Government could ban BBC from showing top shows at peak times

well the reality is that on demand services are only going to grow so the BBC is going to be pushed harder in future to justify itself
 
Then once the market catches up and hopefully the broadband infrastructure too, we'll look at how the model stacks up. Isn't the charter reviewed every decade as standard?

And personally, I've never had trouble opting out of the licence fee when not consuming live television, unless they are making it a mandatory payment now too.
 
There's a proposal to have charter review taken every 11 years to take it out of step with parliamentary terms. Which is a good idea.
 
Cosimo said:
Absolutely. Time to stop the gravy train and make them sink or swim by subscriptions just like the rest. The taxpayer has no reason whatsoever to subsidise this overgrown monster of an organisation. A sleek organisation with two channels and a handful of radio stations should be able to survive in the market.
Click to expand...

If you want to do that then i supose you have to release the bbc from its shackles.

Such as having to spend large amounts of money in research and development of broadcadting and A/V technologies.

Which is one of the main reasons for it being a license to pay for the development of television as an invention and service.
 
malachi said:
Problem is many of the BBC radio stations just chat junk for hours if they are not playing Now whatever number on repeat.
Click to expand...

You may as well make your own playlist on YouTube or something if you don't want the chat. I wouldn't listen to the radio if there was no chat.
And I don't listen to channels that care what number a tune is or was at or if it ever was at any number.
 
Everything they do is governed by the BBC Trust. If the BBC dumped a load of content on YouTube then people would complain that they are providing Google with content paid for by the license fee payer. Any move to do that will have been carefully considered, which is why it takes them a while to get there.
 
Tunney said:
Not even the history and science documentaries on BBC 4?
Click to expand...

I wasn't even aware there was a BBC 4. I would not miss the BBC if it were discontinued today. Forcing people to pay for something they don't use is completely unfair, forcing people to pay for the BBC because they watch other *live* channels if so wrong it's laughable.
 
It's a bit rich to claim that the BBC has nothing for you if you have made zero effort to find out what it offers.

If you don't care about it and don't want to watch it then that's fine. But I'm not sure you can go as far as saying that nothing the BBC do interests you if you weren't even aware that BBC 4 existed.
 
I browse an online TV guide several times a day, so I can see what's on the BBC channels, just seems to be a bunch of rubbish.

The BBC can go down the subscription model if they want, they already have several subscription channels like Dave etc.
 
Brenn47 said:
The BBC can go down the subscription model if they want, they already have several subscription channels like Dave etc.
Click to expand...

this is the key issue - the BBC already offers commercial TV via BBC Worldwide - there is no reason why license money is required for most of their content which could instead be funded via subscription or advertising

could subsidise the news/world service, local radio and the 'canal boat documentaries' on BBC4.... stick the rest of it in a commercial arm that doesn't receive subsidy + have a subscription model for online/streaming content + their archive. BBC 1 can run adverts to fund EastEnders and the Voice.
 
Brenn47 said:
I wasn't even aware there was a BBC 4. I would not miss the BBC if it were discontinued today.
Click to expand...

BBC4 is the one of the channels I watch the most.
It would leave a black hole in my life if its content were to go. A lot of the interesting things that lie in my brain have come from BBC4.

The canal journey in slow season was excellent.
 
Last edited:
Tefal said:
If you want to do that then i supose you have to release the bbc from its shackles.

Such as having to spend large amounts of money in research and development of broadcadting and A/V technologies.

Which is one of the main reasons for it being a license to pay for the development of television as an invention and service.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately most of the 'get rid of the BBC' camp don't seem to realise that the BBC does a lot more than chuck out the odd bit of tv, radio and web content.
As you mention, the BBC has big fingers in the pies of R&D of broadcasting technology and the platforms used by other providers/services.
It'd have a tremendous affect on TV in the UK if the BBC pulled out of this.

And people mention ITV/Channel 4 and their model of broadcasting but their offerings massively lack compared to the BBC especially with regards to their catch-up services, ie - where's the HD streams? And why the pee-poor bitrate of SD streams?
The BBC had this nailed back in 2009.

I also struggle with the idea for paying to view adverts; surely you pay to not view adverts? :p
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom