2
BUSINESS
you are doing, right in front of you, all
the time.
I use a very fine pen (uni-ball deluxe
micro) so I can write small and fit a lot
onto the page. I divide it into columns
for lists: one for each of the people I
work with; others for calls, homework,
emails, things to do when I am out and
about, and pending items; and one for
my monthly Zoom call to the whole
company. Anyone replicating this will
have their own mixture of columns of
varying lengths, but you get the gist. As
soon as the page is full, I carry over
what’s outstanding onto a new sheet and
start again.
A few pointers:
1) As I go through my jobs list, I highlight
priorities with a star and tick the phone
messages I’ve left and my emails/texts
once sent. But I cross them off only once
I have received a reply.
2) The manual process of transferring
outstanding jobs from the old to the newI
am obsessive about being
organised. Apart from the
businesses and charities I run or
oversee, I write books (and now this
weekly column). I also managed and
played in a busy band until recently,
am pretty involved with the
responsible-business movement,
have an active interest in fairness in
society, enjoy time with my family, have
a social life, exercise regularly and
answer my emails promptly. And,
importantly, I have a good work/life
balance.
If I don’t keep on top of things, I get
stressed, which isn’t good for my health.
I also don’t want to let others down,
which is even more important. So how
do I organise my life? It all revolves
around a piece of paper and a pen —
those amazing inventions that have been
around for 2,500 and 5,000 years,
respectively. I am genuinely surprised
that more people don’t use them.Now, before you accuse me of being a
fusty old Luddite, I have, and regularly
use, iPads, a Mac and a laptop — and I
touch-type as well. But, as with design
and furniture, I like a combination of old
and new, using (in my opinion) the best
of each. And I would hate to discard old
technology such as the trusted pen and
paper, just for the sake of it.
Being blessed with an average memory
at best, I realised early on that if I wrote
things down, I couldn’t forget them. And
as soon as I could afford to go to
restaurants, I noticed that waiters who
wrote down orders always got them right.
I love lists, too (a bit weird, I know).
So, the engine that drives my very busy
life boils down simply to this: a
collection of lists on one piece of A4
paper, which I call my “worksheet”. I
have shown this system to my busy
friends, who love it, too. The beauty of it
is, if you adopt this worksheet, it will be
a live, ongoing overview of everythinggone one step further and has his
overview on an iPad, which he swears
works just as well. That is way over my
pay grade, but if it works for him, it may
work for you.
I like the instant view that paper gives
you. It’s cheap, too, and doesn’t require
a charged battery or faffing about with a
password. And it can’t break, no one is
ever going to nick it, it’s virtually
weightless and it has never let me down
for coming up to 50 years.
5) Aficionados might splash out and put
the worksheet in an A4 plastic sleeve to
save it from coffee spills.
6) I always take a copy or photo of mine
(and my diary, too) before travelling, in
case I lose them. It hasn’t happened yet,
but it’s good insurance.
7) When you write things down, your
brain doesn’t have to waste energy
trying to remember them — and then get
stressed when it can’t. So there’s a
double-whammy benefit here.sheet is a good way of assessing their
priority and can push you to get on with
it.
3) I cannot overstate the benefit of
having an overview of your tasks in front
of you on one piece of paper — for you to
oversee throughout the day.
4) The talented and charming Sacha
Berendji — who has a big job as head of
property, store development and
technology at Marks & Spencer — hasMy simple piece of paper will help you run your life
Aficionados
might splash out
on a plastic sleeve
Julian Richer Sound Advice
GERARDO JACONELLI8) If you’re out and about without your
worksheet, then it’s fine to jot down
notes on a small piece of card (which
you’re less likely to lose than a scrap of
paper) until you get home to update it.
9) For years, I wrote my diary myself, but
I now have the luxury of getting one
printed each year, with all my nearest
and dearests’ birthdays and key dates. I
have never yet missed our wedding
anniversary(!). The cover is printed in
dayglo yellow so the diary is less likely to
be left in a taxi or on the bus, and it has a
reward sticker attached in case it does.
Most people I know use digital diaries —
much slower than my speedy paper
version.
Finally, it has been quite remiss of me
not to have mentioned so far that all this
organisation of mine is great, but none
of the work I oversee could be achieved
without my terrific team.
Julian Richer is founder and managing
director of Richer SoundsIt invests in
films that are
extremely
difficult to
make
WHY MUSK GOT
INTO TWITTER
A
nna Hall has a show coming
out on BBC Two on Easter
Monday. In the meantime,
her small army of TV produc-
ers at Candour are beavering
away on commissions for
shows for Channel 5 and Sky
Documentaries.
Business is booming — but
last week’s news that culture
secretary Nadine Dorries plans to sell off
Channel 4 is causing sleepless nights at
the Leeds-based firm. Unlike rival broad-
casters, Channel 4’s remit means it does
not produce its own shows and films;
instead it turns to independent produc-
tion houses such as Candour for content.
Candour makes investigations such as
last year’s Dispatches episode on family
courts. About half its commissions come
from Channel 4, an investor in the com-
pany through its Indie Growth Fund.
“The things I make won’t get commis-
sioned by Netflix or Amazon,” warned
Hall, 53, who has been nominated for
three Baftas over the years. “It invests in
films that are extremely difficult to make... I cannot see a privatised Channel 4
commissioning these sort of films.”
About 1,100 indie production houses
face a similarly uncertain future if Chan-
nel 4 is sold off and rules restricting it
from producing its own content are
dropped, as expected. Yet despite these
warnings, Dorries chose to press ahead
with the privatisation of the Gogglebox
and Bake Off broadcaster — a stand many
view as politically motivated due to a per-
ception that it is left-leaning and critical of
the Tory party. Presenter Kirstie Allsopp
tweeted: “Any Tory MP who votes for this
is a traitor to their party and country.”
On Monday night, Dorries informed
Channel 4 chief executive Alex Mahon of
her decision. The boss’s subsequent
email to staff was leaked on social media,
forcing Dorries, 64, into making a rushed
public announcement. She claimed on
Twitter that government ownership was
“holding Channel 4 back from competing
against streaming giants”.
A sale of Channel 4 could generate
between £500 million and £1 billion for
taxpayers, depending on how much of its
remit is kept intact; the more public-ser-
vice broadcasting requirements that are
heaped on the company as part of a sale,
the less attractive it will be to buyers.
Mahon, 48, submitted alternatives to
privatisation to ministers in February,
aimed at countering the view that in gov-
ernment hands it would never be able to
invest enough in original programmes.
There are signs the fight is not yet over.
Legislation still needs to be passed in par-
liament, where the plans will be met with
stern opposition from critics within the
Tory party; Jeremy Hunt, the former for-
eign secretary, said he was “not person-
ally enthusiastic about the Channel 4
Global, which has a 10 per cent stake in
rival ITV, and others like it that make
long-term bets on media companies.
Channel 4 is also understood to have
offered to sell its central London head-
quarters, said to be worth up to £100 mil-
lion, to show it was in tune with the gov-
ernment’s levelling-up agenda.
Dorries decided none of that was
enough, indicating that Channel 4’s bid to
shore up its regional credentials was too
little, too late. The Department for Digi-
tal, Culture, Media & Sport (DCMS) said it
“carefully considered” Channel 4’s
proposed changes, but said it decided
they can “best be delivered through a
change of ownership rather than at
risk to the taxpayer”.
Mahon’s argument has also turned
into an economic one as she asks the
government to justify making such a
move during a cost-of-living crisis. She
said any revenue earned from a sale
would be far outweighed by the eco-
nomic damage caused by the move.
In a report commissioned by Chan-
nel 4 last year, EY estimated that
allowing the channel to create its own
shows would lead to a £2.1 billion hit to its
suppliers over ten years. The channel’s
own calculations warn of a £3 billion
impact. Pact (the Producers Alliance for
Cinema and Television) puts the figure at
£4 billion. Pact’s chief executive John
McVay said: “So many companies have
told us, ‘Without Channel 4, I wouldn’t
have a business.’ ”
However, some question whether the
impact would be quite so dire. The TV
industry is in the middle of a boom. The
British Film Institute revealed last month
that spending on high-end film and TV
productions hit a record £5.6 billion last
year; post-Channel 4 privatisation, there
should be plenty of work to go around.
Mark Littlewood, director-general of
the Institute of Economic Affairs,
said: “The purpose of television
is to entertain, engage and
inform viewers, not to prop up
domestic production. I very
much doubt that many British
production companies will
need to seriously up their
game to stay in business.”
A DCMS spokespersonHE WANTS TO GIVE TWEETERS THE POWER TO EDIT
The Tesla billionaire stunned the tech
world by becoming the social media
platform’s biggest shareholder last week.There are competing theories about his
motives, writes Jon Yeomans
6 Elon Musk has a long and colourful history with Twitter. In many ways
Musk, the boss of electric carmaker Tesla, is the breakout star of the
platform — someone whose off-the-cuff posts keep his 81 million
followers enthralled. Last week he confirmed he had bought a 9.2 per
cent stake in the company, worth $2.9 billion (£2.2 billion), and was
promptly invited onto the board by Twitter chief Parag Agrawal.
Under the deal, he would not be allowed to table a full bid for the
company until 2024— but nonetheless, Twitter shares surged to
close the week 17 per cent higher.
Agrawal noted that Musk was “both a passionate believer and
intense critic of the service”. Indeed, the billionaire has stepped up
that criticism in recent months — even as he was buying up its
shares from the end of January. And last month, he mooted the idea
of creating a rival platform. But Musk has gained a vast amount from
Twitter — not least in driving hype for Tesla. As one wag put it on
hearing news of Musk’s stake: “Outstanding — he is securing the
raw materials which drive Tesla’s share price.”HE’S A TWITTER SUPER FAN
6 Musk said last week that he wanted to
“make significant improvements to
Twitter in coming months” —
and wasted no time polling
his followers on whether
Parag Agrawal’s
social media giant
should add an “edit”
button to allow users
to fix typos after
posting.
Critics say this would
allow trolls to change the
content of innocuous posts
that go viral into something far
more vicious — potentially
disseminating maliciouscontent far and wide, including via the
re-tweets of people who saw the
harmless original tweet.
Of the 4.4 million people
who voted on Musk’s poll,
74 per cent backed an edit
button; Twitter’s head of
consumer products
hastily confirmed it had
been working on such a
feature since last year.
Spam accounts touting
cryptocurrency could also
be in Musk’s sights, after he
told a fellow user that they were
the “single most annoying problem” on
Twitter.starts on
the big
Channel 4
sell-off
Independent TV producers fear for their future but
fans of privatisation say a sale could energise the
broadcaster, say Jamie Nimmo and Anna Menin
and helping young people who think of
television as being beyond their reach to
take the first steps in careers behind and
in front of the camera.”
Her proposals include teaming up with
private investors to spend an extra
£200 million a year on British films and
shows, on top of current spending of
about £500 million. Giving it access to
private capital and debt would keep the
borrowing off the government’s balance
sheet, which had been one of Dorries’
stated reasons for offloading Channel 4.
Other options explored by Channel 4
included finding investors willing to take
a minority stake. A source said anyone
investing alongside the government
would need to be “credible and politi-
cally appropriate”. They pointed to
investors such as John Malone’s Libertyprivatisation” as it might reduce competi-
tion. There is also likely to be opposition
from Labour and in the House of Lords.
Mahon has indicated that she still
wants her alternative plans to see the light
of day. Writing in The Sunday Times
today, she warns against privatising the
broadcaster and says she will press on
with her proposals to draw in investment.
Mahon said: “A publicly owned Chan-
nel 4 would put billions more into every
corner of the UK and foster the creation of
thousands of jobs. That money would
allow us to commission more pro-
grammes and continue our virtuous cir-
cle. We appreciate the questions that gov-
ernment has asked of us, as it has been a
creative challenge to spark new thinking.
And I believe we should now be getting on
with these plans, hitting those targets,