“CRR, like old age, isn’t great but it sure beats the alternative”

In response to John Billett’s comment on CRR (and Marshall’s age, hearing and understanding), Jim Marshall begs to differ…

“Firstly, can I thank John for his comments about my age and problems with hearing and understanding. It makes a nice change, because normally my age is associated with my loss of hair and the disappearance of my boyish good looks!

However, I’m afraid his assertions about CRR are less accurate. CRR remains in place because the Competition Commission continues to believe that ITV is not ‘substitutable’ and therefore requires ITV’s airtime sales to be regulated.

The problem is that John is still confusing the reason for CRR’s existence with the way it operates. I agree, and I said this in the column, that certain aspects of the way that CRR now operates are potentially iniquitous and there may be an argument for modifying it. Though, in this regard, I think it affords greater protection to smaller agencies and advertisers.

But that’s just my opinion and John’s opinion is clearly the opposite to this – so we’ll have to agree to disagree on this. What isn’t opinion or conjecture is why it was introduced in the first place and why it continues to exist – the Competition Commission report is very clear on this, so perhaps John should re-acquaint himself with CC’s findings and report.

Or maybe let’s just say that CRR, like old age, isn’t great but it sure beats the alternative. I’m sure both John and I can relate to that.”