Political bias at BBC - something has to be done surely
Discussion
psi310398 said:
And, being a liberal-minded sort of chap, I'd not dream of telling you how to spend your money
.
I'm just slightly surprised at the number here who seem to think it is ok to direct others to do precisely that. As a simple proposition, I'm sure there'd be outrage if people were told they had by law to subscribe to the Daily Mail if they wanted to buy and read the Guardian.
Just view the bbc like council tax or some other taxation that goes towards stuff you might not make full use of. . I'm just slightly surprised at the number here who seem to think it is ok to direct others to do precisely that. As a simple proposition, I'm sure there'd be outrage if people were told they had by law to subscribe to the Daily Mail if they wanted to buy and read the Guardian.
Look at where your income tax goes? Do you use all those things?
I imagine my tax goes towards things I use or things that I approve of like the hospital that helped my dad or the cycle path I run along or those cool aircraft carriers the navy have.
Life’s much happier that way.
TTwiggy said:
Requiring a licence to view live TV is not unique to the UK.
Getting a service as comprehensive as the BBC in return is.
For some reason I find myself having to repeat this every few months on here.
Repeating your view doesn't alter the simple fact that others legitimately believe that it is an unjustified arrangement that unfairly subsidises one company over all its competitors in what is an essentially commercial business and insulates its executives from the consequences of their decisions/actions. Getting a service as comprehensive as the BBC in return is.
For some reason I find myself having to repeat this every few months on here.
There are more efficient, effective and economical ways of securing the minuscule proportion of genuinely valuable public service broadcasting.
El stovey said:
Just view the bbc like council tax or some other taxation that goes towards stuff you might not make full use of.
Look at where your income tax goes? Do you use all those things?
I imagine my tax goes towards things I use or things that I approve of like the hospital that helped my dad or the cycle path I run along or those cool aircraft carriers the navy have.
Life’s much happier that way.
Well, if that's what you believe, let's have it funded by general taxation and under proper democratic control then, shall we? Thought not.Look at where your income tax goes? Do you use all those things?
I imagine my tax goes towards things I use or things that I approve of like the hospital that helped my dad or the cycle path I run along or those cool aircraft carriers the navy have.
Life’s much happier that way.
andymadmak said:
Perhaps the reason that you're having to repeat this every few weeks is because the BBC, much like the Labour Party, has forgotten that for it to remain relevant, it must respond to what it's supporters want, and not simply plough ahead with what it wants them to want...
Viewing figures would suggest they are doing just fine.psi310398 said:
Repeating your view doesn't alter the simple fact that others legitimately believe that it is an unjustified arrangement that unfairly subsidises one company over all its competitors in what is an essentially commercial business and insulates its executives from the consequences of their decisions/actions.
There are more efficient, effective and economical ways of securing the minuscule proportion of genuinely valuable public service broadcasting.
And as I've also said before, many senior bods at the BBC would be more than happy to go completely commercial, as they have the infrastructure, knowledge and talent to wipe the floor with their competitors.There are more efficient, effective and economical ways of securing the minuscule proportion of genuinely valuable public service broadcasting.
andymadmak said:
Perhaps the reason that you're having to repeat this every few weeks is because the BBC, much like the Labour Party, has forgotten that for it to remain relevant, it must respond to what it's supporters want, and not simply plough ahead with what it wants them to want...
Are the BBC’s supporters unhappy with it then? El stovey said:
andymadmak said:
Perhaps the reason that you're having to repeat this every few weeks is because the BBC, much like the Labour Party, has forgotten that for it to remain relevant, it must respond to what it's supporters want, and not simply plough ahead with what it wants them to want...
Are the BBC’s supporters unhappy with it then? 
( a supporter and unhappy with it) andymadmak said:
El stovey said:
andymadmak said:
Perhaps the reason that you're having to repeat this every few weeks is because the BBC, much like the Labour Party, has forgotten that for it to remain relevant, it must respond to what it's supporters want, and not simply plough ahead with what it wants them to want...
Are the BBC’s supporters unhappy with it then? ( a supporter and unhappy with it) Radio 4 this morning
Some guy interviewing sone US republican advisor
In The interview actually laughed when he said it looks like some polls are saying trump will win in 2020
Laughed during an interview, because trump might win, can you imagine him doing that during a democrat interview.. but noooo bbc isn’t biased,
Then he said well that was the republican view then his voice noticeable changed pitch and went all deferential. Now here is somebody who helped obama win.
During that interval he asked him does Johnson’s win make you lose faith or gain faith in democracy.
Such a loaded question why even ask? Why would it do either.
Some guy interviewing sone US republican advisor
In The interview actually laughed when he said it looks like some polls are saying trump will win in 2020
Laughed during an interview, because trump might win, can you imagine him doing that during a democrat interview.. but noooo bbc isn’t biased,
Then he said well that was the republican view then his voice noticeable changed pitch and went all deferential. Now here is somebody who helped obama win.
During that interval he asked him does Johnson’s win make you lose faith or gain faith in democracy.
Such a loaded question why even ask? Why would it do either.
TTwiggy said:
andymadmak said:
El stovey said:
andymadmak said:
Perhaps the reason that you're having to repeat this every few weeks is because the BBC, much like the Labour Party, has forgotten that for it to remain relevant, it must respond to what it's supporters want, and not simply plough ahead with what it wants them to want...
Are the BBC’s supporters unhappy with it then? ( a supporter and unhappy with it) https://www.barb.co.uk/viewing-data/weekly-viewing...
But there is a lot of info in there. Obviously some stuff is missing. Netflix never release their viewing figures I think (?). One of the reasons Apple parted company with them.
I am sure there was a paper on Ofcom on the subject.
Zirconia said:
Barb's numbers are up for grabs if people want to go look at them.
https://www.barb.co.uk/viewing-data/weekly-viewing...
But there is a lot of info in there. Obviously some stuff is missing. Netflix never release their viewing figures I think (?). One of the reasons Apple parted company with them.
I am sure there was a paper on Ofcom on the subject.
Whatever Netflix viewing figures are, I'm sure they'd be much higher if they could lock you up for not having a subscription.https://www.barb.co.uk/viewing-data/weekly-viewing...
But there is a lot of info in there. Obviously some stuff is missing. Netflix never release their viewing figures I think (?). One of the reasons Apple parted company with them.
I am sure there was a paper on Ofcom on the subject.
Dr Jekyll said:
TTwiggy said:
But as I said upthread, their viewing figures suggest they are doing ok. You can't really compare them with the likes of Netflix, as Netflix has a very different business model (harvesting viewing data to create content).
What exactly does this mean?TTwiggy said:
Dr Jekyll said:
TTwiggy said:
But as I said upthread, their viewing figures suggest they are doing ok. You can't really compare them with the likes of Netflix, as Netflix has a very different business model (harvesting viewing data to create content).
What exactly does this mean?TTwiggy said:
And as I've also said before, many senior bods at the BBC would be more than happy to go completely commercial, as they have the infrastructure, knowledge and talent to wipe the floor with their competitors.
I wouldn't read anything much into that. It is a view that actually probably reflects just how second rate and insulated from reality they are. Not least as the view you ascribe to these senior bods does not seem to recognise that if the money for ongoing operations is not to be gouged out of ordinary UK residents in the form of a licence fee but earned, it is the level of those earnings that will dictate how much infrastructure, knowledge and talent the BBC will have "to wipe the floor with their competitors". Threat to income apart, what prognosis would you offer a big, fat, lazy public body completely unexposed to meaningful competition suddenly being required to recover its full economic costs, borrow money at non-public sector commercial rates, pay HMRC corporation tax on all its activity and pay HMG the value of the spectrum it occupies?
And on major capital projects, remember the £100m IT project it f
ked up so royally a few years ago? That debacle alone would have brought down almost any commercial TV company in the UK, possibly with the exception of Sky, but the public sector simply had to stand behind the BBC because a public corporation cannot be allowed to go bust. It would be interesting to see what terms any serious bank's project finance team would give a privatised BBC without an imputed government guarantee behind it. Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff