International cultural diplomacy cuts

[don4l]

I was surprised by this morning's news that the BBC are to cut 650 jobs in the World Service.

How on Earth does it take 2400 people to run a radio station?

Why on Earth do we feel the need for licence payers' money to fund "International cultural diplomacy"? What is "International cultural diplomacy" anyway? It sounds like a newspeak term for educating Albanians about the dangers of Global Warming.

Story here:-
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-12283...

Don
--

[Victor McDade]

I guess in years gone by 'International cultural diplomacy' = pushing a particular political agenda. However in todays PC climate you're right, it seems like a waste of money and Labour are up in arms about it so I guess this decision can't be a bad thing.

Edited by Victor McDade on Wednesday 26th January 13:39

[Deva Link]

I remember watching one of Michael Palin's programmes and he was in some God-forsaken place and a young lad started talking to him in English. Turned out he'd learned it entirely by listening to the BBC World Service. I thought that was fantastic.

It'll be very helpful to him when he illegally enters the UK and wants to claim benefits.

[loafer123]

I strongly support an English language world service, which is seen by many around the world as a vital source of unbiased news (presumably because it doesn't talk about UK politics most of the time).

I also think that Spanish and French language world service broadcasts are a great idea and cover most of the rest of the world, especially Africa where independent news is hard to come by.

You could probably also debate the need for Mandarin/Cantonese versions.

I think the need for more minority language stations is very dubious.

[Police State]

loafer123 said:

I strongly support an English language world service, which is seen by many around the world as a vital source of unbiased news (presumably because it doesn't talk about UK politics most of the time).

I also think that Spanish and French language world service broadcasts are a great idea and cover most of the rest of the world, especially Africa where independent news is hard to come by.

You could probably also debate the need for Mandarin/Cantonese versions.

I think the need for more minority language stations is very dubious.

Portuguese for Africa
English for the Caribbean


you couldn't make it up...

[s2art]

Police State said:

loafer123 said:

I strongly support an English language world service, which is seen by many around the world as a vital source of unbiased news (presumably because it doesn't talk about UK politics most of the time).

I also think that Spanish and French language world service broadcasts are a great idea and cover most of the rest of the world, especially Africa where independent news is hard to come by.

You could probably also debate the need for Mandarin/Cantonese versions.

I think the need for more minority language stations is very dubious.

Portuguese for Africa
English for the Caribbean


you couldn't make it up...

Well, Mozambique is a member of the commonwealth, so Portuguese for Africa.

[Chris Type R]

s2art said:

Well, Mozambique is a member of the commonwealth, so Portuguese for Africa.

I didn't know that. Joined in 1996 and not formerly part of the British Empire.

[Police State]

s2art said:

Police State said:

loafer123 said:

I strongly support an English language world service, which is seen by many around the world as a vital source of unbiased news (presumably because it doesn't talk about UK politics most of the time).

I also think that Spanish and French language world service broadcasts are a great idea and cover most of the rest of the world, especially Africa where independent news is hard to come by.

You could probably also debate the need for Mandarin/Cantonese versions.

I think the need for more minority language stations is very dubious.

Portuguese for Africa
English for the Caribbean


you couldn't make it up...

Well, Mozambique is a member of the commonwealth, so Portuguese for Africa.

Then perhaps Portugal could pull up a few quid to teach them; alternatively we could broadcast in English, and the good people of Mozambique could learn that language instead of perpetuating one that is not supported by its originators.

[s2art]

Police State said:

and the good people of Mozambique could learn that language instead of perpetuating one that is not supported by its originators.

?? I think Portugal supports Portuguese.

[Police State]

s2art said:

Police State said:

and the good people of Mozambique could learn that language instead of perpetuating one that is not supported by its originators.

?? I think Portugal supports Portuguese.

so they don't need us to fund it then do they?

[s2art]

Police State said:

s2art said:

Police State said:

and the good people of Mozambique could learn that language instead of perpetuating one that is not supported by its originators.

?? I think Portugal supports Portuguese.

so they don't need us to fund it then do they?

The Foreign and Commonwealth Office funded the BBC world service for, in part, to keep good links with commonwealth countries. Hence Portuguese for Mozambique, amongst other reasons.

[Police State]

s2art said:

Police State said:

s2art said:

Police State said:

and the good people of Mozambique could learn that language instead of perpetuating one that is not supported by its originators.

?? I think Portugal supports Portuguese.

so they don't need us to fund it then do they?

The Foreign and Commonwealth Office funded the BBC world service for, in part, to keep good links with commonwealth countries. Hence Portuguese for Mozambique, amongst other reasons.

Let's get this right, the taxpayers fund the BBC World Service.

[Bing o]

Police State said:

taxpayers fund the BBC World Service.

Is it tax payers, or is it license fee holders, and overseas sales revenue (genuine question)?

[loafer123]

Bing o said:

Police State said:

taxpayers fund the BBC World Service.

Is it tax payers, or is it license fee holders, and overseas sales revenue (genuine question)?

I think it was taxpayers until recently, but is now a BBC cost - whether that comes from licence fee payers or commercial revenues is a moot point.

[Police State]

Bing o said:

Police State said:

taxpayers fund the BBC World Service.

Is it tax payers, or is it license fee holders, and overseas sales revenue (genuine question)?

License fee holders = tax payers, there's no difference; just semantics. Overseas sales is slightly more vague, but fundamentally speaking, without the initial funding (taxpayers), there would be no overseas sales.

Which comes full circle to the fact that without the funding, there would be no Portugese for Mozambique.

[tubbystu]

loafer123 said:

Bing o said:

Police State said:

taxpayers fund the BBC World Service.

Is it tax payers, or is it license fee holders, and overseas sales revenue (genuine question)?

I think it was taxpayers until recently, but is now a BBC cost - whether that comes from licence fee payers or commercial revenues is a moot point.

It was FCO funded until recently, as part of overseas development.

As part of the ongoing licence fee negotiations the BBC itself agreed to take on the funding of the world service from the existing licence fee. Thereby countering calls for an actual cut in the fee.

It is all taxpayers money true, but the cuts were part of the funding negotiations done under Labour, so why they are getting excited when they initiated the cuts is beyond belief usual UK political point scoring.