Quote:
Originally Posted by carlwaring
I knew someone would mention this. However, when you add in everything extra that they have now been given to do with the same money (like funding the World Service) then it does amount to a real-world cut of something like 16-20% 
No they did not  You shouldn't believe everything you read in certain newspapers with proven anti-BBC agendas (which then gets repeated as fact in other papers.)
IIRC (and it was some years ago now  ) that £18m was, in fact, the amount paid to his production company over three (or so) years for everything they produced for the BBC; which was more than just the one BBC1 chat show.
I don't agree with the principle of the idea (ie the BBC making smarter, better use of the money it gets) but the situation is not helped when completely incorrect information, such as the above, is quoted as truth. |
The point about Jonathon Ross is that the BBC have been wasting our money for years and it is only right that when everyone else is feeling the pinch that they also cut their cloth. You've also chosen to selectively quote from my post and as a result somewhat destroyed it's meaning-I know that the freeze is a cut in real terms but the point is that despite that they will still be able to broadcast 8 digital channels, many more radio stations and be at the front of connected TV in the UK. If they're able to do that on what you say is a 20% smaller budget then frankly that just means they've been overcharging by 20%. I'm all for the BBC, I accept the licence fee as a means of paying for it. I expect value as well as quality.