Cable Forum
Page 3 of 4 12 3 4
Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

Cable Forum (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/index.php)
-   Current Affairs (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/forumdisplay.php?f=20)
-   -   Funding of the BBC (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/showthread.php?t=33707081)

pip08456 18-02-2019 16:49
Re: Funding of the BBC
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carth (Post 35983586)
:D erm . . forgot to mention that even if I do find something interesting to watch, it usually clashes with 'her indoors' wanting to watch her favourite soaps, celebrity quizzes, cookery shows (lord knows why 'cos she can't cook), glitzy tarted up talent shows, and any other tat that is disguised as entertainment :p:

Youtube gets some hammer from me . . no adverts either :D
But you can hammer KODI just as much as YouTube, let "er indoors" watch what she wants.

RichardCoulter 18-02-2019 19:17
Re: Funding of the BBC
 
He's already been told this, but carries on regardless.

pip08456 18-02-2019 19:23
Re: Funding of the BBC
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichardCoulter (Post 35983624)
He's already been told this, but carries on regardless.
He carries on with his original forecast which I agree with. That's another thread though.

telegramsam 18-02-2019 19:57
Re: Funding of the BBC
 
Some years ago product placement was allowed on TV,why can't the BBC take advantage of this and partly fund themselves with that revenue? It's not as if you don't already see products being advertised on many of their programs already,is it?,

OLD BOY 19-02-2019 18:54
Re: Funding of the BBC
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 35983565)

https://www.theguardian.com/business...tv-advertising

Quote:

ITV’s profits fell sharply last year as the Broadchurch to Love Island broadcaster reported the steepest fall in TV advertising in almost a decade.

ITV’s pretax profits fell more than 10% to £500m last year as TV advertising revenue, which accounts for about half of its revenues, fell 5% to £1.6bn. In 2009, ITV’s TV ad revenues fell 9.4% amid the advertising recession.

http://www.morningstar.co.uk/uk/news...ne-months.aspx

Quote:

LONDON (Alliance News) - ITV PLC on Wednesday said its revenue grew in the first nine months of 2018, though it expects revenue from advertising to fall in the final quarter due to an uncertain economic environment.

https://www.hl.co.uk/shares/shares-s...10p/share-news

Quote:

(Sharecast News) - A further study has warned that the decline of traditional TV viewing could accelerate to the point where UK broadcasters lose most of their advertising revenues.


According to a new study from Ebiquity, the viewing trend away from traditional TV towards online platforms such as Netflix and Amazon Prime that has already seen by the 16 to 34 age group, will spread out to other demographics.

This could result in advertisers choosing not to spend their money on TV campaigns as they will no longer be as cost-effective. Broadcasters, such as ITV and Channel 4, need the campaigns to stay afloat and the study revealed that they face a "tipping point" in the next five years.

By 2022, Ebiquity foresaw a worst-case scenario where there will be 45% fewer ads viewed by 16-34 year-olds, a 30% fall among the 'housewives and kids' demographic group and a 15% decline among adults in the prime ABC1 demographic.

This tipping point could be avoided, the report said, as broadcasters could still evolve with the new trends and create counter-strategies.
Well, I agree with most of that. But there is no shortage of advertisers. The issue really is the reduction of audience share of our conventional channels as OTT viewing takes over, which is what I've been saying all along. When the level is reached that channels cannot make sufficient income out of them, the linear channels will collapse in favour of VOD alternatives. Many of those will probably have subscription free (or reduced) advertisement-ridden alternatives. That's where the advertisers' money will be channelled and it will be better spent there.

As for whether the conventional channels will come up with new strategies to stay alive, personally I doubt that.

OLD BOY 01-09-2020 16:53
Re: Funding of the BBC
 
The licence fee is indeed doomed. From the Daily Telegraph:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics...unding-battle/

[EXTRACT]

The new BBC director-general will be told to come up with a replacement for the licence fee after decriminalisation of non-payment was described as a “done deal”.

Tim Davie faces a three-pronged attack on the licence fee from the government when he takes up his job this week, senior sources said.

Ministers are expected to announce within weeks that people who fail to pay the licence fee will face civil penalties rather than criminal prosecution from 2022.

There are also moves to “level the playing field” by awarding broadcasting licences to commercial rivals. The media regulator Ofcom has already granted a licence to a new channel named GB News promising coverage “distinctly different from the out-of-touch incumbents”.

Meanwhile Mr Davie will be challenged to replace the licence fee altogether with a new funding model or face a battle when the BBC charter is renewed in 2027, Whitehall sources said.

One senior Whitehall source said: “The decriminalisation of the licence fee is a done deal. It will be done sooner rather than later.

“But it may be the least of the BBC’s worries. There is a real interest in levelling the playing field with more competition. Ofcom has already given a broadcasting licence to a proposed new channel, GB News and that may be a sign of things to come.”

One minister said: “There is real optimism that the BBC will come up with a palatable alternative to the licence fee themselves.

“Tim Davie seems to be open to the idea of a subscription model and his background would certainly suggest that"

papa smurf 01-09-2020 17:01
Re: Funding of the BBC
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by OLD BOY (Post 36048310)
The licence fee is indeed doomed. From the Daily Telegraph:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics...unding-battle/

[EXTRACT]

The new BBC director-general will be told to come up with a replacement for the licence fee after decriminalisation of non-payment was described as a “done deal”.

Tim Davie faces a three-pronged attack on the licence fee from the government when he takes up his job this week, senior sources said.

Ministers are expected to announce within weeks that people who fail to pay the licence fee will face civil penalties rather than criminal prosecution from 2022.

There are also moves to “level the playing field” by awarding broadcasting licences to commercial rivals. The media regulator Ofcom has already granted a licence to a new channel named GB News promising coverage “distinctly different from the out-of-touch incumbents”.

Meanwhile Mr Davie will be challenged to replace the licence fee altogether with a new funding model or face a battle when the BBC charter is renewed in 2027, Whitehall sources said.

One senior Whitehall source said: “The decriminalisation of the licence fee is a done deal. It will be done sooner rather than later.

“But it may be the least of the BBC’s worries. There is a real interest in levelling the playing field with more competition. Ofcom has already given a broadcasting licence to a proposed new channel, GB News and that may be a sign of things to come.”

One minister said: “There is real optimism that the BBC will come up with a palatable alternative to the licence fee themselves.

“Tim Davie seems to be open to the idea of a subscription model and his background would certainly suggest that"
A paywalled site reporting not paying for a tv license ;)

Personally i don't want to fund the BBc,if i'm funding a political organization i wan't it to be one i choose.

telegramsam 01-09-2020 17:13
Re: Funding of the BBC
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by OLD BOY (Post 36048310)
The licence fee is indeed doomed. From the Daily Telegraph:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics...unding-battle/

[EXTRACT]

The new BBC director-general will be told to come up with a replacement for the licence fee after decriminalisation of non-payment was described as a “done deal”.

Tim Davie faces a three-pronged attack on the licence fee from the government when he takes up his job this week, senior sources said.

Ministers are expected to announce within weeks that people who fail to pay the licence fee will face civil penalties rather than criminal prosecution from 2022.

There are also moves to “level the playing field” by awarding broadcasting licences to commercial rivals. The media regulator Ofcom has already granted a licence to a new channel named GB News promising coverage “distinctly different from the out-of-touch incumbents”.

Meanwhile Mr Davie will be challenged to replace the licence fee altogether with a new funding model or face a battle when the BBC charter is renewed in 2027, Whitehall sources said.

One senior Whitehall source said: “The decriminalisation of the licence fee is a done deal. It will be done sooner rather than later.

“But it may be the least of the BBC’s worries. There is a real interest in levelling the playing field with more competition. Ofcom has already given a broadcasting licence to a proposed new channel, GB News and that may be a sign of things to come.”

One minister said: “There is real optimism that the BBC will come up with a palatable alternative to the licence fee themselves.

“Tim Davie seems to be open to the idea of a subscription model and his background would certainly suggest that"
The license fee has been an outdated mode of funding the BBC for many years now and should of went long ago. Sadly it won't be any time soon.

Sephiroth 01-09-2020 17:15
Re: Funding of the BBC
 
Nice one, OB and Papa.

iPlayer sits ready as a vehicle that suits subscription and a News Channel can be an add-on fee.

The concept of the BBC from early days is no longer applicable.

Mind you, the woke left will find an outlet and if that's broadcast by another subscription model company, political popularity will be easily measured!

Chris 01-09-2020 17:35
Re: Funding of the BBC
 
You know decriminalisation isn’t as simple as it seems - the burden of proof is lower in a civil court, which actually makes it easier to go after non-payers, even if it carries the risk of increasing non-payment in the first place.

No matter what the BBC proposes ahead of charter renewal it simply isn’t going to disappear behind a paywall. It is a mass-audience broadcaster like ITV, which as everyone knows, does not charge a subscription. Subscriptions are fine for niche audience products but too many people simply aren’t prepared to pay for their TV. Turkeys don’t vote for Christmas and the BBC is not going to volunteer to relinquish its public funding. The licence may no longer be the means by which the BBC proposes to collect that funding, but whatever they come up with is going to be a million miles away from an encrypted, ITV Digital style service.

OLD BOY 01-09-2020 17:39
Re: Funding of the BBC
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris (Post 36048321)
You know decriminalisation isn’t as simple as it seems - the burden of proof is lower in a civil court, which actually makes it easier to go after non-payers, even if it carries the risk of increasing non-payment in the first place.

No matter what the BBC proposes ahead of charter renewal it simply isn’t going to disappear behind a paywall. It is a mass-audience broadcaster like ITV, which as everyone knows, does not charge a subscription. Subscriptions are fine for niche audience products but too many people simply aren’t prepared to pay for their TV. Turkeys don’t vote for Christmas and the BBC is not going to volunteer to relinquish its public funding. The licence may no longer be the means by which the BBC proposes to collect that funding, but whatever they come up with is going to be a million miles away from an encrypted, ITV Digital style service.
They are already paying for it, Chris - compulsorily through the licence fee.

The licence fee has had its day, and I think Boris Johnson's government is determined to do something about it, as the link I provided indicates.

Chris 01-09-2020 17:43
Re: Funding of the BBC
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by OLD BOY (Post 36048324)
They are already paying for it, Chris - compulsorily through the licence fee.

The licence fee has had its day, and I think Boris Johnson's government is determined to do something about it, as the link I provided indicates.
I’m aware the licence fee actually pays for the tv service. ;). As you say, however, it is compulsory, under pain of prosecution, and further it is, and always has been, styled as a licence to operate receiving equipment rather than as a payment for service (in fact the wording on the licence itself goes to great pains to remind the holder that the licence comes with no guarantee of service ... if you’re in a transmission blackspot, tough. No refunds, no cheerful service tech in a branded van to come and fix it). Don’t underestimate the subliminal effect that has on people who are asked whether they’re prepared to pay for their TV or not.

ntluser 01-09-2020 18:01
Re: Funding of the BBC
 
It will be really interesting to see how this plays out.

The licence fee was to pay for your right to receive broadcasts either from the BBC or elsewhere.

If the BBC decide to adopt a subscription model to raise their funds how does that affect our right to watch the other channels ie. Channels 4 & 5 and ITV?

And what about subscribers to Virgin & Sky who currently get the BBC channels as part of their TV packages? How are they affected? And how will Virgin and Sky be affected under this new BBC model?

And does this mean that in common with the commercial channels, the BBC will start broadcasting advertisements?

The can of worms has truly been opened.

Mad Max 01-09-2020 18:04
Re: Funding of the BBC
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by OLD BOY (Post 36048324)
They are already paying for it, Chris - compulsorily through the licence fee.

The licence fee has had its day, and I think Boris Johnson's government is determined to do something about it, as the link I provided indicates.

Just you wait till the super economist sees that, you'll be in deep doodoo....:D

telegramsam 01-09-2020 18:22
Re: Funding of the BBC
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ntluser (Post 36048329)
It will be really interesting to see how this plays out.

The licence fee was to pay for your right to receive broadcasts either from the BBC or elsewhere.

If the BBC decide to adopt a subscription model to raise their funds how does that affect our right to watch the other channels ie. Channels 4 & 5 and ITV?

And what about subscribers to Virgin & Sky who currently get the BBC channels as part of their TV packages? How are they affected? And how will Virgin and Sky be affected under this new BBC model?

And does this mean that in common with the commercial channels, the BBC will start broadcasting advertisements?

The can of worms has truly been opened.
It's a good point you make about the license is so you can use your tv . No mention of it being used to provide the BBC funding to pay grossly overpaid TV presenters or indeed director generas. The BBC should be ORDERED to fund itself by whatever way it wants,i.e adverts or subscription. It should not be forcing everyone to pay for them regardless of whether they want to watch their programs or not.

OLD BOY 01-09-2020 18:42
Re: Funding of the BBC
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ntluser (Post 36048329)
It will be really interesting to see how this plays out.

The licence fee was to pay for your right to receive broadcasts either from the BBC or elsewhere.

If the BBC decide to adopt a subscription model to raise their funds how does that affect our right to watch the other channels ie. Channels 4 & 5 and ITV?

And what about subscribers to Virgin & Sky who currently get the BBC channels as part of their TV packages? How are they affected? And how will Virgin and Sky be affected under this new BBC model?

And does this mean that in common with the commercial channels, the BBC will start broadcasting advertisements?

The can of worms has truly been opened.
The money goes to the BBC - at least the bulk of it. The rest is subterfuge.

If (or when) the BBC introduces a subscription charge, the other channels will be unaffected, as they get most of their money via commercials. Any additional monies for public service broadcasting can be paid to broadcasters direct from the public purse.

As far as Sky and Virgin subscribers are concerned, they will also have to pay a subscription for the BBC if that's the route Auntie takes, although this could be collected with the subscription to Sky or Virgin Media as with any other channel.

As to whether the Beeb will also have a free 'with ads' option, I guess that remains to be seen, although given they will probably wish to have their programmes broadcast via transmitters while the other channels do, and a subscription would not work for that.

I think the choice could well be between TV channels with commercials or online with a subscription (but perhaps also a free with ads option).

As for the radio stations and the BBC website, I think both will incorporate advertisements in the first instance at least.

Mythica 01-09-2020 18:47
Re: Funding of the BBC
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by telegramsam (Post 36048332)
It's a good point you make about the license is so you can use your tv . No mention of it being used to provide the BBC funding to pay grossly overpaid TV presenters or indeed director generas. The BBC should be ORDERED to fund itself by whatever way it wants,i.e adverts or subscription. It should not be forcing everyone to pay for them regardless of whether they want to watch their programs or not.
The license is to watch live TV as it is broadcast, not to use your TV.

Hugh 01-09-2020 18:48
Re: Funding of the BBC
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36048314)
Nice one, OB and Papa.

iPlayer sits ready as a vehicle that suits subscription and a News Channel can be an add-on fee.

The concept of the BBC from early days is no longer applicable.

Mind you, the woke left will find an outlet and if that's broadcast by another subscription model company, political popularity will be easily measured!
Do you mean like the Fox News channel that closed down in the UK due to lack of viewers?

Sephiroth 01-09-2020 18:49
Re: Funding of the BBC
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 36048340)
Do you mean like the Fox News channel that closed down in the UK due to lack of viewers?
Obtuse as usual and nothing to do with the topic at hans.

Hugh 01-09-2020 18:51
Re: Funding of the BBC
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36048341)
Obtuse as usual and nothing to do with the topic at hans.
Political popularity is easily measured... ;)

Chris 01-09-2020 18:54
Re: Funding of the BBC
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mythica (Post 36048339)
The license is to watch live TV as it is broadcast, not to use your TV.
Not quite - it’s a licence to use equipment to receive broadcasts, not to watch them. You need the licence even if you only use a PVR to record broadcasts for later viewing. (Side note, back in the old days, you were breaking the law if you had a black and white licence for your black and white TV, but also had a video recorder, because the video recorder was receiving and recording colour signals).

It also has an additional stipulation covering reception of “broadcast” via the internet, but uniquely this clause applies only to the BBC and not to any or all TV broadcasts.

downquark1 01-09-2020 19:31
Re: Funding of the BBC
 
This will be a disaster they will just add it to some mandatory tax and you'll be even more forced to pay it.

OLD BOY 01-09-2020 19:49
Re: Funding of the BBC
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by downquark1 (Post 36048345)
This will be a disaster they will just add it to some mandatory tax and you'll be even more forced to pay it.
The link I provided clearly states that the pressure by the government is for a subscription service, although I think advertising is likely to be part of the solution.

heero_yuy 01-09-2020 19:53
Re: Funding of the BBC
 
I could see a freeview service with ads and product placement but a limited output and a premium subscription service of the better(?) output.

That would need to earn it's place in the delivery spectrum so no woke nonsense. The lovvies would hate it.

papa smurf 01-09-2020 20:29
Re: Funding of the BBC
 
Break it up and sell it off.

telegramsam 01-09-2020 20:36
Re: Funding of the BBC
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mythica (Post 36048339)
The license is to watch live TV as it is broadcast, not to use your TV.
That's what I meant as you well know!

pip08456 01-09-2020 21:06
Re: Funding of the BBC
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 36048340)
Do you mean like the Fox News channel that closed down in the UK due to lack of viewers?
Is that the same Fox News that broke UK broadcasting rules?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-41887613

---------- Post added at 20:06 ---------- Previous post was at 20:00 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by heero_yuy (Post 36048350)
I could see a freeview service with ads and product placement but a limited output and a premium subscription service of the better(?) output.

That would need to earn it's place in the delivery spectrum so no woke nonsense. The lovvies would hate it.
But aren't the "lovvies" the biggest part of their audience base???

Mythica 01-09-2020 21:34
Re: Funding of the BBC
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris (Post 36048344)
Not quite - it’s a licence to use equipment to receive broadcasts, not to watch them. You need the licence even if you only use a PVR to record broadcasts for later viewing. (Side note, back in the old days, you were breaking the law if you had a black and white licence for your black and white TV, but also had a video recorder, because the video recorder was receiving and recording colour signals).

It also has an additional stipulation covering reception of “broadcast” via the internet, but uniquely this clause applies only to the BBC and not to any or all TV broadcasts.
That's basically what I said, just left out the recording part.

It doesn't just apply to the BBC, it covers live broadcasts on all other online platforms too such as ITV player.

---------- Post added at 20:34 ---------- Previous post was at 20:30 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by telegramsam (Post 36048352)
That's what I meant as you well know!
How am I supposed to know what you mean? You said it was to use your TV which is incorrect. You can use a TV without needing a license.

Hom3r 01-09-2020 21:44
Re: Funding of the BBC
 
Sack the overpriced Gary Lineker, who said he would leave if we voted leave. That £1.7m saved for a start.

pip08456 01-09-2020 21:55
Re: Funding of the BBC
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hom3r (Post 36048369)
Sack the overpriced Gary Lineker, who said he would leave if we voted leave. That £1.7m saved for a start.
Peanuts when compared to other spending the BBC does. Not that I agree that anyone is worth that amount.

telegramsam 01-09-2020 21:57
Re: Funding of the BBC
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mythica (Post 36048365)
That's basically what I said, just left out the recording part.

It doesn't just apply to the BBC, it covers live broadcasts on all other online platforms too such as ITV player.

---------- Post added at 20:34 ---------- Previous post was at 20:30 ----------



How am I supposed to know what you mean? You said it was to use your TV which is incorrect. You can use a TV without needing a license.
As we are talking about TV channels (BBC) I thought it was very clear but apologize I hadn't reconond on some not being able to see that.

pip08456 01-09-2020 22:02
Re: Funding of the BBC
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by telegramsam (Post 36048372)
As we are talking about TV channels (BBC) I thought it was very clear but apologize I hadn't reconond on some not being able to see that.
I can see where you are coming from. If it covers all live broadcasts then why is it only the BBC who gets the money? If the BBC is so good then let its audience pay for it. The other live broadcasters seem to be doing OK with decreased advertising revenue.

Hugh 01-09-2020 22:19
Re: Funding of the BBC
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by pip08456 (Post 36048373)
I can see where you are coming from. If it covers all live broadcasts then why is it only the BBC who gets the money? If the BBC is so good then let its audience pay for it. The other live broadcasters seem to be doing OK with decreased advertising revenue.
Quote:
- Significant decline in the demand for advertising across most advertising categories with total advertising revenue down 43% in Q2 and down 21% in H1, despite good momentum in Q1 with TAR up 2%

- 17% decline in total Broadcast revenue to £824 million (2019 £991 million)

- 17% decline in total external revenue to £1,218 million (2019: £1,476 million)

- 50% decline in adjusted EBITA to £165 million (2019: £327 million) and 53% decline in adjusted EPS to 2.9p (2019: 6.2p)

- 49% decline in statutory EBITA to £159 million (2019: £310 million) and 90% decline in statutory EPS to 0.5p (2019: 4.8p)
https://www.itvplc.com/investors/results-centre

Mythica 01-09-2020 22:30
Re: Funding of the BBC
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by telegramsam (Post 36048372)
As we are talking about TV channels (BBC) I thought it was very clear but apologize I hadn't reconond on some not being able to see that.
Well it's something a lot of people believe.

jfman 01-09-2020 22:49
Re: Funding of the BBC
 
If we get rid of the BBC what happens with the revolving door to Downing Street and CCHQ for Spads, media advisors etc?

Sephiroth 01-09-2020 23:00
Re: Funding of the BBC
 
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertain...satellite%20TV.

Interesting article of what happens elsewhere.

---------- Post added at 22:00 ---------- Previous post was at 21:55 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 36048378)
If we get rid of the BBC what happens with the revolving door to Downing Street and CCHQ for Spads, media advisors etc?
Not particularly relevant, my friend. What are your views on how the BBC should be funded? Should it even survive in its present form?

jfman 01-09-2020 23:25
Re: Funding of the BBC
 
I’d bin it, however it’s an arm of the British state to control the proletariat so it will remain as part of the Establishment. It plays an important role in controlling the media narrative that the Government (of any day) wouldn’t trust the commercial sector to do.

Hugh 01-09-2020 23:58
Re: Funding of the BBC
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 36048381)
I’d bin it, however it’s an arm of the British state to control the proletariat so it will remain as part of the Establishment. It plays an important role in controlling the media narrative that the Government (of any day) wouldn’t trust the commercial sector to do.
But, but, but....

It’s a left-wing tree-hugging commie-symp woke luvvie organisation - how can it be an arm of the establishment whilst being totally against the establishment? :confused:

Maggy 02-09-2020 00:36
Re: Funding of the BBC
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 36048382)
But, but, but....

It’s a left-wing tree-hugging commie-symp woke luvvie organisation - how can it be an arm of the establishment whilst being totally against the establishment? :confused:
:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:

Mad Max 02-09-2020 01:04
Re: Funding of the BBC
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 36048381)
I’d bin it, however it’s an arm of the British state to control the proletariat so it will remain as part of the Establishment. It plays an important role in controlling the media narrative that the Government (of any day) wouldn’t trust the commercial sector to do.

Trolling again just for another argument?

Mr K 02-09-2020 08:43
Re: Funding of the BBC
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mad Max (Post 36048387)
Trolling again just for another argument?
Think he was being amusing and successfully too.

The anti BBC stuff us all coming from a right wing Govt and a right wing press. Folks are easily led, told what to think, and who to hate these days. They'll be the first to complain, when the quality of TV nosedives, we no longer make anything that won't make a profit ; half the airtime taken up with ads, the other with imported crap.

The BBC is one of the most British things about the country and the envy of others. Go abroad and and see how much if its output is distributed, the US has channels devoted to it.

As for funding, if they can find another way go for it. However it'll still need paying for. A subscription service would cost lots more with fewer subscribers.

telegramsam 02-09-2020 09:03
Re: Funding of the BBC
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr K (Post 36048388)
Think he was being amusing and successfully too.

The anti BBC stuff us all coming from a right wing Govt and a right wing press. Folks are easily led, told what to think, and who to hate these days. They'll be the first to complain, when the quality of TV nosedives, we no longer make anything that won't make a profit ; half the airtime taken up with ads, the other with imported crap.

The BBC is one of the most British things about the country and the envy of others. Go abroad and and see how much if its output is distributed, the US has channels devoted to it.

As for funding, if they can find another way go for it. However it'll still need paying for. A subscription service would cost lots more with fewer subscribers.
The BBC stopped making decent programs many years ago. Much of their stuff is now made by independent companies. Yes now and then they put out a good program but most of it in my opinion is poor. Some will disagree with me I know but more will agree. I'm not a right wing Tory voter either by_the_way. Just thought I'd mention it.

Sephiroth 02-09-2020 09:20
Re: Funding of the BBC
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 36048382)
But, but, but....

It’s a left-wing tree-hugging commie-symp woke luvvie organisation - how can it be an arm of the establishment whilst being totally against the establishment? :confused:


---------- Post added at 08:19 ---------- Previous post was at 08:05 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by telegramsam (Post 36048395)
The BBC stopped making decent programs many years ago. Much of their stuff is now made by independent companies. Yes now and then they put out a good program but most of it in my opinion is poor. Some will disagree with me I know but more will agree. I'm not a right wing Tory voter either by_the_way. Just thought I'd mention it.
Exactly. Hugh, albeit with his usual sarcasm, put it quite well.

Quote:
It’s a left-wing tree-hugging commie-symp woke luvvie organisation
Hence no new stuff like Blackadder, 'Allo 'Allo, Fawlty Towers.

It is a shameful, woke organisation that has clearly demonstrated its political bias and is incapable of looking itself in the mirror (see Lord Hall for dsetails).


---------- Post added at 08:20 ---------- Previous post was at 08:19 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr K (Post 36048388)
Think he was being amusing and successfully too.

The anti BBC stuff us all coming from a right wing Govt and a right wing press. Folks are easily led, told what to think, and who to hate these days. They'll be the first to complain, when the quality of TV nosedives, we no longer make anything that won't make a profit ; half the airtime taken up with ads, the other with imported crap.

The BBC is one of the most British things about the country and the envy of others. Go abroad and and see how much if its output is distributed, the US has channels devoted to it.

As for funding, if they can find another way go for it. However it'll still need paying for. A subscription service would cost lots more with fewer subscribers.
Not bad, what you said.

Maggy 02-09-2020 09:58
Re: Funding of the BBC
 
I note that all political parties complain bitterly about the BBC. Which proves that the BBC is doing just what it should which is expose us the public to all opinions not just one world view.I have Labour and Tory friends who want the BBC gone because they view it as the mouthpiece of the other.Which is why both parties have consistently sought to underfund the BBC.

Pierre 02-09-2020 09:59
Re: Funding of the BBC
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr K (Post 36048388)
Folks are easily led, told what to think, and who to hate these days. .
Ain't that the truth

denphone 02-09-2020 10:08
Re: Funding of the BBC
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maggy (Post 36048405)
I note that all political parties complain bitterly about the BBC. Which proves that the BBC is doing just what it should which is expose us the public to all opinions not just one world view
:tu:

---------- Post added at 09:08 ---------- Previous post was at 09:05 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Maggy (Post 36048405)
I have Labour and Tory friends who want the BBC gone because they view it as the mouthpiece of the other.Which is why both parties have consistently sought to underfund the BBC.
The trouble is too many listen to both the left and right politically mandated media propagandists.

Hugh 02-09-2020 10:32
Re: Funding of the BBC
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maggy (Post 36048405)
I note that all political parties complain bitterly about the BBC. Which proves that the BBC is doing just what it should which is expose us the public to all opinions not just one world view.I have Labour and Tory friends who want the BBC gone because they view it as the mouthpiece of the other.Which is why both parties have consistently sought to underfund the BBC.
Schrödinger’s BBC - it is neither left-wing or right-wing until viewed by a right-winger or a left-winger.

*apologies to Schrödinger‘s Cat...

Sephiroth 02-09-2020 10:32
Re: Funding of the BBC
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maggy (Post 36048405)
I note that all political parties complain bitterly about the BBC. Which proves that the BBC is doing just what it should which is expose us the public to all opinions not just one world view.I have Labour and Tory friends who want the BBC gone because they view it as the mouthpiece of the other.Which is why both parties have consistently sought to underfund the BBC.
...... which raises a point about how bias shows itself.

For example - vacant chair and its associated voids. “We invited a government spokesman to comment, but .....” - so they give the air time to the opposition parties. Brexit was classic BBC bias.


Hugh’s unfortunate sarcasm is more or less the bare truth.

Hugh 02-09-2020 10:38
Re: Funding of the BBC
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36048412)
...... which raises a point about how bias shows itself.

For example - vacant chair and its associated voids. “We invited a government spokesman to comment, but .....” - so they give the air time to the opposition parties. Brexit was classic BBC bias.


Hugh’s unfortunate sarcasm is more or less the bare truth.
It really isn’t - just because you appear to be trapped in a Telegraph bubble, and echo it’s anti-BBC sentiments, doesn’t make it reality...

Brexit - Question Time had Farage on 33 times - obviously didn’t want to show a pro-Brexit view...

papa smurf 02-09-2020 10:40
Re: Funding of the BBC
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 36048411)
Schrödinger’s BBC - it is neither left-wing or right-wing until viewed by a right-winger or a left-winger.

*apologies to Schrödinger‘s Cat...
There's one kind of people in this world.
Those who know about Schrodinger, and those who don't.:sulk:

Sephiroth 02-09-2020 10:57
Re: Funding of the BBC
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 36048413)
It really isn’t - just because you appear to be trapped in a Telegraph bubble, and echo it’s anti-BBC sentiments, doesn’t make it reality...

Brexit - Question Time had Farage on 33 times - obviously didn’t want to show a pro-Brexit view...

A friend of mine at the BBC told me that Farage was invited because it would always lead to argument - like 3 or 4 against one. I class that as political bias.

I’M BY NO MEANS TRAPPED IN A ‘Telegraph bubble’. The Torygraph is a fine newspapers whose article writers reflect many/most of my views on the UK etc.

It is the woke people who are trapped in a woke bubble that is intent on bringing down British identity. Have you noticed the funny accents now being used in TV adverts? I know it’s nothing to do with the Telegraph, but at least the advertisers should put people on who speak proper English, not sink estate accents and don’t change “the” into “de” and so on. Woke, bloody woke.

Damien 02-09-2020 11:05
Re: Funding of the BBC
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by telegramsam (Post 36048395)
The BBC stopped making decent programs many years ago. Much of their stuff is now made by independent companies. Yes now and then they put out a good program but most of it in my opinion is poor. Some will disagree with me I know but more will agree. I'm not a right wing Tory voter either by_the_way. Just thought I'd mention it.
That's still fine though as they tend to be British companies getting the commission. The BBC doesn't have to be a monolithic organisation, it can be just as valuable as a resource for British work to get put into screen.

One of the roles of the BBC is to promote and cultivate British artists. A lot of musical acts got their first radio play from the BBC and a lot of writers/actors started off at the BBC.

---------- Post added at 10:05 ---------- Previous post was at 10:02 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36048418)
It is the woke people who are trapped in a woke bubble that is intent on bringing down British identity. Have you noticed the funny accents now being used in TV adverts? I know it’s nothing to do with the Telegraph, but at least the advertisers should put people on who speak proper English, not sink estate accents and don’t change “the” into “de” and so on. Woke, bloody woke. [/COLOR]
Bit rich to complain about people bringing down British identity and then too to complain of varied accents on advertising. We don't all speak in received pronunciation. Britain has always had varied accents.

jfman 02-09-2020 11:09
Re: Funding of the BBC
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mad Max (Post 36048387)
Trolling again just for another argument?
I hardly think it’s trolling to point out that the BBC, by any reasonable measure, are part of the Establishment.

Sephiroth 02-09-2020 12:41
Re: Funding of the BBC
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damien (Post 36048419)
That's still fine though as they tend to be British companies getting the commission. The BBC doesn't have to be a monolithic organisation, it can be just as valuable as a resource for British work to get put into screen.

One of the roles of the BBC is to promote and cultivate British artists. A lot of musical acts got their first radio play from the BBC and a lot of writers/actors started off at the BBC.

---------- Post added at 10:05 ---------- Previous post was at 10:02 ----------



Bit rich to complain about people bringing down British identity and then too to complain of varied accents on advertising. We don't all speak in received pronunciation. Britain has always had varied accents.
I've no problem with traditional UK accents. But this gangland type London speak, which corrupts the language, is a step too far for me and a lot of people, I suggest.

Chris 02-09-2020 12:50
Re: Funding of the BBC
 
Whose language has it corrupted? It doesn’t affect the way I talk, or any of my kids. Sub cultural forms of expression come and go.

papa smurf 02-09-2020 12:53
Re: Funding of the BBC
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damien (Post 36048419)
That's still fine though as they tend to be British companies getting the commission. The BBC doesn't have to be a monolithic organisation, it can be just as valuable as a resource for British work to get put into screen.

One of the roles of the BBC is to promote and cultivate British artists. A lot of musical acts got their first radio play from the BBC and a lot of writers/actors started off at the BBC.

---------- Post added at 10:05 ---------- Previous post was at 10:02 ----------



Bit rich to complain about people bringing down British identity and then too to complain of varied accents on advertising. We don't all speak in received pronunciation. Britain has always had varied accents.
There's Lincolnshire and there's foreign ;)

nomadking 02-09-2020 12:54
Re: Funding of the BBC
 
The most important thing about any accent used, is that it must be clearly understood by the majority.

papa smurf 02-09-2020 12:55
Re: Funding of the BBC
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris (Post 36048434)
Whose language has it corrupted? It doesn’t affect the way I talk, or any of my kids. Sub cultural forms of expression come and go.
I see you've never watched eastenders init.

Damien 02-09-2020 13:00
Re: Funding of the BBC
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36048433)
I've no problem with traditional UK accents. But this gangland type London speak, which corrupts the language, is a step too far for me and a lot of people, I suggest.
You're talking about using words like 'fam', 'bruv' and 'innit' right?

That kind of accent and language has been around in London for a few decades at least now. Those are proper British/London accents which you can easily identify. London has all kinds of dialects and if enough people speak it, and they're British, then it's as proper a dialect as any others. It was cocky before that for example.

downquark1 02-09-2020 13:02
Re: Funding of the BBC
 
The English have often had incomprehensible accents. My father worked for a farmer who was completely English and that I literally could not understand.

My concern is more the political manipulation of language the BBC seems to do like "Sexual assault survivor" and "Decolonising the curriculum". This are things that were never used in the language before and do not actually make sense on their own terms.

Pierre 02-09-2020 13:53
Re: Funding of the BBC
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damien (Post 36048419)
Bit rich to complain about people bringing down British identity and then too to complain of varied accents on advertising. We don't all speak in received pronunciation. Britain has always had varied accents.
I've no problem with the BBC having "correct" accents, I can't think of anything worse than a newsreader/ presenter with a broad Scouse, Brummie, Geordie, etc accent.

and that's comes from someone born and bred in Liverpool.

Another accent I hate, I can only describe it as Generic female middle clasee southern accent, where there is a little croak in the voice to. Goes through me like nails on a black board.

Mad Max 02-09-2020 13:58
Re: Funding of the BBC
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 36048421)
I hardly think it’s trolling to point out that the BBC, by any reasonable measure, are part of the Establishment.

You know this, how? Or is it just your usual warped view of everything and anything that anyone else posts which is different from your views?

jfman 02-09-2020 14:34
Re: Funding of the BBC
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mad Max (Post 36048454)
You know this, how? Or is it just your usual warped view of everything and anything that anyone else posts which is different from your views?
Oddly, you are the only person that has contested the point.

I can only assume you deny the existence of an Establishment at all and that all our political, business and leaders within the media are there on merit. They all got to Oxford and Cambridge on merit, and it didn’t matter that Daddy was the 39th Lord something and cousin of King George VI.

Somewhat naive if so.

Damien 02-09-2020 14:35
Re: Funding of the BBC
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pierre (Post 36048451)
I've no problem with the BBC having "correct" accents, I can't think of anything worse than a newsreader/ presenter with a broad Scouse, Brummie, Geordie, etc accent.
Newsreaders are different because their purpose is to be clear. You always hear the weakest/most general of any given accent on BBC News/BBC Radio.

Sephiroth 02-09-2020 15:19
Re: Funding of the BBC
 
Maybe the new DG has just saved the BBC. A small choir in the Albert Hall will lead the nation into the songs so deprecated by the woke minority.

GrimUpNorth 02-09-2020 15:23
Re: Funding of the BBC
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 36048461)
Oddly, you are the only person that has contested the point.

I can only assume you deny the existence of an Establishment at all and that all our political, business and leaders within the media are there on merit. They all got to Oxford and Cambridge on merit, and it didn’t matter that Daddy was the 39th Lord something and cousin of King George VI.

Somewhat naive if so.
You don't really have to look too far back in the list of past BBC DG's to find the bit in bold falls in to the category of a crock of shit, but hey I suppose it sounds good if you say it confidently enough. Are we maybe seeing the old green eyed monster showing its head?

jfman 02-09-2020 16:07
Re: Funding of the BBC
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by GrimUpNorth (Post 36048473)
You don't really have to look too far back in the list of past BBC DG's to find the bit in bold falls in to the category of a crock of shit, but hey I suppose it sounds good if you say it confidently enough. Are we maybe seeing the old green eyed monster showing its head?
The Director General is but one position. I suppose Durham is nice too. Maybe not St. Andrews but up there.

I fail to see how pointing out that patronage and nepotism are a common part of public life in the United Kingdom, including at the BBC, is “the green eyed monster”.

Sephiroth 02-09-2020 16:44
Re: Funding of the BBC
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 36048477)
The Director General is but one position. I suppose Durham is nice too. Maybe not St. Andrews but up there.

I fail to see how pointing out that patronage and nepotism are a common part of public life in the United Kingdom, including at the BBC, is “the green eyed monster”.
Quite few media Alumni went to Durham - but no DG.
Know it well - my son studied there.

jfman 02-09-2020 19:57
Re: Funding of the BBC
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36048479)
Quite few media Alumni went to Durham - but no DG.
Know it well - my son studied there.
And was his mind corrupted by left wing lecturers and tutors? ;)

Sephiroth 02-09-2020 21:39
Re: Funding of the BBC
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 36048503)
And was his mind corrupted by left wing lecturers and tutors? ;)
No - Software Engineering doesn't attract lefties.

But my daughter's mind was so corrupted at Sussex. We've only just got her mind right - 12 years later. Some of the woke is still there - like multi-culturalism which just doesn't work and which some cultures just don't do.

Damien 02-09-2020 21:46
Re: Funding of the BBC
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36048512)
[COLOR="Blue"]No - Software Engineering doesn't attract lefties.
Wouldn't you classify me as a leftie? ;)

Hugh 02-09-2020 22:40
Re: Funding of the BBC
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damien (Post 36048513)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth View Post
[COLOR="Blue"]No - Software Engineering doesn't attract lefties.
Wouldn't you classify me as a leftie? ;)
Pinko! (from someone with 46 years IT experience, 15 of which was programming...) :D

Sephiroth 02-09-2020 23:16
Re: Funding of the BBC
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damien (Post 36048513)
Wouldn't you classify me as a leftie? ;)
Studied at Durham?

Anyway, I've no evidence of your leanings.

On the basis of my son, Durham didn't breed sarcos either.

Anyway, the BBC looks like it's going to be a more evenly balanced (if not boring) place.

Hugh 02-09-2020 23:26
Re: Funding of the BBC
 
:D
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36048515)
Studied at Durham?

Anyway, I've no evidence of your leanings.

On the basis of my son, Durham didn't breed sarcos either.

Anyway, the BBC looks like it's going to be a more evenly balanced (if not boring) place.
As the joke going round Universities in March went

Quote:
Hearing rumours that Dominic Cummings only travelled to see family in Durham because he'd been rejected by his family in Oxford and Cambridge
Also, I have two friends who work at Durham (one as an Associate Dean, one as a Senior IT Manager), and they contradict your position (being sarcy AF).

Sephiroth 02-09-2020 23:57
Re: Funding of the BBC
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 36048516)
:DAs the joke going round Universities in March went



Also, I have two friends who work at Durham (one as an Associate Dean, one as a Senior IT Manager), and they contradict your position (being sarcy AF).
Well, if they're friends of yours, no surprise. How do they think the BBC should be funded?

Hugh 03-09-2020 09:50
Re: Funding of the BBC
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36048518)
Well, if they're friends of yours, no surprise. How do they think the BBC should be funded?
Never came up in conversation, like with most people - this is the only place I have ever discussed it...

btw, well done in joining the "sarcos"... ;)

Damien 03-09-2020 10:24
Re: Funding of the BBC
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36048515)
Studied at Durham?

Anyway, I've no evidence of your leanings.
I was just saying I don't think there is a strong collation between political views and who gets into software development. Anecdotally it may be that people who go into STEM are less likely to be left-wing than those who go into the creative arts but maybe more left-wing than those who do humanities. But that could just be the stereotype.

Personally I think demographics largely override what any one person's interests are.

Remember Silicon Valley is a pretty liberal place which is why the Republicans are paranoid that big tech companies are censoring them.

Quote:
On the basis of my son, Durham didn't breed sarcos either.
What does sarcos mean? Is that some sort of regional dialect? I don't like this corruption of the English language. (ok, that's pretty sarcastic).

tweetiepooh 03-09-2020 10:36
Re: Funding of the BBC
 
I think that those who go into to any job from uni tend to be left leaning. It's while in the job that attitudes can change.

If you are in a job that uses public funding you are more likely to want more tax and better sharing of the wealth.

If you are in a job that "generates wealth" you don't want all those "lazy" arty types taking more of your hard earned cash. You may be OK to give as you want but not have it taken.

Pierre 03-09-2020 11:43
Re: Funding of the BBC
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by tweetiepooh (Post 36048528)
I think that those who go into to any job from uni tend to be left leaning.
until they start earning money, good money and see themselves paying back all those loans, and all those taxes and then it's usually a swerve to the right.

Damien 03-09-2020 11:46
Re: Funding of the BBC
 
I wonder if there are statsitics on how university educated people vote broken down by age? It's usually one or the other.

downquark1 03-09-2020 11:55
Re: Funding of the BBC
 
In the 70s American Universities were found to have 3:1 balance of liberal
over conservative academics. Now it ranges from 10:1 to 60:1 depending on which University you look at.

Sephiroth 03-09-2020 12:17
Re: Funding of the BBC
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by tweetiepooh (Post 36048528)
I think that those who go into to any job from uni tend to be left leaning. It's while in the job that attitudes can change.

If you are in a job that uses public funding you are more likely to want more tax and better sharing of the wealth.

If you are in a job that "generates wealth" you don't want all those "lazy" arty types taking more of your hard earned cash. You may be OK to give as you want but not have it taken.
I, like many of my cohort, were Labour leaning when we first started work.

Within 5 years, having a house and some luxury goods (colour TV in those days), I saw the folly of the TUC strike/driven Labour party and switched to the Conservatives whom I can and do criticise but to whom I still subscribe.

Until just a few years ago, the BBC seemed to do a reasonable job in terms of current affairs. I'm not sure when the turning point was - prolly at the start of Cameron's reign - but it is clear to me at least that their compulsory funding cannot be justified unless the new DG sorts this woke nonsense and leftie bias out.

Hugh 03-09-2020 12:26
Re: Funding of the BBC
 
"Woke nonsense" & "lefty bias" = "stuff that does not conform to, and support, my world view, so is very bad"...

You weaken your argument by using derogatory terms, rather than using fact-based reasoning, imho - ymmv

---------- Post added at 11:26 ---------- Previous post was at 11:21 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by downquark1 (Post 36048539)
In the 70s American Universities were found to have 3:1 balance of liberal
over conservative academics. Now it ranges from 10:1 to 60:1 depending on which University you look at.
Interesting article in that subject from 2017.

https://www.insidehighered.com/news/...out-what-means

nomadking 03-09-2020 12:34
Re: Funding of the BBC
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 36048542)
"Woke nonsense" & "lefty bias" = "stuff that does not conform to, and support, my world view, so is very bad"...
It is the "wokes", Liberals and Lefties that are restricting opinions etc. Those that criticise them, are criticising that restricting of opinions. They are not trying to stop them from having an opinion.
It's quite ridiculous watching the News nowadays. Only one side of an argument is going to be presented. Any counter argument is rarely explored by the journalists.

Sephiroth 03-09-2020 12:51
Re: Funding of the BBC
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by nomadking (Post 36048547)
It is the "wokes", Liberals and Lefties that are restricting opinions etc. Those that criticise them, are criticising that restricting of opinions. They are not trying to stop them from having an opinion.
It's quite ridiculous watching the News nowadays. Only one side of an argument is going to be presented. Any counter argument is rarely explored by the journalists.
Exactly. What's more, those that criticise them with an accurate description such as "woke" and "lefty" draw Hugh's disapproval.

Pierre 03-09-2020 13:24
Re: Funding of the BBC
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pierre (Post 36048537)
until they start earning money, good money and see themselves paying back all those loans, and all those taxes and then it's usually a swerve to the right.
I forgot to mention putting your hands on your hips and bend your knees in tight..................

downquark1 03-09-2020 13:32
Re: Funding of the BBC
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 36048542)
This basically equates conservative to mean fundamentalist religious type which I think lacks nuance as to what a conservative is.

For the record I don't think I really have a conservative temperament. The most conservative person I know is actually a liberal democrat candidate.

Pierre 03-09-2020 16:02
Re: Funding of the BBC
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 36048542)
Interesting article in that subject from 2017.

https://www.insidehighered.com/news/...out-what-means
Basically says most Lecturers and faculties are left biased and promote those views. Some Conservative students still do well despite this.

No recent data (10years +)

Left leaning students tend to stay in academia longer

Right leaning students tend to go for more business subjects, and subjects that pay more in a career.

I don't really think it's very insightful report.

Chris 03-09-2020 16:46
Re: Funding of the BBC
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by OLD BOY (Post 36048310)
The licence fee is indeed doomed. From the Daily Telegraph:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics...unding-battle/

One minister said: “There is real optimism that the BBC will come up with a palatable alternative to the licence fee themselves.

“Tim Davie seems to be open to the idea of a subscription model and his background would certainly suggest that"
No it isn’t.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-54014210


Quote:
The BBC's new director general has said he doesn't support any switch from the licence fee to a subscription service.
In his first speech since taking over, Tim Davie said such a change "would make us just another media company" that serves only "the few" ...
”For the avoidance of doubt, I do not want a subscription BBC that serves the few," Davie said during the speech in Cardiff.
"We could make a decent business out of it, and I suspect it could do quite well in certain postcodes, but it would make us just another media company serving a specific group."
Mr Davie indicates what I’ve always believed. You can’t build a mass-market tv service with high penetration in British homes based on subscriptions. There is no example of it in the British media industry. Subscription products are inherently niche, and as the new DG sees the BBC as continuing to serve the entire country he is not going to propose a subscription model when charter negotiation begins in earnest.

Interestingly, and chiming with the other strand of this discussion, what he does want to do in pursuit of a respected, reliable BBC with mass appeal, is to

Quote:
“renew our commitment to impartiality", he said.
Impartiality is "the very essence of who we are" and is possible to achieve even in polarised times.
"It is not simply about left or right. This is more about whether people feel we see the world from their point of view. Our research shows that too many perceive us to be shaped by a particular perspective."
He added: "If you want to be an opinionated columnist or a partisan campaigner on social media then that is a valid choice, but you should not be working at the BBC."
New social media guidelines for presenters and staff will be "rigorously enforced", he said.

Hugh 03-09-2020 16:46
Re: Funding of the BBC
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36048548)
Exactly. What's more, those that criticise them with an accurate description such as "woke" and "lefty" draw Hugh's disapproval.
{”Freedom of speech’ does not mean "can’t be criticised for what I say"...

Sounds like you are trying to restrict freedom of speech by saying people can’t disapprove of what others say...

FYI, I disapprove of "gammon" as much as "woke" and "lefties", because, as I said earlier, it’s name-calling, not debating.

You move the Overton Window your way, then accuse people who used to be called "moderates" lefties.

telegramsam 03-09-2020 20:58
Re: Funding of the BBC
 
My personal view is I don't care whether the BBC is run by lefties,righties or aliens from Mars! All I say is scrap this unfair TV licence and fund the BBC by advertising or subscription. Or perhaps all those that agree with the licence carry on sending money to the BBC.

pip08456 03-09-2020 21:27
Re: Funding of the BBC
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by telegramsam (Post 36048579)
My personal view is I don't care whether the BBC is run by lefties,righties or aliens from Mars! All I say is scrap this unfair TV licence and fund the BBC by advertising or subscription. Or perhaps all those that agree with the licence carry on sending money to the BBC.
Sounds about right!

nomadking 03-09-2020 21:47
Re: Funding of the BBC
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 36048560)
{”Freedom of speech’ does not mean "can’t be criticised for what I say"...

Sounds like you are trying to restrict freedom of speech by saying people can’t disapprove of what others say...

FYI, I disapprove of "gammon" as much as "woke" and "lefties", because, as I said earlier, it’s name-calling, not debating.

You move the Overton Window your way, then accuse people who used to be called "moderates" lefties.
A key difference is that the terms "woke", "Liberal", and "left" come from those groups themselves. They can't very well complain about using labels, they themselves created.

Eg May sound surprising, but the term "woke" originated with those that refer to themselves as being "woke". "Woke" people refer to themselves as that, as a "badge of honour", not a criticism. They use it to set themselves apart, and on a supposedly "higher" plane. By implication they are disparaging those they consider not to be "woke".

Sephiroth 03-09-2020 22:23
Re: Funding of the BBC
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 36048560)
{”Freedom of speech’ does not mean "can’t be criticised for what I say"...

Sounds like you are trying to restrict freedom of speech by saying people can’t disapprove of what others say...

FYI, I disapprove of "gammon" as much as "woke" and "lefties", because, as I said earlier, it’s name-calling, not debating.

You move the Overton Window your way, then accuse people who used to be called "moderates" lefties.
That's a hughe stretch you've made. Why on earth would I want to restrict freedom of speech?

It's the BBC that has slanted free speech, for example by ensuring it's 4:1 against Farage on Question Time with a lefty dominated audience to jeer as appropriate.

1andrew1 06-09-2020 03:00
Re: Funding of the BBC
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36048592)
That's a hughe stretch you've made. Why on earth would I want to restrict freedom of speech?

It's the BBC that has slanted free speech, for example by ensuring it's 4:1 against Farage on Question Time with a lefty dominated audience to jeer as appropriate.
Nigel Farage was once an obligatory fixture on Question Time for the Brexit Broadcasting Corporation. Inevitably, one of those many appearances would have left-wing audience members in it.
That was then and it has acknowledged its errors. The new Director General seems to be making the right noises so I will give it the benefit of the doubt for now.

Sephiroth 06-09-2020 08:16
Re: Funding of the BBC
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 36048775)
Nigel Farage was once an obligatory fixture on Question Time for the Brexit Broadcasting Corporation. Inevitably, one of those many appearances would have left-wing audience members in it.
That was then and it has acknowledged its errors. The new Director General seems to be making the right noises so I will give it the benefit of the doubt for now.
Fair enough.

GrimUpNorth 06-09-2020 09:42
Re: Funding of the BBC
 
I don't think the BBC or the license is going anywhere. There are many 'older' viewers who don't have or want subscription TV and just happen to be true blue and vote Conservative.

Chris 06-09-2020 10:36
Re: Funding of the BBC
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by GrimUpNorth (Post 36048778)
I don't think the BBC or the license is going anywhere. There are many 'older' viewers who don't have or want subscription TV and just happen to be true blue and vote Conservative.
There are plenty of socially conservative Labour voters as well. The BBC isn’t the preserve of the blue rinse brigade.

Maggy 06-09-2020 10:47
Re: Funding of the BBC
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris (Post 36048783)
There are plenty of socially conservative Labour voters as well. The BBC isn’t the preserve of the blue rinse brigade.
:tu:

denphone 06-09-2020 10:52
Re: Funding of the BBC
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris (Post 36048783)
There are plenty of socially conservative Labour voters as well. The BBC isn’t the preserve of the blue rinse brigade.
Exactly.:tu:


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 00:16.
Page 3 of 4 12 3 4
Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
All Posts and Content are © Cable Forum