BBC - how does it fight back?

[MatijaTelevizija]

Not much I disagree with here. The argument is too often framed as you’re either for the BBC or you’re against it, but it sounds that you believe, like me, that the BBC needs to exist but needs to be rationalised.

I’ve argued in the past that what I’d like to see is a thorough review of what content the BBC does and should create, and then work backwards to figure out how many channels that actually fills. Too often though you get excuses as to why things can’t happen - my gut feeling is you’d probably fit all new content (excluding kids but including all news) onto 2 channels.

I had thought of this since even 2009. The channels feel very empty.

[W. Knight]

Despite the controversies, BBC overseas is still widely acclaimed for its output, some might say a "cultural treasure" from Britain. So, for the corporation, how to bring this feeling back to domestic viewers is the main focus of restructuring: As others have said, quality is more important than quantity.

Here're my thoughts:
TV:
-BBC One: Flagship channel, general entertainment. Stronger rebranding required.
-BBC Two: Combing BBC Three, targeting a younger demographic.
-Scrap BBC Four, or turn the space into BBC Prime, a place showing the best of BBC (and UKTV?) programming, a taster for exclusive online content, plus the original BBC Four content (at a reduced ratio).
-BBC News Channel will stay, as general TV stations can't transition as soon if accidents occur (such as 4th Bridge).
-Alba and S4C are also here to stay, as per others' suggestions.
-CBBC and CBeebies remain separate due to the audience's age differences.

Radio: I agree that there are too many Radio stations, so merging will be the main point here.
-Merging the (E)Xtra stations into programme blocks.
-Merging Radio 1 and 6 due to similar music genres.
-Combining the news & current affairs elements in Radio 4 and 5 Live, the latter of which will exclusively be a sports station that shares with BBC Sport (and scrapping 5 Live Sports Extra - that's a mouthful!)
-Similar to keeping BBC Alba and S4C, Asian Network remains.
-Regionality remains as normal, bar scrapping Radio Cymru 2.
-Phasing in BBC Sounds as online content becomes more dominant.
-Turn regional stations into commercial stations for more revenue?

Overall and others:
-Moving more focus online, as well as original content on BBC1 and 2.
-BBC acts as a backbone for other streaming services, not a direct competitor.
-Personally, rebrand UKTV to a more cohesive identity?
-If it ain't broke, don't spend money and resources on 'fixing' the masterbrand. :lol:

That's the end of the plan. Structural and political factors are left unconsidered, due to my limited knowledge from not living in the UK. Feel free to express any opinions to me!

[Cassia Tuna]

The BBC also needs to greatly rethink about how it goes about collecting the licence fee. Employing private firm Capita to send intimidating letters which are often disguised as bills and then "enforcement officers" round to those who don't pay up, is clearly doing itself no favours, especially in these trying times for many.

We have all seen the videos online of disgruntled homeowners filming these officers, attempting to enter a property and who are often confrontational, which are then shared around many times and are again used a stick to bash the BBC with. In my view, the BBC needs to put a stop to this practice immediately and instead use the collection letters as an opportunity to sell to licence fee payers why paying it is a good thing, highlighting the good work and many useful services that the BBC provides. For instance, they could consider bundling in a small booklet with their collection letters outlining everything the BBC has done in the past year and everything it plans to do the following. Collection via intimidation is a tactic that is becoming increasingly resented by the British public, I suspect.

Gone are the days when it was either the BBC or bust. Tactics which might have worked in the 1960s are clearly not working today, especially in an age when it is so easy to watch content online and through alternative means. The corporation needs to start selling itself and justify why we should pay the licence fee.

[Brekkie]

I'm still surprised that the Local TV network was allowed to go ahead - its eventual fate was predicted by many prior to the launch of the first station.

Dissatisfaction with the BBC is not isolated to the right although I do admit that discontent is wider in that part of the population - for now.

However, addressing the growing negative feelings towards it from many different sides rather than dismissing it as the obsession of just one part of the population is likely to be a more successful strategy for defending the BBC.

Absolutely. I think the issue with all sides is many people feel some kind of ownership of the BBC - that's a sign of how successful it is and historically the licence fee model has connected it to the people.

The solutions need to be long term - which is why I think just saying axe this and axe that is never a solution and a few years later either the decisions need reversing or you just get people who basically say "OK, now axe more". There will also always be a contradiction between "streamlining" services and reaching as wide an audience as possible, especially audiences deemed not to be served in the commercial market. For some Asian Network is as crucial as CBeebies and CBBC and it's just not quite as easy as saying one can be axed but the others must continue as separate services. If it was the issue wouldn't come up time and time again.

I think for a long term solution the debate shouldn't be framed around stripping down the BBC but instead how it would look today if you were building it up from scratch, and whether linear TV and radio is always the best way to provide services - and where they're not whether a linear service can still add value and support an online offering.


How it's all funded is an issue which usually seems to result in a reluctant agreement the licence fee is the best model. Personally I do think we need to look at whether some of the burden of funding the BBC should fall upon the industry rather than the viewer, especially as we now have significantly reduced PSB requirements for commercial radio and TV compared, much of which are picked up by the BBC.

It's all very well saying axe this, that and the other and look overseas at how commercial channels pick up the slack - but it's worth noting mainly thanks to how historically markets have developed and in the US especially there is still a much higher amount of what we'd consider PSB content coming from the commercial market - most US channels produce more local news in a day than ITV do in a week for example.

[Toby brown]

TVLF comrades, most of us love and support the BBC but it's in trouble.

Opting out of the licence fee seems to be accelerating (although some of that may be offset by the creation of new homes and dwellings to an extent).

In today's Times, Julian Knight, Conservative chairman of the Commons media select committee, said it was “clear the BBC is haemorrhaging support amongst a significant proportion of the British public...(I)f this trend continues, (it) could soon reach vanishing point where evasion is so widespread as to undermine faith in the TV licence system. This is fast becoming a crisis for the BBC.”

I have to agree with him.

A couple of friends of mine have stopped paying the licence fee. I have had discussions with them explaining why I think the BBC is so valuable to our cohesiveness as a nation and our soft power as a country abroad.

I would personally never stop paying the licence fee as, because there is much I dislike about the BBC, that is far outweighed by what I love about it.

So how does the BBC fight back?

If I were in charge, I would petititon the Government to sell off the radio bandwidth (including local radio) which could be catered for by commercial rivals (leaving perhaps Radio 4). As well as the one-off income boost, there would be savings of hundreds of millions of pounds per year which could then be reinvested into programming.

I would scrap BBC3 and, as much as it pains me to say in, BBC4 to free up another £100m for the type of content I describe at the end of this post. BBC Alba and S4C should be protected imo because they are indigineous minority languages crucial to the identities of their speakers and both are under threat, especially Scottish Gaelic, but I would lobby the Welsh and Scottish governments for more assistance.

Does the BBC really need to spend £350m pa on news and £100m on its online services? Could there be a cull in these departments without diminishing quality too much? Could another £150-£200m be saved from these departments?

With these actions, the BBC would save hundreds of millions of pounds per year.

I would then focus on investment in content on BBC1, 2, Cbeebies, and CBBC. I would then try to create brands for example on iPlayer where people within given demographics are more likely to easily find the content they want.

It's amazing how much we rave about the BBC for stuff like Line of Duty, Life on Mars, and event/appointment to view type programming. Let's hit the public with one new brilliant thing a week which is quality, distinctive, and unmissable.

Because, when it boils down to its essense, the BBC is loved and respected for its content. And I think that's where it has the best chance of making it relevant 100 years after its formation.

MODS - I didn't know which forum to put this in - please shift if you think fit.

If the bbc did what your suggesting it would have no future as all the services aimed at young audiences bbc three cbbc cbeebies radio 1 1xtra and Asian network would be gone. Those networks are far more important than radio 4

[Toby brown]

The majority of people who listen to radio 4 are uper class southeners the bbc would become less relevant to normal people if it did what you were suggesting

[James Martin]

It's no secret I'm no fan of the license fee. However, I don't believe privatisation is remotely equitable as the advertising pie is only so big, and it would see a major squeeze on the commercial PSBs.

My main issue with the BBC is that it's not businesslike enough. Some of the "we have to make cuts" announcements are, let's be fair, like the Rockerfellers pleading poverty.

I personally believe either subscription is the way forward or a levy from another tax goes towards it. But the license fee is extortion for what I personally need it for, which really does boil down to some football matches in 4K, Neil Brand docs on Four and a pan-European music competition that the broadcaster sees as a joke and phones in year in year out. Everyone will say "but you get this and this and that and that" but when I don't use this and that, to what benefit does it bring me? Why can't I just pay for the bits I use?

Not to mention that if you don't own a television you can still access the radio services.

Would I stop paying if decriminalisation comes in? Yes.

It just needs making so much more efficient. But that involves a massive culture change that is so baked in how do you start turning it around?

In my opinion the BBC would benefit from the sort of shakeup ITV had 30 years ago.

[Toby brown]

Despite the controversies, BBC overseas is still widely acclaimed for its output, some might say a "cultural treasure" from Britain. So, for the corporation, how to bring this feeling back to domestic viewers is the main focus of restructuring: As others have said, quality is more important than quantity.

Here're my thoughts:
TV:
-BBC One: Flagship channel, general entertainment. Stronger rebranding required.
-BBC Two: Combing BBC Three, targeting a younger demographic.
-Scrap BBC Four, or turn the space into BBC Prime, a place showing the best of BBC (and UKTV?) programming, a taster for exclusive online content, plus the original BBC Four content (at a reduced ratio).
-BBC News Channel will stay, as general TV stations can't transition as soon if accidents occur (such as 4th Bridge).
-Alba and S4C are also here to stay, as per others' suggestions.
-CBBC and CBeebies remain separate due to the audience's age differences.

Radio: I agree that there are too many Radio stations, so merging will be the main point here.
-Merging the (E)Xtra stations into programme blocks.
-Merging Radio 1 and 6 due to similar music genres.
-Combining the news & current affairs elements in Radio 4 and 5 Live, the latter of which will exclusively be a sports station that shares with BBC Sport (and scrapping 5 Live Sports Extra - that's a mouthful!)
-Similar to keeping BBC Alba and S4C, Asian Network remains.
-Regionality remains as normal, bar scrapping Radio Cymru 2.
-Phasing in BBC Sounds as online content becomes more dominant.
-Turn regional stations into commercial stations for more revenue?

Overall and others:
-Moving more focus online, as well as original content on BBC1 and 2.
-BBC acts as a backbone for other streaming services, not a direct competitor.
-Personally, rebrand UKTV to a more cohesive identity?
-If it ain't broke, don't spend money and resources on 'fixing' the masterbrand. :lol:

That's the end of the plan. Structural and political factors are left unconsidered, due to my limited knowledge from not living in the UK. Feel free to express any opinions to me!

Radio 1 and 6 are aimed at different audiences 6music is more for radio 2s audiences than radio 1 it is basically radio 2 extra

[Toby brown]

TVLF comrades, most of us love and support the BBC but it's in trouble.

Opting out of the licence fee seems to be accelerating (although some of that may be offset by the creation of new homes and dwellings to an extent).
I know you're saying you will keep cbbc and cbeebies but what about the young adult services

In today's Times, Julian Knight, Conservative chairman of the Commons media select committee, said it was “clear the BBC is haemorrhaging support amongst a significant proportion of the British public...(I)f this trend continues, (it) could soon reach vanishing point where evasion is so widespread as to undermine faith in the TV licence system. This is fast becoming a crisis for the BBC.”

I have to agree with him.

A couple of friends of mine have stopped paying the licence fee. I have had discussions with them explaining why I think the BBC is so valuable to our cohesiveness as a nation and our soft power as a country abroad.

I would personally never stop paying the licence fee as, because there is much I dislike about the BBC, that is far outweighed by what I love about it.

So how does the BBC fight back?

If I were in charge, I would petititon the Government to sell off the radio bandwidth (including local radio) which could be catered for by commercial rivals (leaving perhaps Radio 4). As well as the one-off income boost, there would be savings of hundreds of millions of pounds per year which could then be reinvested into programming.

I would scrap BBC3 and, as much as it pains me to say in, BBC4 to free up another £100m for the type of content I describe at the end of this post. BBC Alba and S4C should be protected imo because they are indigineous minority languages crucial to the identities of their speakers and both are under threat, especially Scottish Gaelic, but I would lobby the Welsh and Scottish governments for more assistance.

Does the BBC really need to spend £350m pa on news and £100m on its online services? Could there be a cull in these departments without diminishing quality too much? Could another £150-£200m be saved from these departments?

With these actions, the BBC would save hundreds of millions of pounds per year.

I would then focus on investment in content on BBC1, 2, Cbeebies, and CBBC. I would then try to create brands for example on iPlayer where people within given demographics are more likely to easily find the content they want.

It's amazing how much we rave about the BBC for stuff like Line of Duty, Life on Mars, and event/appointment to view type programming. Let's hit the public with one new brilliant thing a week which is quality, distinctive, and unmissable.

Because, when it boils down to its essense, the BBC is loved and respected for its content. And I think that's where it has the best chance of making it relevant 100 years after its formation.

MODS - I didn't know which forum to put this in - please shift if you think fit.

If the bbc did what your suggesting it would have no future as all the services aimed at young audiences bbc three cbbc cbeebies radio 1 1xtra and Asian network would be gone. Those networks are far more important than radio 4

[Toby brown]

TVLF comrades, most of us love and support the BBC but it's in trouble.

Opting out of the licence fee seems to be accelerating (although some of that may be offset by the creation of new homes and dwellings to an extent).

In today's Times, Julian Knight, Conservative chairman of the Commons media select committee, said it was “clear the BBC is haemorrhaging support amongst a significant proportion of the British public...(I)f this trend continues, (it) could soon reach vanishing point where evasion is so widespread as to undermine faith in the TV licence system. This is fast becoming a crisis for the BBC.”

I have to agree with him.

A couple of friends of mine have stopped paying the licence fee. I have had discussions with them explaining why I think the BBC is so valuable to our cohesiveness as a nation and our soft power as a country abroad.

I would personally never stop paying the licence fee as, because there is much I dislike about the BBC, that is far outweighed by what I love about it.

So how does the BBC fight back?

If I were in charge, I would petititon the Government to sell off the radio bandwidth (including local radio) which could be catered for by commercial rivals (leaving perhaps Radio 4). As well as the one-off income boost, there would be savings of hundreds of millions of pounds per year which could then be reinvested into programming.

I would scrap BBC3 and, as much as it pains me to say in, BBC4 to free up another £100m for the type of content I describe at the end of this post. BBC Alba and S4C should be protected imo because they are indigineous minority languages crucial to the identities of their speakers and both are under threat, especially Scottish Gaelic, but I would lobby the Welsh and Scottish governments for more assistance.

Does the BBC really need to spend £350m pa on news and £100m on its online services? Could there be a cull in these departments without diminishing quality too much? Could another £150-£200m be saved from these departments?

With these actions, the BBC would save hundreds of millions of pounds per year.

I would then focus on investment in content on BBC1, 2, Cbeebies, and CBBC. I would then try to create brands for example on iPlayer where people within given demographics are more likely to easily find the content they want.

It's amazing how much we rave about the BBC for stuff like Line of Duty, Life on Mars, and event/appointment to view type programming. Let's hit the public with one new brilliant thing a week which is quality, distinctive, and unmissable.

Because, when it boils down to its essense, the BBC is loved and respected for its content. And I think that's where it has the best chance of making it relevant 100 years after its formation.

MODS - I didn't know which forum to put this in - please shift if you think fit.

I've noticed you have said you would keep cbbc and cbeebies but what about the young adult services they are very important especially for the bbcs future

[James Martin]

What would I do, personally?

Close 6Music and 1Xtra. Radios 1 and 2 handle this remit instead. Radio 2 definitely needs to be made more distinctive - like Radio 1 30 years ago it is too popular to justify public money.

Close BBC Three and BBC Four; this content should be picked up by BBC Two's remit. In turn this means that more original content can be aired across One and Two rather than the way they phone it in across large parts of the schedule.

Close BBC Scotland. It's just a money pit. Allow Scotland, Wales and NI to do their own 1, 6 and 10 in

More radicaly:

Close local radio and turn Radios 2 and 5 into regional networks with opt outs mirroring the TV regions at breakfast, drive & weekend brunch on 2 and breakfast, weekend brunch & sport on 5.

In turn Radios 1 and 3 would become DAB only. Radio 5 would gain FM access and close on AM. This would be done in a full FM frequency audit with Ofcom ideally, which would see Global and Bauer invited to take their piecemeal networks national in return for the surrender of their local licenses. Larger Community Radio licenses are offered with what's left.

[johnnyboy]

If the bbc did what your suggesting it would have no future as all the services aimed at young audiences bbc three cbbc cbeebies radio 1 1xtra and Asian network would be gone. Those networks are far more important than radio 4

I've noticed you have said you would keep cbbc and cbeebies but what about the young adult services they are very important especially for the bbcs future

The young adult market isn't really served by the BBC at all at the moment save for a few programmes with the BBC3 branding on iPlayer and occasionally on linear channels.

I agree that this is a market which is crucial for them.

However, this was true back in the 1990s and 2000s when I was part of that demographic. The BBC has never really been able to successfully connect with them - it's their blind spot.

In the past, the assumption was (correctly I believe) that, as the audience matures, they drift back to the BBC. Imported programming is great and I appreciate that this observation is anecdotal but, as you get older, you want to watch more stuff from Britain.

Content always wins and you get breakthrough hits like Fleabag, Killing Eve, Line of Duty, and so on which appeals to much wider audiences including young adults.

That's why my focus on revitalising the BBC is to aim to launch one big hitter a week whether it's a film, a short series like Bodyguard or Time, or maybe a long-running sci-fi show.

[tellyblues]

Many of the solutions offered in these types of discussions focus on cutting costs rather than addressing why people are cancelling their licence fees.

What value were they getting from it?

It doesn't matter how many channels or radio stations there are but the content on them and the regularity of which people consider it to be of relevance to them. That's not to say that cost-cutting shouldn't be done but even if the BBC are in profit, they can't rest on their laurels and need to establish what drives people away.

Just my opinion but the BBC1 and BBC2 schedules need revamped. Daytime there are shows that are or thereabouts 20 years old that are hardly off our screens because the BBC insists on repeating them. People can get fed up after years of monotony. Prime time is no different. The One Show, Eastenders, Strictly - all long-running. Even something considered relatively new, Call The Midwife, is in its tenth series. There are those who enjoy these programmes but do the BBC allow their audience to age with them?

Where are the shows for younger viewers? It seems that since the CBBC block was taken off BBC1 the BBC want people to watch the channel all day long. That's not how it should work.

[johnnyboy]

I personally believe either subscription is the way forward or a levy from another tax goes towards it. But the license fee is extortion for what I personally need it for, which really does boil down to some football matches in 4K, Neil Brand docs on Four and a pan-European music competition that the broadcaster sees as a joke and phones in year in year out. Everyone will say "but you get this and this and that and that" but when I don't use this and that, to what benefit does it bring me? Why can't I just pay for the bits I use?

James is an example of the type of person who is let down by the BBC.

Put aside James's or anyone else's political views because the BBC is more (thankfully) than just news and current affairs.

James, if there was a type of content you wanted from the BBC of outstanding quality a few times a year, what would it be?

[Mr Q]

I think it's naïve to imagine that the BBC can ever reform itself out of being a political punching bag. The objective cannot be to appease the baying mob, because they will always demand more.

That said, I agree with many others here that there is a strong case for rationalisation. The BBC is a long-standing institution. It has traditional functions that have accrued over time. But the media environment is not the same today as it was 10, 20, 30 years ago. Times change, and a public service broadcaster (as much as, perhaps even more than, any commercial broadcaster) must change with it. That's more than just adding new services/functions -- it also means culling things that are no longer relevant.

The BBC should reflect the voices of the UK. My view is that the BBC can best do that by being local. Wherever people live, they should be able to turn to the BBC and find stories/programming that say something about society as they experience it.

My sense is that, over time, there's been a tendency for the BBC to curb investment in the regions - preferring centralisation as a means to save money. While I absolutely understand the budget pressures driving that, I also think that's been a strategic mistake for the BBC. It's had the effect of making the broadcaster more foreign to some people. Simply devolving certain output/functions to other parts of the country (eg. Breakfast to Salford) isn't necessarily the solution to that.

In addition, while I'm not a consumer of the BBC's domestic output, my perception at least is that there are a lot of siloes that result in unnecessary duplication. Maximum integration between TV, radio and online should drive the BBC's future -- a future that is moving, and will continue to move, the BBC away from "old" to "new" media.

I think the UK-wide radio services are a key candidate for cuts. More podcasts, less linear radio programming. Instead, the BBC should focus on boosting local coverage -- and integrating local radio better with TV. I understand that the footprints of local radio and the TV regions aren't the same, but one suggestion I'd offer is to replace the breakfast regional slots and all daytime TV news updates with simulcasts from the local radio studios. And online, it should be easy for people to find content from and about their local area. BBC.co.uk should put the local perspective front and centre.

As for TV: daring dramas and comedies, educational and entertaining children's programming, and high-quality news and informational programming must be the core pillars of the BBC. Less is more. Like others, I'd be inclined to cut down to BBC One and Two + children's channels. I'm open to keeping BBC News as a separate channel (especially given the increased integration nowadays with BBC World News), though I still think the BBC would be better to focus on flagship bulletins and current affairs programming than running a 24-hour news service. To the extent there's breaking news not significant enough to interrupt regular programming on BBC One, this could still be streamed online.