Should the BBC be privatised?
Discussion
munroman said:
Some examples here of the size of the teams used for these operations, I wonder what the equivalent 'privatised' equivalent would be:
http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/home-news/anger...
Personally, as someone without a TV, by choice, I am sick and fed up of the assumed criminalisation of those who choose not to have a TV, the constant threatening letters, in my innocence I even had an inspector in showing that I didn't have a TV , the following week another threatening letter came through the letterbox.
The time for the BBC has passed, and it's bias has become so extreme that it has lost a lot of credibility, let the market decide what replaces it!
If a newspaper had to take its printing press, along with it, every time it went to a story, they would be taking a fairly high number of staff. Have you any idea how many camera operators, vision control, sound engineers, communication engineers, production staff, directors, floor managers, editing staff, riggers and security staff are needed at a big rock event. Versus a reporter from a paper. Thought not. If you have no TV what's your problem. You are one of the micro numbers who don't watch the haunted fish tank, rejoice in your difference, your independence and just deal with the reality of being out side the main stream.http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/home-news/anger...
Personally, as someone without a TV, by choice, I am sick and fed up of the assumed criminalisation of those who choose not to have a TV, the constant threatening letters, in my innocence I even had an inspector in showing that I didn't have a TV , the following week another threatening letter came through the letterbox.
The time for the BBC has passed, and it's bias has become so extreme that it has lost a lot of credibility, let the market decide what replaces it!
DonkeyApple said:
grumbledoak said:
DonkeyApple said:
Just tell me why you pay for a License Fee that you don't need and clearly don't want? That's the bit I don't get. You clearly feel very strongly about it.
If you want to watch DVDs and commercial television, you must pay for the BBC. You can end up in court if you don't, you'll at the very least get a load of hassle. If the BBC were privatised that would not be the case. I'd buy CBeebies, at most, and quite probably none of it.
You only require the TV License to watch television in the live environment.
This means that you don't need it to view any 'non live' media. This includes DVDs, videos etc, 4OD, iPlayer anything that plays media at your selection at a time other than when it is shown live via public broadcast.
The BBC has compromised it's position by allowing the development of an internal culture of trying to lead opinion.
That should not be it's remit, it should, together with all it's employees, be neutral on any issue, yet presenting in an equal manner, both sides of any argument.
Across all it's areas.
A reflection of the world, as it were, not providing any value judgement on the world.
If it were to adopt that neutrality, I would want it to continue.
That should not be it's remit, it should, together with all it's employees, be neutral on any issue, yet presenting in an equal manner, both sides of any argument.
Across all it's areas.
A reflection of the world, as it were, not providing any value judgement on the world.
If it were to adopt that neutrality, I would want it to continue.
Fittster said:
Would you agree that a lot of the output on BBC 1 and Radio 1 could easily be replicated on a commercial station?
Agreed 100%BBc1 and radio 1 would be completely viable as commercial stations as they are lowest common denominator dumbed down garbage which appeals to half wits
Radio 4, 6 Music, BBc 2, BBc 4 would never survive as commercial stations
So to give everyone in the country that pays for the beeb value for money they must spend 90% of the license fee on moron fodder. So keep the beeb please
Fittster said:
jmorgan said:
Fittster said:
In your opinion would Total Wipe and the Chris Moyles show be classed intellectually stimulating?
In my defence, I do think there is some crud on the beeb. I do not watch or listen to it all. The recent one with the short one from TG and what we can or cannot see, whilst I liked the idea, the program was mediocre at best.Is it the role of the government to enforce a tax on the whole population to ensure the BBC can show Total Wipe Out on a Saturday evening? If not should the BBC be limited in the type of content it produces?
They have to compete. They have to show the early Saturday evening stuff and they need soaps that cater for many. Remember Swap shop? My parents thought it was drivel, I was just starting to grow out of it in the last few years.
I do not know what the viewing figures for Wipeout or Radio 1 shows but as a yoof I used to listen to R1 all the time. Now its R4 and occasionally R2 even R3 if I catch something I like. Just because you do not like it does not mean everyone should not like it.
I think you have to take it as a package for the whole. Lets not forget the Blue Planet and Walking With series. Another few good uns.
Halb said:
tinman0 said:
jmorgan said:
Privatise the beeb and quality programing vanishes from the UK, welcome to the US and car crash telly.
Trouble is that most of the popular tv shows are now made in the US, so your argument doesn't really stack up.The BBC has one jewel left in Top Gear, and that's more about JC and Andy Wilman than the BBC itself.
The days of the BBC's quality programming are long since over. If the BBC was so successful, then why do we have Sky?
Much of BBC programming is produced on a sub-contract basis. The BBC has also "rescued" programmes that were dropped by ITV (presumably because they were too intelligent - like University Challenge).
I still think BBC comedy is head amnd shoulders ahead of anything on commercial TV - especially the panel quizes such as QI, Mock the Week, HIGNFY, Never Mind the Buzzcocks etc etc etc (the list is almost endlesss).
Comedy on Radio 4 is also very good. BBC also brings forth new talent and keeps series running even if the initial audience level is low. Commercial channels can't afford to do this. I doubt that Andy Hamilton could ever have had a career as a writer if he had only commercial outlets for his ideas.
Finally, because the BBC is not dependent on commercial spnsorship, it can crriticise outside commercial organisations. I know people slag of Wattchdog (rightfully, sometimes) but there is almost no proper consumer programming on commercial TV. Radio 4 is even better at this type of thing with programmes such as You and Yours and the various permutations of Money Box and programmes on the legal system (such as Law in Action).
Once upon a time ITV DID have some consumer programmimng - I remember one series being presented by the late Tony Bastable (of Magpie fame) - but these days it shies away from anything that might upset a potential commercial sponsor.
And then there is the whole area of childrens' programming - which ITV have virtually abandoned (save for the ubiquitous cartoons).
I still think BBC comedy is head amnd shoulders ahead of anything on commercial TV - especially the panel quizes such as QI, Mock the Week, HIGNFY, Never Mind the Buzzcocks etc etc etc (the list is almost endlesss).
Comedy on Radio 4 is also very good. BBC also brings forth new talent and keeps series running even if the initial audience level is low. Commercial channels can't afford to do this. I doubt that Andy Hamilton could ever have had a career as a writer if he had only commercial outlets for his ideas.
Finally, because the BBC is not dependent on commercial spnsorship, it can crriticise outside commercial organisations. I know people slag of Wattchdog (rightfully, sometimes) but there is almost no proper consumer programming on commercial TV. Radio 4 is even better at this type of thing with programmes such as You and Yours and the various permutations of Money Box and programmes on the legal system (such as Law in Action).
Once upon a time ITV DID have some consumer programmimng - I remember one series being presented by the late Tony Bastable (of Magpie fame) - but these days it shies away from anything that might upset a potential commercial sponsor.
And then there is the whole area of childrens' programming - which ITV have virtually abandoned (save for the ubiquitous cartoons).
Edited by Eric Mc on Tuesday 29th June 08:51
jmorgan said:
I believe the beeb has had an input in one or two? Rome for example I think?
Prolly, I never watched Rome but the joint productions are usually top notch. (checked wiki, it was)Eric Mc said:
I still think BBC comedy is head amnd shoulders ahead of anything on commercial TV - especially the panel quizes such as QI, Mock the Week, HIGNFY, Never Mind the Buzzcocks etc etc etc (the list is almost endlesss).
Comedy on Radio 4 is also very good. BBC also brings forth new talent and keeps series running even if the initial audience level is low. Commercial channels can't afford to do this. I doubt that Andy Hamilton could ever have had a career as a writer if he had only commercial outlets for his ideas.
Finally, because the BBC is not dependent on commercial spnsorship, it can crriticise outside commercial organisations. I know people slag of Wattchdog (rightfully, sometimes) but there is almost no proper consumer programming on commercial TV. Radio 4 is even better at this type of thing with programmes such as You and Yours and the various permutations of Money Box and programmes on the legal system (such as Law in Action).
Once upon a time ITV DID have some consumer programmimng - I remember one series being presented by the late Tony Bastable (of Magpie fame) - but these days it shies away from anything that might upset a potential commercial sponsor.
And then there is the whole area of childrens' programming - which ITV have virtually abandoned (save for the ubiquitous cartoons).
I agree aboot the comedy, my fave sitcoms tend to come from the beeb, with a sporadic one popping up from commercial, like Angelos. And then there is the story that Clarkson says when they criticized a car, Citroen or Renault? The chairman rings up and tells his UK man to cancel all advertising. he was then told how the beeb worksComedy on Radio 4 is also very good. BBC also brings forth new talent and keeps series running even if the initial audience level is low. Commercial channels can't afford to do this. I doubt that Andy Hamilton could ever have had a career as a writer if he had only commercial outlets for his ideas.
Finally, because the BBC is not dependent on commercial spnsorship, it can crriticise outside commercial organisations. I know people slag of Wattchdog (rightfully, sometimes) but there is almost no proper consumer programming on commercial TV. Radio 4 is even better at this type of thing with programmes such as You and Yours and the various permutations of Money Box and programmes on the legal system (such as Law in Action).
Once upon a time ITV DID have some consumer programmimng - I remember one series being presented by the late Tony Bastable (of Magpie fame) - but these days it shies away from anything that might upset a potential commercial sponsor.
And then there is the whole area of childrens' programming - which ITV have virtually abandoned (save for the ubiquitous cartoons).
There was a great documentary on last year that showed how childrens programming has evolved. To the sad state of affairs now where the some channels are just constant cartoons.
Can't remember if this is it.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbcfour/features/childrens-tv... was ace
Fittster said:
Eric Mc said:
Finally, because the BBC is not dependent on commercial spnsorship, it can crriticise outside commercial organisations.
But if you turn that round it will always support a large state with high taxes because that's was it relies on for funding.I'm no socialist but the fact that the BBC exists keeps the TV (and radio) in some sort of balanced state. There are about 7 BBC TV channels - there are now hundreds of commercially run ones.
I'm fairly happy with things as they are - although I would like to see BBC's standard of TV news and curent affairs reporting get back to a high standard. Their radio equivalent is light years ahead.
Eric Mc said:
Fittster said:
Eric Mc said:
Finally, because the BBC is not dependent on commercial spnsorship, it can crriticise outside commercial organisations.
But if you turn that round it will always support a large state with high taxes because that's was it relies on for funding.I'm no socialist but the fact that the BBC exists keeps the TV (and radio) in some sort of balanced state. There are about 7 BBC TV channels - there are now hundreds of commercially run ones.
I'm fairly happy with things as they are - although I would like to see BBC's standard of TV news and curent affairs reporting get back to a high standard. Their radio equivalent is light years ahead.
I agree that most of the Beeb should remain intact, as there have been some great programmes (Wonders of the Solar System, Top Gear, LoM etc. However, it does seem that the news and current affairs section is broken and skewed by their own selfish ideology, and this needs a severe shake up. I cannot watch this type of programme now, as most of the time, I feel it isn't 'news', but the BBC journalist's own point of view - or a proxy for all the left wing socialist movements that the Beeb seem to love - Panorama last night (and any other night, to be honest), is a prime example - and look how one sided the news on Israel always is. I have absolutely no interest in taking sides, but I have found the Beebs coverage of all things Israel pretty disgusting - You can almost feel the hate for the Jews in the broadcasters’' tomes’. I have no interest in religion too, but again, from the Beeb (and to be fair, C4), what I get is black and white, good versus bad - Islam = good, Christianity and Catholicism = very bad.
All we ask for (me at least..) is unbiased and balanced news and political coverage (Andrew Neil seems to be the only one brave enough to do this), and not one sided leftist opinion from people on hundreds of thousands of Pounds per year with iron clad pensions, preaching to us from their own very safe ivory towers.
So – keep everything else apart from news and current affairs – I despise any news programme that subliminally tries to tell me how I should act, or who or what religion/culture I should hate or embrace – Just give us unedited facts, and us grown ups with more than two brain cells can form our own opinion – or is that thought too scary for them?
All we ask for (me at least..) is unbiased and balanced news and political coverage (Andrew Neil seems to be the only one brave enough to do this), and not one sided leftist opinion from people on hundreds of thousands of Pounds per year with iron clad pensions, preaching to us from their own very safe ivory towers.
So – keep everything else apart from news and current affairs – I despise any news programme that subliminally tries to tell me how I should act, or who or what religion/culture I should hate or embrace – Just give us unedited facts, and us grown ups with more than two brain cells can form our own opinion – or is that thought too scary for them?
Edited by chris watton on Tuesday 29th June 10:18
It should be commercial. We should not live in an age where the media is owned and controlled by the state and the citizens are compelled to pay for it.
There should be a free choice as to whether you choose to pay for the service and the BBC should have to raise its own revenue in the same way as other, successful media outlets do.
There should be a free choice as to whether you choose to pay for the service and the BBC should have to raise its own revenue in the same way as other, successful media outlets do.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff