively, and deliver the vital public value that is generated by a wealth of diversity of contributors on our TV screens.
10