All eyes are on the Paralympics, for now – but the future may depend on Channel 4

As we watch the epic sporting stories playing out in Tokyo across the next two weeks, it is worth thinking about what a loss a reduction in such coverage would be, writes Chris Stevenson

The latest iteration of the Games has started in Tokyo (Getty)

As the spectre of possible privatisation looms over Channel 4, the channel’s programming director, Ian Katz, has issued a warning about what such a move would mean for coverage of events like the Paralympics.

The latest iteration of the Games has started in Tokyo, but Katz has said that future coverage would not be “anything like” as comprehensive if profit became the main driver.

“I just don’t think there’s any chance that a primarily profit-driven Channel 4 would invest anything like what we invest in trying to build up and celebrate the Paralympics in the way we do,” he told the Edinburgh Television Festival. “I think we should make no mistake that a purely profit-driven Channel 4 would be a very different beast to the Channel 4 that we know now.”

The channel is devoting 300 hours of TV airtime to events in Tokyo and 1,000 more hours online, which is a good thing. Although, as my colleague James Moore argues, support for those with disabilities needs to be increased across the board.

A government consultation on the issue of the privatisation of Channel 4 – which is currently funded by advertising but is publicly owned – will close in September.

It is an issue that has sparked plenty of consternation from readers about the damage they believe such a move would do to the television landscape. A reduction in coverage for the Paralympics might be just the thing they feared.

As we watch the epic sporting stories playing out in Tokyo across the next two weeks, it is worth thinking about what a loss a reduction in such coverage would be – at least in my view.

It is certainly not the last time we will hear about the fate of Channel 4 – and I look forward to receiving your thoughts on the matter.

Yours,

Chris Stevenson

Voices editor