Channel U has provided a much needed platform for UK urban music and artist over the last four years. But despite what would appear to be an impressive track record for being instrumental in breaking underground UK acts the number of complaints about practices at the channel have hit alarming proportions. How beneficial are Channel U? How much do they contribute or detract from the UK music scene? The jury is out over Channel U, with opinions and feelings fiercely divided. Is it simply representing modern day urban youth culture or is it a catalyst for violence amongst inner city gangs? Is it a positive and accessible outlet for up-and-coming British urban music, or no more than an exploitative profit-making machine? Despite up to one million viewers in its first month of transmission, Channel U’s success has been followed by a spate of employee resignations, an Ofcom fine, and even scorn from the Metropolitan Police. It’s the channel that everyone loves to hate. But is the criticism justified…?
Lola Adesioye sets out the charges and hears Channel U's defence, as told to her by Darren Platt, Channel U's director.
Charge #1: Hot! On Road has witnessed a growing number of complaints that Channel U videos are of poor quality.
Darren Platt for the defence: "Channel U has made a conscious decision to play videos of varying quality. The channel's view is that many new artists have great songs, but their videos may not be as of an equally high standard due to budget constraints. However, we have noticed that after the first couple of songs, the video quality of these new artists tends to go up and we are willing to give these fledgling artists their first foot in the door. If only high quality, big budget videos were shown, those promising artists could potentially lose out on exposure (continue...)