[Non-footy] Do we really need the BBC anymore?

I've just been reading an article on the BBC website which reports that they (ie the BBC, although it does read like they are talking about another organisation) have abandoned an IT project which has cost £98m - you may say fair play to them for admitting it but someone would have found out eventually and they would have been shot down even more for trying to sweep it under the carpet. (How exactly do you spend £98m before realising the project is a waste of time?)

I've thought for a long time that the BBC is just not needed in this day and age and doesn't provide anywhere near the level of quality television that it used to. My arguments against them aren't anything to do with begrudging paying the license fee, but the fact that all of us pay for it should give us opportunity to say whether it is relevant.

Back when we had only three or four channels, maybe even in the early days of Sky (when all the programming and channels were truly dire), then yes the BBC provided quality entertainment, insightful news reports when the nearest thing we had to the internet was Ceefax/Teletext, lots of live sporting events and a varied range of factual programming. Personally I always used to look forward to watching films on the BBC purely because they wouldn't be interrupted by adverts like on ITV and Channel 4.

These days though, the quality of the content is laughable. Weekday evenings are centered around Eastenders and that terrible One Show, weekends it's the equally terrible The Voice and not a lot else, all run of the mill filler programmes of a similar quality that you find on channels like Living.

They barely have any live sport anymore, of course they've kept that middle-class favourite Rugby...a sport that I literally never hear anyone talk about so it can't be as popular as the BBC like to think it is. They GAVE AWAY 50% of the Formula 1 races that they had whilst still in a contract where they could show all of them - they cited that they could not afford to broadcast all the races yet they send a full production team to EVERY race even when they are only showing a relatively short highlights.

Anyway, I could drone on about this for hours and get into the propaganda of their news department but really my point is there should be some kind of vote to either retain, close, or sell the BBC to be run as a normal commercial entity that isn't funded by a license fee.

 

The days when they produced the best dramas and comedies on TV has long gone, the comedies (like The Wright Way) are awful, and most of their dramas are soap operas, American TV drama being far superior these days.

The BBC should either take commercials or go the subscription route like Sky, forcing everyone to pay for rubbish like Eastenders and The Matt Lucas Awards is simply not fair.

 

If they did ever do away with the BBC, we'd still have to pay TV TAX,

 

The BBC, by and large, is excellent IMO. The website alone is worth it. Radio 6 Music and BBC Four produce more quality content then the majority of commercial tv and radio put together. They produce quality drama like The Hour and The Shadow Line, have brought the best of world tv to us in The Wire, The Killing, Borgen etc. To be honest the only other channels I tend to watch are Sky Atlantic and Sky Sports which i pay through the nose for. If I do watch anything else it tends to be reruns of BBC sitcoms on Gold like Partridge, Early Doors, and The Office.

Commercialise the BBC and you will lose any impartiality to Murdoch-esque billionaires and TV output will descend to lowest common denominator rating chasers.

 

I'm sure we would, for me that would be better than knowing I'm funding the pathetic BBC gravy train.

 

Oh another anti-BBC post. Not sure about your comments on rugby union because I see and hear plenty of folk talking about it. BBC News channel without any commercials is worth the licence fee itself.

 

The programmes you mention aren't my cup of tea either but plenty watch them so they are popular. And rugby is most definitely popular, particularly the internationals. I don't think it's bad value for money. Agree about the 98m wasted though, should have ended the project long before that amount was spent, although I have no idea of the details why.

 

Can't imagine how many people worldwide would literally die for a medium such as the BBC...

 

Well for what it's worth, my internet home page is BBC Sport and the only tv channel I watch every single day is BBC World News. I also subscribe to BBC Canada.

What does that say about the BBC (and what does it say about me?)

 

Err, well it reinforces my comment...

 

I like the BBC, it's easy to pick out the odd programme you don't think is worth it because there's so many - four channels and countless radio stations. I much prefer it to ITV or 4, not just because I think the programmes are better but because you don't have 20 minutes of adverts for every 40 minutes of actual programme.

There's also a lot more rubbish elsewhere, xfactor, BGT, I'm a celebratory etc. Not that I'm against that being on tv, it's very popular and channels are supposed to cater for a wide range of audiences, not just what you want.

For sport you've got the Olympics, Euros, World Cup, Championship football (yes not even that rubbish premier league stuff), rugby, F1 and MOTD. Radio 5 Live has a load of sport as well plus we get a reasonable amount of coverage on Radio Shefield.

It's easily value for money.

 

No they don't.

 

Football is by far the most popular sport in the country, the BBC is supposed to be a service for the people and it has NO live football at all, just Match of the Day highlights. That's not the main issue though, the BBC could probably afford to outbid Sky for the Premier League but I agree it would be unfair to make every license payer pay for what maybe 20% would want.

If people love the BBC so much, it should become a private company and sort it's own revenue out and it will thrive won't it? Do we not think the salaries are absolutely ridiculous for state-owned entity where more than a handful of the managers are paid several times more than the PM a year? Not to mention some of the distinctly average presenters over the years who have earned millions.

 

What do they do different then as the highlights only races seem exactly the same as the live races...apart from the fact that we don't see every lap and it's not live.

 

It's only value for money if you use it and want the things it offers. My problem with the BBC is that they make me have to pay a tv licence for something I don't ever watch. I don't care that it shows lots of sports, interesting documentaries, has a website and radio channels etc. I don't use any of those. So why should I have to pay to watch the other channels that I do enjoy? (I'm not debating whether the things they provide are amazing or not, I have no interest in them and I don't use them, why can't people who use it and enjoy it pay for it and have access to it's services, and other people, like me, not have to pay and don't get access, a la Sky.)

 

Oh yes privatise it...What could possibly go wrong???

 

It saddens me that anyone would even suggest such a thing. The BBC means so much globally to so many people and is the most respected, pioneering bastion of broadcasting. If I didn't have BBC4, there would be very little point in me owning a television.

 

If I only had BBC channels, there would be zero point in me owing a television.

 

Exactly, make it a subscription channel, charge people a tenner a month, cut down on all the rubbish (do they really need umpteen radio stations and 18,000 employees?).

I think more people ought to challenge the TV license, when I lived alone I didn't pay it for two years, I was never visited but I was sent at least ten letters during that time. I replied to the first one saying I did not watch any television as it was being broadcast and that I only used catchup services via an Xbox. (I'll admit this wasn't strictly true but I did watch very little live television, only sport really, and none of it on the BBC).

Despite this they continued to send me letters which threatened me with fines and legal action, one of the later ones was strange as to me it seemed to suggest that simply having a television meant I would need to pay the license fee.

 

Not said with any agenda Jamdrop, but you genuinely never use a BBC service?