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

BBC licence fee to be abolished in 2027 and funding frozen

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 225 posts

Re: BBC licence fee to be abolished in 2027 and funding frozen

#201

Post by iso1210 »

chrisseaton wrote: post #129
iso1210 wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the 70s and 80s there was little entertainment other than real time broadcast TV on the 3 (later 4) channels. The BBC was a cultural institution. 20 million people would tune in to watch absolute crap, because that was really the only option other than go to the pub or play cards. Places like the BBC Television Centre were engrained in the public zeitgest, and thus newsworthy. This clearly isn't the case any more,…

> In the 70s and 80s there was little entertainment other than real time broadcast TV on the 3 (later 4) channels. Pretty sure people had books, radio, theatre, cinema, etc, in the 70s and 80s.

Hence the reason TV would only attract half of the adult population then.

Those still exist and presumably attract similar numbers, but there are far more options in the 'sitting on couch' area, hence TV viewership is massively down, and what remains is split amongst far more options

Re: BBC licence fee to be abolished in 2027 and funding frozen

#202

Post by mschuster91 »

inglor_cz wrote: post #134
mschuster91 wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I hope the BBC continues to survive, just with a more modern funding approach Difficult. There are not many ways to fund a public TV/radio program, and all of the non-per-household-license free-OTA variants have issues: - anything tax-based is just asking for trouble aka a populist government extorting the public stations after critical coverage - ad-funded... well that's just ordinary private TV, with the threat h…

To your last point: isn't it sort-of dangerous to rely on a TV news channel in case of serious events? Power to households may be off; people may not realize that they need to turn on their TV set. Something like a network of alarm sirens that can also speak would be more resilient. We have such a system in Prague. Every 1st Wednesday of each month at noon, it is shortly tested. If Prague can afford it, most of the U…

The key is multi-modal communication. People may not have a standalone radio in a home any more these days, but they may have a TV set.

Basically, the initial warning via sirens, firefighter trucks or Cell Broadcast tells the people to find one of the four networks (tv, radio, internet on a PC, internet on a smartphone) and inform themselves what to do.

The more avenues the authorities have to distribute both the initial warning and the followup information, the better.

Re: BBC licence fee to be abolished in 2027 and funding frozen

#203

Post by M2Ys4U »

t6667877789789 wrote: post #120
tristanperry wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's what multiple newspapers including The Times are reporting, yes. Since Boris' job is on the line, he's apparently panicking and due to roll out a series of popularist policies next week.

Boris is finished, he probably won't last the week. It reminds me of the day when Thatcher fell. Leading Conservative MPs will be currently phoning each other trying to determine how much support they will get if they make a move. Someone who has no serious chance will be nominated as a 'stalking horse' to stand up and challenge Boris. Then the other stronger candidates will put themselves forward to 'save the name o…

>Someone who has no serious chance will be nominated as a 'stalking horse' to stand up and challenge Boris. Then the other stronger candidates will put themselves forward to 'save the name of the party'. That is how they do it.

There doesn't need to be a stalking horse any more. Once 54 letters have been submitted to the 1922 Committee then a Vote of No Confidence is held amongst Tory MPs by secret ballot. If he loses then there's a leadership election.

It used to be the case that a sitting leader had to be formally challenged (which was usually done by a stalking horse), but the rules were changed a long time ago and it's not necessary any more.

Re: BBC licence fee to be abolished in 2027 and funding frozen

#204

Post by mschuster91 »

pessimizer wrote: post #143
mschuster91 wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I hope the BBC continues to survive, just with a more modern funding approach Difficult. There are not many ways to fund a public TV/radio program, and all of the non-per-household-license free-OTA variants have issues: - anything tax-based is just asking for trouble aka a populist government extorting the public stations after critical coverage - ad-funded... well that's just ordinary private TV, with the threat h…

> - anything tax-based is just asking for trouble aka a populist government extorting the public stations after critical coverage Why a populist government? It seems that it's consistently Tory governments that do this, or even threaten it. If Tory politicians are populist, than the word has no meaning.

> Why a populist government?

Because your usual honorable Conservative government doesn't give a fuck about public mass media, and left-wing governments are usually happy that there is a counter-view to the Conservative-leaning private media.

> If Tory politicians are populist, than the word has no meaning.

Well, the Tories did put up Boris Johnson as Prime Minister. Given that he's routinely called the "British Trump" for both his looks and his behavior, the Tories can indeed be called populist

Re: BBC licence fee to be abolished in 2027 and funding frozen

#205

Post by M2Ys4U »

dankboys wrote: post #138
kaashif wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the Government does not get to control the national TV like it does when the one who pays is it directly. You may want to double check who's in charge of the BBC. The Director-General Tim Davie is a former deputy chairman of a local Conservative party and Conservative councillor candidate. Not that bad, perhaps. But the Chairman of the BBC, Richard Sharp, was a banker at JP Morgan and Goldman Sachs, advisor to Bori…

If this is the case, why did the BBC vote 5 to 1 in favour of Remain[1], despite the Conservative party being down the middle on Brexit. 75% of comedians are explicitly left wing [2] Anecdotally, the sidebar of BBC News UK edition is littered with articles attempting to argue that any inequality between sex or race of people in a unvaried analysis is indicative of system X-ism. Very rarely do people leave the BBC and…

>If this is the case, why did the BBC vote 5 to 1 in favour of Remain[1]

The Express should be considered more of a fiction publication than a reliable newspaper. It's notorious for making stuff up, especially when it comes to Brexit.

Re: BBC licence fee to be abolished in 2027 and funding frozen

#206

Post by glomph »

onphonenow wrote: post #109
HWR_14 wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Only to answer your question about the party scandals - it totally made its way across the Atlantic. The severity of the scandal has been stated but is not obvious (Boris May lose his prime ministership over this ?) However, it was drowned out by the ouster of Phillip.

What I don't get is why the conservatives were so draconian over covid. Your partner is dying, you can't see them. Folks couldn't walk around outside. Some guy driving to walk around outside was like national news. I mean, if you go to this extreme, and then are throwing parties. (Rules for thee, not for me) it would make me furious as well. Let me go sit on the beach with sunshine and fresh air instead of having to…

>What I don't get is why the conservatives were so draconian over covid.

Because hundreds of people were dying every day? Because that would have been worse without widespread restrictions?

Re: BBC licence fee to be abolished in 2027 and funding frozen

#207

Post by M2Ys4U »

ssddanbrown wrote: post #9

I like much of what the BBC do and produce, especially BBC news, but the licence fee has always felt like a relic from the past with a bad strategy of enforcement (With their threatening letters and misguiding terminology as to when a license is required). Their actual broadcast service is lacking in some areas too. On BBC One HD I still get a blank place-holder screen for local news, advising to switch to the non-HD…

>On BBC One HD I still get a blank place-holder screen for local news, advising to switch to the non-HD channel, which is just bizarre at this point, 10 years after support for HD viewing.

That is changing this year!

Re: BBC licence fee to be abolished in 2027 and funding frozen

#209

Post by lobocinza »

Nextgrid wrote: post #99
Hokusai wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are not that funds created so taxpayers are there ones in control of party finances instead of corporations? The USA seems a good example of what happens when politicians are fully dependent on corporations if they want to be elected, and it's servitude to the interest of the few.

I guess this depends on what the requirements are to access said fund. If accessing said fund requires being on good terms with the establishment then it's the worst of both worlds.

Throwing public money on elections didn't solve the problem it aimed to solve, corps financing candidates for favors. Even before the prohibition most of it was transferred over the counter or in deals where corp X pay for something for Y in the name Z. This is illegal and people got arrested (mainly the intermediaries) but it's a widespread practice. What this achieved is making running a campaign as a grassroots politician more expensive and prohibitive while empowering parties leaders. The 'caciques' have enormous financial power in their hands and act as gatekeepers of who will get elected.

The share of the pie to parties is proportional to the number of votes their congressmen received in the last election. And the voting system is bizarre. Multiparty system in Brazil is a joke, mostly parties doesn't have ideology or political coherence. It's simply power for power. If you vote for candidate A from party X that is a good guy with nice ideas you will probably help instead to elect candidate B from the same party which is a piece of shit. On last election a popular Youtuber and outsider of the political system received a large number of votes but due to how the system work a bunch of trash from his party got elected along. End of day, when he tried to make the right thing he didn't have the support of his own party.

Re: BBC licence fee to be abolished in 2027 and funding frozen

#210

Post by chrisseaton »

iam-TJ wrote: post #62
chrisseaton wrote: post #20

The BBC's version of the article at https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-60014514 . > The BBC has declined to comment. Nothing more BBC than the BBC writing an article about the BBC saying that the BBC haven't commented.

More likely there is no comment until the UK government makes the announcement public - rather than responding to 'informed sources'. BBC is caught between a rock and hard place. Its journalists 'need' to report the story or risk being accused of 'censorship' for not reporting on the rumour/leak/background-briefings when other news organisations are reporting those, but at the same time the BBC board [0] (10 non-exec…

> rather than responding to 'informed sources'.

They edited the story as it developed to later refer to 'sources' within the BBC. Publishing an anonymous leak from themselves given to themselves because they wouldn't comment themselves? It's a farce.

Post reply on HN