Re: 'Austerity' at the BBC
 

Yes it was and you where quite clear about it because

i said

you said

so i stand by my point of many, many people in many countries could manage perfectly fine without it and since you introduced "many, many people in many countries" into the discussion (so you must be referring to the world service as well) ,let those many ,many people in many countries contribute if they want the service

Re: 'Austerity' at the BBC
 

Personally I'd rather have the Beeb acting as a public broadcaster than leave it to the private media who frankly have shown themselves to be irresponsible when it comes to disseminating info and creativity to the country.

Looking at what's been available all across the 100 or so channels I have access to recently I'm afraid the Beeb still wins hands down and because ALL political parties accuse the BBC of bias on a very regular basis I think they are still doing a good job.;)

Re: 'Austerity' at the BBC
 

As I said, I was referring to other country's PSB equivalents rather than the BBC specifically. Obviously I should have been clearer in the distinction. So apologies for that.

---------- Post added at 19:52 ---------- Previous post was at 19:45 ----------

Exactly. Plus the fact that they can (and have to) produce such a wide variety of programmes and they can and do do so precisely because of the way they are funded; ie because the do not have to rely exclusively on the commercially-successful programmes.

If we didn't have the BBC we'd only have ITV :eek:

And this :)

Also, I'm sure someone said that "the BBC could shut down tomorrow" and it wouldn't make any difference to anything. Well, apart from all those lost jobs, and the couple of £1bn that the company contributes to the UK economy each year, I suppose they might be right. On the upside, those with transferable skills will certainly be able to get a similar job earning a lot more money ;)

However, in the interests of not going round and round in circles for days on end not getting anywhere, I would like to suggest we leave it there.

Re: 'Austerity' at the BBC
 

One final post from me, just to put it into perspective a little.

Well, I say "from me". It's a link and quotes of a post over on the DS Forums.

This is the original post

http://www.kidderminstershuttle.co.u...Forest_s_ex_MP

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...s-1692548.html


---------- Post added 27-12-2012 at 00:01 ---------- Previous post was 26-12-2012 at 23:04 ----------

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-20844251
"National Audit Office to examine BBC pay-offs"

As with the previous investigation of this type (ie executive pay), I'm sure they will find nothing wrong.

Re: 'Austerity' at the BBC
 

Meanwhile i hope they do, they might think twice next time.

Re: 'Austerity' at the BBC
 

Can't see it sadly. Some people just feel they're 'entitled' no matter what the prevailing economic circumstances. Clearly the way in which the BBC enters in contracts with senior managers is also an issue. If that doesn't change then the payoffs and perks won't either.

Re: 'Austerity' at the BBC
 

Given that, as has been clearly demonstrated, the BBC is no different than any other public sector company in its pay and pay-off systems, what exactly do you think they're going to find? :confused:

Personally, I think the £2m the BBC was forced to waste because some anti-BBC newspapers screamed "cover-up" over the Jimmy Savile 'Newsnight' issue was a bigger waste of money than they industry/public sector-standard pay deals.

A problem which, has also been clearly demonstrated seems to not be confined to the BBC.

Re: 'Austerity' at the BBC
 

The BBC is not a private enterprise ,it is run using tax money and is accountable to fee payers not share holders .Private companies can pay what they like ,the BBC or any other state run company for that matter can't .I wish you would stop the comparisons as there aren't any ,the BBC is unique and has no viable comparator in the media industry

Re: 'Austerity' at the BBC
 

True. But it does have to live and survive in the commercial world of broadcasting.

It already pays lower rates than the commercial sector. You want it to lower it's other benefits too?

"Come and work for the BBC. We don't pay as much as your Final Salary Pension (and other benefits) won't be as high, but we do have a nice Cafe. Oh, yes, but it's in Manchester!"

Sorry. Not good enough! I want my BBC to be staffed by professionals who know what they're doing, not everyone who can't get a job elsewhere.

But I have given you actual figures of what other public sector bosses, etc., are getting (as well as that other "publically-funded" UK broadcaster, Channel 4). IIRC I have only mentioned one 'private company' and they gave their boss £7m when she resigned after breaking the law!!

Exactly. Works both ways though. And, as I said, it has to survive using workers from that same media industry.

Re: 'Austerity' at the BBC
 

No it doesn't .The bbc gets it's money regardless .Commercial stations have to produce programs that advertisers are willing to pay money to advertise next to ,ones that will grab the audience and so watch the adverts .I they don't, advertisers will pull out, revenue will fall and share holders will kick off ,ultimately the company will fail .To get it's revenue the BBC simply has to produce programs ,if viewing figures fall then the only consequence is a change in manager ,no loss of income at all ,so in reality no competition at all

Re: 'Austerity' at the BBC
 

Well I meant in terms of staffing, for a start. You think it would get the money if it didn't do it's job well enough? Pretty sure if it got no viewers and wasted every penny it received it would not go down very well with anyone.

Whereas the BBC do not and can therefore take risks with some programming and have a dedicated channel for programmes that may not get a lot of viewers but which is appreciated by many; BBC4.

You know you just made the case for the BBC there, don't you? ;)

Well yes. Apart from that Royal Charter nonsense and it's remit to "inform, educate and entertain" then yes, it can do what it likes :rolleyes:

Yeah. Okay. Well done on completely missing the point though :rolleyes:

Re: 'Austerity' at the BBC
 

It's not going down well with ministers at the moment ,hence the investigation

you looked at those channels recently ,BBC 3 and 4 only transmit for a few hours and when they do they are mostly repeats from BBC 1 and old stuff .Less channels and more new content is badly needed ,and i don't mean more reality tv

which means that their remit is to produce quality programs not provide cradle to the grave luxury lifestyles for it's execs at the expense of those quality programs

What point is that then ?you have failed to make a valid one and i just pointed out how it works .

The BBC have a market advantage in that their revenue is guaranteed and only likely to go up in the future ,i feel that program making is suffering so they can overpay their senior management .In my opinion the BBC has to change ,it cannot continue to fund all the new channels ,i player ,HD etc on it's current income and pay the wages it is to the senior management something has to give .

Re: 'Austerity' at the BBC
 

Which, as with all the previous such investigations, will find nothing out of the ordinary. So another waste of public money.

You have been reading the links and quotes I posted I assume?

I haven't had a detailed, close look, no. Have you or are you just looking at the odd day and assuming?

Good job they don't actually do that then, isn't it?!

I give up. No, really. I have spent the last couple of days making very good points, all of which seem to have been completely ignored. Which doesn't really help in a discussion.

Apart from the recent 16% real-terms cut, you mean? See. You aren't actually reading my responses, are you?

What you 'feel' is completely irrelevant. The fact is that the BBC make far more programmes of a wider range than any other UK broadcaster.

And you are welcome to it.

I'm done here.

Re: 'Austerity' at the BBC
 

Oh how i wish bbc threads just died sorry but it always descends into the same loyal bbc diehards defending it no matter how stupidly (there are some who raise valid points but get lost in the complete rubbish spouted by others) and those who do not want it. My personal views on the bbc have been stated before so not doing it again the fact is go ask staff at other media companys and the bbc is not that highly regarded and often is the butt of jokes and perhaps it is envy but they way the bbc spends money also draws many negative comments. When you get payoffs as high as the bbc has made recently i question the "public sevice" spirit of many of it's high end staff they just seem like snouts in the trough no different to many politicians.

Re: 'Austerity' at the BBC
 

My issue with the BBC is how they force themselves on you, of course the BBC zealots will say you don't have to pay your licence and dont watch the BBC.

However if you don't pay for a licence because you dont watch the BBC rubbish and you only watch commercial stations you will still be hounded to death by the TLA who will call at your house every week till you give in and pay your TAX.

If the BBC think there product is so good then issue cards to everyone for the freeview boxes and make the BBC a subscription service to the same amount as the licence fee. That way you have the CHOICE if you want to watch the BBC then pay your subscription if you dont then you dont pay and dont watch. This will remove the other argument that they should go to a advert based system.