Parting shots: Jonathan Ross and the BBC

It happens to even the most loving relationships. Something is just not right any more and – however hard either side might try to restore the old magic – it is better to part ways. So it is with Jonathan Ross and the BBC . When the presenter announced yesterday that he was moving out of Auntie's pad , both sides agreed it was for the best. For the BBC, the departure removes a £17m rod for its back – a snazzy-suited symbol of all that was most craven in its dealings with ratings-winning stars. That is important in the run-up to a general election where both main parties have (rightly) had a pop at Mark Thompson for throwing licence-fee millions at his on-screen talent. As for Mr Ross, he has not been half the broadcaster he was before the Sachsgate furore of just over a year ago. BBC bureaucrats are not known for interpreting compliance orders lightly; and so a presenter who won praise from bosses for having "the fastest mind to mouth" in radio now records a once-live programme and double-checks his off-the-cuff comments. The result is a Friday-night chat show that should have been renamed Curb Your Enthusiasm. A huge talent, Mr Ross will do better out of the publicly funded spotlight for a while. While splitting up is the right thing to do , it does leave both sides with the age-old problem of what to do next. Mr Ross and his agent can look after themselves; but the BBC has lost its second big popular entertainer in less than a month – and, unlike Terry Wogan, it does not have a successor for three of its big programmes. Doubtless management work-arounds are already being generated – a movie buff to do the film programme , an old hand for Radio 2 and so on – but there is a deeper problem here: what does the BBC have to offer by way of successful popular entertainment ? That question should matter to anyone who cares about the BBC, whether they download Composer of the Week or pacify their children with CBeebies , because one of the wonders of the corporation is its appeal across audiences. Take that away and you take away a big reason for the BBC's existence. Yet for a long time it has got big audiences by pandering to those who can pull them in – allowing stars to produce their own programmes and ride all over management. One result was Sachsgate . The irony is that stars were gaining power at the point when good programme ideas were becoming all-important. The BBC ought to be able to draw on its world-class production talent, rather than giving millions to fly-by-night presenters. That would require BBC bosses to rely on imagination and daring rather than big names. The question is, will they?