There is also another issue. A democracy requires a sceptical, probing media. ITV does not provide probing journalism of any kind. It cannot be beneficial to our political culture that serious coverage of political issues that reaches the bulk of the population is left to the BBC, financed in effect by a tax. But that is the situation that the decline of ITV has produced.

Can ITV return to producing and broadcasting high-quality programmes? It is not impossible. Serious journalism is undergoing a significant revival at Channel 4, where for several years it appeared to be being eliminated in favour of reality TV, freak-shows and soft porn. Channel 4’s recent history shows it is possible to pull a channel back from the downward slide towards uninterrupted dross – but it is going to be enormously difficult at ITV. It is under some serious financial constraints, including a sharp fall in advertising and a deal (negotiated by Charles Allen) which has the consequence that if any ITV show does not provide the number of viewers expected, then advertisers can claim a proportion of their money back.

But the lack of confidence and commitment to quality are even more important than the shortage of money. Michael Grade, the chief executive of ITV appointed in 2006, can certainly distinguish between quality and dross, and wants ITV to provide quality. But because the creative ethos was so thoroughly destroyed during the Robinson/Allen era, there’s no one left at ITV to generate it. Michael Grade’s greatest challenge is to create an ethos within ITV that nurtures creativity, originality and quality. Achieving that took the old Granada about 20 years. The new ITV has about 12 months to do the same, before the shareholders consider breaking it up. On present performance, no one would miss it.