The restructuring process at the Public Broadcasting Services has borne fruit with the latest announcement of it returning to profitability and better projections for the future.

PBS registered a profit of Lm60,000 for the financial year 2005-2006 and projected that it would register an improved figure of Lm200,000 in the year 2006-2007. Apart from the restructuring, what helped improve the financial situation was a higher yield of advertising and a sharp cut of Lm1.2 million in expenditure.

Profit should not be the ultimate aim in such enterprises, which have a vital role to play in society. But then, neither should profit be a dirty word. Turning in a positive financial report must surely help employee morale, which would then normally be reflected in the workers’ output. Nor would projects such as the planned new radio station, strictly to be only for Maltese talent, be possible without profits being made.

Even more welcome is the fact that the profit will be re-invested in the company itself – in terms of equipment and quality. Investment, Industry and IT Minister Austin Gatt highlighted the extent of the turnaround of the station’s fortunes when he pointed out that for three years running, the government had to bail it out with Lm2.4 million in funding. Lm60,000 does not sound like much, but there is always a first step that has to be made.

The company’s management has pledged to re-invest the profits across the board, particularly in equipment for its editing suites, the newsroom and its recording studios – a step which is much needed. In fact, the station said that it was about half way through its studies to implement digital broadcasting, which is fast becoming the norm rather than a novelty.

Other areas which will receive funding are those of sports broadcasting and general broadcast content. This will fit in line with the station’s commitment to try and improve quality while remaining profitable.

In terms of improving quality, PBS has decided to focus on broadcasting more drama, particularly period drama. Such productions are always popular with audiences in any country and must also surely be a hit in Malta.

In the area of sports broadcasting, one would have to ensure that the broadcasts pay for themselves as one cannot expect to haul in the rights for broadcasting certain events, only to register a loss. Besides, one has to bear in mind that there are already a large number of sports packages available on cash packages through other providers.

The PBS team is also set to put up production of their own current affairs programme. The newsroom would obviously be suited to this task and will not only give added value to PBS’ audience, but also to the company profile. Such a production has been missing for quite some time now, and it is good to know that fresh plans are in hand.

However, while all this holds true, the state television statement does need a boost in the area of presentation. Dr Gatt said it was subjective as to whether presentation skills were ‘amateurish’ and ‘outdated’. We are not trying to knock anyone here, but one only has to watch television stations in countries that are on a par with us (and even others that are still developing), to see that this is very well the case.

Perhaps a few training sessions and infusing the idea that the presenter is there to present and nothing more might help. There are far too many programmes that are of good quality in both production and design, but are let down by bad presentation.

On a closing note, it is also heartening to hear that PBS is about to embark on a process to sort out its archives, which are a goldmine of information. The footage and files that are contained in those archives are a living reminder of our history and should be restored, re-mastered and hopefully released to the public.