To think the BBC really should be shut down?

[Loeri]

After the child abuse scandals, and now this where BBC execs have been given payments far beyond anything they were required to be given, isn't it time that the BBC was just shut down? It can't really be said that it makes the best TV in the world anymore, the best TV programmes come from the US and have done for well over a decade now. I just don't see the purpose of the BBC in 2013. It is arrogant, bloated beyond belief and seems only to exist to provide cushy jobs for the Guardian set.

[BoffinMum]

Imagine life without CBeebies

[BoffinMum]

The reality shows get comparatively high ratings, so they are actually making programmes people want to watch. You may not like them, but enough do.

[Catmint]

I think the BBC does a decent job of meeting it's objectives to inform, educate and entertain. Much of the output isn't to my taste, but they offer a wide selection targeted at many different audiences. I think they are making good progress with integrating tv and online content.

I trust that they are getting to grips with their responsibilities in respect of using their resources wisely overall, but in such a giant institution there are always going to be things which go wrong. What's important is not repeating mistakes.

I get excellent value from my tv licence fee, I can't think of many other resources that provide my family with so much day to day culture, richness, information for such a low cost. ( apart from the great outdoors, possibly the library ).

The BBC still has a place.

[ivykaty44]

Boffin You may not like them, but enough do. It makes no difference if I like them or not to have such a high number of them is not what the station is supposed to be about

Many of seem to miss the point that without the licence fee the BBC would only make populist programmes

the BBC are not supposed to be making a large majority of their shows one style of show and they are doing so and therefore we have a channel that is no different from ITV.

[BoffinMum]

Isn't it?

You're not a viewing snob then?

[ivykaty44]

Do you really think that the BBC giving a majority of one style of program for viewing figures is value for money when they are not making programs as they might not get a high viewing figure?

[yellowballoons]

The BBC has a left wing bias, everyone knows that.

[Jaynebxl]

Yellow that's quite funny ... all my lefty friends think the bbc has too much of a right wing bias!

[LisaMed]

I think that you need to have a furtle in the outer reaches of the BBC to see where some of the benefits are. You don't have to judge all of the BBC on BBC1.

Yesterday I failed to cook the fish souffle using the recipe I got from their food pages as OH was late, but I was able to give him some idea about which way to get out of the traffic jam by using their travel pages. Fortunately I kept DS occupied playing the computer games on the Ceebeebies site. I am a bad mother but ds has learned loads from that site.

Lots of different groups get lots of different things from the BBC. In my posts I've mentioned, (iirc without checking) Walking with Dinosaurs, Sherlock, Doctor Who, The White Queen, EastEnders, Strictly, Pointless, Great British Bake Off, Casualty, Holby City, Coast, Boat Race, Last Night of the Proms, Life on Earth, The Royle Family, QI, Bottom, HIGNFY, Fawlty Towers, and can I add Watchdog, Countryfile, BBC Cymru, BBC Alba, local radio, Bollywood Carmen and Changing Rooms. That's just the tip of the output. BBC make room for all sorts, and they are able to take risks without worrying about shareholders and their commercial interests.

yyyyyyy to stricter financial auditing and HR issues.

(I do actually watch other channels as well)

[Bunbaker]

"Reality tv is excessive on both ITV and BBC,"

I agree, but as has been pointed out they are very popular. So are soaps and sport which I don't watch either. But I don't mind. If there is nothing interesting on TV I have loads of recorded stuff to watch, or I could just MN instead

[Tortington]

i would rather pay for the bbc than be bombarded by bipartisan political news channels who fund political campaigns shamelessly pushing disgusting agendas.

has anyone seen the fox anti gay stuff?

the best reason is political, in a word dominated by enormous media machines such as news corp, we need an organisation that is not in the clutches of big business, that big business cannot manipulate the public's feelings to engender a response from a government which will no doubt require action which indirectly makes them more money - a political campaign to which they have donated massively to gain influence.

so they have your eyes, they have your ears and they have your government.

and fuck me if all the dumb shits aren't fucking PAYING this monstrous machine for the privilege.

[ivykaty44]

Bunbaker -Many of seem to miss the point that without the licence fee the BBC would only make populist programmes

and that is what the BBC are doing making popular programs and not making programs that would be a risk - if only fools and horses was actually made now it wouldn't have stayed on the TV more than one series - due to the risk as it wasn't popular for the first series.



but as has been pointed out they are very popular

You can't have it both ways, either the BBC needs to balance of the programs or they stay the same as the ITV channel.

Sports is also heavily dominated by male sports, they had the olympics and that showed how much people want to watch womans sport, cycling was shown and it proved that womans road cycling was far far more exciting than the male side and yet still the BBC refuse to show it.

Womans football is top class in the Uk and yet it is never shown on BBC, mens football is shown. Why how can that not be unbiased,

Just because you don't mind if there is nothing on tv that you want to watch doesn't mean it is right to have a total slant on the programs available.

I don't want to watch womans football, but then I don't have that choice to go to the pub and watch womans football I only have the choice to watch male football on BBC why is that right?

[Darkesteyes]

Yeah Course they do Yellow Thats why DPAC were protesting outside their HQ this week which they didnt report on and why they made a programme called WE All Pay Your Benefits.

Yep TOtally left wing

[Inertia]

Re big commercial media companies such as News Corp - Tortington is spot on :

" They have your eyes , your ears and your government"

I want a broadcaster who is not in the pocket of Murdoch or his ilk.

[TotemPole]

What are all these reality shows?

There's the strictly ballroom type, then the voice, the boot sale hunter/antiques. What else is there?

[friday16]

"Womans football is top class in the Uk and yet it is never shown on BBC, mens football is shown. Why how can that not be unbiased,"

Manchester United, one of the leading men's football teams (other successful clubs are available), play at Old Trafford. It has a capacity of 75 032. Their average gate is 75 032: they sell every ticket, every match. Over the premiership, the average gate is about 37 000; given there are typically ten matches per week, around 370 000 people per week pay to watch men's premiership football.

Arsenal Ladies, far and away the leading British women's football team, play at Meadow Park, Borehamwood. It has a capacity of 4502. Don't worry about phoning ahead: there'll be tickets. The FA Women's Super League has an average gate of 550. If there were ten matches per week (there aren't, there are only four) attendances would total 5 500. As it is, about 2 200 people per week go to see women's premiership football, less than 1% of the attendances at men's premiership matches.

It's hardly a compelling argument for showing it on the telly, is it?

[yellowballoons]

I didnt say totally left wing. I said a left wing bias.
It has been studied and researched hasnt it.

So they are now having to try and redress things partly, or at least be seen to try and redress things.

I dont like bias either way. Fox news is awful. Right wing beyond belief. Should be allowed.

[yellowballoons]

That should say shouldnt not should

I am what is known as a floating voter. I would straight news,truth, not biased in any way. You wouldnt have thought that was too much to ask in the uk, but it seems to be. Not on.

[yellowballoons]

and want not would. doh

[ivykaty44]

So friday are the BBC to only to show sports that are popular the same as ITV? I thought the argument was the BBC is paid for and world class because then it will show programs that are not popular and not for the masses, it will take risks.

But woman's football has a far more complicated history and has had up to 50000 spectators... it was destroyed on purpose though en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women's_association_football

[friday16]

"So friday are the BBC to only to show sports that are popular the same as ITV?"

Given the cost of showing sport (even if the rights are free, it's a major OB) the answer is pretty much "yes". Or at least, more popular than a couple of thousand people a week. There's no proposal to show non-league men's football, for example, which has attendances far higher than the women's top tier.

[ivykaty44]

What a great crying shame

There are some really great sports out there that only a smaller number of people may enjoy to watch but you think we don't deserve to be able to watch them due to cost.

I would rather poke my eyes out than watch football by any sex - but it would be watched and it may have even grown, but with the BBC as misogynistic as it is we will never know

[friday16]

"There are some really great sports out there that only a smaller number of people may enjoy to watch but you think we don't deserve to be able to watch them due to cost."

The BBC shows very little domestic sport. It's not about "deserving", it's about the brutal truth that it's very expensive and once you get away from Premiership football and possibly test cricket no-one, for practical purposes, watches it. They could televise basketball and ice hockey, but it would cost staggering amounts of money and attract minuscule audiences. And I'd be interested to know what you think are the "really great" sports that would be successful on TV are: it needs to be something comprehensible, with a reasonable number of participants who will provide the initial audiences, which is aesthetically attractive. Leaving aside the men's/women's issue, what are the sports that would be good TV that currently aren't shown, and which have more than a few thousand potential spectators?

[HomeHelpMeGawd]

Friday, as I understood it, the main argument against funding the Beeb through general taxation was that it brought the Beeb within the ambit of government and thus more susceptible to political influence / interference.

Incidentally, income tax is non-regressive, but most other forms of taxation are regressive to some degree. VAT is the most notorious example.