BBC to axe 1000 jobs. Wheels are comming off....
Discussion
Eric Mc said:
Really looking forward to TV commercials on the BBC. Will they still have to put sticky tape over the labels though?
Why does it have to be commercials?Why not just a much smaller BBC funded by a static tax or a (lower cost) subscription service with protection of content by encryption and the elderly, etc still qualifying for a free subscription?
Chimune said:
"BBC to cut more than 1,000 jobs" due to.......:
"an unexpected increase in the number of households saying they do not watch live TV"
Also makes you wonder how good the top brass are at the BBC if they get caught out by something like this - there are now so many streaming services out there all of which offer an affordable and convenient way to watch TV, free from licence fee, with a significantly broader range of quality programming than the BBC could ever hope to match."an unexpected increase in the number of households saying they do not watch live TV"
How people watch TV has now significantly changed and companies like the BBC are to stuck in their ways to see this. We canceled our Sky sub a while ago and now use NOWTV - basically Sky just at a fraction of the price of what it costs to get it through a satellite dish.
The times are changing and streaming is going to replace terrestrial TV for the majority of people.
I'm glad to say that I am one of the growing many who do not subscribe to the current BBC TV tax set up.
Haven't needed to pay for the BBC tax for over 5 years and never really missed it at all. I can easily see why the trend is growing.
It just needs more people to see that catch up is perfectly fine, instead of subscribing to some 'live' timetable organised by some scheduler.
For up to date 'live' content then I see it that the news is the only thing that requires to essentially be in that category, in which case websites provide the information perfectly well.
The sooner they fund the BBC by alternative methods the better. Remove the tax altogether in order to save the state broadcaster that some hold deer.
Haven't needed to pay for the BBC tax for over 5 years and never really missed it at all. I can easily see why the trend is growing.
It just needs more people to see that catch up is perfectly fine, instead of subscribing to some 'live' timetable organised by some scheduler.
For up to date 'live' content then I see it that the news is the only thing that requires to essentially be in that category, in which case websites provide the information perfectly well.
The sooner they fund the BBC by alternative methods the better. Remove the tax altogether in order to save the state broadcaster that some hold deer.
Eric Mc said:
Would that be viable?
Do they have similar set ups in the US - which is much, much bigger market of course.
I don't know. Do they have similar set ups in the US - which is much, much bigger market of course.
PBS operates on a fraction of the budget (though is much more complex network),carries various kinds of advertising and yet remains an extremely trusted channel for information.
fblm said:
I find the whole concept of the BBC completely bizarre, it's about 20 years past its sell by date IMO. It should be encrypted with only those choosing to pay the tax having access.
It's such a bizarre concept that virtually every Western European country has a similar set up - except that they almost all show commercials on their state owned and licence funded stations.I was brought up in Ireland where RTE is the national broadcaster. They are funded by a compulsory licence fee too but they have always shown commercials as well.
Vaud said:
Eric Mc said:
Would that be viable?
Do they have similar set ups in the US - which is much, much bigger market of course.
I don't know. Do they have similar set ups in the US - which is much, much bigger market of course.
PBS operates on a fraction of the budget (though is much more complex network),carries various kinds of advertising and yet remains an extremely trusted channel for information.
tangerine_sedge said:
Cheese Mechanic said:
turbobloke said:
They need the licence fee abolished - quickly! Though some time in the next decade is apparently more likely.
Their senior politicians, or managers as they are jokingly called, need formal reprimands over not tackling left-wing bias, wasting hundreds of £millions, and then sacking.
Pretty much bang on the nail, the bias is profound. The *license fee * is an absurd abberation, particularly the fact iff you don't have one and watch a live broadcast rival you can be jailed for it, totally and utterly absurd.Their senior politicians, or managers as they are jokingly called, need formal reprimands over not tackling left-wing bias, wasting hundreds of £millions, and then sacking.
Interesting article here: http://www.spectator.co.uk/columnists/rod-liddle/9...
Former BBC staffman Rod Liddle nails the bias and feels its getting worse. No surprise there then.
It's funny how it's usually only ever *ex* BBC staffers who only realise that the BBC is biased after they've lost their jobs...
Vaud said:
I agree that it should not a criminal offence, given the number of things the police say are a "civil matter"...
Me too. Ultimately though it will no difference in reality; if you can be pursued for the fee as a civil debt and don't pay then you can still get locked up for contempt.tangerine_sedge said:
The BBC is not responsible for the way it's funded, blame the politicians who decide that.
It's funny how it's usually only ever *ex* BBC staffers who only realise that the BBC is biased after they've lost their jobs...
Yes, but the BBC repeatedly lobby to retain the "fee" It's funny how it's usually only ever *ex* BBC staffers who only realise that the BBC is biased after they've lost their jobs...
Not all those who admit bias are former employees, plenty of those still situ
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/bbc/...
http://www.newstatesman.com/uk-politics/2010/09/le...
http://biasedbbc.org/blog/2014/10/15/educating-ron...
The fact remains, if it had to justify its existence in a free market , freedom of choice model , it could do what it likes, produce what people want or wilt on the vine. Being forced to pay for the BBC just because one has the cheek to watch a live broadcst from a competitor is not reasonable by any measure.
Eric Mc said:
...virtually every Western European country has a similar set up...
Virtually every other Western European country joined the Euro to. Doesn't mean it's a good idea. I don't like adverts in EVO, should there be a tax on everyone who buys other magazines so that I can have EVO for free with no adverts? What possible justification is there for the BBC's funding model? fblm said:
Virtually every other Western European country joined the Euro to. Doesn't mean it's a good idea. I don't like adverts in EVO, should there be a tax on everyone who buys other magazines so that I can have EVO for free with no adverts? What possible justification is there for the BBC's funding model?
If EVO were broadcast over the airwaves you would require a licence to receive the broadcast. And you'd have to pay for it. I pay for a radio licence for my boat (and had to pass a test too!). The BBC was accused of having right-wing bias, right up until the late 80s. Then we we had Murdoch's demands. Since then, attacking the BBC has been a political must from all parties. If any party wants the support of the Murdoch press it has to comply with what was stated in the McTaggart lectures by Murdoch's mini-me. It was nothing more than a list of what Murdoch wanted for his support.
Major resisted the demands and all of a sudden Murdoch jumped on the labour band-wagon. He stayed with them until he realised they were not going to win an election and jumped ship. When the tories didn't win the election, he was the first visitor to #10 and one of its most frequent.
The BBC has become the whipping boy of the right wing (at the moment).
The BBC is a gem. It produces some of the best TV programmes in the world. Ignore the supposed massive left wing bias, although, of course, it is one of the most heavily controlled TV outlets in Europe. Now we have its content controlled by May, so that's fully independence gone.
Without the BBC life in the UK will be much the poorer. BBC 4 is brilliant.
Politicians who want Cameron's job moan about the BBC content and funding methods, as do the silly wing of the tories. As would Blair's lot is they were still in because that aspect was controlled by Murdoch.
Let's look at the BBC going private. Where do you think the advertising would come from? There's only so much around.
Since 1987, the BBC has been under attack. It is a miracle it has lasted this long.
It's output has been tremendous. I have umpteen CDs of the programmes they produce and don't want to lose it just because Cameron wants the support of Sky. Times and a red top.
Read through the Radio Times and compare look at the programmes it produces. All for a few quid a week. A bargain.
If you want to dance to Murdoch's tune, then you can by not paying the charge. But think what you will be missing.
Since the BBC became the victim of politics, it has lost the Olympics and half of F1. All due to politics.
I have a number of American friends who just enthuse about the BBC. Their treat after the long journey over.
Think what you will lose before rejoicing.
Fox News anyone? My lad has a friend who emigrated to Oz and he says he'd love the place if it had 'decent', ie BBC, television. Out there it is all controlled by Murdoch.
Major resisted the demands and all of a sudden Murdoch jumped on the labour band-wagon. He stayed with them until he realised they were not going to win an election and jumped ship. When the tories didn't win the election, he was the first visitor to #10 and one of its most frequent.
The BBC has become the whipping boy of the right wing (at the moment).
The BBC is a gem. It produces some of the best TV programmes in the world. Ignore the supposed massive left wing bias, although, of course, it is one of the most heavily controlled TV outlets in Europe. Now we have its content controlled by May, so that's fully independence gone.
Without the BBC life in the UK will be much the poorer. BBC 4 is brilliant.
Politicians who want Cameron's job moan about the BBC content and funding methods, as do the silly wing of the tories. As would Blair's lot is they were still in because that aspect was controlled by Murdoch.
Let's look at the BBC going private. Where do you think the advertising would come from? There's only so much around.
Since 1987, the BBC has been under attack. It is a miracle it has lasted this long.
It's output has been tremendous. I have umpteen CDs of the programmes they produce and don't want to lose it just because Cameron wants the support of Sky. Times and a red top.
Read through the Radio Times and compare look at the programmes it produces. All for a few quid a week. A bargain.
If you want to dance to Murdoch's tune, then you can by not paying the charge. But think what you will be missing.
Since the BBC became the victim of politics, it has lost the Olympics and half of F1. All due to politics.
I have a number of American friends who just enthuse about the BBC. Their treat after the long journey over.
Think what you will lose before rejoicing.
Fox News anyone? My lad has a friend who emigrated to Oz and he says he'd love the place if it had 'decent', ie BBC, television. Out there it is all controlled by Murdoch.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff