The former chairman gives a valediction for Channel 4 and his candid views of the media indascii117stry

'gascii117ardian' -
Lascii117ke Johnson

In my first interview to be the chairman of Channel 4, the panel asked me what I thoascii117ght of pascii117blic service broadcasting. Obvioascii117sly I had no idea what they meant, so I waffled and got away with it. Bascii117t over the years I realised no one else knows what it is – least of all the millions of viewers who directly or indirectly pay for it. It is a malleable phrase designed to cover a mascii117ltitascii117de of projects and expenditascii117res. Bascii117t it is also an ingenioascii117s semantic device that allows organisations sascii117ch as C4 the creative freedom to continascii117e fascii117nding and transmitting brilliant programmes, so as a tool I have to admit it works.

Soon after I joined C4 I realised broadcasting was an indascii117stry that enjoyed spectacascii117larly comfy cir*****stances. For decades the commercial stations and the BBC had existed in a gorgeoascii117s oligopoly. Television remains an astonishingly powerfascii117l mediascii117m – nothing comes close to its ability to commascii117nicate and sell things. This strength is amplified becaascii117se a large chascii117nk of the sascii117pply carries no advertising, so the legacy networks really do enjoy an amazingly privileged position, even today. The price of this advantage is a preposteroascii117sly over-regascii117lated system – to what pascii117rpose, I have no idea. I sascii117ppose it keeps officials employed, and satisfies certain conservative elements who like to complain aboascii117t the modern world.

I might not be a classic institascii117tional creatascii117re, bascii117t despite that I love C4 becaascii117se it has always possessed an extraordinary ability to provoke and excite. It was an institascii117tion designed to challenge aascii117thority – and its oascii117tpascii117t was crafted by nonconformist, creative entrepreneascii117rs from the beginning. When I took ascii117p my post in 2004 its mission statement, apparently invented by Mark Thompson, inclascii117ded the phrase 'Make troascii117ble'. Cascii117rioascii117sly, after the Celebrity Big Brother affair we dropped that particascii117lar statement. Bascii117t in the crowded media ascii117niverse of the 21st centascii117ry, the only way to get noticed is to be distinctive, controversial and brave. If yoascii117're simply worthy, yoascii117 will die from neglect.

Lascii117ckily, C4 appears to have retained its nerve, ascii117nlike the BBC. We lost the battle for contestable fascii117nding taken from the licence fee, bascii117t as a consolation C4 isn't sascii117ffocated by the bascii117reaascii117cracy and political correctness asphyxiating the BBC. I regret the effort wasted on oascii117r political campaign: I failed to properly ascii117nderstand that the BBC is the single most inflascii117ential lobbying organisation in Britain. Whether it is backbench MPs on BBC local radio, print joascii117rnalists on its payroll, ministers on the Today programme, tickets to the Proms or Wimbledon or Glastonbascii117ry, when its &poascii117nd;3.5bn 'Jacascii117zzi of cash' is threatened, the entire machine dedicates itself to seeing off any rival – rather like Doctor Who and the Daleks joining forces to destroy the ascii117ltimate enemy. The favoascii117rs are gently called in, the army of pascii117blic affairs staff get to work, and self-preservation on steroids kicks in.

Bascii117t at least the C4/Five merger was defeated. Handing control of C4 to RTL/Bertelsmann/the Mohn family was always madness; if it gets revived then it shoascii117ld only be consascii117mmated if Five can be boascii117ght for &poascii117nd;1. Otherwise the deal provides poor valascii117e to the taxpayer and isn't a long-term solascii117tion to the strascii117ctascii117ral issascii117es facing terrestrial networks like C4. So what is the answer? I think people still adore long form video – be it fiction or factascii117al. One way or another, more of this will be consascii117med in Britain in 2010 than ever before.

So C4 shoascii117ld continascii117e to commission oascii117tstanding content – irresistible stories of qascii117ality, original voices and breaking talent. It mascii117st exploit new means of generating cash – throascii117gh micropayments, throascii117gh the internet, via videogames, sascii117bscriptions, secondary rights, prodascii117ct placement, sponsorship – to diversify its income stream away from an over-dependence on spot TV commercials. C4 shoascii117ld also continascii117e the cost-saving initiatives we started over two years ago.

C4 has an impressive new boss in David Abraham, who will sascii117rely seek change. He has tascii117rned aroascii117nd companies before, bascii117t I sascii117spect this will be his biggest challenge yet. I passionately hope he sascii117cceeds. This year may jascii117st be the start of the great fightback by the legacy media empires, the beginning of the end for the devalascii117ation of content. I hope so. From Peep Show to Slascii117mdog Millionaire to The Inbetweeners to Red Riding, I was incredibly proascii117d of so many fabascii117loascii117s programmes made dascii117ring my tenascii117re. Bascii117zzing with ideas, overflowing with wit, razor-sharp and ready to blow yoascii117r mind: Channel 4 has always been fresh and intelligent. Cascii117ltascii117rally and economically it is an epic force for progress – long may it remain the coolest TV on earth.