Cable Forum - View Single Post

**Chris** · 24-02-2004, 10:58

There isn't another broadcaster in the UK - arguably the world - that produces drama of the quality of the BBC. Anyone see The Deputy last night? Jonathan Creek on Saturday? Just two examples of what the Beeb happens to be putting out at the moment and which I happen to think are really quite good. I could also mention any number of 'classic' serials produced over the last half-century. It is also a massive news organisation that I still have a great deal of trust in, despite the Hutton report - it would be stupid to tar the entire operation on the basis of a single, high-profile cock-up.

Subscription charges would kill the BBC as we know it. You pay a subscription to see Sky One and they still have to run almost 15 minutes of adverts per hour to bring in enough money. How high would the subscription have to be in order to keep commercials off our screens and pay for the high-quality original programming we're used to? For me, the lack of adverts is one of the biggest attractions. You sit down to watch 60 minutes of TV and you get 60 minutes of TV.

A few noted BBC haters (like the MP Gerald Kauffman, whisper, whisper) are using low ratings for channels like BBC3 as their latest platform for demanding change, conveniently forgetting that when the BBC launched its TV service, most of the UK couldn't see it. BBC2 had a similarly limited reach in its early years. No-one would argue against the success of those channels now, especially as their output over the last 20 years is now the mainstay of the ever-popular UKTV (incidentally, part-owned by the BBC and generating revenue that supplements the licence fee).

The BBC's ongoing role as a public service broadcaster is to identify the needs and demands of the broadcast-consuming public and ensure there are no service gaps left unfilled by the various commercial operations. To my mind there is a yawning quality gap that ably justifies the BBC's existence all by itself; of all the alternatives Channel 4 probably comes closest to matching the BBC for the standard of its output, but 4 isn't a commercial answer to the BBC because its remit is not to be mainstream.

24-02-2004, 10:58	#5
Chris Trollsplatter Cable Forum Team Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: North of Watford Services: Humane elimination of all common Internet pests Posts: 38,305	Re: Scrap TV license fees? There isn't another broadcaster in the UK - arguably the world - that produces drama of the quality of the BBC. Anyone see The Deputy last night? Jonathan Creek on Saturday? Just two examples of what the Beeb happens to be putting out at the moment and which I happen to think are really quite good. I could also mention any number of 'classic' serials produced over the last half-century. It is also a massive news organisation that I still have a great deal of trust in, despite the Hutton report - it would be stupid to tar the entire operation on the basis of a single, high-profile cock-up. Subscription charges would kill the BBC as we know it. You pay a subscription to see Sky One and they still have to run almost 15 minutes of adverts per hour to bring in enough money. How high would the subscription have to be in order to keep commercials off our screens and pay for the high-quality original programming we're used to? For me, the lack of adverts is one of the biggest attractions. You sit down to watch 60 minutes of TV and you get 60 minutes of TV. A few noted BBC haters (like the MP Gerald Kauffman, whisper, whisper) are using low ratings for channels like BBC3 as their latest platform for demanding change, conveniently forgetting that when the BBC launched its TV service, most of the UK couldn't see it. BBC2 had a similarly limited reach in its early years. No-one would argue against the success of those channels now, especially as their output over the last 20 years is now the mainstay of the ever-popular UKTV (incidentally, part-owned by the BBC and generating revenue that supplements the licence fee). The BBC's ongoing role as a public service broadcaster is to identify the needs and demands of the broadcast-consuming public and ensure there are no service gaps left unfilled by the various commercial operations. To my mind there is a yawning quality gap that ably justifies the BBC's existence all by itself; of all the alternatives Channel 4 probably comes closest to matching the BBC for the standard of its output, but 4 isn't a commercial answer to the BBC because its remit is not to be mainstream.