`100 tribes of Britain'

by Simon Bond

   The UK's government-owned BBC is pioneering a new kind of audience analysis. On the way out are the old class-based socio-demographic divisions, to be replaced by so-called tribal groupings.

   And that has raised a question in London television circles and elsewhere: Has the BBC identified new audiences for the new millennium or are the ground rules being changed simply to cover up its sliding ratings in the face of commercial competition?

   As the formerly united United Kingdom is busy devolving itself with new parliaments in Scotland and Wales, the BBC has decided that the new era needs a new way of profiling its TV audiences titled the ``Tribes of Britain.'' The plan is now wending its way through the BBC's programming bureaucracy.

   ``We have recognized that simple segmentation tools are not nearly sophisticated enough to understand the myriad audience groups and their complex lives--including their attitudes, motivations, passions, dislikes, aspirations and media preferences,'' states a recent BBC document. The plan identifies more than 100 viewer types, or tribes, made up of different demographic groups, community habitats and all with different passions and interests.

   This is all very modern--and key to BBC's repositioning in the multimedia age. With neither advertising nor subscriptions, the BBC must rely substantially on funding from a license fee of $150 annual fee charged every TV set owner in the UK.

  Ten years ago, when the BBC commanded the largest share of TV audiences and the corporation invested most of its money back into programs, the license fee made some sense to people. However, the rise of multichannel pay-TV has eroded the BBC's audience share--especially among the young--to around 28 per cent for BBC1 and 11 per cent for BBC2.

  Moreover, the system is riddled with unfairness. A TV license costs a family the same whether they have an income of $10,000 or $100,000 and regardless of how much or how little they watch BBC programs. Also, though levied against TV owners, those same funds also finance five national radio stations, digital television channels that can only be received by viewers with pay-TV equipment, and two major Internet projects, BBC Online and beeb.com. The BBC has been criticized for frittering away $104 million on BBC Online alone when only 15 percent of the population has internet access.

   In response, a high-powered government committee has been impaneled to look at the BBC's funding, and a lobby of commercial media owners has organized to set limits on the BBC's expansionist ambitions.

   Defending the BBC, its chairman, Gavyn Davies, has said: ``The BBC can either be asked to maximize profits or it can be asked to maximize the effectiveness of its public-service broadcasting. It cannot, however, sensibly be asked to serve two masters.''

  It is against this kind of public scrutiny that the BBC is redefining its relevance to audiences. The BBC's tribe-based research can be used to identify key audience groups and see how its TV, radio, publishing and internet interests are used by each of them.

   By recognizing groups that it represents poorly, the BBC can either market to or create programming to keep them in touch with the BBC brand. By offering a little something for everyone some of time, the BBC will hope to argue for retaining its presence as a multi-platform media player at public expense.

   It is a bold strategy that effectively aims to maintain the status quo. But will it be bold enough? Even the 100 tribes of Britain may not be sufficient to keep the commercial media barbarians from the gates of the BBC.