I cant decide if this is a good thing or not. State broadcasters like the BBC are tied to conditions not normally imposed on privately owned broadcasters. The BBC has probably the worlds best TV archive in the world, they did alot of the digitisation down at BBC Maida Vale. I wonder when looking at Britbox if this is a backdoor/stealth way for Channel 4 to access & commercialise BBC archives when the BBC cant really…
Channel 4 privatisation to go ahead
81–90 of 96 posts
Re: Channel 4 privatisation to go ahead
#82TIL Channel 4 was previously publicly owned.
I was also completely unaware of this, it gives past controversies around Brass Eye and other edgy programming a different light.
It's most reasonably criticised for making too "easy" controversial choices, not really challenging for an audience, not really telling anybody anything they didn't know, just going for outrage - something like let's show people having sexual intercourse on TV but with medics explaining what's going on, rather than satire like Brass Eye that demands a bit more of the audience.
So for example Queer As Folk, now considered a pretty tame TV series (and indeed since rebooted for a wider audience) about young gay characters in Manchester was sufficiently controversial when Channel 4 first aired it that right wing newspapers of course insisted it should be banned. Arguably this was "too safe" but on the other hand it's not as though other broadcasters were doing this at the time.
Re: Channel 4 privatisation to go ahead
#83Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well Channel 4 actually critique the government for one… secondarily they produce different content than the BBC which will also soon be privatised.
The BBC has been pretty anti-government since about the time of Brexit. It was really obvious in particular during the pandemic, which had many decisions where all options had major downsides - and they spun whichever the government chose as obviously bad, focusing entirely on the downsides of that particular choice, then forgot about all those downsides and switched to spinning the new choice as the bad one the mome…
Re: Channel 4 privatisation to go ahead
#84This is vandalism. Channel 4 uses no government money and has a remit to show programming other channels cannot. The only reason this is on the table is because they critised the current government.
Funds from the sale of a publicly owned asset should not just be handed to other commercial organisations. Unless of course, your mates own those organisations, amiright?
Re: Channel 4 privatisation to go ahead
#85From a Hackernews point of view the most relevant part of this will be their video distribution platform 'All4' (previously '4 On Demand'). All4 is one of the buggiest platforms of all of the big channels. The others may be lacking in features but even Channel 5 has a pretty smooth user experience. All4 consistently crashes, shows ads but then no programme, doesn't show programmes in its search results, doesn't keep…
I use All4 a lot and never had a single issue with it. I use it in the Browser. Is there any data to support it being "buggiest"?
The problems described above were so bad on Roku that I had a '3 strike' policy - if the stream failed 3 times in one sitting and forced me to start the show again and sit through ads then I'd leave All4 and watch another service. Three strikes would be met weekly.
I contacted support on multiple occasions but they weren't helpful.
I haven't had anywhere near the same experience, even using self hosted like Plex and Jellyfin.
Re: Channel 4 privatisation to go ahead
#86Earlier quoted context omitted.
My experiences are mostly from other countries but it seems whenever the government sells something off it's always sold way under value...
Isnt this how oligarchs are created - buying state owned assets at massively knocked down prices from their friends in government? If you donate 20k to the party you can have yourself a multi billion pound media empire and a knighthood all of your own.
Re: Channel 4 privatisation to go ahead
#87That's another no-brainer to why I shouldn't pay for a TV License. I'm not going to support an organisation which cuts off my Scottish PM, refuses air importance. Produces poor quality entertainment and now wanting to sell a decent broadcaster from the UK. No seriously, to the down-voters; in the UK you have to pay a TV license. I find the quality of BBC programming really poor. C4 was decent, but if the government i…
> in the UK you have to pay a TV license You have to only if you watch broadcast TV, live TV, or use iPlayer. If you're not doing any of those things, then not paying isn't really a boycott. On the other hand, if you are doing them, then you're likely to get fined for it eventually.
Re: Channel 4 privatisation to go ahead
#88From a Hackernews point of view the most relevant part of this will be their video distribution platform 'All4' (previously '4 On Demand'). All4 is one of the buggiest platforms of all of the big channels. The others may be lacking in features but even Channel 5 has a pretty smooth user experience. All4 consistently crashes, shows ads but then no programme, doesn't show programmes in its search results, doesn't keep…
Re: Channel 4 privatisation to go ahead
#89What's really interesting is how cheap it is being sold for. The current figure being given is "around" £1 billion, which seems like low ball offer for the third biggest broadcasting company in the UK.
Re: Channel 4 privatisation to go ahead
#90Earlier quoted context omitted.
> in the UK you have to pay a TV license You have to only if you watch broadcast TV, live TV, or use iPlayer. If you're not doing any of those things, then not paying isn't really a boycott. On the other hand, if you are doing them, then you're likely to get fined for it eventually.
And let's not forget that almost 1/3 of all criminal convictions for women in the UK are due to the BBC TV license [1] which is disgusting. TV License non-payment needs to be de-criminalised. [1] https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/tv-licence-f...