BBC

Yossie

Should it be privatised so that its like Sky and you have to pay per view?

Discuss.

daviesee

But isn't it a good return on investment and doing a lot of good for the Country? :twisted:

VmanF3

Steady as she goes.

themekon

Stay as it is but with much tighter control on spending.

simonhead

No, never. Whilst the BBC is less than perfect it is the only channel that shows some original programming without any ad breaks. Some of the programming is a little bit shit and in the copycat talent show mould and the highly biased reporting isnt great, however what other channel gives you Susanna Reid in the mornings.

ballysmate

simonhead wrote:

No, never. Whilst the BBC is less than perfect it is the only channel that shows some original programming without any ad breaks. Some of the programming is a little bit shoot and in the copycat talent show mould and the highly biased reporting isnt great, however what other channel gives you Susanna Reid in the mornings.

One of the reasons I listen to Radio 2 is the lack of annoying adverts.
The weather girl Lucy Verasamy who was on Sky was well fit. I believe she has gone to Breakfast Telly on ITV, but I can't bear to watch that dross.
The BBC does need a reality check with its spending though.

VmanF3

Biased reporting - you should see American news TV, especially Fox! BBC is a very well respected agency around the world for being pretty impartial. Sometimes they get it wrong, sometimes they have their axes to grind, but on the whole, I'll take that over some Australian owned private empire...

team47b

I think television should only be available on prescription, like a methadone replacement for real life.

Yossie

team47b wrote:

I think television should only be available on prescription, like a methadone replacement for real life.

So basically what you are trying to say is that television is the drug of a nation, breeding ignorance and spreading radiation?

the playing mantis

VmanF3 wrote:

Biased reporting - you should see American news TV, especially Fox! BBC is a very well respected agency around the world for being pretty impartial. Sometimes they get it wrong, sometimes they have their axes to grind, but on the whole, I'll take that over some Australian owned private empire...

Get real, i think even their own internal investigation concluded they are institutionally biased to the liberal left wing cause. as for the US stations you mention, its irrelevant, none are public (and publically funded) broadcasters, they have no requirement to be impartial. a publically funded body clearly does.

the playing mantis

it does produce some good stuff, but also a lot of bollox, such as countryfile (which is only worth watching if that blonde is on there). they should really try and resurrect lovejoy and bergerac and have some sort of mash up between the 2.

Ouija

Yossie wrote:

team47b wrote:

I think television should only be available on prescription, like a methadone replacement for real life.

So basically what you are trying to say is that television is the drug of a nation, breeding ignorance and spreading radiation?

Oh man. That brings back memories. Who used to sing that (or should i say RAP that).

edit:

Never mind... found it....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qA5faeCGg-w
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RKut-ATXUfA

VmanF3

the playing mantis wrote:

VmanF3 wrote:

Biased reporting - you should see American news TV, especially Fox! BBC is a very well respected agency around the world for being pretty impartial. Sometimes they get it wrong, sometimes they have their axes to grind, but on the whole, I'll take that over some Australian owned private empire...

Get real, i think even their own internal investigation concluded they are institutionally biased to the liberal left wing cause. as for the US stations you mention, its irrelevant, none are public (and publically funded) broadcasters, they have no requirement to be impartial. a publically funded body clearly does.

Get real?

How is comparing news coverage irrelevant in this instance? I used that comparison to illustrate just how biased some news stations are to demonstrate a point.

It's funny that right wing conservatives think the BBC is left wing, when many from the left wing consider it a right wing organ. BBC appear to me to be sniped at from all quarters, when overall, they are arguably the better of the channels we have.

I am overseas for 8 months of the year, the BBC is a great broadcaster on the World stage. On our ship, the BBC is watched by 66% of passengers/crew, with an 84% American passenger ratio and a 52% Fili crew manifest. Small sample of course, but considering we have another 10 news channels, Fox included [sic], that's pretty indicative.

A privatised BBC would have to sink to the level of other privately owned broadcasters and play for the lowest common denominator.

As stated at the top, steady as she goes.

the playing mantis

as i said, there own internal investigation concluded they were biased left wing. you cant really argue with that imo.

the ones you listed are not public broadcasters, so its not a valid comparison. compare bbc news to abc news in oz, or compare those US ones to itv news/c4 news thats valid. im not suggesting those partisan US ones are any good either, and im not saying BBC news is bad, im just saying it is biased as well.

i agree bbc shouldnt be privatsed, but it does need reform. all these shocking cash payoffs to execs is evidence enough.

VmanF3

the playing mantis wrote:

as i said, there own internal investigation concluded they were biased left wing. you cant really argue with that imo.

the ones you listed are not public broadcasters, so its not a valid comparison. compare bbc news to abc news in oz, or compare those US ones to itv news/c4 news thats valid. im not suggesting those partisan US ones are any good either, and im not saying BBC news is bad, im just saying it is biased as well.

i agree bbc shouldnt be privatsed, but it does need reform. all these shocking cash payoffs to execs is evidence enough.

One report by the The New Culture Forum is not a definitive study.

the playing mantis

well its their own internal report so i cant see why it would not be trusted. Anyway, the BBC clearly do have an agenda, look at the reporting on Israel for example.

team47b

Yossie wrote:

team47b wrote:

I think television should only be available on prescription, like a methadone replacement for real life.

So basically what you are trying to say is that television is the drug of a nation, breeding ignorance and spreading radiation?

Yeh but Michael Franti raps it betta, thanks for the link Ouija

It is also keeping the bewildered herd happy, no sense them getting involved in the real world, they might get in the way of what is going on and impede the progress of the few and this would never do.

crankycrank

VmanF3 wrote:

Biased reporting - you should see American news TV, especially Fox! BBC is a very well respected agency around the world for being pretty impartial. Sometimes they get it wrong, sometimes they have their axes to grind, but on the whole, I'll take that over some Australian owned private empire...

This^^ An American here and you Brits have one of the greatest gems in the world in the BBC. We get a BBC news program tailored to the US five nights a week and it puts any US news channel to shame, not to mention all the other shows it produces. Wish we had that here. And Rupert Murdoch can kiss my arse.

Frank the tank

In reply to OP.

No, never ever.

As I've said before, I think it's great value for money and it always irritates the government of the day one way or another. Which is good.

ballysmate

the playing mantis wrote:

VmanF3 wrote:

Biased reporting - you should see American news TV, especially Fox! BBC is a very well respected agency around the world for being pretty impartial. Sometimes they get it wrong, sometimes they have their axes to grind, but on the whole, I'll take that over some Australian owned private empire...

Get real, i think even their own internal investigation concluded they are institutionally biased to the liberal left wing cause. as for the US stations you mention, its irrelevant, none are public (and publically funded) broadcasters, they have no requirement to be impartial. a publically funded body clearly does.

Is this the Mantis' first use of the upper case? He has actually begun a sentence with a capital! Only one, mind you.

pinno

Without a publicly owned broadcasting corporation, media is left to the whims of commercialism, politics and vested interests. Although I can be critical of the BBC, as an institution, it is critical to the well being of this state.
Having met an American in Barcelona when the Iraq invasion kicked off, she was alarmed at the vigils and Anti-americanism. Coca cola vendors were plastered wit ' Boycutto produtto Americanos' and McDonalds was smashed up.
When I bought her a copy of the Independant as well as reading some Spanish papers, her whole propoganda fed notion of the world became suddenly compromised. This is because the media in the US is all about propoganda and bad, bias news driven by Neo-liberal/neo-cons with only one motive. We need the balance that a publicly owned and run insitution can provide.
Without the BBC and some of the broadsheets, the British media would be run by the likes of K McKenzie and that other tyrant Rupert Murdoch. It would be devil takes the hindmost.

ballysmate

pinarello001 wrote:

Without a publicly owned broadcasting corporation, media is left to the whims of commercialism, politics and vested interests. Although I can be critical of the BBC, as an institution, it is critical to the well being of this state.
Having met an American in Barcelona when the Iraq invasion kicked off, she was alarmed at the vigils and Anti-americanism. Coca cola vendors were plastered wit ' Boycutto produtto Americanos' and McDonalds was smashed up.
When I bought her a copy of the Independant as well as reading some Spanish papers, her whole propoganda fed notion of the world became suddenly compromised. This is because the media in the US is all about propoganda and bad, bias news driven by Neo-liberal/neo-cons with only one motive. We need the balance that a publicly owned and run insitution can provide.
Without the BBC and some of the broadsheets, the British media would be run by the likes of K McKenzie and that other tyrant Rupert Murdoch. It would be devil takes the hindmost.

Yeah, you can't beat a State owned media can you? North Koreans swear by theirs.

raymondo60

I can only express my own opinion of course, but I think Radio 4 is one of the finest things invented by man, and the World Service a beacon of sanity when I am away overseas. And I do not come from Tunbridge Wells.

Hrmmph!

VTech

We couldn't be without the BBC, its the governments number one form of people hypnosis.
It is there for a reason and Add Free programmes isn't one of them

VmanF3

Quick, go get your tin foil hats...

asprilla

As has been said, whilst the BBC is less than perfect it provides a necessary benchmark for commercial, TV, radio and Internet and maintains at least some measure of independent broadcasting.

Alitogata

Yossie wrote:

Should it be privatised so that its like Sky and you have to pay per view?

Discuss.

BBC is a national broadcaster and doesn't exist in order to bring money as a private company, but in order to support and promote your country's culture. So it can't be privatized neither shut down. It would be better to ask to have better management and produce higher quality programs.

morstar

Can those stating how biased it is please provide the evidence?
I have many frustrations with the BBC output but these are more problems with media trends rather than the BBC specifically. On the whole, it is still, imho, a great institution and I'd be sorry to lose it.

VTech

morstar wrote:

Can those stating how biased it is please provide the evidence?
I have many frustrations with the BBC output but these are more problems with media trends rather than the BBC specifically. On the whole, it is still, imho, a great institution and I'd be sorry to lose it.

It's a constant so hard to bring soacifics but the BBC just doesn't tell is the truth all the time, it's a brainwash Chanel that tells us what we "need" to hear rather than necessary truth.
I can be in the phone to someone in Israel at the same time the BBC tells me there is huge conflict and violence yet my guy on the ground knows nothing of this.

I can watch a programme on the dangers of Cuba and not go there missing out on one of the most wonderful places on earth (I didn't listen and went with the family for the time of our lives).

The ressesion was blasted out each mor ing for years telling us how bad the economy was just at the same time companies had price wars and mortgages were at their cheapest for years making most people actually better off than before the ressesion (yes I know pensioners and savers lost but true economists know what I'm referring too).

What I'm saying is, we hear what they want us to hear.

pinno

Ballysmate wrote:

pinarello001 wrote:

Without a publicly... ...the hindmost.

Yeah, you can't beat a State owned media can you? North Koreans swear by theirs.

..and you say i'm a tw@t !?!?! How can you compare the two?

morstar

VTech wrote:

morstar wrote:

Can those stating how biased it is please provide the evidence?
I have many frustrations with the BBC output but these are more problems with media trends rather than the BBC specifically. On the whole, it is still, imho, a great institution and I'd be sorry to lose it.

Apologies but my next question is deliberately obtuse, are you suggesting that the domestic reporting of the UK economy was any different when labour were in power?
If so, I disagree. However, I actually agree with most of your post. I just don't perceive it as left wing bias. I see it as media behaviour. The economy has been damaged by perpetual media scaremongering but I think that's inevitable regardless of political agenda.

It's a constant so hard to bring soacifics but the BBC just doesn't tell is the truth all the time, it's a brainwash Chanel that tells us what we "need" to hear rather than necessary truth.
I can be in the phone to someone in Israel at the same time the BBC tells me there is huge conflict and violence yet my guy on the ground knows nothing of this.

I can watch a programme on the dangers of Cuba and not go there missing out on one of the most wonderful places on earth (I didn't listen and went with the family for the time of our lives).

The ressesion was blasted out each mor ing for years telling us how bad the economy was just at the same time companies had price wars and mortgages were at their cheapest for years making most people actually better off than before the ressesion (yes I know pensioners and savers lost but true economists know what I'm referring too).

What I'm saying is, we hear what they want us to hear.