The BBC Thread

[Weston Super Saint]

1 hour ago, sadoldgit said:

Drink driving for one was rife back in the 70’s. 

Not a surprise really with ad campaigns like this.

[Whitey Grandad]

1 hour ago, Fan The Flames said:

I was being provocative. Seeing as you took my bite, I'll take yours; how can a president be more expensive than a king with all the hanger ons.

It’s the cost of the elections.

Plus we make a lot of money out of the Crown Estates in exchange for the Civil List.

[AlexLaw76]

1 hour ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

It’s on its last legs anyway. It’s not sustainable to charge a compulsory poll tax to watch TV in the second quarter of the 21st century. Eventually they’ll have to make it a subscription service & cut off people who don’t pay. 

It will die off soon enough anyway, more and more people under 30 just do not bother.

[spyinthesky]

3 minutes ago, AlexLaw76 said:

It will die off soon enough anyway, more and more people under 30 just do not bother.

Fair comment but I would rather pay the equivalent of £3 a week to watch relatively decent, advert free, content from the BBC than a lot of dross on other channels

[AlexLaw76]

5 minutes ago, spyinthesky said:

Fair comment but I would rather pay the equivalent of £3 a week to watch relatively decent, advert free, content from the BBC than a lot of dross on other channels

Then that should be a choice. If the BBC is as good as people claim, it should flourish when not constrained by the tax

[spyinthesky]

Just now, AlexLaw76 said:

Then that should be a choice. If the BBC is as good as people claim, it should flourish when not constrained by the tax

Interested in your view of the options.

Adverts (no thanks) or do I have to pay more than £3 per week for access to something that is US financed?

[badgerx16]

6 minutes ago, spyinthesky said:

Interested in your view of the options.

Adverts (no thanks) or do I have to pay more than £3 per week for access to something that is US financed?

The moment you get outside financing, you get outside influencing.

[AlexLaw76]

17 minutes ago, spyinthesky said:

Interested in your view of the options.

Adverts (no thanks) or do I have to pay more than £3 per week for access to something that is US financed?

I think the BBC should be made to stand on its own 2 feet. We get routinely told how outstanding it is, which must mean it would rake-in even more if not locked-in to a fixed fee

[Tamesaint]

8 minutes ago, AlexLaw76 said:

I think the BBC should be made to stand on its own 2 feet. We get routinely told how outstanding it is, which must mean it would rake-in even more if not locked-in to a fixed fee

Are you looking forward to paying one of the richest men on the planet to use your Twitter account?

[AlexLaw76]

7 minutes ago, Tamesaint said:

Are you looking forward to paying one of the richest men on the planet to use your Twitter account?

Good point, well made

[Patrick Bateman]

2 hours ago, Weston Super Saint said:

Not a surprise really with ad campaigns like this.

That's a fake advert created by the Irish Garda to attempt to tackle drink driving by showing that it's got tighter or something. Either way, it's not genuine. 

[aintforever]

1 hour ago, AlexLaw76 said:

Then that should be a choice. If the BBC is as good as people claim, it should flourish when not constrained by the tax

Maybe it is good because of how it is financed?

[AlexLaw76]

19 minutes ago, aintforever said:

Maybe it is good because of how it is financed?

Be prepared for it to get very shit then, because hordes of people, mostly u30s, are ditching their license fee

[Fan The Flames]

The prize for the tories is TV deregulation, they are desperate for partizan partial fox style channels. They want to pump the airwaves full of culture war bollocks, because they know their politics is failing.

Edited 20 October, 2023 by Fan The Flames

[AlexLaw76]

8 hours ago, Fan The Flames said:

The prize for the tories is TV deregulation, they are desperate for partizan impartial fox style channels. They want to pump the airwaves full of culture war bollocks, because they know their politics is failing.

So much so, they have done precisely nothing about ditching the license fee in nearly 14 years

other than that, good point

[Fan The Flames]

1 minute ago, AlexLaw76 said:

So much so, they have done precisely nothing about ditching the license fee in nearly 14 years

other than that, good point

The licence fee and impartiality are two different things. Other than that, good point.

[Lord Duckhunter]

12 hours ago, spyinthesky said:

Interested in your view of the options.

Adverts (no thanks) or do I have to pay more than £3 per week for access to something that is US financed?

Why does it need to be one of those options?
 

Still charge a licence fee. If it’s a good as it’s supporters make out most people will still pay. The ones that don’t or don’t want to, can lose access the service, rather than be put in prison. You could even have voluntarily top ups,  so you good people who think it’s brilliant could pay a bit extra to ensure it remains so. 

Edited 20 October, 2023 by Lord Duckhunter

[AlexLaw76]

2 hours ago, Fan The Flames said:

The licence fee and impartiality are two different things. Other than that, good point.

The two are intrinsically linked. The reason they are supposed to remain impartial is a direct consequence of the license fee.

[Fan The Flames]

5 minutes ago, AlexLaw76 said:

The two are intrinsically linked. The reason they are supposed to remain impartial is a direct consequence of the license fee.

The BBC mission set up by it's charter is to be impartial, the way the BBC is funded is via the licence fee, two separate things.

By intrinsically linked you're saying you can't have impartiality without the licence fee, that's not correct. Impartiality is preserved by not being funded directly by the government, but a subscription form of funding could preserve that as well, even advertising funding could.

[AlexLaw76]

55 minutes ago, Fan The Flames said:

The BBC mission set up by it's charter is to be impartial, the way the BBC is funded is via the licence fee, two separate things.

By intrinsically linked you're saying you can't have impartiality without the licence fee, that's not correct. Impartiality is preserved by not being funded directly by the government, but a subscription form of funding could preserve that as well, even advertising funding could.

They have impartiality because of the license fee you know this.

The believed continued breach of it impartiality is a significant reason why pressure is growing to ditch the legal requirement of the License fee.

Edited 20 October, 2023 by AlexLaw76

[revolution saint]

1 hour ago, AlexLaw76 said:

The two are intrinsically linked. The reason they are supposed to remain impartial is a direct consequence of the license fee.

Ofcom requires all broadcast media to be impartial.  Surprised you didn't notice it cos GB News got done for it not so long ago: https://www.ofcom.org.uk/news-centre/2023/ofcom-finds-gb-news-in-breach-of-due-impartiality-rules#:~:text=An Ofcom investigation has today,2023%2C breached due impartiality rules.

[AlexLaw76]

Just now, revolution saint said:

Ofcom requires all broadcast media to be impartial.  Surprised you didn't notice it cos GB News got done for it not so long ago: https://www.ofcom.org.uk/news-centre/2023/ofcom-finds-gb-news-in-breach-of-due-impartiality-rules#:~:text=An Ofcom investigation has today,2023%2C breached due impartiality rules.

the fact it is believed BBC routinely breach this is part of the reason there is a growing desire to remove the legal requirement for a license fee.

[revolution saint]

Just now, AlexLaw76 said:

the fact it is believed BBC routinely breach this is part of the reason there is a growing desire to remove the legal requirement for a license fee.

That's bollocks.  People don't want to pay for it because they don't feel they use it enough.  That's a fair argument although I actually like the BBC and the license fee but I can see it being harder and harder to justify.

[AlexLaw76]

Just now, revolution saint said:

That's bollocks.  People don't want to pay for it because they don't feel they use it enough.  That's a fair argument although I actually like the BBC and the license fee but I can see it being harder and harder to justify.

that is bollocks in your opinion. Not mine.

the BBC is dying on its arse. The sooner it gets with the times, accepts the need for drastic change the better it will be the other side. I am sure you will agree, if it is as brilliant as many claim, it should do even better when not wedded to a strict charter and a fixed fee.

[swannymere]

I thiink the issue for me is that the quality programming of the BBC brings other broadcasters up rather than being gutter stuff (except GB news Obvs.) i'll be sad when the BBC does go but seeing as GB inc is being gutted from the inside it won't be long. The Great sailed along time ago.

[Fan The Flames]

33 minutes ago, AlexLaw76 said:

They have impartiality because of the license fee you know this.

The believed continued breach of it impartiality is a significant reason why pressure is growing to ditch the legal requirement of the License fee.

Just by saying 'you know this' doesn't make it right. 

It's obligations and funding method are separate. The BBC could easily be funded in a different way and still be required to operate in a similar way. I would go as far as to say, that the BBCs culture is it's USP and that it wouldn't want to change it, even if it was allowed to, when the funding model inevitably changes.

What you are really saying is that the percieved left wing bias in some peoples heads makes them not want to be obligued to pay for it. That is a million miles away from 'intrinsically linked'.

[revolution saint]

28 minutes ago, AlexLaw76 said:

that is bollocks in your opinion. Not mine.

the BBC is dying on its arse. The sooner it gets with the times, accepts the need for drastic change the better it will be the other side. I am sure you will agree, if it is as brilliant as many claim, it should do even better when not wedded to a strict charter and a fixed fee.

Your kind of impartiality would be endless droning about culture wars - I doubt a news story goes by without you trying to find some angle to bring it up.  So the idea that you have any kind of handle on impartiality is frankly laughable.

As to your second point I've already said that it's becoming harder to justify a license fee in a media landscape that has so many options available.  It's nothing to do with impartiality though and as all broadcast media are required to be impartial, getting rid of a licence fee would make no difference whatsoever.

[AlexLaw76]

6 minutes ago, revolution saint said:

Your kind of impartiality would be endless droning about culture wars - I doubt a news story goes by without you trying to find some angle to bring it up.  So the idea that you have any kind of handle on impartiality is frankly laughable.

As to your second point I've already said that it's becoming harder to justify a license fee in a media landscape that has so many options available.  It's nothing to do with impartiality though and as all broadcast media are required to be impartial, getting rid of a licence fee would make no difference whatsoever.

Impartiality is within its own charter, which is the framework that the license fee supports. 

Anyway, at least we agree that it is dying a death. Pretty sad that people who cherish the Beeb would rather let slowly decay than set it free

Edited 20 October, 2023 by AlexLaw76

[swannymere]

7 minutes ago, AlexLaw76 said:

Impartiality is within its own charter, which is the framework that the license fee supports. 

Anyway, at least we agree that it is dying a death. Pretty sad that people who cherish the Beeb would rather let slowly decay than set it free

'Set it free' Blue sky David Brent speak right there.😀

[Fan The Flames]

Set it free so it can thrive unencumbered in the sunny uplands.

[Raging Bull]

16 hours ago, badgerx16 said:

The moment you get outside financing, you get outside influencing.

Ain’t that the truth 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/mediaaction/about/funding

[Lord Duckhunter]

2 hours ago, revolution saint said:

Your kind of impartiality would be endless droning about culture wars - I doubt a news story goes by without you trying to find some angle to bring it up.  So the idea that you have any kind of handle on impartiality is frankly laughable.

 

The fact that anybody thinks there can be impartiality is laughable and naive. It’s not a question of “here’s a Tory, here’s labours side”. Everything from running orders, guests, commissioning, scheduling is the subject to somebodies bias. 
 

Rod Liddle a man of the left & former BBC man spells it out. It’s over, gone. It’s unsustainable. The only debate  is what replaces it.

 

 

[Fan The Flames]

Two middle aged white men ranting on about the lack of diversity and going on about commercial imperative that didn't lead to better water or train companies.

But the truth came out in the end, these people want to punish the BBC for being perceived as anti-brexit.

[aintforever]

It's impossible to be completely impartial but the BBC is as close as you will get in today's media.

 

Edited 20 October, 2023 by aintforever

[Lord Duckhunter]

25 minutes ago, Fan The Flames said:

Two middle aged white men ranting on about the lack of diversity and going on about commercial imperative that didn't lead to better water or train companies.

But the truth came out in the end, these people want to punish the BBC for being perceived as anti-brexit.

O Sullivan was a remainer. 

[Lord Duckhunter]

24 minutes ago, aintforever said:

It's possible to be completely impartial but he BBC is as close as you will get in today's media.

 

In English? 

[revolution saint]

56 minutes ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

The fact that anybody thinks there can be impartiality is laughable and naive. It’s not a question of “here’s a Tory, here’s labours side”. Everything from running orders, guests, commissioning, scheduling is the subject to somebodies bias. 
 

Rod Liddle a man of the left & former BBC man spells it out. It’s over, gone. It’s unsustainable. The only debate  is what replaces it.

 

 

I might have a look at the video later so can't really comment on that.  I assume the point is that no one or no organisation can be truly impartial, and you can probably make a philosophical debate out of that but it's not going to get you any further than a pantomime of an argument that descends into "The BBC is impartial" vs "Oh no it isn't".  There can be no clear answer either because it's in the eye of the beholder and subjective.  I could of course respond with the fact that your link is to a man sacked for breaking BBC impartiality rules - it's not like he doesn't have any skin in the game is it?

Point I was making is that if you want to make a case for the license fee being unnecessary and irrelevant then you're best off leaving impartiality out of it.  I mean, I quite like the BBC and the license fee model, but it does look fairly anachronistic and quite difficult to defend in a media landscape that has a plethora of channels and streaming options.

Anyway, knock yourself out on the impartiality debate if you want - it won't get you anywhere.

[Tamesaint]

5 minutes ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

In English? 

You know what he meant. If possible stop being a dickhead.

[Fan The Flames]

32 minutes ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

O Sullivan was a remainer. 

Playing to the Talk Radio outraged crowd then, he has to earn a crust.

[Fan The Flames]

31 minutes ago, revolution saint said:

I might have a look at the video later so can't really comment on that.  I assume the point is that no one or no organisation can be truly impartial, and you can probably make a philosophical debate out of that but it's not going to get you any further than a pantomime of an argument that descends into "The BBC is impartial" vs "Oh no it isn't".  There can be no clear answer either because it's in the eye of the beholder and subjective.  I could of course respond with the fact that your link is to a man sacked for breaking BBC impartiality rules - it's not like he doesn't have any skin in the game is it?

Point I was making is that if you want to make a case for the license fee being unnecessary and irrelevant then you're best off leaving impartiality out of it.  I mean, I quite like the BBC and the license fee model, but it does look fairly anachronistic and quite difficult to defend in a media landscape that has a plethora of channels and streaming options.

Anyway, knock yourself out on the impartiality debate if you want - it won't get you anywhere.

The impartiality debate will at some point include a photo of Corbyn in a Russian hat.

[The Kraken]

 

[Weston Super Saint]

They're cancelling doctors FFS.

[badgerx16]

3 minutes ago, Weston Super Saint said:

They're cancelling doctors FFS.

NHS budget pressures.

[Fan The Flames]

17 minutes ago, The Kraken said:

 

Apparently arranged weeks ago, but he will get a grilling for recent events.

[The Kraken]

4 minutes ago, Fan The Flames said:

Apparently arranged weeks ago, but he will get a grilling for recent events.

A grilling? He shouldn’t be even considering an official meeting with a fringe group of lunatics. 1922 don’t represent Tory policy, they represent backbenchers. 

[whelk]

BBC News app is now shite. Whoever designed and signed off on that upgrade needs horse whipping 

[Gloucester Saint]

The article Alex Law refers to is here https://advanced-television.com/2022/01/24/survey-1-in-20-young-adults-watch-bbc-live/

There is most support for adverts, then staying as is, with a subscription model (the Conservatives preferred option arising from Dorries failed attempts to privatise C4 https://www.thesocialreview.co.uk/2022/04/17/the-conservatives-netflix-problem/). One of the issues is that Netflix over-expanded and hardly has any new programming with the hefty debt accrued, despite yet another price rise coming our way. Amazon Prime has the issue that it isn’t clear whether it’s profitable or merely a loss leader for the rest of the empire.

Regarding the BBC, iPlayer use in that article was rising amongst that demographic albeit less than the over-65s. Of course, live TV viewing will be far higher for the over-65s because that demographic is by and large (with exceptions) retired and the UK has an ageing population.

There are improvements to be made which would widen the BBC’s reach but that probably involves social inclusion measures the Conservatives probably won’t want from a culture war perspective. Some of the programming, especially children’s, was recognised as still being world class and the rest popular with middle aged onwards. 

The BBC are far from alone in having issues as a long-standing public institution connecting to millennials and the generation following https://www.kcl.ac.uk/news/are-millennials-really-killing-the-tory-party and https://pressgazette.co.uk/news/trust-in-news-uk/

Tastes may still change a bit later in people’s lifecycles. In this household, we have little time to watch any live TV bar the rugby WC matches but do use the catch up channels including iPlayer. 

A final observation in that article is that ITV/C4/Sky would all be opposed to BBC having adverts because after the initial excitement by advertisers at being on the BBC, they would be fishing from the same market for that income, lowering the tide. 

Edited 20 October, 2023 by Gloucester Saint

[revolution saint]

50 minutes ago, Gloucester Saint said:

The article Alex Law refers to is here https://advanced-television.com/2022/01/24/survey-1-in-20-young-adults-watch-bbc-live/

There is most support for adverts, then staying as is, with a subscription model (the Conservatives preferred option arising from Dorries failed attempts to privatise C4 https://www.thesocialreview.co.uk/2022/04/17/the-conservatives-netflix-problem/). One of the issues is that Netflix over-expanded and hardly has any new programming with the hefty debt accrued, despite yet another price rise coming our way. Amazon Prime has the issue that it isn’t clear whether it’s profitable or merely a loss leader for the rest of the empire.

Regarding the BBC, iPlayer use in that article was rising amongst that demographic albeit less than the over-65s. Of course, live TV viewing will be far higher for the over-65s because that demographic is by and large (with exceptions) retired and the UK has an ageing population.

There are improvements to be made which would widen the BBC’s reach but that probably involves social inclusion measures the Conservatives probably won’t want from a culture war perspective. Some of the programming, especially children’s, was recognised as still being world class and the rest popular with middle aged onwards. 

The BBC are far from alone in having issues as a long-standing public institution connecting to millennials and the generation following https://www.kcl.ac.uk/news/are-millennials-really-killing-the-tory-party and https://pressgazette.co.uk/news/trust-in-news-uk/

Tastes may still change a bit later in people’s lifecycles. In this household, we have little time to watch any live TV bar the rugby WC matches but do use the catch up channels including iPlayer. 

A final observation in that article is that ITV/C4/Sky would all be opposed to BBC having adverts because after the initial excitement by advertisers at being on the BBC, they would be fishing from the same market for that income, lowering the tide. 

Thanks for sharing those links, some really fascinating stuff although we could probably veer well off topic discussing them all.

[Fan The Flames]

2 hours ago, Gloucester Saint said:

The article Alex Law refers to is here https://advanced-television.com/2022/01/24/survey-1-in-20-young-adults-watch-bbc-live/

There is most support for adverts, then staying as is, with a subscription model (the Conservatives preferred option arising from Dorries failed attempts to privatise C4 https://www.thesocialreview.co.uk/2022/04/17/the-conservatives-netflix-problem/). One of the issues is that Netflix over-expanded and hardly has any new programming with the hefty debt accrued, despite yet another price rise coming our way. Amazon Prime has the issue that it isn’t clear whether it’s profitable or merely a loss leader for the rest of the empire.

Regarding the BBC, iPlayer use in that article was rising amongst that demographic albeit less than the over-65s. Of course, live TV viewing will be far higher for the over-65s because that demographic is by and large (with exceptions) retired and the UK has an ageing population.

There are improvements to be made which would widen the BBC’s reach but that probably involves social inclusion measures the Conservatives probably won’t want from a culture war perspective. Some of the programming, especially children’s, was recognised as still being world class and the rest popular with middle aged onwards. 

The BBC are far from alone in having issues as a long-standing public institution connecting to millennials and the generation following https://www.kcl.ac.uk/news/are-millennials-really-killing-the-tory-party and https://pressgazette.co.uk/news/trust-in-news-uk/

Tastes may still change a bit later in people’s lifecycles. In this household, we have little time to watch any live TV bar the rugby WC matches but do use the catch up channels including iPlayer. 

A final observation in that article is that ITV/C4/Sky would all be opposed to BBC having adverts because after the initial excitement by advertisers at being on the BBC, they would be fishing from the same market for that income, lowering the tide. 

As you say, its not known if this is a permanent shift with young people or will they change as they get older. I know I've seen my daughter's habits change over the last 10 years, from TV and DVDs to no tv and only the internet, to binging on netflix and prime on her own/with friends, to watching normal tv, to following normal tv series with the family in the living room. 

I think netflix are even holding episodes back to create shared moments. So who knows which way it will go, there's life in the old dog yet.

[AlexLaw76]

Question of Sport axed.

anyone actually still watch this anyway?