Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The bargain at the heart of the BBC is fraying

jamesomalley.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 183 posts

Re: The bargain at the heart of the BBC is fraying

#51

Post by SideburnsOfDoom »

wyager wrote: post #24
glugc wrote: post #15

>Even if you don’t engage with Newsnight’s coverage of the Namibian Presidential Election6, or you don’t tune in to hear what the fishing conditions are like in the North Sea, it’s good that at least someone, somewhere is being paid to care about these things. Why?

You’re being downvoted but I think this is a fair question. I don’t accept this assertion as true at face value. Presumably the BBC, as with any other government-controlled revenue source, acts as some sort of patronage mechanism, and a lot of these roles exist as a jobs program rather than something the taxpayers actually extract a benefit from.

> The BBC, as with any other government-controlled revenue source

Point of fact, the BBC was not intended to be "government-controlled", and it is not a "revenue source" for the UK government.

https://www.quora.com/Is-the-BBC-the-state-owned-and-state-c...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BBC#

Re: The bargain at the heart of the BBC is fraying

#52

Post by gamacodre »

jay_kyburz wrote: post #27
glugc wrote: post #15

>Even if you don’t engage with Newsnight’s coverage of the Namibian Presidential Election6, or you don’t tune in to hear what the fishing conditions are like in the North Sea, it’s good that at least someone, somewhere is being paid to care about these things. Why?

Because we need to know what is going on in the world, whether its profitable or not. News should not be entertainment. News should not be for profit.

> News should not be entertainment. News should not be for profit.

But why?

If "news" isn't profitable or entertaining (and FWIW I agree those shouldn't be preconditions for quality news), then it will have to be subsidized by someone. Who will do that? What is their reason for putting up that money? And - most importantly - who decides whether the end product is "good enough", and what changes can they demand for the subsidy to continue?

Re: The bargain at the heart of the BBC is fraying

#53

Post by open-source-ux »

The challenge the BBC faces is one that all public service broadcasters face across Europe. Although they cannot compete with the enormous budgets of streaming services, that doesn't mean they can't make programmes the public want to watch and which can be popular. And not every series needs a huge budget to succeed. Co-productions are common throughout the industry and a lot of BBC content ends up on Amazon and Netflix.

For those not familiar with the BBC outside the UK, the variety and scope of content they produce is simply massive. Some argue too much.

It's not just big-name TV shows though - there are national radio stations covering music and speech, a further 40+ regional radio stations and the BBC World Service.

They fund 5 orchestras, produce the biggest classical music festival in the world (BBC Proms), also support UK artists to get exposure with their BBC Music Introducing scheme.

Children's TV programmes are free of commercial influence and ad-free. Educational materials cover the entire UK school curriculum and are extensive. (Remember the recent bbc micro:bit project to get kids coding? Only the BBC would have taken the initiative).

The entire BBC website is completely ad-free for everyone in the UK (not ad-free outside the UK though).

The list goes on...

There are lots of things I dislike about the BBC, particularly their domestic news output. I hate the 'dumbing down' of some documentaries. But I think we in the UK would be worse off without the BBC despite all it's faults.

Re: The bargain at the heart of the BBC is fraying

#54

Post by carnitine »

traceroute66 wrote: post #49

There are just so many things the BBC in its current form is doing wrong I don't know where to start: - Paying too much for too little (both quality *and* quantity of "talent") - Repeats, repeats and more goddam repeats in increasingly short timeframes - Recent actions such as putting Spitting Image on BritBox (paid commercial service), it should have been on license-paid TV ! I certainly refused to pay for it. - Tak…

I think the BBC needs to reject the premise of celebrity entirely and start summarily getting rid of people when they start demanding exorbitant fees. Particularly for programmes which are factual, Huw Edwards and Gary Lineker are simply not worth their fees, people are tuning in for the content.

Re: The bargain at the heart of the BBC is fraying

#55

Post by tomjen3 »

mdoms wrote: post #11

Why the hand-wringing over show budgets? One of the greatest shows I have ever watched, People Just Do Nothing - a BBC production - must have had a budget one one thousandth of a Marvel show but I would re-watch it a hundred times before I bothered with a single episode of that generic PG-13 comic book dreck. And I can say the same for all of the BBC greats. BBC doesn't need to compete on budget. Netflix may pour bil…

It is fine that you do not like comic book shows. I find most of them cheese too, but evidentially lots of people disagree and they want the most possible for their money too.

Personally I don't think the BBC should produce entertainment at all, only scrupulously neutral news and explanations because that is what society needs if it is to be held together.

Re: The bargain at the heart of the BBC is fraying

#56

Post by MattPalmer1086 »

throwaway287391 wrote: post #43
iso1210 wrote: post #16

My kids have no concept of linear TV. My 9 year old came back and told me that a friend had a broken TV as when they turned it on, the program was already half way through. Their 'channels' are netflix, amazon and disney. When I had the choice and they were pre-school then sure, we watched things like Alphablocks on iplayer. I can force them to watch Attenborough or Blue Peter, and they enjoy it, just not enough to w…

> I think linear TV will still be going in 10 years time, but probably not 30 I think you're probably right, but I'm one of the few millennials who will miss it when it's gone. I still like being able to turn on the news or some dumb show as background noise, it's an old habit from my boomer parent upbringing. I'm a bit surprised I haven't really met anyone else around my age with a nostalgic attachment to linear TV.…

I agree with all of that. Streaming is about choice, but linear TV is about an event and/or serendipity.

I have a lot of movies on Plex, but when we browse them it's rare for us to select one. On the other hand, we often watch those movies when they're on TV. "We have that on Plex" has become a household joke.

Re: The bargain at the heart of the BBC is fraying

#57

Post by vharuck »

zwieback wrote: post #26

BBC (and other national broadcasters) should focus on news, children's TV and maybe a small selection of cultural stuff that otherwise wouldn't have exposure. It makes no sense to compete in the commercial entertainment space. I'm already noticing that there's stuff on streaming now that includes funding from several non-profit or national cultural organisations, I think that model can work well. I enjoy watching Eur…

This is what Japan's NHK does, and I watch it a lot on Roku. Documentaries, cooking shows, talk shows focusing on Japanese culture, etc. They're basically cultivating and training tourists, which is great! I want to know about famous places that I can visit, new food I can try, and enough Japanese to at least get directions or buy things from people who can't speak English. And, while the production values aren't Hollywood-level, I expect they're better than what prefectural tourist offices would make.

If I were planning a trip to Great Britain, I'd happily watch a similar channel.

Re: The bargain at the heart of the BBC is fraying

#58

Post by laurencerowe »

dreen wrote: post #34
tialaramex wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're thinking of BBC Studios, the global for-profit arm. The BBC World Service is an international multi-lingual news and discussion service. Big budget costume drama your commercial broadcaster paid $$$ for? BBC Studios. Guy speaking your language but likely from a radio studio thousands of miles away, telling you stuff that your local news media are too scared (if they exist) to broadcast? BBC World Service. Hist…

You're right, I was thinking of BBC Worldwide which is now part of BBC Studios. Still, it makes a lot more money than the group gets from the license fee, which was my point.

That's not correct.

"Licence fee accounted for 71% of BBC funding in 2019/20"

https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-...

Re: The bargain at the heart of the BBC is fraying

#59

Post by parenthesis »

Why isn't everything the BBC has ever made available on a streaming service for license free payers? I'd love to able to watch the TV news for days when interesting things happened; old dramas with `low production values' but actual acting and writing and stories and no constant gratuitous cuts and close-ups …
Post reply on HN