In the week that the welfare system receives a controversial overhaul, it's worth remembering that putting public policy under the microscope should be the bread and butter of current affairs programming. That sounds like a statement of the obvious, but it is one of the most difficult aspects of the genre to execute effectively.
Public policy is often the basis of a programme or extended feature, but the policy itself can easily be overwhelmed either by politics or the human interest angle justifiably used to illustrate the issue. Producing a meaningful piece of broadcast journalism on the subject also depends on the nature of the policy and the timing of the programme. The more a policy can be shown to have a direct impact on the lives of the audience, the easier it is to produce and the more likely it is to be commissioned. This criteria is often satisfied only once a policy has been implemented and case studies of people affected start to emerge.
The welfare changes are a prime example of the first rule and the exception that proves the second. The policy has the potential to directly - and adversely - affect the lives of hundreds of thousands of people. Its relevance to the audience cannot be in any doubt. And, unlike many policy issues, it was easily covered in advance of its official arrival - would-be victims of its effects fell like manna from heaven for journalists. All of which probably accounts for why this story has enjoyed such comprehensive coverage - from local radio all the way up to peak-time television documentaries - ever since it was announced.
Other policy issues are far less generous in providing a template for the perfect piece of broadcast journalism. More often than not, public policy deals with things that seem relevant only to Whitehall wonks - like amorphous concepts of structure and governance. For a tiny minority of the audience, that's really rather interesting (as somebody who has just produced a documentary on academies - just for the fun of it - I'll let you decide which category I fall into), but most broadcasters would have a justifiable fear that programmes on such subjects might record the dreaded zero in audience measurement data.
Yet it is a marker of the quality and range of current affairs broadcasting in the UK, that these programmes do get made. The reforms to the NHS, which also begin this week, are arguably as far-reaching as those to the benefit system - but are a wholly different beast to present to an audience. So little about them is tangible and reporters would be searching for a long time to find even a fragment of human interest. However, it remains a matter of huge public interest (whether the public are actively interested in it or not) and so broadcast news and current affairs has a duty to report and investigate - one which it has discharged admirably across radio and television.
Such policy issues are even less appealing to journalists in advance of their implementation. However, it is at the policy formulation stage when programmes highlighting potential changes are most valuable. It is at this point - perhaps when matters are open to public consultation - that programmes can help inform and even initiate debate. Usually, the policy and its potential effects will not be as inextricably linked as was the case with welfare reform - so making the journalist's job all the harder, but even more important.
Public policy programming always needs to walk a fine line. One that demonstrates potential for impact and how policies relate to everyday life, but which isn't afraid of hard analysis and subjects not tailor-made for TV or radio.
