Issue link: https://maltatoday.uberflip.com/i/318021
12 Europe 2014 TO walk into the PBS office in Gwardamangia is in a sense to walk down some five decades of Maltese history. Every nook and cranny con- ceals relics of a not-too distant past. Archaic cameras, lenses and reel- to-reel consoles adorn each corner, while larger-than-life images of past events and personalities loom large in every corridor. To get to the office of the chairman you have to walk past an immense (and eerily unset- tling) image of the late Charles Ar- rigo, staring impassively down at you from the wall. Inside the office, you are beset by a similarly outsized im- age of Prince Philip cutting the rib- bon to inaugurate Television House in distant 1960. Tonio Portughese may not him- self have been around since the very outset of public broadcasting – he is around 40 years too young for that, at least if you include Rediffusion – but he has certainly been part of the broader picture for as long as I can remember. Most people still identify him as the man who for years mod- erated election-eve debates between the two party leaders. His baptism of fire, as it were, occurred in 1981… when such debates were televised for the first time, against the back- drop of a country ready to almost burst with political unrest. As we ex- change pleasantries he shows me an illustration of the debate in a book he wrote himself ('People Engage- ment: for Business Excellence and Social Wellbeing'): Dom Mintoff and Eddie Fenech Adami are prudently seated some 20 feet apart, looking ready blast each other with heavy ar- tillery… with an apprehensive Tonio Portughese sandwiched directly in between. Clearly, he is used to being caught between the hammer and the anvil. Which is probably just as well, given his current position as chairman of a state broadcaster that invariably finds itself in the line of political fire. "To understand how public broad- casting operates, you have to also understand the history behind it," he begins: pointing out how the original decision to open a national TV sta- tion in 1960 had been prompted by the fact that RAI – the Italian state broadcaster – suddenly found a foot- hold in every Maltese household to own a TV set. As this was still within living memory of World War II, the colonial government felt the need to counterbalance this foreign in- fluence with a local equivalent; and there were commercial pressures, too. RAI also provided a platform from which Italian goods could flood the market; and especially in the years after Independence, the public broadcaster came to be viewed as an essential component of the govern- ment's protectionist strategy. Times have since changed, and Por- tughese himself was instrumental in a few of the developments. As direc- tor of the station between 1992 and 1996, Portughese oversaw a major transition from part of the govern- ment apparatus to a company in its own right: still government-owned, but no longer parastatal, and there- fore theoretically at an arms' length from the political establishment. "I was entrusted with the migration process," Portughese recalls almost exactly 25 years later, adding that it was a politically sensitive operation at the time. "This included negotia- tions with the General Workers Un- ion. PBS had hundreds of employees. We had to restructure it to operate with fewer people, but this was done without any major social conflicts…" Subsequent restructuring exercises have left the station with fewer peo- ple still, and Portughese concedes that lack of resources remains a fun- damental issue. But the current staff complement, he insists, does not fea- ture among the main problems. "Our complement corresponds to our current needs. Obviously as we go along there will be specific re- quirements that will have to be ad- dressed. Any operations will occa- sionally need 'surgical' resources… to give you an example, with the launch of our website we now need people with specific web-oriented technical capabilities. But this is primarily a company; our decisions are taken in the interests of retaining competitiv- ity and productivity…" This does not necessarily corre- spond with public perceptions of the national station, which has all too often been viewed (not unlike other government-owned companies) as a means of accommodating well-con- nected political favourites. "I can't comment about anything that happened before my time, but since being appointed chairman a year ago there has not been any in- terference. Not in editorial decisions, and not in operational management either. I was not given any hidden or public agenda to follow. The only thing I was given was a copy of the mission statement…" But that, he quickly adds, goes only for government. Political interfer- ence in other senses of the word is in fact a daily occurrence. But before getting to the ongoing issues between PBS and the Broadcasting Authority, I am curious to know what guar- antees the station's independence from government in financial terms. It's all very well to say that govern- ment doesn't interfere directly; but if government holds the purse strings, surely it can still influence operations simply by threatening to cut funding. How autonomous is PBS, anyway? "Government does give a sum of money to cover part of our public service obligations, but it is nowhere near enough. We struggle to raise the remaining 70% of our financial needs through advertising revenue…" Meanwhile, Portughese reminds me that the other pressures are all still there. PBS now operates in com- petition with not just RAI, but every station available on the combined resources of cable and satellite TV. But its chairman has good reason to be upbeat in spite of everything. It is with visible pride that he lets slip a few details from the latest – unpub- lished at the time of the interview – Broadcasting Authority survey, which reconfirms TVM as the mar- ket leader par excellence, occasion- ally reaching the scarcely believable peak audience of 150,000 viewers. Overall, the station accounts for 33% of the entire market, including all foreign stations. Compared only to local competitors, it is miles ahead and steadily gaining momentum. "PBS news viewership has grown by 4.4% over last year," Portughese con- tinues with evident satisfaction. How does he account for this suc- cess? "I think that, in spite of every- thing, these figures confirm that we have credibility with the Maltese public. I would like to think this is down to our capabilities as a team." With specific reference to the 8 o' clock news – the PBS' 'cavallo di battaglia', as Portighese describes it – he points out how the edito- rial standards of news reporting has evolved since the days when every government movement, no matter how trivial, had to be given promi- nence. "It is no longer a case that we feature any old press release we are given. We still receive press releases, but we will only run them as a story if there is a news angle worth report- ing. Everything gets discussed: why should we run this piece of news? Where's the public interest? How does it fit in with our mission state- ment, with our declared ethos, and so on? We also apply rigorous ethical standards in journalism. Our news reports report the news. They do not comment on it." This has not stopped the station from receiving its fair share of criti- cism and complaints over political imbalance. Portughese admits these have shown no sign of relenting. "We have had 30 official complaints brought against us, but the number of times we have been found guilty was zero. Besides, no one can really argue with these figures. We wouldn't have audiences peaking at 150,000 view- ers, if the constant complaints about imbalance were true." Political interference, he continues, is more of a regular distraction than a reflection of wider discontent with the local station. "You'd have to be naïve to think there isn't interfer- ence. Political parties always want more. But that is not why we exist. We are not a noticeboard for every- one to have their say." Do the complaints only come from political parties? "No. There are al- ways a number of complaints from outside politics… mostly NGOs or some other special interest group. Recently the hunters' lobby com- plained about an imbalance in Animal Diaries, a TV show hosted by Moira Delia. We have had com- plaints by band clubs about our cov- erage of a local festa… that sort of thing. When these are justified we take the necessary action; people do have a right to complain if they feel they've been unfairly treated." On a separate level, PBS is also of- ten criticised (though not through any official mechanism) for wasting taxpayers' money… with the most- frequently cited example being its decision to participate annually in the Eurovision Song Contest. The festivity is organised by the Europe- an Broadcasting Union, and techni- cally it is the state broadcaster (and not the state itself) which actually chooses to take part at its own ex- pense, and also organises the local Song for Europe festival. Portughese smiles as he is reminded of this annual controversy. "I honest- ly don't know where people get their information from. The Eurovision, a waste of taxpayers' money? It is one of our biggest financial successes. This year we couldn't even accom- modate all the people who wanted to take out advertising. And it doesn't cost the taxpayer a cent, either. All expenses are paid for through adver- tising revenue." One thing people don't complain about, he tells me, is the World Cup. "This year we competed for and won the rights to show all 64 games on TVM for absolutely free. Not even RAI shows all the games… they tend to focus only on the Italy matches." Portughese is reluctant to divulge the exact amount paid for this privi- lege [note: an Independent article es- timated the cost at €65,000… which provoked considerable mirth at the PBS offices], but describes it as a "six-digit" figure. "Again, this comes out of our advertising revenue. It does not cost government a penny." Yet the perception remains: no matter how often PBS tries to cor- rect the inaccuracies, that its output is heavily subsidised by government. Some of this perception may be down to popular confusion between the Broadcasting Authority – which is a Constitutional body entirely in- dependent of the station – and PBS. By Raphael Vassallo maltatoday, SUNDAY, 25 MAY 2014 Between the hammer and the anvil POLITICAL INTERFERENCE Who is You'd have to be naïve to think there isn't interference. Political parties always want more. But that is not why we exist. We are not a noticeboard for everyone to have their say