>> charlie: welcome to our program. tonight everything you've wanted to know about the bbc and more with mark thompson, the director general. >> it has been a great addition to the family of broadcasting. they were innovative, they brought sports that people couldn't get before. sky is a success story which i think has improved british television. i don't think what they do right now is a problem. i think there are questions for the government and for the regulators to look at when you have so much power vested, i mean sky, in terms of its revenue is already bigger than bbc and will get much much bigger because of the way in which paid tv is moving in that country. >> charlie: mark thompson for the hour, next.

or maybe you want to help when the unexpected happens. whatever you want to do, members project from american express can help you take the first step. funding provided by the following: captioning sponsored by rose communications from our studios in new york city, this is charlie rose.

>> charlie: mark thompson is here. he is director general and editor-in-chief of the british broadcasting corporation known as the bbc. it is the largest broadcasting organization in the world. it provides news and sports and entertainment via television and radio and the internet. it has about 240 million viewers globally and broadcasts in 33 languages. its news operation comprises 72 bureaus employing 250 correspondence and 2000 local freelancers. here's a look at some of what they do. >> some of the most power nations believe iran is building nuclear message and outrageous words were indeed betraying the people. >> i don't take war lightly. if they take those constructive steps and serious negotiations, then not only should there not be a threat of war, but there

also won't be the sanctions that are currently in place. >> a passing priest stopped to administer the last rites. then as the crowd watched, a man came to identify the victim. the his grandson just seven years old. >> with the cooperation of guatemala authorities, american government scientists came here to the country's biggest prison and mental asylum and deliberately infected nearly 700 inmates and patients with syphilis and gonorrhea. >> today they're learning how to deliver a baby safely. 18 year old is her the mother of two sons. she's here because her village chose her, her family gave permission. in this conservative culture this is as close as they get to the delivery room. >> charlie: they're well-known for their drama and entertainment wings. here's a look at some of those

productions. >> i should have known nothing about worlds with no morals and no responsibilities and not just glimpse. you took my faith with your hands and pushed it up against the window. >> we should have pushed it through. [laughter] >> and then reclines. >> can you just say what's on your mind and i'm getting it down >> are you sure you're getting it down, it's not going to be pretty. >> statistics, field tests, photographs. he invented them. >> invented them. >> yes, a few months ago. >> maybe he should listen. >> sshh. >> charlie: at the helm since

2004 she's seen a dramatic down sizing. at the same time the company expanded and launched media adventures. i'm pleased to have him here at this table for the first time. welcome. >> hi. >> charlie: why are you in the united states. >> i gave a talk yesterday about public broadcasting to in a sense kind of symposium of -- >> charlie: broadly speaking as what. >> i was talking about the bbc but talking in the context about national public radio and pbs in this country and the direction of travel. >> charlie: in which way. >> it could be more united, could get more resource and could do more and other ways they could potentially learn from the model of the bbc. one of the basic points is the bbc arrived at a moment in time in the united kingdom, it's a

different country, different traditions. and it's very hard to replicate this model i think in the united states. >> charlie: came in 1922. >> what happened is as part of history there was a giant venture of wireless manufacturers who realized they needed some programs if they were going to sell wireless sets. a few years layer, this is the big idea, it was decided by the government that actually broadcasting could be a great force for social and cultural good and the british broadcasting company became the british broadcasting corporation with the royal charter and a middle and very very high values, enlightenment values about what should be happening. the idea is that everyone who wanted broadcasting would pool together money, be a compulsory charge, the money would be pooled and high quality programs would then be available for everyone no matter how rich or poor. >> charlie: and paid for by a license two by everybody who had a television set. >> sure. >> charlie: that's been standard in the history of the bbc. >> that's been the core, that's

been the core funding of the bbc right along. it surprises me, well two surprises. firstly british public continues to be very supportive. nobody loves taxes but support for the license fee, this compulsory charge for having now a television set. >> charlie: how do they measure how much you pay. does everybody pay the same. >> everyone pays the same thing. if you're 75 years old or older, the government pays for it. so from the age 75 above. every other household, each household pays for it and in return for that, the average person in britain is across tv and radio and the web is continuing more than 19 hours a week of bbc programming, 19 hours a week. >> charlie: what is the cost per year in terms of american dollars. >> about $230 a year. >> charlie: $230 a year, commercial free. >> yes. and obviously it's also enabled

the bbc to be a not for profit organization in a way can put its values. we can concentrate on making news, for example, which is unashamedly serious. and because if you like the spread of our programs and the fact we haven't been as well as news, 80% of the uk population are reached by bbc news every week. and with serious stuff. the night over our recent election when there was a night of high drama when the new coalition government was being formed, bbc won our main tv network something like 11 or 12 million people. more than, you know, probably more than half of the available television viewing audience were with us on bbc one as we had a camera on downing street. microphone comes out in the street, gordon brown comes out, dana cameron is stuck in traffic somewhere. you go to the palace or the prime minister. this drama unfolded and we had a

large part of the country with us. and that sense of an entire country connected and sharing the same experience is i still think a magical thing. it's still in some ways in a digital age, it feels even more precious than maybe it did in the 1920's. >> charlie: you have an interesting background coming out of oxford married an american. at the bbc, you came up primarily through the news end. >> yes. >> charlie: you were producer and editor of some of the major broadcasts. >> yes. >> charlie: do you think you look at the job differently than someone who might have come up from the business side? >> our tradition is that we have people with creative background. >> charlie: who run the bbc. >> who run the bbc. one of the things that gives some of my colleagues in a sense the authority is we've done all the jobs. i mean the kids who see this studio with the clipboard, i've done those jobs. i've been the director, i've

been the film director, i've run news programs and actually subsequently got involved in many other kinds of programs. in a way, we all, we're a bit like an academic institution, more like a university which feels most comfortable when, you know, the president or the dean and someone who is an act digit rather than someone with a distant background. >> charlie: you are here to make a speech. are you also selling the bb. are you looking for partnerships. >> of course. we have many many business contacts. one of the things the bbc does at home we're broadcasting in this environment which is paid for by the licensee and which people receive without adverse or sponsorship. but internationally one of our jobs is to make sure that these programs which have already been made for the british audience potentially if we could get money by selling to other broadcasters or come up with the right partnerships, that's money we can also apply. >> charlie: a more revenue

source makes more programs. >> we have a commercial arm which has got a turnover of one and-a-half billion dollars a year. i say make the contacts and have the conversations which are about furthering our business interests. >> charlie: how does bbc america fit into this. >> well bbc america is the first chance we've had really in our history to get our program directly under our own brand to the american public. >> charlie: so they were run previously on either commercial networks. >> they might or for pbs. sometimes they'll run a first run on bbc america. we hope over time that cable channel well get more and more original high quality programs that haven't been seen anywhere else. we have like any broadcaster, we think hard about what's the best way of getting the most value out of this intellectual property and sometimes it's production sometimes it's selling to a big network and sometimes it's running our own radio station. >> charlie: and sometimes repurposing as people do all the

time. but there is this question. why can't we see more bbc stuff? for example a lot of your really wonderful doubt -- documentary programs we can't access here. >> there are often problems. but i think it's true that also the american cable market is a market where we would love to launch more cable channels in this country for a variety of reasons, that's typical for us to do. one of the things we hope to do, we've launched a very successful web-based product which is called the bbci class. it's a way on the web and mobile phones and devices, ipads and so forth. you can catch up with the broadcasts within seven days and instantly start listening to them. we want the international version. >> charlie: when will that

be. will it be a digital box. >> it will be an application on the web, it will be an application on an ipad. it will be something we hope we can provide for mobile phones and we'll launch it next year, 2011. >> charlie: the world in the future in terms of digital is the question is applications. it's social networks and applications, yes? >> i think browsers and search engines like google are going to go and play a very important role as well but certainly for a tv-like experience where in the same way you press one button and you get a tv channel, you get bloomberg, bam there you are. aps have this magical quality that you press one button and you have this entire thing opens up. >> charlie: you don't have to go searching for it, there it is. how is that going to dominate. >> i think it will dominate for certain kinds of behavior. back at home you want to relax.

the simpler you can make the way of getting what you want -- >> charlie: if i want to watch the bbc, say, i more likely want to go to an application than i wanted to go to my, to my pc, say, or my computer and access it that way. >> think about college students in this country who is interested in a international story, what's happening inside china and wants to use the bbc website to as a resource. i think they'll use it as much -- >> charlie: will that be an application or will that be ... >> i think it will still be the use of browsers. that's the kind of lean forward and use the keyboard. i think the way of trying to think through this very bewildering digital revolution is human behaviors, how the people use small devices, what are they good for and how do they use devices like laptops where there's a lot of

inputting. what is the experience the entertainment experience of sitting at home with a big screen, high quality pictures, high definition 3-d surround sound. and in these mood states is a way of putting it, what's the easiest way of accessing what you want. in a way quite a lot of economics, what feels right and what feels easy and convenient. >> charlie: that is your challenge today, isn't it. >> it's the challenge of everyone in our business. and we've been, i mean bbc is big enough that we have scientists, we have engineers, behavioral scientists and we can try and think through these. but i mean your point perhaps the core of it must be right which is public at large in the uk but around the world they want simple clear, effective, reliable way of getting the cunt

tent -- content that they want. like the iplayer, there was a series of if you literally prestlessed the picture of the program within two or three seconds you were watching that program. no complexity, just press it and it stops playing and you're enjoying yourself. >> charlie: the story of technology is to find some need often that people didn't know that they even wanted, add to their life, enhance their life, give them options they didn't have and make it as easy to access as possible. >> the really big thing which i think the whole world media is still grappling with is there's an extraordinary unfolding story about social activity on digital media. mobile phones, the wait they took off. >> charlie: personal communication and sharing and everything else. >> i mean all of that. the social media networks like facebook, i mean the extra way in which mobile devices are changing people's lives. and of course when people use these devices, what they talk about often is about television and other forms of media.

and we're playing with this consent with social discovery of media. i mean how, how people will be using facebook and those networks to exchange, share, recommend and engage with media. any media company thinking about what's the best way of letting people use those, not just the application but how do you make sure that this show is, it's got a life in all this. it's already on twitter and facebook and so forth. people on in digital thought it was going to be an isolating thin, the people would be on their own. >> charlie: rather than going out and sitting in front of a screen. >> it's a party, it's kind of a noisy party. >> charlie: also come to grips with the consequences of it in terms of what it does in terms of invasion of privacy, what it does in terms of tragedy too where someone is seen in a way that causes them great pain.

all of those kind of things in technology opening up to new kinds of things that we never projected. >> the virtual world sometimes has very real consequences. things that happen here because of information and about people can have very powerful consequences. >> charlie: the news today in britain, the news today in the united states is a budgetary questions, looking at huge debt and looking at deficits and looking at new government which is talking about an austerity budget. >> yes, very different approach in the uk from the administration here in the u.s. where fear of upsetting this rather fragile recovery means that u.s. government is not addressing the deficit at the moment and there's a big debate about who is right. but in the uk the assumption by the new coalition government is that steps need to be taken now to get public spending down, under control and balancing the

public books. >> charlie: how successful do you believe as someone with i don't remember kind of journalistic experience in explaining that. he clearly knows there's going to be protests as there are about pension reform and everything else and welfare benefits. >> yes. >> charlie: and he clearly knows that but i guess his bet is what that if you talk common sense to the british people? >> i have to be a little bit careful here but it seems to me -- >> charlie: why do you have to be careful. >> because i as the editor and chief of the bbc have to think very carefully about the exact way and everybody else in my organization talks about politics. but it seems to me what we're seeing in the uk is the coalition government which is exactly the tactical approach of trying to in a sense draw the public into a kind of common sensical what they would take to be a common sensical conversation about the national household and what needs to be done to balance the books.

and a call from mr. calendar today what you can do for your country in a sense that everyone may have to make a sacrifice but if we pull together we can get through this. it's rather as if we have a coalition government which is a government of, you know, proposed national unity during a kind of economic emergency. what remains to be seen is whether that, that approach will continue to earn the support of the public when individual unpalatable decisions start being made and people start looking at individual benefits. there was a big fuss this week about child benefits. about 60 or $70,000 -- >> charlie: with the benefits. >> the benefits they've been getting. this is the british middle class has some potentially unpleasant truths about the kind of benefits they have. now we don't know and i'm certainly not in the business of

physical kind of toothsaying whether or not this government will continue to win that argument when the reality was what's happening. but i have to say we're in that early stage of the government's life where my sense is although there's a grown debate, there's the leader of the labor party and i think we'll see our position parties taking the fight to the government strongly. there's an element of a honeymoon period. crucially george os borne has yet to stand up. he's standing up in a few days. >> charlie: making a speech. >> to make a speech saying what's going to be cut and that is an absolutely, it's going to be a critical day for the government. >> charlie: we interviewed him and he said that's going to be when the rubber meets the ground when i have to tell them exactly where it's going to come. there is this too that sort of creates a little bit of a flare. bbc representative perhaps including you, you know, with a

commitment to impartiality met with mr. osborne, was it, to look at the kinds of government -- >> well, there was a lot of misreporting. i went to see some officials in number 10 which is the residents and office of the prime minister. i have to say i go and see every prime minister and every prime minister's officials and the leader of the opposition and leaders of the parties as well and all i would say is that we talked to politicians, we sometimes listen to concerns about our coverage. that doesn't, we don't do what televisions say. the bbc i think has got as good a record about being impartial and independent of government as any broadcaster or any newspaper i know anywhere in the world and we're very very focused on maintaining that reputation. our trust, we get very high rankingses.

our trust is based on the fact that audiences around a around the world believe we are independent and we are. >> charlie: in the context of both the entertainment business and being in the news business and being in the business of public service, which you've all set, is the balance going to shift because of the economic crunch. >> we're in the broadcasting business and the role of the bbc has always been seen literally has been to inform, educate and entertain. entertainment has always been part of the mix but have i to say it's always been a smaller part of the mix. it would have been on commercial tv in this country. over time the proportionment thing has reduced the news and public affairs programming has increased and we've reduced the numbers of for example dramas we bought from hollywood and increased the numbers of dramas and comedies we make ourselves

where there's more of a market failure. there is progressively a reshaping of the bbc around the things that we do best. great program. british programs for children for british children shown without for example is one of the things the bbc really concentrates on. we know parents love that. they love the absence -- they love that the child has something alongside those cartoons which are educational and valuable. so yes, there is a shift towards a more distinctive offering if i can use that word, something which feels more different from the rest of the market. but i have to say it's also a way in which the bbc plays to its strength. this is giving the public what they say they most want from the bbc which is quality and something, things, programs, ideas, talent, they couldn't encounter anywhere else. >> charlie: but john simpson for example, take one example, he worries the bbc is getting out of the habit of documentaries. >> well, i mean john's worked

with in the square, i've stood in tiennamen square with him covering events there. john is actually entitled to worry. we are a colossal supporter of documentary. we're not a british documentary, we have a strong story though which puts money into documentary, american documentary, documentaries from around the world. and the amount of for example arts and music we put on our television, the hours have massively increased over the five or ten years. with our digital channels in the uk we can do much more justice to the whole world of documentary, arts and music. and of course there will always be people who want more. but we have a very -- >> charlie: you're saying i think the balance is right and i think we're doing as much news programming and as much documentaries and as much public surveys. >> nobody says we're not doing enough news. we're doing more news than we have in any point of our history.

>> charlie: are you doing too much. >> there are certainly people in the uk who worry about the strength and scale and popularity of our website. i would say that the bbc -- >> charlie: websites. >> they do say this too much. my view is the public wants news and a modern public doesn't want news on one medium or news at one part of the day. they want access to news at any time that they have the fancy to catch up with it or when an event is happening and they want to deliver in whatever is the most convenient way. and bbc news in the uk and as far as possible around the world is something we try and offer on multiple devices, radio, tv, the web, phones, ipads and so forth. and try to make it relevant in parts of the uk and suited to

the way the website is presented. we are trying to use the website in this country and trying to make sure that the website that they access really works for them. >> charlie: are you cutting back on the website at all because of economic considerations or are there protest considerations. >> economic but also a sense that after a period of growth, our website is an enormous website. i don't think anyone knows how many millions of pages there are. >> charlie: and popular in terms of news. >> it's very popular but also actually for information and sort of culture and so forth. there is a strong case of focusing it, news is example, our coverage of sports for example, our coverage of history and science where we really can do something which is world class exceptional. so we're going to try and trim and focus the website, not to make it less popular. in a way it's a more focused

proposition. i think it's actually more popularity. there's nothing i would want to say to anyone using the bbc website but a sense on strengthening it and making it better actually. >> charlie: as you travel around the globe as i have the great fortune to do and you follow what people are saying and doing and you follow even the lecture. >> yes. >> charlie: it looks like the bbc and the person of you and the person of james murdock are sort of warily watching each other and you say about them my god if they own all of the big sky b, the murdock course, news corp. which they're trying to do, plus all the newspapers, there's a dominant force in britain like nobody's ever been. that's what you say. >> as a matter of being true, charlie, as well and it's a concentration that wouldn't be allowed i believe in this

country. >> charlie: the bbc is too strong, they're too powerful, they're too arrogant, whatever he says, right? >> that's a fair reflection. >> charlie: in fact, that's pretty much where it is, right? what do you think you worry about with respect to mr. murdock. >> well firstly, if you, i'm sure you did read it -- i would say that big sky b which is significantly owned and perhaps one day will be fully owned by news corporation. this is a big payoff in the uk. a satellite director home satellite, sky has been a great addition to the family of british broadcasting and they're innovative, they brought quality to bear, they brought sports that people couldn't get before. sky is a success story which i think has improved british television. so i don't think scig big sky b does right now is a problem. i think there are questions for government and for the regulators to look at when you have so much power vested. i mean sky in terms of its

revenue is already bigger than bbc and will get much much bigger because of the way in which paid tv is moving in that country. you have a company which owns that also has a straightforwardly dominant position in terms of national newspapers in the country and by one of british's biggest publishers, harpercollins. there are questions about how you insure plurality. it's not saying that the question can't be satisfactorily answered and it's not saying that big successful companies should be punished. on the contrary but i would say the thing like the bbc, it's a public institution which is in all sorts of ways held to account and where -- >> charlie: how is it held to account. >> well, there's a governing body. >> charlie: that you report to. >> which i report to. by the way all of the director generals get fired. this is not very solid.

they changed the management over the history of the bbc. >> charlie: mostly over controversy or not. >> mostly over controversy, that's true. but there is regular scrutiny of whether the bbc is living up to its public purposes, about the quality of it. >> charlie: are you saying there's no scrutiny of big sky b in all the newspapers that murdock owns, there's no constitute knee or questioning of that because -- scrutiny or questioning of that because they question -- >> the accountability that the bbc is subject to is, as it were, we can be told to do things by our government body. we can be told to stop services, we can be told to change our direction of travel. so if a complaint is made for example from a member of the

public about a particular news item which we've got wrong or which this person claims and the bbc trusts the governing body believes that that complaint is justified, we have to change our journalism, you know, except that we made a mistake. >> charlie: the governing body could say whoever they are could say we've gotten some political pressure here, we're concerned about the way you're doing this and they could say stop covering those stories the way you're covering them. you are on the wrong track and we don't approve of it so stop it. >> the process, this process -- but the process of considering the program itself happens as it were in public. there are opportunities that give evidence, the findings are published. there's a complete system in place so that, you know, if the bbc wants to launch a new service, there's a process to decide and an external regulator equivalent of the fcc has to look at the potential market

impact of this service. there's a whole process for working out whether anything the bbc does might damage plurality. >> charlie: have you seen evidences that the news corp. for example jims murdock and his son is abusing their power. >> the debate in the uk at the moment is simply a debate whether the government should begin a process of looking at the question -- >> charlie: i know what the debate is, i'm asking as you look as the head of the bbc, do you see such abuse of power that it worries you and you want to bring it to the public's attention. >> more specifically what i was saying in edin borough was that i certainly think the proposal to take a hundred percent ownership of b sky b for the reasons we already talked about raises questions which should be looked at. now the right thing to say is, when the competent authorities look at it, they can gather the

evidence, they can look at whether there isn't a problem or there was a problem. >> charlie: what is exhibit a that you want them to look at. >> we should look at whether the combination, the loss of independent directors on b sky b the connection between the editorial -- >> charlie: i have a share of it so -- >> currently there are independent directors and the editorial direction of big sky b and news is separate from the management and direction of travel of their newspapers and so forth. if the two were combined, there might be a loss, a significance loss of plurality in our media market. now in the end, for cable, the relevant minister decides whether he wants to refer this and then there's a process which again will be an open process, probably of the fcc equivalent looking at the evidence and deciding whether or not it was a problem. so i think what we're saying is

we're not saying there's been a crime committed here. what we're saying is given the scale of the potential ownership in the uk media, there's a strong case for looking at it systematically and deciding whether or not anything needs to be done to address. >> charlie: can i repeat what i think i hear you saying. it's not that they've done anything wrong, it's just that there's a potential of an abuse of power. we do not believe or say they abuse the power. >> i think that's a good way of 3509ing it. >> charlie: fair enough. look here, this is where they -- >> i think that's a good point. >> charlie: -- not acted in the public interest. >> i would not want to see anything done which would stop the continued potential of b sky b to go on to add to british television. what i said however and it was actually the principal point i made in my speech was that i would like to see b sky b spending more money on british content. at the moment a is he very small protorture of the small revenues

they get goes into british talent, ideas and programs. >> charlie: is he saying that because he just wants to jab them or does he really care whether they create british content or not. is it a debating point or is it something that in the end he would -- >> what happens is britain has had an outstanding television tradition of real quality and not just bbc, itv and channel 4. >> charlie: some people -- it used to be channel 4 by the way. >> i was. >> charlie: some people have argued that there was at different times an independent television more clever, better programming coming out of those places than the bbc. the bbc lost its edge at times and maybe that's -- >> i would agree with that. i would agree with that, i would agree that the creative competition is good for audiences and it's good for the bbc to have other people out there and i think some of the best programming we ever made quite often it must be the

american audiences see who is made by the bbc and made by others. >> charlie: if it comes from britain we think it's bbc. what do we know. >> it's not such a bad thing architecturally. but what's happened is because of the mobile of the funded broadcast is not unlike the u.s. networks has become compromised and difficult. the amount of money that companies like i the. v and channel 4 can put into programs has diminished. now all the while sky's revenues have been growing and growing and growing. they haven't been putting as much money in. so although -- >> charlie: what are they doing with the money as their revenues grow rather than putting it back in programming they're doing what, to expand. >> and i mean, you know, sky, itv is the principal commercial broadcast in the uk. sky we think spends more on its marketing budget than itv can now spend making programs in the market. so i'm not suggesting that sky's business model on its head -- >> charlie: it's a private enterprise. you want to dictate how much

money they spend, you want the government to say we want you to spend 40% of every dollar you make profit, profit on public service programming. would you like to see that. >> we already have in the uk for some of the other commercial broadcasters, itv is a good example, they have to spend 35% of their money on production. so there will be another revolution in this country as was suggested heres not completely unknown in the uk. >> charlie: you think it's a good idea. it would be a good idea to apply the same thing you apply to itv. >> it's by far the best route if sky simply as itv did over the years decided that in the end it made sense to play a significant role in our own creative industries in the country rather

than relying on imported programs and on premier exclusive spowrts rides to spend some money on british drama and comedy. by far the best thing would be if they did it in a sense because that's part of what it is to be a great british broadcast. >> charlie: why don't they do it do you think. >> i think in the end, you ask the question you should probably put it to my colleagues at b sky b. i'm not convinced it's the wrong thing to do, they will be very successful at it. >> charlie: mr. murdock said about you and bbc, he said your ambitions were chilling and that your on-line ambitions had to be dealt with. >> i mean, i think -- >> charlie: are you saying the government -- >> our sin here is we have a website which people really like to use. bbc news -- >> charlie: you think he's just jealous. >> it's not a new thing it started in 1920's, it has a global reputation, it has a very big reputation in the uk. each period of the british public are using it.

and not surprisingly nowadays they want to get access to it on the web as well. although i accept that, particularly on the web, we think hard about what it is we do. what's the offer from the bbc and why is the bbc doing it and how does it live up to our values. by inform and educate particularly part of the equation. so i think it's fair to say let's make sure what we do on the web really feels like it should be the bbc doing it. but i think it would be madness for the bbc to say do you know what we're not going to have a website or we're not going to have news on our website. >> charlie: it would be mad, i'm here to tell you. here's something, i want to just throw this right down the middle because it's of interest to me. this is a quote from you. if you do my job, you're always looking at the heavenly city of the bbc as it could be, should be and the whole time you're wrestling the realities of a big

noisy complex hetero generous complex to a city of god. now there's a man with the command of the language. give me the spirit of what you meant by that. because i'm -- >> if you look at the royal charter which sets out the scene. the public person of the bbc they read like the declaration of independences. we fill the public space with programs which enrich individual's lives, educate people bring them together inform the national debate so we have a more perfect dempsey, give them skills and give them the kind of entertainment which is wholesome and brings communities together. it's a rather naive but wonderful set of ambition which i completely believe in. and of course that's what you aim for, and by the way, all of these ambitions i think still make more senses in a complex

digital world than they did in the world we inhabit it 25 years ago. getting there of course with real human beings and the whole discomputation world of creative talents, that's quite a challenge. >> charlie: is it under siege because of the current economic circumstances. >> well, you show me an organization which at some level isn't under siege in the current economic circumstances. in other words, many people, many of my colleagues -- >> charlie: under siege is a powerful thing. that's not a question of having to make hard decisions. under siege is more than a hard decision. >> sure. >> charlie: you've laid off 25% of your staff. >> sure. >> charlie: you cut your own salary. >> yes. the bbc is in so many ways in the middle of british national life. >> charlie: it is the most important british institution as someone said. >> well, i think once you take the government out of the equation, it is one of the most

salient organizations and one of the most argued about, one of the most controversy organizations in britain, definitely. and part of the price of that of course is that when there is a war about values, what is appropriate to say and do on television and radio in terms of comedy, strong language, sexual content, religious images. we have enormous roust about jerry springer. probably the last person in an attempt to prosecute me for blasphemy and nearly ended up in the clink. >> charlie: what did you do to deserve this wealth. >> so the bbc is so often in the middle of these rounds. last year we have a right wing party called the british national party. they did rather well in some european elections last year. we believe that the bbc, the

level of support they achieved at the ballot box meant that we should have them every week but once in a while we should invite them to our big television political discussion programs question time. thousands of people outside the bbc protesting it and letting these extremists on to the air. so in a sense almost everything the bbc does places in the middle of public debate. there's nothing quite like it. >> charlie: it's part of the national life and it's part of everybody's life. >> the day we're not part of that is to get worried about the future of the bbc. but the economics of the bbc right now we have real challenges. the bbc will service the global radio operation of the bbc. it's directly in scope for the george osborne's comprehensive spending review. i'm not saying it's going to be singled out but it's paid for by

the uk government as a grant in aid by government. it's not paid by the license fee. it's in scope for that review and we will find out in the next ten days or so whether, what's going to happen to its funding. it's going to be tough, certainly yes and by how much. that comes up right away. next year the coalition government will turn to the issue of the next five years at the level of the license fee. so there's, there will be a big debate next year. >> charlie: they will make the argument it ought to be increased or decreased, the license fee. >> i'll take a wild guess here. it's unlikely in a broader climate of public spending in the uk the government's going to be arguing for a big increase. >> charlie: that would obviously be the answer. on the other hand -- >> the thing about the bbc is -- it remains very popular and it remains a very good way of investing into the creative industries. a large part of what the bbc, that license is large part goes straight out to the bbc in

commercial contracts for independent producers and talents and the cross sections and so forth. in some ways, you know, we go -- every five years. will the bbc be under acute pressure in terms of its budget, in terms of its scale and scope, its boundaries and market impact, definitely yes. that's definitely part of our future. but what i want to say is that idea, the idea of what the bbc can do is still very strong in the country. increasingly strong around the world. when i travel around the world, people hunger for what the bbc does for its value. it's probably stronger now. >> charlie: as you say the bbc is in the forefront of national consciousness and therefore controversy. what's been the most embarrassing thing for you at the bbc in terms of its actions over the past.

>> two things. embarrassing -- >> charlie: regret. >> i certainly felt embarrassed about one incident which was about a documentary, one of those documentaries about the queen. it wasn't even something we broadcast. there was a promotional video made for a press launch of this documentary where for reasons known the producers who made it flipped a couple of images and implied the queen had stormed out of the photo shoot with annie liebowitz. essentially the bbc, it was okay with the queen. the fact we hadn't broadcast doesn't mean it didn't cause enormous amount of anger and outrage. it was an unforgivable thing to do. for me it was so frustrating and utterly unnecessary piece of nonsense which was damaging to our reputation and you know, not surprisingly grow grave defense to many people. but what's interesting is by far

the most traumatic experience i've had in this job was when one of our correspondents was kidnapped and abducted in gaza. partly because perhaps i come from there -- when you're going through the process of many many weeks of not knowing whether it's going to be possible to get that person released and safe. and kind of questions the kind of debates you have to have about what you should do. that makes issues like the queen feel, you know, embarrassing and certainly undesirable. but it puts them in context. >> charlie: what was the relationship between tony blair and the bbc? >> well, i mean it's interesting. the blare government in many ways was a strong supporter of the bbc, some of the expansion in the bbc was possible because of the licensing settlement with the blare government settle on

the bbc in 1999. i believe that tony blair after he was in power remains a really strong supporter of public service broadcasting and the bbc. however it's also fair to say that the iraq war and in particular the rather arcaneness but the particular incident that happened in the bbc's reporting of the iraq war, this is the incident which led to the government saying to david kelly committing suicide and which led to the departure of my predecessor and indeed chair of the governing body also left at the same time. i think it's fair to say that that changed the relationship between that government and the bbc perhaps not surprisingly you might say. and it became a more distant, more brittle relationship after that. and although i came in after

that, i think that did color the relationship. i have to say they continued in many ways to be very supportive of the bbc but it felt like there was -- i felt as if there was a bargain. >> charlie: i was just in london when tony blair, to interview him when his book was released. it's flying off the book shelves, it's a best seller. >> it's remarkable of its kinds. i don't think there's ever been a book of political memoirs. >> charlie: there were protests when he tried to go make appearances at book stores. it remains such a controversy figure yes they can't get enough of the book to read. it's the same thing. >> i think that's right. i would say that to many many people in the united kingdom maybe it's true here in america as well that's kind of unfinished business in iraq and the decision to go to iraq in

2003-2004. and in a way people, we've had multiple public inquiries, there's another queer -- >> charlie: the mayor testified before that. >> there's been a successive series of attempts to find out what happened, to explain what happened and i think it's very interesting. we did an interview on the bbc with andrew mar with tony blair and again many many more people than i would have predicted. i was involved in arranging that interview. >> charlie: you were involved in arranging it meaning the director general of the bbc. >> i'm editor-in-chief and sometimes i'm the one that goats phoned up. >> charlie: did you place the call to tony blair and say look i think this will be a great idea and andy mar is the right guy to do it. >> i think someone phoned me and i think that would be -- >> charlie: did you do some sort of bridge building before

tony blair agreed to do this. >> no. >> charlie: it was in his interest to sell the book. >> it was a practical question about whether we would be interested in doing the interview at that point in publication. >> charlie: why would you not have been interested in the prime minister and the leading organization in the country wouldn't be interested. >> that's why we did the interview. >> charlie: but you had to get involved. >> one thing about my job is in a way which i think would surprise others, i get involved in editorial matters of the bbc most days of the week. absolutely, i mean i'll see something which i think we might want to change or somebody would ask me a question. sometimes it will be the magazine publishing these -- >> charlie: how much do -- whether we should cast this actor in this historical piece.

is this yours. >> i've been involved -- >> charlie: you've been involved in the conversation for sure. >> in my previous jobs i have been involved but no, no. my role with most of the content of the bbc, the right way for me to throw in my worth is after it's been broadcast and kind of with next time in mind, it's real time and sometimes i get stuck in real time. >> charlie: from whence you came. let me just close with this. the future of the bbc and the context of two big things of which they may pea connected. one is that we have seen, you know, a sort of new global aware, i wish there was a better way to express that. power shifting to the east and you've got the rise of different kinds of news organizations in china and in india and other places. but the political and economic power going there, rising political power, clear economic power. we have a world of technology offering unparallel opportunities to do things. give me your sense of where are we going to be and what does the

challenge for news organizations and does it all come down to how they prepare themselves for the inevitable and ongoing digital revolution. >> my view is this. firstly today it's bottle folks where in the hotel room, it's over. there will be a vast vast range of choices. imagine going into a gigantic mobile, the vast vast number. and so those who will succeed are those media players i believe the bbc is one of them and will remain one of them. we're very clear for what they stand for and who are, whose proposition is very clear and the proposition is like a brand which stands out in this tower of voices of opinions and ideas. what the bbc stands for is in a way quite british.

it's about a cool dispassionate, fair minded impartial view of the world. it comes out of a western perspective but actually the bbc world services has a way of capturing africa and east asia in a way which is not simply locked into a western perspective. we found a way i would say sometimes not always our american colleagues are somehow floating above that. if we can preserve those values and dedicate ourselves to seriousness actually unashamedly seriousness and to quality, we can stand out in what is going to be very exciting but very very crowdie noisy world. >> charlie: i'm so happy i'm a part of it, aren't you. >> this is the time in broadcasting. >> charlie: it certainly is. thank you very much. >> thank you.