Frights of fancy

“Today I wish to give you some food for thought. Since these last few years, our entry for the Eurovision has been stopped at the semi-finals. Can you check if the whole contingent stays till Saturday (Finals Night)?

“As I see it, if anyone wants to stay on, he should do so at his own expense. The expenses for four days multiplied by the number of people in the deputation staying in a far away country do add up. By the way, do you know the amount of the expenses incurred in this farce?”

This letter was representational of the sheaf I got following last week’s column. Other subjects touched were the PBS Programme Statement of Intent for radio, reminiscences of Sossy, the constant bad use of English and even worse use of the vernacular, and the waste of airtime given to people campaigning in favour of or against the introduction of divorce legislation in Malta.

In fact, I did check about the funding for the trips, and the official reply was more or less as follows:

“PBS, as state broadcaster, is compelled to pay for the Eurovision expenses (hotel and flights) in advance for the whole duration of the festival – till the final night. Returning after a failure to qualify would mean forfeiting these prepaid expenses and having to pay for the ‘new’ flight tickets.

“In any case, tickets are cheaper when you book round trips... and it could well be that a part of the expenses was mitigated in the bartering process. One always has to leave some people at the Eurovision as there are meetings of heads of delegations and other staff, and a lot of networking takes place.

“Apart from that, it is not nice to bring a singer back without allowing him to stay for the finals, just because he would not have made it there. The least we can do to take the edge off his disappointment is to let him watch the final live.

“For the record, last year the whole package was more expensive.”

Be that as it may, I find it weird that whenever the same thing – that is, lack of qualification – happens in any sport, the contingent usually returns on the next plane out.

Are the people involved in sport less careful with their money? Or is it just that they assume they will not be passing on to the next round, and so they do not book round tickets and return when they deem fit.

The way some people think they can manipulate facts to suit their own version of events never ceases to amuse and fascinate me.

As it happened, PBS received 30 applications for the 10 passes in its possession. They were given to people covering the event, except for two which went to Glen Vella’s record company representatives.

After much waiting and wondering, PBS has finally issued its Programme Statement of Intent for radio. There have been much speculation as to why PBS waited so long after having issued the one for television, but this is not a conspiracy theory newsletter.

The statement of intent covers the period from October to the end of September 2012. There are a lot of regulations, but basically we are told that just because a programme is accepted, it does not mean it will be allowed to run for the full schedule if the quality does not match that promised in the synopsis and application; and as a corollary, one may apply for programmes for the duration of the year.

The forms to fill in divide the listening population into five belts, mostly according to social status, from A/B households headed by a professional, to group E, which lumps together old age pensioners, widows, the unemployed, and those who through sickness or unemployment depend on social security and/or supplementary benefit.

Then, of course, there are the divisions by target audience, genre of programme and time the programme would air. I see that a provision has been made for one-off drama hours, and also a radio serial – a daily 10-minute slot – dealing with the Maltese way of life in an educational and entertaining manner. If nobody applied for this, I suppose PBS archives could dig up Fredu Frendo Sghendo.

There is an option as to whether or not recorded programmes would be delivered ready for transmission, or need to use PBS studios/facilities.

Of special interest would be a 60-minute entertaining weekly quiz programme with personalities in studio and live contribution by listeners with the possibility of winning prizes. Ħallini Minnek is still remembered fondly by many – although sadly, if it is resurrected, Charles Clews won’t be on the panel this time around.

The small print covers just about everything: “Whereas PBS shall treat the proposals submitted with the strictest confidentiality, PBS shall in no way be liable or assume any responsibility in the eventuality that a programme bearing a similar name or having the same programme idea or characters, is produced or allegedly to be produced, by any other person other than the one submitting the proposal, and any such eventuality shall be deemed to be purely coincidental, and the person submitting the proposal declares that she/he shall have no right of action against PBS in this regard.”

Stranger things have happened. For the programme proposal I had submitted to a particular television station (not PBS), in another life when floppy disks and hard copy were still de rigueur, these had conveniently been mislaid. And yet, in the next schedule of this station, there was a programme too similar to my proposal not to raise my suspicions. Nevertheless, as stated in the aforementioned PSI, it was deemed a mere coincidence.

television@timesofmalta.com