If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Options
The BBC
Former Member
Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/4804044.stm
Im not sure if this is the correct board..
I've just read an article on the BBC site that it's to change its way forward by accounting to the audiences needs more. It says it will limit the amount of activities on the Internet, however.....
I read not long ago that the BBC is thinking of also moving online to broadcast shows like Eastenders. I can understand the prospect that Internet TV looks good but is it so good at the moment when we can just use our TV. I just cant understand the justification when we use the computer for the Internet, DVDs, writing documents which all can be done when watching the TV. Maybe when technology moves forward it will be more convenient.
Whats your opinion?
Im not sure if this is the correct board..
I've just read an article on the BBC site that it's to change its way forward by accounting to the audiences needs more. It says it will limit the amount of activities on the Internet, however.....
I read not long ago that the BBC is thinking of also moving online to broadcast shows like Eastenders. I can understand the prospect that Internet TV looks good but is it so good at the moment when we can just use our TV. I just cant understand the justification when we use the computer for the Internet, DVDs, writing documents which all can be done when watching the TV. Maybe when technology moves forward it will be more convenient.
Whats your opinion?
0
Comments
Of course nothing moves quick but I'd expect it to happen ahead of the analogue turn off in 2008, as a further method to guarantee access to TV
I thought that was in 2012?
It should be an independent watchdog, and everyone who pays the BBC Tax should have the right to vote out sickeningly violent men such as the DG Mark Thompson, a man so mature he thinks its cool to bite people he doesn't like.
The BBC should be shut down and sold off anyway. It should have happened 30 years ago, long before things that actually were broken down and sold off.
A programme that is worth an entire year's licence fee money.
A programme which would not have been made if the BBC didn't exist in its present form.
Enough said.
As far as BBC-haters are concerned, the insitution cannot win. If it produces high quality cultural programmes the ratings go down and the bbcphobes complain that nobody is interested in watching the BBC and that there is no reason for the fee to exist.
And if the BBC produces mass-market products that are watched by every other fool (beating in fact all other channels including the ultra populist ITV) the very same bbcphobes argue that it is dumbed down television and that shouldn't be so given the amount it receives through the licence fee.
As it happens the BBC does an excellent balancing act of providing programmes for all tastes from mindless soaps to ground-breaking nature programmes. Just as it's required by the charter by the way.
It's all down to personal opinion of course, but if we have to choose between keeping the BBC as it is through the licence fee or allowing it to go commercial and lose the jewels it produces, then I'm all for the licence. Sorry for those who disagree but Auntie is an asset to this country that should be protected at all costs.
You would have absolutely Sky News last night. I was going through their interactive service fairly late at night, looking at the news before going to bed. Meantime, they were busily reviewing this morning's newspapers. The guests were Yasmin Alibhai-Brown, of The Independent, and Andrew Porter, deputy political editor of The Sun. The story about the BBC came up, and they showed on screen a report in The Sun, written by none other than Mr Porter himself. Yasmin laid into it, describing it as "the most biased report I've ever seen". You should have seen it - Porter went absolutely livid! He just came across as a complete twat. Read his report and you can smell the impartiality... no wait, it's the smell of bullshit. :rolleyes:
His report, if you can stomach it.
I couldn't agree more.
The day that independant companies produce programme of that quality, or that of Life on Mars (for example) is the day that I will be converted to anti-licence fee.
For all the abuse which is heaped on the BBC, the quality of shows on satellite and ITV is a damn sight poorer and yet you still pay for those - just indirectly.
Wire in the Blood?
Sharpe?
As If?
Other examples are the shakespeare remakes, before that the canterbury tales. CBBC retains it's educational value (I managed to catch the really wild show's latest incarnation, it was one coral reef destruction), and is in fact providing new opertunities for children to have experiences in the new "seriously" set of programs sending kids to the amazon, antarctic and andies etc etc. Though in the same way as adult television, dick and dom in da bungalow is considerably more crap than live and kicking ever was on it's worst day.
Swings and roundabouts really.
Incidentally, when the bbc did that ocean nature thingy didn't the team actually discover a new species?
The BBC's best efforts aren't exactly knee-deep.
Maybe if the BBC actually did show its "quality" more often, I wouldn't resent the licence fee quite as much. But for every Coast there's a Davina McCall on a £1million salary. And whilst the Canterbury Tales was good, the Beeb didn't exactly excel itself with the truly diabolical adaptation of Gormenghast did it?
And if I have to see one more advertisement with Leslie Grantham telling me BBC is "the one to watch" (gosh, it must have taken the world's greatest minds to come up with that one), I will scream.
But all this again misses the point. If the BBC's programming is so fantastically wonderful, surely they would have no problem selling subscriptions to it? Sky manage it, and Sky is rubbish.
:yes: