Scrap the BBC to cut the defecit

ninky_2

bendix wrote: »

If you think the great unwashed care enough about the BBC to have a revolution about it, you're thinking like some defensive media darling. Oh . . wait a minute . . .

Those revolutionaries already have Sky - I strongly suspect hardly anyone would give a damn and would welcome it, in fact.

Personally, i like the BBC but dont think it is value for money anymore.

We should let the market dictate the license fee. The license fee should be related somehow to the marketshare the BBC channels get, compared to the other options available.

let's think ahead a little bit here shall we? if the bbc has to compete with commercial channels to get audience to secure its licence fee (it already does this through political pressure to a certain extent) what can we expect to see nonstop on our screens? shall we take a look at the possibly entertaining but absolute intellectual drivel that scores some of the highest ratings?

itv - x factor / coronation street
bbc - strictly come dancing /eastenders
channel 4 - come dine with me
channel 5 - ice road truckers

under your plan if the bbc fails to put out wall-to-wall shows like this it will lose ratings and therefore lose its revenue. once again you want to put power in capital which will just have a cumulative impact of collecting that capital (ergo power) into fewer and fewer hands. it also means the minority have to succumb to the will of the crowd. hell i love a bit of lowbrow culture - even make some of it. i'm not keen on seeing the entire television industry dissolve into a morass of it however.

purch

Its not my fault they arent clever enough to get a decent job.

I guess it's also not your fault that you still cannot spell the simple word DEFICIT, despite having started at least 50 threads on the subject.:eek:

If you are going to attack people for not being clever, the best option would be to use a spellchecker before you post in future. It'll help your credibility.

doire_2

FTBFun wrote: »

...and that was it eh? Nothing else on any of the other channels or radio stations or website?

Who said that was it?Im giving an example of the crap they put on their main channel on prime time saturday night.....is that hard to understand? Consistent from you though....not reading a post properly


Ahh i get it....you are a Blue fan...how sad

bendix

ninky wrote: »

let's think ahead a little bit here shall we? if the bbc has to compete with commercial channels to get audience to secure its licence fee (it already does this through political pressure to a certain extent) what can we expect to see nonstop on our screens? shall we take a look at the possibly entertaining but absolute intellectual drivel that scores some of the highest ratings?

itv - x factor / coronation street
bbc - strictly come dancing /eastenders
channel 4 - come dine with me
channel 5 - ice road truckers

under your plan if the bbc fails to put out wall-to-wall shows like this it will lose ratings and therefore lose its revenue. once again you want to put power in capital which will just have a cumulative impact of collecting that capital (ergo power) into fewer and fewer hands. it also means the minority have to succumb to the will of the crowd. hell i love a bit of lowbrow culture - even make some of it. i'm not keen on seeing the entire television industry dissolve into a morass of it however.

Once again, our resident leftie thinks it is our responsibility to tell people what they want, rather than letting the market speak for itself.

What gives you guys the moral right to impose highbrow stuff onto people for their own benefit, when left to their own devises they would rather watch X factor? Who made you guys the ultimate arbiters of taste?

If there is demand for highbrow stuff, then a commercial channel would meet that need.

Frankly, i could care two hoots if there is highbrow tv or not. There are books, the internet etc too. TV is being increasingly dumbed down, because at the end of the day it is what people want.

And if there is a minority like you (and to a degree me too) who wants more quality, why should we (usually higher earners too) have that subsidised by people on a Blackburn council estate.

God, I hate elitism and those who think their duty is to protect people from themselves and their poor choices.

doire_2

twadge_face wrote: »

For your information, BBC now have additional channels beyond BBC1:

BBC2
BBC3
BBC4
BBC News 24
BBC Parliament
BBC Fish

Not to mention the iPlayer and myriad radio stations.

Some people just love to complain!

Jeeeez i didn't know that. *roll eyes*

No doubt you watch "so you think you can dance".....license money well spent on that rubbish

Jennifer_Jane

bendix wrote: »

Once again, our resident leftie thinks it is our responsibility to tell people what they want, rather than letting the market speak for itself.

What gives you guys the moral right to impose highbrow stuff onto people for their own benefit, when left to their own devises they would rather watch X factor? Who made you guys the ultimate arbiters of taste?

If there is demand for highbrow stuff, then a commercial channel would meet that need.

Frankly, i could care two hoots if there is highbrow tv or not. There are books, the internet etc too. TV is being increasingly dumbed down, because at the end of the day it is what people want.

And if there is a minority like you (and to a degree me too) who wants more quality, why should we (usually higher earners too) have that subsidised by people on a Blackburn council estate.

God, I hate elitism and those who think their duty is to protect people from themselves and their poor choices.

Actually, I thanked Ninky because I agreed with him that another private channel would mostly have the most popular things on (or what they considered to be the most popular things, as they chase advertising revenue), and I would hate to lose the other BBC channels which would get very little or no advertising revenue.

Nevertheless, I love some of the things that were mentioned (just not the soaps). I wonder, however, if a private channel would have something like the Swedish 'Wallender', or per last Saturday's 'Spiral'. BBC 4 often acts, it seems, as a test run for BBC2. I think Ninky is right (for once).

ninky_2

bendix wrote: »

Once again, our resident leftie thinks it is our responsibility to tell people what they want, rather than letting the market speak for itself.

What gives you guys the moral right to impose highbrow stuff onto people for their own benefit, when left to their own devises they would rather watch X factor? Who made you guys the ultimate arbiters of taste?

.

nothing. i'm just better than other people so if i can force my agenda through i will.

plus it gives me more chance of having half a decent conversation once in a while.

bring on those reithian values.....

FTBFun

doire wrote: »

Who said that was it?Im giving an example of the crap they put on their main channel on prime time saturday night.....is that hard to understand? Consistent from you though....not reading a post properly

That hardly constitutes a criticism of the whole BBC output though.

It's not particulary difficult to read posts that are just pithy two line comments.

Loughton_Monkey

DexterA wrote: »

I like no having adverts....

So do I.

But we don't get that with BBC any more do we?

1. Firstly, we have 'market pressures' that ensure that all 'saleable' BBC programs need to be, say, 25 minutes and not a full 30, hence they 'fill' 5 minutes with advertiesements on how to pay your license fee, what's coming up next, new series starting next week... So avid is this that they even overlay the credits with more adverts.

2. For sheer commercialism, just watch "The One Show". Prime time television, and yet every day the main 'guest' is there to flog his book, world tour, new DVD, new TV series (even on ITV), new play...... I simply don't know how this doesn't breach 'guidelines' when they aren't even allowed to have a Fairy Liquid bottle on show in, say, Eastenders, without very expensive conferences each time to deliberate about how many times they show a competing brand elsewhere....

ninky_2

if anyone is interested you might like to know that ofcom has very recently removed its rules against product placement in programming. (ofcom doesn't regulate bbc which has its own regulations only commercial).

this could lead to a massive editorial shift and means that programmes can now feature commerical products within them. it seems to be a reaction to the growth in content on internet which isn't regulated by ofcom and so this is needed to reduce the disparity between the two mediums. the main broadcasters are taking a slowly slowly approach to adapting content / their own editorial guidlines to this so as not to shock the viewer and suddenly shift their brand identity - also it has implications for existing advertising and therefore revenue streams (why pay for an ad when you can offer a production company freebies to feature in their show). do expect to see it creeping in over time however.