³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ

³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ BLOGS - Roger Mosey
« Previous | Main | Next »

The 2012 story has to be told warts and all

Post categories:

Roger Mosey | 13:49 UK time, Tuesday, 9 March 2010

Here at the ³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ we've the simple aim of being the place where the story of is told. But we're aware of the traps: one is that we bore everyone senseless by swamping the airwaves and peaking too early, and another is that we under-report and under-cook the biggest UK event in our lifetimes.

There's also a risk of being caricatured as cheerleaders because we have such a stake in Olympic broadcasting, and we're conscious that our project team operates largely among people who are utterly consumed by the Olympic year in prospect - which isn't the case for most of our audiences.

So the trick is to make sure the independent journalism is being done now, and the longer-term programmes are being commissioned, ready for the point when "Olympic world" and "real world" coincide.

The Olympic StadiumThe Olympic Stadium nears completion

One of the pleasures in this job is seeing how ideas in this area are already becoming reality.

An example: in the autumn of 2008 I went to a meeting of our Global News teams - the people who run World Service radio, and our internationally-facing websites - to chat about how the main ³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ 2012 project could work with them.

This has a fantastic opportunity in that we're enormously proud of our global broadcasting role and it would be nuts for it not to be a main plank of the ³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ Olympic story, but also the pain that the rights restrictions mean it can share very little of the action when the Games themselves get under way.

So what's essential is that they show imagination and ambition in what the wider story means for the UK and for the world.

At that meeting, Tony Phillips mentioned a thought that the Olympic boroughs already have 'the world' living there: local residents in come from and , from and .

This is part of the theme I've touched on before about the incredible diversity of London in general and the East of the city in particular.

So wouldn't it be interesting to follow their story between now and 2012 - to see how an Olympics based on the concept of "the world in one city" tries to deliver what it promised?

Well, that partly-formed thought of 18 months ago is now a series on the ³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ World Service. Its website is here and you can listen to the most recent episode here.

You'll see that this is interactive too: you can email some of the people featured in the programme, and the excellent "World Have Your Say" has already been to Hackney to connect global audiences to the place where their greatest athletes will compete in two years' time. It's available as a podcast here.

Meanwhile on television last week, audiences in London could see "The Day The Olympics Come to Town" - unfortunately not available on iPlayer because of rights restrictions - which was an imagining of the way London might operate in 2012. It's the latest sign of the way that will follow the Olympic story for audiences in the capital.

I should say that these kind of programmes aren't controlled by the 2012 project team.

It's right that the ³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ journalists operate independently, and I've often said - both now and previously as director of sport - that my personal role is to let programmes like be Newsnight and not to seek to limit our programme-makers' ability to operate freely.

People on Oxford StreetLondon is well known for its diversity


Indeed, what we're doing as a project team in addition to our core planning function is encouraging creativity around the ³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ: helping make connections, liaising with the outside bodies and making sure that there's an attractive range of programmes for all our audiences as Olympic fever grows.

There's another reason too, of course, why there are "" at this stage between the 2012 project and some of our programme-making.

We spend a lot of time with , and our other key partners, and it wouldn't be right for us to hotfoot it from an external planning meeting to feeding the juiciest morsels to our output teams.

There's nothing new about this in that confidentiality and daily news co-exist on a whole range of issues - and it's the same with some long-form documentaries where exclusive filming access can give you scoops which have to be saved until the scheduled transmission time.

The crucial thing that guides us is public interest: the public interest in London 2012 being planned safely and successfully for the UK and the world, and equally non-negotiable the public interest in asking the awkward questions and holding the decision-makers to account.

It can be a difficult tight-rope to walk, but I can't see any other way of doing it - and if the story is to be told properly it has to be "".

Comments

  • Comment number 1.

    I look forward to the 2012 story being told on the ³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ, but now I have to critise the programme "The day the Olympics come to town", it was more negative than positive. Good negative points were raised, but i'm feeling it's quite typical of ³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ London to focus on negatives.
    I think as a society we're very negative, the Olympics is a great time to try and change this, get the people excited.
    By all means, tell the negatives of the Olympics, but don't forget that London is getting alot from these games - the redevelopment of stratford as a prime example.

  • Comment number 2.

    Roger, you make an excellent point - just make sure the negative doesn't get in the way of a rounded approach: all too often one of your colleagues from ³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ London seems to just pump 'doom-and-gloom' stories as if there is no tomorrow.

    On a side note: why has the link to your blog been removed from the front page of the ³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ Sport site? Can you get it restored?

  • Comment number 3.

    Jordan D - thanks for the alert about the link: it's now back!

    To you and gdodds on the question of negatives: I think it's inevitable that ³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ London have to look at many of the challenges for the capital, and it's right their journalists should be holding decision-makers to account on everything from how the traffic will move around to how the legacy will be delivered.

    I had a really interesting discussion with the ³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ London leadership team a month or so ago, and they're fully aware of the need to be fair and balanced overall - while recognising that independent journalism for all their audiences, with a multiplicity of views about the Olympics, is essential within the ³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ portfolio.

  • Comment number 4.

    Oh, I agree ³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ London should be doing that, but it's not all doom and gloom. And I wouldn't want one sided journalism - just it needs to be remembered, there are positives.

  • Comment number 5.

    Independence yes, but always a danger in a bid to prove the point the ³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ goes too far and paints an unfair picture of what is really going on.

    In my view I think amongst the general public the games are viewed much more positively than some quarters of the press would like us to believe.

  • Comment number 6.

    Gdodds and Brekkie: you make very fair points. I have, of course, mentioned here before that the polling evidence is crystal clear: most people in the UK support the Games and want them to be a success. And one reason there actually isn't that much coverage in the UK media at the moment is preparations are (touch wood) going well.

    The overall point for the ³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ remains that we have to get the Olympic balancing act right - and feedback on how we're handling the positives and negatives is a big help.

  • Comment number 7.

    There didn't seem to be any coverage last week of the Olympic Stadium reaching full height, a momentous moment in any build.

  • Comment number 8.

    @Brekkie probably when there's a topping out ceremony (completion of the build but not the fitting out), then there'll be some coverage, I'm guessing.

  • Comment number 9.

    Yep - we want to do some bigger OBs during the construction work that will give people a real insight into what's going on. And in 2011-12 we will, of course, be there for the testing and opening of each of the buildings on the site. (It'll be like Wembley: they have to stage crowd events with increasing sizes to get the appropriate licences.)

  • Comment number 10.

    The most serious problem Britain always has is lying politicians and excitable journalists, I'm afraid.

    For some reason, politicians think that the British will flinch from the truth, so lie their way into a position where they can say: 'well we lied, but it's too late to do anything about it now'.

    And journalists would rather wait for them to be in that position so they can sensationalise post facto rather than brutally hold them to account ex ante through proper due diligence prior to correct decision-making.

    It's why we're in danger of going bust as a nation and most of the rest of the world quietly holds us in contempt about this, although they clearly don't say it quite as bluntly as that, do they?? No, they promote 'free markets' in the UK, closed markets at home and let us push, for example, EPL clubs toward bankruptcy through wage inflation spirals whilst slowly but surely taking control of ownership to subsequently turn it into a closed shop of foreign oligarch owners ruling the football world. Pretty silly, isn't it??

    I simply cannot credit the fact that there is a £450m budget to be found from thin air to make the Olympic Park 'fit for purpose' after the games. For a bid which only won due to its legacy promises, as if legacy 'just happens' without proper funding and planning. Let's be clear here: Paris would be hosting 2012 on basic sporting proposals. It had the infrastructure broadly in place and had a few generations of proper commitment to communal sporting facilities across the board. It simply isn't good enough to say '£9.3bn is non-negotiable' but fail to mention 'oh, but that means the park is unusable afterwards'.

    One can only conclude that other interests wanted that to be so all along and the only question is: 'Why?'

    Well, the words 'West Ham Utd' and 'English Premier League' come to mind, but I'm not saying that's the reason.........I don't know the reason, but it's either gross incompetence or planned mendacity and neither is acceptable in any way, shape or form. I suggest that Lord Coe hoping to succeed Jacque Rogge at the IOC might be a long shot if satisfactory explanations do not emerge fairly quickly.......

    I, as a member of the public, would want truly brutal questioning of Ministers, LOCOG etc etc on this, formally minuting all the lies told all the way down the line, publishing them online and ensuring front page press headlines from the more razor-sharp elements of the Press and I expect some reputations for fiscal probity, political honesty and general competence to hold senior positions in UK life to be somewhere near the plateau experienced by Ben Johnson after his second mind-blowingly stupid drugs escapade at the end of it all.........unless some pretty clear answers come through pretty quickly from those drawing £200k+ a year for their role in all of this...........

    Now if the answer is: 'the price of XXXXX went up so much that the legacy budget was eaten up as a result', the question is: 'WHY did it go up so much?' 'Were contractors being greedy and simply pushing up prices to stop delays, or is there another reason??'

    At the end of the day, £10bn (assuming we add on £450m to £9.3bn and allow £250m for complete incompetence in project planning leading to a 55% budgetary stretching) through 7 years isn't a huge cost for the Olympics project. £1.45bn a year is less than Crossrail, much of that budget is actually decontaminating land, doing transportation infrastructure, building affordable accommodation and there will be construction assets left at the end as well. The true cost is probably £3 - 5bn. I don't know the exact figure, but no doubt Tessa Jowell and Lord Coe can supply one, can't they??

    It's the ridiculous posturing all the time saying how perfect it all is, a refusal to do the sums properly up front and a refusal to get tough with greedy operators, if greed there is, to control costs.

    I think it's just political incompetence myself.

    Selling this as a 25 year project to regenerate a part of the East End with the first 7 years as the upfront phase leading to a one-off sports fiesta isn't exactly hard, if you are a politician of third rate rank.

    It isn't hard to say that the total bill is £10bn, including £5bn of realisable/communally usable assets at the end of if all, but the target is for £3-5bn commercial partnership income.

    It isn't hard to line up sponsors behind closed doors prior to winning who only commit to anything after the bid is won. If you are serious in planning for not only the beauty contest to be won, but for the project to be smooth also.

    It isn't hard to explain to the public that economic cycles may affect the ability of the commercial partners to come on board, since millons of them know that, in recessions, staff get laid off. It's not news, it's grown up reality. FDR somehow managed it 75 years ago, so it's not some Einsteinian political insight you know.........

    Finally, it's not hard to state that what this project is about is a fight for this nation's post-imperial soul. To wean this country off imperial grandeur and restore a sense of national pride within the reality of being a mid-sized 65m nation, not a global behemoth with a population of greater than 1 billion. A way to show that big projects in the world's eye positions Britain well to compete successfully for other big projects in future, in Britain or elsewhere. A way to increase UK skills sets in big project management. A unique opportunity to engage a generation of youngsters in winning on the sporting stage, the biggest one of all. A unique opportunity to rethink how sport fits into our national daily life, how it can be used to rethink education strategies, social inclusion strategies and lots, lots more besides.

    Not to put too fine a point on it, £10bn as a means to free us from US serfdom, EU serfdom and schizophrenic self-destruct mode S+M politics.

    Perhaps that's the last thing that UK politics, sport, media and financial communities want, eh??

  • Comment number 11.

    Do we know if LOCOG are planning to make an event of the Olympic Trials in 2012, using the trials of a few flagship sports like athletics and swimming as a test event and ideally packaging them together so they become a broadcast event in themselves. Of course too from a Team GB point it gives our athletes an advantage of a guaranteed chance to compete in the venues before the games themselves.

  • Comment number 12.

    Brekkie - pretty much every sport and every venue has a test event, yes. And you've then got the additional issue of licensing the new stadiums - so it's like Wembley where they had to do a small then medium-sized then full capacity event to test systems and safety.

    What this means is I suspect most events will be single rather than packaged together, and some we'll want to televise while others will be covered more on the web or in sports news. But we're starting to plan all this now in association with LOCOG and other partners.

  • Comment number 13.

    Well if they are separate I hope ³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ TV covers them - too much in recent years is being palmed off to online and (often non-existent!) news reports, when really in the run up to 2012 you'd be expect Olympic sports to be much more dominant in the schedules. Great we've got the World Track Cycling again this year - but beyond that, a couple of athletics meetings and a bit of swimming and rowing here and there, it seems F1 has swallowed up the budget.

  • Comment number 14.

    Well, our commitment to Olympic Sport --- and to all the build-up to 2012 --- is massive. But not all test events would naturally make network TV since they include World Junior Championships and invitationals.

    It's certainly not "palming them off" online, though. This website gets millions of views each week, and even in Beijing 31% of the UK population were following the Olympics online. That's double the audience for radio, vital though that also is.

    On F1: it was a replacement for the FA contract and has been offering better value-for-money - with some terrific audience figures like last weekend's peak of over 6m. It has had no effect on the Olympic budget.

    But I'll certainly blog more in the coming months about the events planning and how we're working with our partners to deliver some great moments well before the Opening Ceremony.

Ìý

³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ iD

³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ navigation

³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ Â© 2014 The ³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.