The combination of a drastic slump in advertising revenues and a recent lack of artistic flair have forced ITV into crisis. Both revenues and ratings are looking extremely fragile. Much of this is not the fault of Charles Allen, the chief executive, who has done his best to strike a balance between ITV’s traditional character and developing new services as the old terrestrial audience fragments. When a ship leaks, however, the temptation to force the captain to walk the plank can be irresistible. Mr Allen is treading that timber.

This is not an inconsequential development. The next ITV chief executive will have to decide whether to follow the Allen model or strike away from any attempt to emulate the public service broadcasting ethos of the BBC to something closer to a less brash Five. This in turn will have an impact on the tactics of other major players in broadcasting and the overall quality of television in this country. ITV may be a fading force — the (ex-) Celebrity Love Island of modern British media — but it is certainly not irrelevant.

Even before Mr Allen’s fate is set, it has been mooted that Stephen Carter, the chief executive of Ofcom, the principal regulator in this field, might be his successor. Mr Carter handed in his notice to his present employers in the middle of June, will stay in situ, albeit with a diminished role, until mid-October and then could be available to ITV before Christmas. This idea has been the cause of alarm to other broad- casters. That is understandable. It would be astonishing and improper for Mr Carter and Ofcom if he went to ITV.

This is not because Mr Carter lacks flair and talent — far from it. He has been a shrewd Ofcom chief executive. That organisation has been the subject of much criticism, not least from this newspaper, for its propensity for “mission creep”, particularly in the regulation of the internet, and for a tendency towards micromanagement. In fairness to Mr Carter, though, much of this was the fault of the legislation by which Ofcom was established and he has been willing to listen to the complaints directed at his institution.

It is, nevertheless, far too soon for him to switch to running a business that he has recently been regulating. The nature of his position at Ofcom means that he has seen extremely sensitive business-plan material and been informally consulted on strategic matters that range well beyond Ofcom’s official remit. In his post he has deliberately (and reasonably) sought to assist ITV through troubled times to ensure that the number of large broadcasters does not fall from three to two.

He would be in an unduly privileged place at ITV, knowing more about the company and regulatory thinking towards it than would his successor at Ofcom. Under the oddly cosy arrangements that operate at Ofcom, its chairman, Lord Currie of Marylebone, has the discretionary authority to impose an extra six months “gardening leave” on Mr Carter to stop him securing “in- appropriate” employment. Ofcom will be a laughing stock if he does not do so. He should then turn his mind to ensuring that his next chief executive signs a more ethically robust contract.