Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú

The Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú and the Digital Revolution

The Story of Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú Online and iPlayer

David Hendy

David Hendy

Emeritus Professor, University of Sussex

As with many inventions, the story of how Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú Online and Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú iPlayer came to be launched is not really about the work of one remarkable genius or one single moment of revelation. It’s a tangled tale, with a cast of hundreds and involving a multitude of creative decisions. And although it’s a tale that involves failures as well as successes, it also shows that it’s sometimes large and long-established public organisations, rather than their smaller, younger commercial competitors, which are in the best position to turn advanced technology into an everyday resource for millions.

To trace the origins of Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú Online, we need to go back to the 1980s, when Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú Education launched a remarkable computer literacy project. A small group of programme-makers working away in this Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú department saw how helpful it would be if viewers at home who joined in had access to an affordable and easy-to-use personal computer. This was the moment when the famous Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú Micro was born through a collaboration between the Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú’s own in-house Research and Development team and scientists at the Acorn company.

The Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú Micro
The Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú Micro made its first appearance on Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú TV in 1982 in The Computer Programme series.

The computer literacy project wrapped around the Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú Micro provided the template for an attempt in 1994 to get viewers connecting to the World Wide Web. The producers behind this latest TV series, The Net, were keen to establish a dialogue with viewers while the programmes were still on air. They set up bulletin boards, placed an email address in the closing credits and even planned a ‘user’s club’.

By this stage, one of the Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú’s most internet-savvy engineers, Brandon Butterworth, had also built an internal network behind-the-scenes, linking desktop computers across different production departments. This meant that the Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú’s own staff were starting to embrace the idea of ‘connecting’ online, at exactly the same time as programmes such as The Net, and the Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú Networking Club which was set-up to accompany it, were helping the public to access the as-yet unfamiliar terrain of the Internet.

The story of this crucial moment in the Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú’s digital revolution is told in this short archive clip, featuring George Auckland, Jemima Kiss, Bill Thompson and Brandon Butterworth:

George Auckland and Brandon Butterworth talk about how the Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú came online in the early 90s. (Clip of The Net thanks to Illuminations).

As those interviews suggest, by the mid-1990s staff in lots of different corners of the Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú had started to explore the Internet. Soon hundreds of web-pages were being created – a site for the Hungarian Service, a fan-page called Trumptonshire Web, a message board for football fans over at Five Live.

It was, though, all a bit ad hoc. And by 1997, the Director-General, John Birt, was keen to create something bigger and more organised. He explains his thinking in this interview from the Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú Oral History archive:

 

John Birt interviewed by Ron Neil, 2003. Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú Oral History Collection.

It was now that the Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú’s journalists seized the initiative. In August 1997, a ‘rolling news’ website was very quickly created in response to the death of Princess Diana, complete with video and audio extracts from the Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú’s existing TV and radio services. But even before that dramatic moment, a site with some 8,000 pages had been created by the Corporation’s journalists as part of their coverage of the May General Election. Bella Hurrell, an editor in Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú News at the time, recalled 1997 as a crucial turning-point in the Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú’s attempts to popularize the use of the Internet:

Bella Hurrell and Jemima Kiss recall how the Budget and General Election of 1997 were covered on the early pages of Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú Online.

It was in 1997, too, that John Birt travelled to the United States to visit Microsoft and some of the emerging new technology companies, such as Geocities, Netscape, and Progressive Networks. He realised theywere starting to take notice of the Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú’s web presence. As he saw it, his task now as Director-General was to persuade staff throughout the Corporation - many of whom, including the Chairman of the Governors, still thought of their core business as being radio or television - to throw their support behind large-scale investment in what looked like being a brand new medium altogether:

John Birt interviewed by Lucy Hooberman, 2015. Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú Oral History Collection.

For Birt, and the management team he’d assembled in his Policy and Planning unit, it was important that, even now, the Corporation had a long-term vision of what Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú Online could become and where it would fit in with the Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú’s wider public service mission.

One of the key figures involved in shaping this vision was Ed Richards, then the Controller of Corporate Strategy. In this recording of a ‘witness seminar’, now archived as part of the Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú’s Oral History collection, Richards reveals what he and his team were busy imagining behind-the-scenes during those closing years of the 1990s:

"What that vision was, was about a world in essence where the viewer was completely in control, he or she could choose what they wanted on a programme, or item by item basis, it was pure on demand world and that the Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú services would have to be presented and available in a form that enabled, over any distribution mechanism and in essentially non-linear as well as linear forms, the viewer could exercise that judgement. And that the journey was to an endpoint that looked like that. The character of the journey, the nature of the journey, of course featured an evolution from existing linear channels, putting those on different distribution mechanisms and then migrating to probably the world we haven’t even yet reached, which was a pure on demand world in which we imagined linear channels may not even exist anymore. And we didn’t know when that would happen or if that would happen, and indeedit hasn’t quite yet happened. But it enabled us to develop a plan and a strategy which said, well let’s go with the flow of that, we know in some form or another that’s where we’ll end up, let’s plot the Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú services in that context."

— Ed Richards interviewed by Lucy Hooberman, 2015. Witness Seminar, Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú Oral History Collection.

According to John Birt, this ability to develop a strategy which might pay dividends in the long-run, rather than needing to make a quick returns, was key to the Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú’s success with Online. It reflected an institutional capacity to both ‘think big’ and absorb all those unpredictable changes of direction that suddenly arise when it comes to technological innovation:

John Birt interviewed by Lucy Hooberman, 2015. Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú Oral History Collection.

During his term as Director General, John Birt had watched over a Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú in which Online was starting to be seen as a third medium in its own right, standing alongside the two older media of television and radio. But it was under his successor, Greg Dyke, that the Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú finally achieved for its viewers and listeners what Ed Richards and his team had set as their end-goal: an ‘on demand world’ that would melt the boundaries between different media - and challenge the supremacy of the traditional broadcast schedule.

The iPlayer was unveiled to the public on Christmas Day, 2007. It had had a difficult gestation lasting more than five years. Lots of managers at the Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú remained naturally fearful of any new and untested technology which threatened to be a drain on their own resources. And the Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú was not allowed to launch any new service without approval from the government.

But, as with Online, a great deal of the momentum for what would later be called the iPlayer had come from below.

In one part of the Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú, Tony Ageh, Robin Price and Bill Thompson had together come up with the seemingly simple concept of allowing people to access Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú Three’s programmes using their personal computers. Their initial proposal was for something called ‘3VO – Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú Three’s streaming video on demand service’. The Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú Radio Player already did something similar for audio. The challenge now was to create something similar for television.

The man who took up this challenge was Ben Lavender, a young engineer in the Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú’s New Media Technology department. He’d already worked-up detailed plans for what he called an Internet Personal Video Recorder – or, rather more romantically, a ‘time machine’:

Ben Lavender, the creator of the iPlayer explains where the idea came from and the challenges he had in creating the service.

A working prototype of iPlayer had been created as early as November 2003. But it took more than two more years – and endless staff presentations – before Greg Dyke’s successor, Mark Thompson, gave the go ahead for what he called MyÂ鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿ÚPlayer, subject to ‘all necessary consents’ from the government and the Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú’s own Governors.

Tony Ageh and Ben Lavender had originally hoped that their new platform would include programmes from ITV, Channel 4 and Channel 5 as well as the Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú’s own. But what emerged in 2007 was something rather more restricted: limited to carrying only Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú material, and, after intense lobbying from commercial rivals, programme availability restricted to a mere seven days.

Even so, iPlayer was free. And it was easy to use. As one newspaper put it, the Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú had shown how ‘it should be done... glossy, navigable and without too much fiddling around’. Before long, a third of the country’s entire internet capacity was taken up by people using iPlayer. By March 2012 it had been voted the UK’s number one brand. That same year, the Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú’s coverage of the London Olympics was more extensive than ever, thanks largely to the combined effect of Online and iPlayer.

It was in 2012, too, that the US Company Netflix arrived in Britain. Well-resourced and free from the regulation which prevented the Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú from developing iPlayer to its full potential, the American company was able over the next few years to grow its share of the UK audience for on-demand video; the Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú’s, meanwhile, fell from 40 per cent to 15 per cent.

This did not stop Netflix’s Chief Executive from acknowledging the debt he owed when it came to the public embrace of box-set binging. ‘The iPlayer’, he said, ‘really blazed the trail’.

He was surely right. In an organisation more tightly managed and market conscious than ever, looking to the future had sometimes been seen as wasteful effort. But, in the end, it was the Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú that had taken on the large-scale risks in developing new and unfamiliar technology from which most commercial companies in Britain had initially recoiled and which would play such a large role in building ‘Digital Britain’.

It was this organisational ability to be liberated from short-term thinking that struck many insiders as the biggest lesson of all to be learned from the Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú’s digital revolution – as we can hear in this extract from the Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú Oral History collection. In this brief clip, three key figures in the Corporation’s Policy and Planning Unit - Robin Foster, Jeremy Oliver and Jamie Reeve – reflect on the longer-term implications of that extraordinary moment in time:

"My thought is that we shouldn’t underestimate the nature of the Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú, its institutional form, and its form of funding as a way of underpinning the sort of approach we’ve been talking about and the capacity for trying new things, for innovating and for taking risks. Which some commercial companies, especially established commercial broadcasters would have found much more difficult to do, and I think if you turn that around it is a good case for public funding of this sort of enterprise, it does allow much more flexibility and much more freedom to do those sorts of things. It has its downsides of course as well, and one point I would add would be that although I agree with Ed and others about the importance of a consumer focus, the risk of that is that if it’s not thought about in a careful enough way it leads an organisation like the Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú just to do lots of things. And I think pulling that back to say, ‘What’s the Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú really all about’, is quite a key factor in all of this."

— Robin Foster interviewed by Lucy Hooberman, 2015. Witness Seminar, Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú Oral History Collection.

"I think I would like to second the point about the balance between the responsibility the corporate centre had and that of the mass of the Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú. Because there may have been a framework and some forward looking thinking, but the fact was that the reason why the things are great was because of the extraordinary population of creative people who are ready to look out and take advantage of the new space. And that was something, again, that may follow partly form the method of funding but it’s also from the nature of the Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú as an institution. So there was a framework but there was also this extraordinary fervent and hardworking population who actually did it, and were part of what made if innovative and successful."

— Jeremy Oliver interviewed by Lucy Hooberman, 2015. Witness Seminar, Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú Oral History Collection.

"I’ve got a couple of observations, one about the Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú and one of them a more personal one. I think one of the interesting things, on reflection, about the Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú is that it was the non-commercial broadcaster internet he landscape who was able to take more risk, for some of the reasons we’ve all talked about, but actually I think that’s slightly counterintuitive and very, very important for peoplepolicy and sustaining the Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú. That our ruthlessly commercial competitors failed here and we didn’t fail, and there’s a really important lesson to learn from that and John’s leadership was very important but I do think the ability to take risk was not to be underestimated. And from a personal level I feel incredibly privileged, I think it’s probably the historian in me talking, I feel incredibly privileged to have been able to witness at a macro level, at a corporate level and a personal level, a revolution going on, upfront, very, very close and I still am excited by it. I was excited by it in 1995, I still find it the most unbelievable source of inspiration, I think it is one of the great developments that humankind has ever seen."

— Jamie Reeve interviewed by Lucy Hooberman, 2015. Witness Seminar, Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú Oral History Collection.


Written by David Hendy, Emeritus Professor, University of Sussex, author of The Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú: A People’s History.

Rebuild Page

The page will automatically reload. You may need to reload again if the build takes longer than expected.

Useful links

Theme toggler

Select a theme and theme mode and click "Load theme" to load in your theme combination.

Theme:
Theme Mode: