The BBC

[Dougie Do'ins]

BBC licence fee to rise by £3 per year from April

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-51363612

[Megadrive Man]

How is this still being allowed to continue?

 

I can't believe they've got the nerve to put the TV license up! 

[Stickman]

After the Kobe Bryant LeBron James fuck up on the news they've only gone and done it again...

 

Wonder when they'll do a Panorama investigation into racism at the Beeb

 

 

[sir roger]

The amusing follow up is that the Evening Standard picked up on the story to criticise the BBC , but unfortunately they posted a picture of a 3rd black lady Labour MP, Bell Ribeiro Addy, instead of Marsha Cordova.

[Colonel Bumcunt]

I love the BBC content, for the most part, but i just can't justify the fee structure model.

 

In some ways, the BBC are lucky, because they haven't had to prove to execs that there might be an audience for their content, they already know their figures and what works, and advertisers would queue up to be the first to advertise with them. 

 

I would also support the licence fee if they offered much, much more.  IE, no more big name presenter salaries, merge BBC2 and BBC4, and scrap almost all political output.  I am very uncomfortable with the BBC having such broad political programming, it's one output feeding another (the news), and it becomes this incessant circle-jerk.  It also will always be accused of taking sides, by both sides.  It can end that bollocks by not having opinions on politics, and just reporting the news for a change.  It's only political 'output' should be broadcasting live debates on BBC Parliament, which needs no commentary or analysis. 

 

Moreover, I want to see the BBC do more with schools.  I want to see children given the chance to learn how programmes are put together, and how to make their own content.  I want the BBC to offer a channel that is simply educational, a la the Open University lectures.  Use the platform to help educate on the basics, like maths, like science, like English.

 

But if it can't offer these things, then it can get back in line with the other broadcasters and make its own way in the world, using advertising revenue and learning to budget appropriately. 

 

 

 

 

[Dougie Do'ins]

 

 

[Mudface]

3 minutes ago, Dougie Do'ins said:

 

 

Dear God. These next few years are going to be a nightmare, aren't they?

[Creator Supreme]

54 minutes ago, Dougie Do'ins said:

 

 

Fucking hell, they are hell bent on killing it off aren't they? That would be a step too far even for me! I'd rather they closed down than have that cunt as DG!

[moof]

It doesn’t need to be privatised (whatever that means in this context) it needs to be properly democratised. A properly democratised, regulated public broadcaster, with proper journalism that doesn’t just parrot hegemonic talking points, would be a perfect tonic to combat the continued rise of propaganda and help restore trust in institutions. I’m talking specifically about the news output, the entertainment stuff is still largely good*, afaik.
 

*Note: I have not watched a second of the updated Top Gear with renowned banter merchants “Fredward” Flintoff and Paddy mcguiness 

[sir roger]

4 hours ago, Dougie Do'ins said:

 

 

Surely that's Rupert with a wig on ?

[Dr Arthur De Sabre]

On 30/01/2020 at 23:47, SasaS said:

Must admit views on here never fail to amaze me, most people are usually arguing for the nationalization of a good part of the economy but just about the best publicly funded broadcaster in the world, no, this needs to be funded commercially.  

See the line in bold - who voted on this, and when? Because unless you have travelled the world and seen what each Public broadcaster has to offer, it’s a bit of a bullshit accepted truth. 
a lot of the best stuff is done by the commercial arm these days and for sale internationally, so what does the British public get that makes this such a stand out service?

 

[Dr Arthur De Sabre]

On 31/01/2020 at 00:13, SasaS said:

Nobody is. I made it all up.

 

Having a publicly funded broadcaster like the BBC would be a huge asset for any nation. It's ultimately more important than utilities.   

 

 

BBC is more important than utilities? How the fuck are you going to watch or listen without eleccy?

[VladimirIlyich]

12 hours ago, Mudface said:

Dear God. These next few years are going to be a nightmare, aren't they?

Who'd have thought,eh?

[VladimirIlyich]

There is a scene in the tv series Succession where there is a Senate Hearing into the main protagonist company, who are a media company and their boss is being grilled by a left wing Senator who is 'put down' by the media company exec saying that media is independent because the US is a democracy and not state funded like China or Russia and then they pat themselves on the back for such a good retort. The Senator's lines could have included 'And the UK too,is state funded' just to piss on their chips.

[Jairzinho]

7 hours ago, Jim Spartacus said:

BBC is more important than utilities? How the fuck are you going to watch or listen without eleccy?

Ultimately, programs about baking and having Fiona Bruce being a snide in front of a crowd full of halfwits is more important than being able to heat your house.

[Paulie Dangerously]

What's more important to a government than a 24/7 propaganda machine?

[Rico1304]

1 hour ago, Paulie Dangerously said:

What's more important to a government than a 24/7 propaganda machine?

CBeebies is fucking rife with it.  

[SasaS]

10 hours ago, Jim Spartacus said:

BBC is more important than utilities? How the fuck are you going to watch or listen without eleccy?

 

3 hours ago, Jairzinho said:

Ultimately, programs about baking and having Fiona Bruce being a snide in front of a crowd full of halfwits is more important than being able to heat your house.

 

Having publicly owned influential media is more important and ultimately beneficial than public ownership of utilities, you don't have to publicly own electricity suppliers to get electricity. When a good public broadcaster has a dominant or a significant position in the media landscape, it also influences other media, by setting and maintaining standards. Media will in the future be even more fragmented and under ever increasing financial pressure, due to technological change, so already established public broadcaster will be a huge asset for any society.  
 

On the best in the world comment, BBC has generally been considered the best in the world in its category by media professionals across nations. People in Britain seem to think that the NHS is "the envy of the world", even though nobody outside the UK knows or cares about it, since they have similar or better healthcare systems. It's the BBC that people are envious of. Protect it, develop it and cherish it.

[Guest Pistonbroke]

I've not heard one person in Europe say they are jealous of the BBC, that's just pure arrogance. They may appreciate some of the BBC content, but jealous? Nah. Other countries have their equivalent channels which have just as much decent content these days, not everyone thinks the sun shines out of the BBC's arse. Plus let's be honest, the quality from the BBC has been going downhill for a while now, what good content there is lands on Netflix/other outlets. All about making money to pay for all those top jobs. Opinions eh. 

[VERBAL DIARRHEA]

My lad was security on a big BBC event in Liverpool on Sunday, all the big wigs.

Shower of cunts.

[Jairzinho]

20 minutes ago, SasaS said:

 

 

Having publicly owned influential media is more important and ultimately beneficial than public ownership of utilities, you don't have to publicly own electricity suppliers to get electricity. When a good public broadcaster has a dominant or a significant position in the media landscape, it also influences other media, by setting and maintaining standards. Media will in the future be even more fragmented and under ever increasing financial pressure, due to technological change, so already established public broadcaster will be a huge asset for any society.  
 

On the best in the world comment, BBC has generally been considered the best in the world in its category by media professionals across nations. People in Britain seem to think that the NHS is "the envy of the world", even though nobody outside the UK knows or cares about it, since they have similar or better healthcare systems. It's the BBC that people are envious of. Protect it, develop it and cherish it.

So, er, what the fuck has happened here then?

 

 

 

Like, PB, I've never heard anyone in Spain give the slightest fuck about the BBC. 

 

The value you place in the BBC, and the flippancy with which you talk about the healthcare system, is utterly bizarre.

[Strontium]

Spanish healthcare is better than ours, and Spanish TV is dire.

 

[Jairzinho]

10 minutes ago, Strontium Dog™ said:

Spanish healthcare is better than ours, and Spanish TV is dire.

 

Correct on healthcare. They haven't started privatising theirs. Autonomous regions having actual power and funds helps.

 

Spanish TV is slightly better than ours and there is no license fee. Plenty of documentaries, sport on free channels, etc.

 

They have shite just as we do, also on channel 5 as it happens.

[SasaS]

24 minutes ago, Jairzinho said:

So, er, what the fuck has happened here then?

 

 

 

Like, PB, I've never heard anyone in Spain give the slightest fuck about the BBC. 

 

The value you place in the BBC, and the flippancy with which you talk about the healthcare system, is utterly bizarre.

 

I'm talking about perception of what people perceive as an achievement in development, relative to where other countries are, not about the absolute importance. Healthcare is obviously more important than having a license-funded broadcaster or not. As I explained.

 

I've never seen any Spanish programming, never heard anybody praise Spanish TV.

[moof]

The forum tories are at it again *sigh*