The BBC charter renewal process begins

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by Chris

So, this is the point in the argument where you profess to know nought of such things, and therefore their importance is suspect.

There’s clearly little point in trying to discuss this with you - the entire British tv broadcasting system is based on the concept of public service broadcasting. It affects everything done by all the BBC’s TV channels, as well as the channel 3 broadcaster (ITV1, STV etc), Channel 4, S4C and Five, and all broadcast platforms whether or not they are owned by the public service broadcasters.

It is so fundamental to the discussion you’re trying to take part in, that if you really are “not entirely sure”, nothing you say can possibly carry any weight. This is laughable. And no, I’m not going to prove I do know by answering your thinly-veiled attempt to get me to do your homework for you.

Opinions are like erseholes, OB. Everybody has one but sometimes they’re full of *. On the off-chance that you’re interested in making an interesting contribution to a discussion rather than fancying yourself as an armchair expert, you could start your research with the very basic information here:

http://letmegooglethat.com/?q=What+i...United+Kingdom

Rubbish, Chris. What I am saying is that other channels appear to cover all the other programmes, and therefore they are not as special as some like to make it out to be.

What programmes would not be broadcast if the BBC was not there? All such programmes are available on other channels.

If you think BBC is ‘even more special’ than ITV, Channel 4 or Channel 5, what is it that stands out from your perspective?

Lack of adverts is the only thing that stands out to me. Apart from the wokeness, which I could well do without.

---------- Post added at 17:22 ---------- Previous post was at 17:19 ----------

Originally Posted by denphone

l would not say ITV news programmes are very regional as such given its 120 plus miles away from where we live wherever BBC South West regional HQ is just down the road..

For you, maybe. Our BBC region has been merged and now covers a huge area. We get more news from the southern coastal towns than we do for the Thames Valley.

[jfman]

Old Boy out to decapitate the UK TV industry as he clutches at his 2025/35 prediction. It’s only telly...

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

Lack of adverts is the only thing that stands out to me. Apart from the wokeness, which I could well do without.

If you’re in a hole, stop digging. Right now you’re simply hanging your ignorance out on the washing line for all to see. No, I’m not going to do this for you. The public service remit is a thing (has always been a thing in the U.K.), its impact on British tv broadcasting is profound, but as it’s something you know nothing about (and you clearly hate the fact that you know nothing about it) if you expect your little opinions to be taken seriously you’re going to have to swallow your pride and do your research.

Except of course that it might just be beyond you to do that ... it would certainly explain why you’re so quick to start bleating “whatever” and “woke” whenever you’re challenged with new information.

From today’s Yorkshire Post

Yep ... Guido was fuming this morning because none of the people on the new PSB Advisory Panel have ever expressed overt scepticism about the TV licence. He thinks this means whatever study they do and whatever recommendations they make, actually abolishing the licence fee is effectively off the table before they start.

It is certainly the case that Dowden is only talking about the level of the fee that comes into force in 2022 rather than whether there should be one. It’s also the case that a charter normally runs for about 10 years. So the licence fee is going to be with us until 2032 at the earliest.

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by Chris

If you’re in a hole, stop digging. Right now you’re simply hanging your ignorance out on the washing line for all to see. No, I’m not going to do this for you. The public service remit is a thing (has always been a thing in the U.K.), its impact on British tv broadcasting is profound, but as it’s something you know nothing about (and you clearly hate the fact that you know nothing about it) if you expect your little opinions to be taken seriously you’re going to have to swallow your pride and do your research.

Except of course that it might just be beyond you to do that ... it would certainly explain why you’re so quick to start bleating “whatever” and “woke” whenever you’re challenged with new information.

I note that you are unable to explain it either, Chris. If nobody knows what it is, who is going to miss it?

If it’s all about standards, that’s bullshit. I’d rather watch Netflix, thanks. And there are other ways of ensuring that standards are met that are more relevant for today anyway.

You're still trying to get me to do your homework for you. I'm not biting. I'm comfortable that nobody else reading this is likely to conclude that I don't understand what public service broadcasting is. I'm also pretty sure you don't want to read about it yourself because you suspect it drives a coach and horses through (what passes for) your argument about the BBC's future funding - and that people reading this reckon that's the case as well.

If you prefer to remain in ignorance, that's your prerogative.

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by Chris

You're still trying to get me to do your homework for you. I'm not biting. I'm comfortable that nobody else reading this is likely to conclude that I don't understand what public service broadcasting is. I'm also pretty sure you don't want to read about it yourself because you suspect it drives a coach and horses through (what passes for) your argument about the BBC's future funding - and that people reading this reckon that's the case as well.

If you prefer to remain in ignorance, that's your prerogative.

Your posts are becoming a little perverse, Chris. I have already outlined above the type of programming that constitutes public service programming. Basically, local news, arts and religious programming.

My point is, of course, that this does not necessarily have to be provided by the Beeb.

The tragedy is that you might actually have convinced yourself you know what you’re talking about (spoiler: based on what you’ve said so far, you don’t).

---------- Post added at 20:00 ---------- Previous post was at 19:59 ----------

Originally Posted by jfman

Old Boy out to decapitate the UK TV industry as he clutches at his 2025/35 prediction. It’s only telly...

QFT

[OLD BOY]

Hopefully this will sort out this nonsense.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics...age-ministers/

[EXTRACT]

Public service broadcasters such as the BBC and Channel 4 face “profound questions” about their role in the digital age, the Culture Secretary has said, as he begins fresh negotiations over the licence fee.

Oliver Dowden will on Tuesday announce a new panel of experts to assess the future of public service broadcasting as he suggests there is a genuine debate over whether “we need them at all.”

Writing for The Telegraph, Mr Dowden says that the panel of broadcasting, journalism and technology leaders will not be “tiptoeing around the edges” but rather “drilling right down into the current system and how it operates.”

With the media landscape experiencing an “utter transformation” in recent years, he adds that the rise of Netflix and Amazon Prime has “lobbed a grenade into the system” and poses serious questions about the “role that all broadcasters have to play in the digital age.”

About time too!

[Raider999]

Originally Posted by Chris

How would you compel a private company to operate a subscription model?

If you cut-off their funding (license fee) they would have to become a subscription based channel or accept adverts.

Originally Posted by Raider999

If you cut-off their funding (license fee) they would have to become a subscription based channel or accept adverts.

Precisely - they have the choice. Either adverts, or subscription, or both.

So the question remains: how do you force them to start taking subscriptions? (Answer .... you can’t).

[Legendkiller2k]

Originally Posted by Chris

Precisely - they have the choice. Either adverts, or subscription, or both.

So the question remains: how do you force them to start taking subscriptions? (Answer .... you can’t).

With more and more people allegedly cancelling their tv licence i think a time will come where BBC will go comercial, not sure about subscription though, maybe bbc1 and 2, news will be comercial with bbc 3,4, cbbc and cbeebies going subscription?
Thatr's only guesswork though.

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by Raider999

If you cut-off their funding (license fee) they would have to become a subscription based channel or accept adverts.

Or both. That’s the idea.

---------- Post added at 07:40 ---------- Previous post was at 07:38 ----------

Originally Posted by Chris

Precisely - they have the choice. Either adverts, or subscription, or both.

So the question remains: how do you force them to start taking subscriptions? (Answer .... you can’t).

You are being extremely pedantic, Chris. You know very well from this exchange that that is precisely the choice. So why are you still arguing?

Originally Posted by Legendkiller2k

With more and more people allegedly cancelling their tv licence i think a time will come where BBC will go comercial, not sure about subscription though, maybe bbc1 and 2, news will be comercial with bbc 3,4, cbbc and cbeebies going subscription?
Thatr's only guesswork though.

Accepting for the sake of argument that the BBC’s Royal Charter is not renewed in 2032, the organisation becomes a commercial broadcaster, free to choose how it raises revenue, and its public service obligation is reduced but not entirely withdrawn, then they could pursue the strategy you’ve outlined. I’d have thought it very unlikely that the public service obligation would be withdrawn from BBC1 and 2. That being the case they would still not be able to put these behind a paywall.

If you look at ITV as the BBC’s nearest analogy on terrestrial TV, only the main channel in epg position 3 is a public service channel that must be free to air. Yet ITV 2, 3 and 4, which are not public service channels, are also FTA. Their HD variants are behind Sky’s paywall on satellite but this has more to do with Sky’s willingness to pay broadcasters to keep HD channels off Freesat than any deliberate strategy to ‘sell’ their channels (Film 4 is paywalled on Sky for the same reason).

So while you could see a scenario where the BBC’s more niche stuff could be paywalled (and the public service obligation on those channels were withdrawn then they would be free to do that), the example of ITV suggests they wouldn’t. Also consider that all of the BBC’s output is geared towards mass audiences. Even the niche stuff on BBC4 is intended for that entire market segment, and not just those within that segment that are prepared to take out a subscription to Sky or VM. At least a third of the potential audience for BBC4 live in homes that don’t already have a pay tv service is significant. If they don’t have Sky already, are they likely to go and get it for BBC4? I’d say it’s unlikely.

Furthermore, at present every one of the BBC’s channels is designed around a public service requirement, and not a commercial one. So despite all of the above, it is unlikely that any of the BBC’s channels would continue in precisely the same form, in a commercial environment and without the public service obligation.

---------- Post added at 08:41 ---------- Previous post was at 08:07 ----------

These posts were split out of the Netflix/streaming services thread. Please continue discussion about the TV licence and the BBC Royal Charter renewal process here.