The Big British Castle

[Jim_Campbell]

Check it out.

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/22/20100114/tuk-uk-britain-bbc-future-fa6b408.html

Kinda what I was trying to partially say but not very well 

Yeah, but it perpetrates the lie I've already addressed:

"Other commercial channels would deliver those U.S.-style entertainment shows that appeal to mass audiences anyway, it said."

They won't. They really won't, because they won't be able to stay in business using their current model. There's a reason why the commercial TV companies are all angling for a slice of the license fee: they know that the advertising revenue model has no future.

They know that they can't do anything that the BBC can't also do, so instead they turn the argument on its head and insist that the BBC should only do the things that they can't. Well, if ITV ends up receiving a chunk of the license fee to shore up dwindling ad revenues, why not just call it BBC5? At the same time, why shouldn't entertainment be part of a public service remit?

To be honest, with the commercial channels failing, it becomes incumbent on the BBC to provide the broadest range of output possible!

Cheers

Jim

[radiator]

Isn't the guy that wrote that report an ex-Sky exec?

[Proudhuff]

I happily pays me money, A tenner a month for my TV and Radio, cheers!  I hate hate hate adverts, especially on the radio, I seldom watch ITV especailly the scottish bits. ( having said that I seldom wacth or listen to the JOck bits of of the BBC as its only ever Football)
News Bias? Fox news anyone GRRRRRR!

[Tanky]

I haven't had a telly since moving into my current house about 6 months ago and I don't miss it one jot. In fact, I think not having a telly is right up there in my list of Best Things Of Last Year. I didn't have three months of Christmas advertising shoved in my face and had a much nicer time than usual. I've generally been a much happier individual since getting shot of it. I s'pose it just goes to show how much of the Absolute Bollocks involved in modern life is in fact the fault of the media.

Having said that, I am looking forward to downloading new Lost, until such a time as I can complete my dvd collection 

I too could've put this better but I have things to do x

[TordelBack]

Said it before and I'll say it again:  I don't live in Britain but I'd pay the BBC license fee in a heartbeat:  Radio 4, CBeebies, David Attenbrough, The Sky At Night, Country File, Jeremy Paxman, no bloody ads for self-esteem-destroying dreck, feck it even Top Gear is fun to watch.  The reality competition crap how fat-is-your-anus stuff I just don't watch - but the cream makes up for it.  It's about the only flat tax I endorse, even if I barely watch TV any more.

Perhaps naysayers just don't realise how utterly crap TV in  the rest of the world actually is, perhaps imagining it to be wall-to-wall The Wire and Deadwood.  Honestly,  I believe if you had to pay the Irish licence fee (€160!) for the unmitigated shite that is Irish national broadcasting, which still includes ads on every channel BTW, you'd be begging Auntie to let you pay her.   Even our radio is crap, with an apparent policy of identifying anyone with a shred of talent or charm and either firing them or relegating them to 5.30am n a Sunday or illness cover.

EDIT:  Actually, the €16-odd of that fee that goes to TG4, the Irish language channel, is well spent.  Everything else, every smug moronic minute of it, is the cold sick of the TV world.

[Professor Bear]

Can we all at least agree that the steaming pile of shite that is Channel 4 should be burned away with cleansing fire?

I don't support the licence fee for the simple reason that there's no 'opt-out' option.  You pay even if you don't have a telly or an aerial, otherwise you can look forward to the inspectors visiting you quite often with some variation of "Oh, the last person who visited you mustn't have put down your details - just ignore the letters that will still come and continue to let strangers into your home at a moment's notice every month or so to confirm what six other people have confirmed already."

[SamuelAWilkinson]

But it's not just entertainment, is it? It performs educational services, community services. Why do you think all the commercial TV stations abandoned local news programming as soon they were no longer mandated to provide it by the terms of their license?

Then the licence fee should be halved and the BBC should be just that. Educational and informative broadcasting. No need for soap operas or game shows or drama or any of the other expensive "light entertainment" type shows with celebrity hosts that commercial television has in abundance.
They have half the money but dont have to compete for ratings, as they seem compelled to do, and the so called public service end of the BBC could be 20 times better than it is now. But no, we still need to afford Davina to front "So you think you can dance"

Or in other words, drop BBC1.

The reason there's so much light ent on nowadays is because it costs peanuts but it still looks sparkly enough to draw in the channel-flicking masses. And of course the reason Auntie does it is because everyone else does, and she's caught between those who want her to stay competitive with the commercial channels (in order to provide licence fee value for money) and those who think she should be well out. Like when your girlfriend asks if her arse is fat and you take too long to answer, the Beeb's in trouble either way.

Well, if ITV ends up receiving a chunk of the license fee to shore up dwindling ad revenues, why not just call it BBC5? At the same time, why shouldn't entertainment be part of a public service remit?

ITV aren't after a chunk of licence fee for ad revenue purposes, they're doing fine (he said, sucking up to his corporate masters. Please don't fire me for posting on here at work!). What they want is money to fulfil their regional news obligations required by their licence (which are something of an anachronism in the modern day, bearing in mind that the added worth of ITV's expensive terrestrial licence grows smaller each day (that wasn't corporate sucking up, I really think that)).

Also, entertainment is part of the BBC's remit; Lord Reith's "inform, educate and entertain" remains their central tenet.

[JOE SOAP]

EDIT:  Actually, the €16-odd of that fee that goes to TG4, the Irish language channel, is well spent.  Everything else, every smug moronic minute of it, is the cold sick of the TV world.

That's another illusion TB, most of TG4 output is bought in from other countries and consists of redubbed docs, old movies, children's TV plus HBO series that would end up otherwise on late night RTE2. The small amount of stuff they do make, some is worthy but not all and I've seen much crap - seriously, do you consider Feirm Factor, Glas Vegas, diddly-i & showband sessions, Pimp My Ride any better than RTE?. Their identity promos look good but the vast majority of everyday TG4 schedule is not home produced, I'd say 70% percent is bought in. The TG4 myth is bullshit and it's viewership is shrinking with less than 50,000, about 2 viewers in every 100 at their highest. The most popular programmes are in English and sport. Many who say that TG4 is "great" rarely, if ever, watch its Irish-language programmes.

I actually see no reason why a country of 4 million people needs 3 state broadcast channels anyway. They should bring the license fee down, reduce it to 2 channels again and absorb TG4 programming into RTE2 and have it as bilingual or full Irish, it doesn't really matter but we don't need 3 state channels. Half of RTE2 is dead air anyway but if you do an honest count amongst the crap, RTE still shows a higher proportion of better, more watched programming than TG4.  RTE  needs to hire the better talent, stop paying way over the odds for independent programming (which is where a lot of the crap lifestyle shows come from) and reduce the management structure.

[Peter Wolf]

Can we all at least agree that the steaming pile of shite that is Channel 4 should be burned away with cleansing fire?

I don't support the licence fee for the simple reason that there's no 'opt-out' option.  You pay even if you don't have a telly or an aerial, otherwise you can look forward to the inspectors visiting you quite often with some variation of "Oh, the last person who visited you mustn't have put down your details - just ignore the letters that will still come and continue to let strangers into your home at a moment's notice every month or so to confirm what six other people have confirmed already."

You are absolutely right about CH4 but it never used to be that way as it was a good channel once upon a time but now its just inane drivel.

BTW TV licence inspectors have no actual right of entry and letting them in is at your disgression .

[radiator]

A special treat for those who missed it.... Skip to 5:38 and feel the rage wash over you......

COTTON/GELDOF:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uBbcbYyl6bA

[Colin YNWA]

At the same time, why shouldn't entertainment be part of a public service remit?

Pretty fine point. Particularly when the revenue from entertainment is channeled to supporting the continuing chopped main income. Not that entertainment in and of itself isn't of value. With the BBC however due to its charter there will always be a balance. A commerical channel of whatever nature will always be motivated by what makes the most money and hence you will get reduced diversity.

[Professor Bear]

A special treat for those who missed it.... Skip to 5:38 and feel the rage wash over you......

COTTON/GELDOF:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uBbcbYyl6bA

I don't feel any particular bile towards either Geldof or Cotton, more pity that they're indulged to the extent they'll never know any better and hold themselves to such low personal standards.  Any bile I have is reserved for those paying them to be onscreen, and I'd argue there's more merit in paying homeless people to fight and then filming that - because some people will be entertained, some will not, some will ponder what such a programme suggests about the human condition, a homeless dude will have some money in his pocket and the world will not have changed in the slightest.

[Jim_Campbell]

I don't support the licence fee for the simple reason that there's no 'opt-out' option.  You pay even if you don't have a telly or an aerial

Nonsense. They'll try to tell you that still have to pay if you have an internet connection, as they just have with a friend of mine, but it's not true and you most definitely do NOT have to pay if you don't have a TV.

Cheers

Jim

[JOE SOAP]

I believe there are draft legislations in Ireland & Britain that include web accessing technologies where TV programming can be accessed online for future licensing.

[TordelBack]

...most of TG4 output is bought in from other countries and consists of redubbed docs, old movies, children's TV plus HBO series that would end up otherwise on late night RTE2.

Agreed, but the fact remains that I watch a lot more movies and cartoons on TG4 than I ever do on RTE - and a lot more foreign language stuff than Irish.  I also have the trad music shows on a lot while I work, and of the Irish language stuff I've enjoyed the sailing and hiking programmes, and my Irish is virtually non-existant.  I watch bugger-all TV, and less Irish TV than anything else, but TG4 holds my attention better than most, in between My Super Sweet 16 and One Tree Hill.  However, I'd have no problem seeing it merged back into RTE2, as long as nothing of RTE2 remained.  And if I ever see Pat Kenny or Ryan Tubirdy again i'll be way too soon.