Save The Bbc

[nightrider 13]

2 hours ago, HumbleNarrator said:

I think there should be a licence fee funded BBC but it should be reduced right back; it has become far too  bloated, trying to do too much, trying to compete with everything.

it should only do things the commercial sector won't.

 

Much of its output is just "me too" copies of light entertainment and soaps you can find on many other providers. Why is e.g Eastenders publicly funded? Coronation Street isn't, yet we still have that...

[Waldo 96]

32 minutes ago, dan_999uk said:

They wouldn't, but that isn't what the E20 project is actually providing. 

Thanks for posting the link. Looks like a long read, and to be honest, I'm just not all that interested in the topic to go through 46 pages of text!

[Mr Bloke 1,445]

12 minutes ago, Waldo said:

Thanks for posting the link. Looks like a long read, and to be honest, I'm just not all that interested in the topic to go through 46 pages of text!

Hmmm...

Well I've just had a quick read through it all, and it's not looking good!

I can't see anything in there that disagrees with my original post (#24)...

... and bear in mind that their own report that I quoted of going £27m over budget, and the National Audit Office Report itself, are dated December 2018 - that's 3 years ago...

... so who knows how much over budget the project is now?

[Mr Bloke 1,445]

15 minutes ago, dan_999uk said:

The BBC do. £27m over budget, totalling £87m.

 

Hmmm...

 

Nope... I don't think they do!

On page 8 of the Audit Office Report, section 11 states:

 

Quote

11 The BBC plans for E20 to be completed in May 2023 – 31 months later than envisaged in its 2015 plans.

 

So if the project is still ongoing for another year (at least), then there is no assurance that the £27m over budget estimated in December 2018 is still valid.

 

 

[alchresearch 214]

I read that BBC3 is going to be re-launched as a broadcast channel again, five years after it was dropped because the corporation argued its young viewers had abandoned terrestrial viewing.

 

In 2016 the BBC Trust said that the move was justified because “independent evidence shows younger audiences are watching more online and watching less linear TV”.

 

I'm curious to know what's changed.  

[Anna B 1,401]

2 hours ago, nightrider said:

it should only do things the commercial sector won't.

 

Much of its output is just "me too" copies of light entertainment and soaps you can find on many other providers. Why is e.g Eastenders publicly funded? Coronation Street isn't, yet we still have that...

I agree up to a point. I do think we need the BBC. It does have a purpose and responsibility to the nation. There are a lot of things that aren't necessarily commercially viable but which are important nonetheless, and yet it also has to attract viewers. Maybe this could be funded by the licence fee subsidised by the state.

I would also suggest it makes some of its Britbox output available on the channel, as its vast content is a real treasure trove, and would attract viewers if marketed properly. 

 

And the BBC radio output is also very popular with listeners. 

Edited January 19, 2022 by Anna B

[Mr Bloke 1,445]

5 minutes ago, Anna B said:

I agree up to a point. I do think we need the BBC. It does have a purpose and responsibility to the nation. There are a lot of things that aren't necessarily commercially viable but which are important nonetheless, and yet it also has to attract viewers. Maybe this could be funded by the licence fee subsidised by the state.

I would also suggest it makes some of its Britbox output available on the channel, as its vast content is a real treasure trove, and would attract viewers if marketed properly. 

 

And the BBC radio output is also very popular with listeners. 

Hmmm...

State run TV?

 

Well, I suppose it works in China and North Korea...

[Anna B 1,401]

7 minutes ago, Mr Bloke said:

Hmmm...

State run TV?

 

Well, I suppose it works in China and North Korea...

When it's partly government money, there would be another party vetting the BBC's expenses, and what it's paying their 'stars' for a start. That could only help. There are plenty of wouldbe stars, just as good, and willing to work for less.                                               

Edited January 19, 2022 by Anna B

[Dromedary 166]

Given that there is not such a great difference in viewing habits by channel the BBC should go for adverts on their TV channels to generate funding as well.

 

Not up to date (2019) but gives a glimpse into viewing by channel habits and shows people don't seem to be put off with advertising.

 

https://www.statista.com/statistics/269807/leading-tv-channels-in-the-uk-by-reach/

 

It seems that the BBC is popular with older people over 55 (average age 61) and less young people are watching it now as they seem to be in favour of streaming Netflix, Youtube etc. Which seems to show up in the top 10 Youtube money makers. 

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-59987711

 

Perhaps the BBC should consider doing their own version of Youtube... Just a thought!

 

 

[ab6262 202]

19 hours ago, Mister Gee said:

 

I like Danny but I guess a working class lad who slags off the Tories is a bit too much for a pair of cap doffing forelock tuggers like you two.

working class lad i doubt hes done a day in his life???? his only claim to fame is being a very bad imitation of a cockney, false accent and false bravado what a tool!

[Anna B 1,401]

7 hours ago, Dromedary said:

 

 

7 hours ago, Dromedary said:

Given that there is not such a great difference in viewing habits by channel the BBC should go for adverts on their TV channels to generate funding as well.

 

Not up to date (2019) but gives a glimpse into viewing by channel habits and shows people don't seem to be put off with advertising.

 

https://www.statista.com/statistics/269807/leading-tv-channels-in-the-uk-by-reach/

 

It seems that the BBC is popular with older people over 55 (average age 61) and less young people are watching it now as they seem to be in favour of streaming Netflix, Youtube etc. Which seems to show up in the top 10 Youtube money makers. 

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-59987711

 

Perhaps the BBC should consider doing their own version of Youtube... Just a thought!

 

 

Personally, I hate the adverts interupting programmes, maybe they could try sponsorship at the beginning and end of programmes instead, (gives you time to nip to the loo and make a cup of tea.)

 

I'm not surprised the BBC is popular with older people, which is why some Britbox programmes would bring the viewers in, That, and a few decent films and Arts programmes would help. As for youtube, some good stuff on there too, I'm not sure how they go about buying rights to it.

Edited January 19, 2022 by Anna B

[Dromedary 166]

4 minutes ago, Anna B said:

 

Personally, I hate the adverts interupting programmes, maybe they could try sponsorship at the beginning and end of programmes instead, (gives you time to nip to the loo and make a cup of tea.)

 

I'm not surprised the BBC is popular with older people, which is why some Britbox programmes would bring the viewers in, That, and a few decent films and Arts programmes would help. As for youtube, some good stuff on there too, I'm not sure how they go about buying rights to it.

Its not so much about buying right to it but setting something similar up to gain revenue, although that's highly unlikely given YouTube's success.