+- TV Live Forum (https://www.tvliveforum.com)
+-- Forum: TV Live Forum (https://www.tvliveforum.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=4)
+--- Forum: Presentation (https://www.tvliveforum.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=5)
+--- Thread: BBC - how does it fight back? (/showthread.php?tid=471)
BBC - how does it fight back? - James Martin - 11-07-2021
Mr Q post_id=27165 time= user_id=834 Wrote:You have to pay for the BBC to own a television irrespective of whether you use the BBC or not. Although just to contradict my own thinking, the idea everyone pays the same amount could also be construed as a poll tax...James Martin post_id=27159 time= user_id=872 Wrote:But the whole ideology of the Corporation and its set up is decidedly socialist.Citation required.
BBC - how does it fight back? - MatijaTelevizija - 11-07-2021
James Martin post_id=27173 time= user_id=872 Wrote:Of course , it would still be hard to enforce some other kind of system ( that still involves a license fee )Mr Q post_id=27165 time= user_id=834 Wrote:You have to pay for the BBC to own a television irrespective of whether you use the BBC or not. Although just to contradict my own thinking, the idea everyone pays the same amount could also be construed as a poll tax...James Martin post_id=27159 time= user_id=872 Wrote:But the whole ideology of the Corporation and its set up is decidedly socialist.Citation required.
BBC - how does it fight back? - Brekkie - 11-07-2021
James Martin post_id=27159 time= user_id=872 Wrote:TRIGGER WARNING: Politics used in context.I get where you're coming from but interestingly it was the Conservatives who turned the BBC from a private company into a public corporation in 1926, it was them who gave BBC2 the go ahead over an additional commercial station in the 60s and similarly with local radio and them who favoured a highly PSB new commercial channel over a pure rival to ITV in the 80s, and though Labour ultimately were in power in the early years of digital TV the foundations were laid under the Major administration.
News is a problem, that I agree with. But the whole ideology of the Corporation and its set up is decidedly socialist.
Pre-1926 though it was a private company and though it didn't carry adverts it did carry sponsorship. Perhaps a century on that model could become relevant again, but even if the BBC took only sponsorship rather than traditional ad breaks there would still be a sizeable impact on the ad market.
BBC - how does it fight back? - gottago - 11-07-2021
James Martin post_id=27159 time= user_id=872 Wrote:TRIGGER WARNING: Politics used in context.Of course a lot of this is influenced by your consumption of right-leaning media. You'll get a lot of people on the left saying the exact same thing. How the BBC combats its reputation being negatively impacted because people are increasingly stuck in echo chambers is certainly something that needs to be addressed though I've got no idea what the answer to that is.
News is a problem, that I agree with. But the whole ideology of the Corporation and its set up is decidedly socialist. So I can forgive it for what I perceive to be a left bias. That's also the root of the shade it gets from the Daily Mail. I think if you were to draw a Venn diagram of people who thought the BBC News output was "fair and balanced" and those who have an issue with GB News' existence, you'd get quite the overlap.
Certainly I just do not remember BBC News going after the Government before 2010 anywhere near as much as they have done since. But is that because News is simply now more, for want of a better word, "available" and we've had a run of stories which have hit a public nerve - eg.Brexit, Grenfell, Manchester, London Bridge, Covid?
I do think the launch of GB News proves just how balanced the BBC is in a way; the same voices, stories, opinions that were regularly broadcast on the BBC, Sky and other news outlets but correctly challenged to provide balance; now they're left unchallenged and mis-sold as 'unheard voices'.
The reality is the BBC offers a very balanced news service, and they certainly did very much hold the government to account constantly before 2010. Important to remember that it continues to be ranked the most trusted news source in the UK.
BBC - how does it fight back? - Mr Q - 11-07-2021
James Martin post_id=27173 time= user_id=872 Wrote:I would contest the notion that taxation and provision of services by the government is uniquely socialist. Moreover, I would challenge the idea that the BBC's "ideology" is socialist because of it. By that logic, the police and the military must also be ideologically socialist.Mr Q post_id=27165 time= user_id=834 Wrote:You have to pay for the BBC to own a television irrespective of whether you use the BBC or not. Although just to contradict my own thinking, the idea everyone pays the same amount could also be construed as a poll tax...James Martin post_id=27159 time= user_id=872 Wrote:But the whole ideology of the Corporation and its set up is decidedly socialist.Citation required.
There is a perfectly sound economic rationale for public service broadcasting: that there are certain functions performed by (for example) the BBC, which society values, but which would be underfunded by the private sector if left exclusively to commercial players. The substantive question is, what functions would be insufficiently delivered in the absence of a public service broadcaster? I would tend to take a relatively minimalist view (especially in the UK, where commercial players provide a considerable range of services); others would argue that the BBC should cover a broad field of interests -- even in competition with the private sector. That's a debate which is quite separate from questions of how the BBC is funded.
BBC - how does it fight back? - JK1985 - 11-07-2021
I still think a PBS styled system of funding for the BBC is best. It would end the licence fee, which you do have to agree, has become unfair recently, especially from those who never watch any BBC content at all.
Simply include the funding for the BBC in the council tax - add a little extra to the council tax every year, and that will be the core funding to the BBC, instead of the licence fee.
BBC - how does it fight back? - technologist - 11-07-2021
JK1985 post_id=27286 time= user_id=1347 Wrote:I still think a PBS styled system of funding for the BBC is best. It would end the licence fee, which you do have to agree, has become unfair recently, especially from those who never watch any BBC content at all.But only 2/3 of the LF goes to fund Tv ….. and many more people use BBC radio, website etc
Simply include the funding for the BBC in the council tax - add a little extra to the council tax every year, and that will be the core funding to the BBC, instead of the licence fee.
In the UK and around the world…
And the BBC has a role and budget for a lot of the UK arts / education scene…
The question is far more about what PSB (or media) does the UK want
..and then how is it funded …….
BBC - how does it fight back? - dbl - 11-07-2021
JK1985 post_id=27286 time= user_id=1347 Wrote:I still think a PBS styled system of funding for the BBC is best.Telethons to raise money for their local PBS station to stay on the air? Nahh...I just can't see it for the BBC.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0bqjmZH6yzI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mzvaiCrmM8w
BBC - how does it fight back? - AxiosBrit67 - 12-07-2021
Brekkie post_id=27178 time= user_id=976 Wrote:James Martin post_id=27159 time= user_id=872 Wrote:TRIGGER WARNING: Politics used in context.I get where you're coming from but interestingly it was the Conservatives who turned the BBC from a private company into a public corporation in 1926, it was them who gave BBC2 the go ahead over an additional commercial station in the 60s and similarly with local radio and them who favoured a highly PSB new commercial channel over a pure rival to ITV in the 80s, and though Labour ultimately were in power in the early years of digital TV the foundations were laid under the Major administration.
News is a problem, that I agree with. But the whole ideology of the Corporation and its set up is decidedly socialist.
Pre-1926 though it was a private company and though it didn't carry adverts it did carry sponsorship. Perhaps a century on that model could become relevant again, but even if the BBC took only sponsorship rather than traditional ad breaks there would still be a sizeable impact on the ad market.
I have question for it. Both BBC and NBC are claimed as world's oldest national broadcasting organisation. If the BBC in current form were founded in 1927, then the world's oldest organisation must be NBC. When the BBC is private company (British Broadcasting Company) was founded?
BBC - how does it fight back? - johnnyboy - 12-07-2021
I think BBC News is broadly balanced.
But then again, I am socially left-leaning and fiscally right-leaning which is broadly where the BBC is.
I, for one, thought its impartiality towards the 2016 referendum was impeccible although I couldn't say that for what followed.
I can absolutely see why some people on the right think it's biased and I can see the same for the left - for example, its treatment of Corbyn was a lot harsher than its treatment of Boris (both of whom are disasters for our nation, imo).
What I don't quite understand is why BBC News has a budget of £350m a year - that seems way too high.
It has 2,000 journos, 250 correspondents, and 50 foreign news bureaus. Does it really need that many to run two news channels, news for the nations and English regions, websites, and World Service language provision?
gottago Wrote:I do think the launch of GB News proves just how balanced the BBC is in a way; the same voices, stories, opinions that were regularly broadcast on the BBC, Sky and other news outlets but correctly challenged to provide balance; now they're left unchallenged and mis-sold as 'unheard voices'.
I am personally surprised that, a few weeks after launch, GB News is still being treated by members of this forum as some right-wing frothing station when that is patently untrue. They promised that it would be nothing like Fox and they have been good to their word.
"Unheard voices" tend to be those who go against the current consensus or report on issues widely ignored by other broadcast media.
I only get a limited chance to watch the output but on yesterday's Alistair Stewart show, the host and guests were gushing in their praise of how the English football team reflects the class and racial mix of the country as a whole.
The "Wokewatch" section is a section worthy of inclusion. There are lots of philosophies and approaches being taken by some in the name of equality and progress which many people, myself included, think go too far, are divisive, and counterproductive.
Anyway, apologies I digress, this is a thread I started about the Beeb.
I must admit that I don't think telethons are the way to go.
I, like many others, think the licence fee will be extended for a further 10 years at its next review. I would spend this time and those 10 years diverting funding away from what I consider (I know you all don't share my beliefs) non-core activities which could be made profitable by the private sector and devote that funding to creating a production line of hits week after week which wow and charm licencepayers.
BBC - how does it fight back? - XIII - 12-07-2021
Anyone who thinks the PBS or ABC Australia would work here is kidding themselves, it would turn the BBC into something that is unrecognisable.
BBC - how does it fight back? - gottago - 12-07-2021
johnnyboy post_id=27405 time= user_id=925 Wrote:What I don't quite understand is why BBC News has a budget of £350m a year - that seems way too high.Are you saying that with any authority or knowledge of news production or is it simply because to you the numbers sound a bit "too high".
It has 2,000 journos, 250 correspondents, and 50 foreign news bureaus. Does it really need that many to run two news channels, news for the nations and English regions, websites, and World Service language provision?
I assume not all of that budget is covered by the license fee, but also by the commercial side via BBC Global News and some from the Foreign Office via World Service (although a lot less than it was previously).
BBC - how does it fight back? - JK1985 - 12-07-2021
I have noticed a large number of commentators online and on TV who find it hard to accept the BBC has a commercial arm to it as well.
The BBC has always had a commercial side to its operations, going all the way back to the launch of the Radio Times, which of course is a commercial magazine. Of course it has no profitability now in 2021 sadly.
BBC has always been allowed by every government, whether Conservative or Labour to have a commercial arm, to gain extra finances to supplement the licence fee, by exploiting their archives and programming. It has always been the case. I saw a BBC News programme from 1958, where they appointed someone to properly manage the commercial exploitation of BBC Television programmes to international audiences.
BBC Studios is a great way for the BBC to get more income and maybe in the future, provide more funding to the BBC through this side - helping to ensure the vital licence fee income is concentrated on the heart of public service broadcasting programming on BBC Television and Radio.
BBC Studios hands back a large chunk of their profits to the main BBC - around £200 million a year usually, which is a sizeable portion - indeed a lot of that commercially generated income can easily be spent on funding the big salaries of the top presenters, it would easily cover that expense, without having to touch a penny of the licence fee funded part.
BBC - how does it fight back? - johnnyboy - 12-07-2021
gottago post_id=27426 time= user_id=900 Wrote:Are you saying that with any authority or knowledge of news production or is it simply because to you the numbers sound a bit "too high".
I assume not all of that budget is covered by the license fee, but also by the commercial side via BBC Global News and some from the Foreign Office via World Service (although a lot less than it was previously).
The fact that I am not in the television/radio/media business is well known.
Having had a look at page 19 of BBC Global News's accounts, it states that it receives £22m in licence fees from its £94.5m income. The rest is made up from digital advertising, television advertising, syndicated programming, and programme partnerships. Last year, the company made a loss of £5.8m (following the previous year's profit of £33.1m).
I am not sure on how money is transferred to and from the BBC from Global News Ltd but, like you, I think the BBC itself makes money from this arrangement where possible shuffling losses into the Ltd account when possible or necessary. If there is an accountant among us, it'd be great if you could clear this up.
According to Wikipedia, "The World Service is funded by the United Kingdom's television licence fee, limited advertising and the profits of BBC Studios." It did get a big grant award in 2015 but I think that ran out last year, "close to the £245m annual cost of the World Service that the corporation was forced to take on from the Foreign and Commonwealth Office last year as part of the 2010 licence fee settlement with the government."
So, in honest answer to your question, it "seems" a bit high considering we don't really seem to see much output from a field team that large.
BBC - how does it fight back? - Brekkie - 12-07-2021
johnnyboy post_id=27405 time= user_id=925 Wrote:What I don't quite understand is why BBC News has a budget of £350m a year - that seems way too high.I don't know how anybody can look at the significant on screen effects of the cuts in recent years and still think BBC News still needs to drastically cut their budget.
It has 2,000 journos, 250 correspondents, and 50 foreign news bureaus. Does it really need that many to run two news channels, news for the nations and English regions, websites, and World Service language provision?
Yes, £350m a year as a figure plucked out of thin air may seem way too high, but so does £150billion for the NHS. These things add up. Back to TV and even the simplest half hour show will often have 50+ names in the credits.
People who have little idea of how to resource a broadcast news organisation may think 160 journalists would be more than enough to run a 24/7 service, but it clearly isn't. At a guess each 2 minute report we see on air each day probably involved at least half a dozen people (that's an estimate as a viewer - I could see how it could easily be more than that). At 10 reports a region per day, and say 20 for the national news, we'll round that up to being 200 reports a day and to keep things simple if they all take 5 people to make you soon hit 1000 people a day. For a 24/7 operation you'd need at least twice that many on your books when you factor in weekends and holidays, so suddenly 2000 isn't that unreasonable. And that's just for TV and just for short form routine news packages.
Yes, there is duplication* and yes I do question whether the BBC really needs to provide services in several middle Eastern languages. They used to be funded by the foreign office but came under licence fee funding a while back, though I think is now funded by the government again - they were given £289m to fund 12 foreign language services back in 2017 at a time when hundreds of millions was being withdrawn to support the free over 75s licences.
* - One obvious duplication for me is Today and 5 Live Breakfast. Yes, both serve different audiences but when 5 Live Breakfast seemingly doesn't cut through as a significant player in the market (it's not on the ministerial morning routine for example) you have to wonder whether a simulcast could work there, especially as that is what is done on TV with BBC1 and BBC News where arguably the viewer would benefit from something more general on BBC1 and more newsy on BBC News. However if it's a question about value rather than cost there is absolutely value in 5 Live doing their own thing in the mornings.