Brekkie post_id=63536 time= user_id=976 Wrote:It doesn't feel like the Royal Charter protects the BBC's independence in the way that it should - not only should it be editorially independent it really shouldn't have to rely on the government of the day being sympathetic to secure it's funding. Does this even have to be debated through Parliament?
Question is, if it isn't the government of the day who should decide:
1 - do we need a BBC in the modern era;
2 - if so how big should it be; and
3 - assuming we do, how should that be funded.
There is so much talk about the need to replace the licence fee, both by those who'd defund the BBC and those who want to protect it, but very little is put forward about viable alternative methods.
I guess the options basically are:
[list=]Licence Fee
General Taxation
Broadband (or other media) levy
Subscription
Advertising[/list]
Or a combination of two or more of the above.
All the alternatives have their own issues which is ultimately why we keep coming back to the licence fee. General taxation still raises questions of independence and means funding is subject to the whims of the government of the day. A broadband levy is surely the same thing under a different name.
Subscription means the BBC is no longer a PSB and in the same arena as Netflix, Sky etc. whilst advertising would not only destroy the BBC but risk seriously weakening ITV, C4, C5 and Sky too as advertising budgets aren't going to suddenly double to plug the gap.
I think a combination of a free and subscription service is what many of those who want to "defund the BBC" expect to be the long term solution - after all that is the case in most areas of public services too. How that would work in practice is questionable - would viewers expect shows like Strictly to be on the free service or for premium viewers only. And as you'd expect any subscription service now to be streaming based rather than channel based would shows like that even work in this environment?
All of this speculation over the future funding of the BBC is useless speculation and empty threats as there will be a general election by 2024, meaning a new Prime Minister and a new government will be in power, and I have no doubt any threats over the BBC existence and future funding will change considering which party and which Prime Minister is in power.
Toby brown post_id=63546 time= user_id=1251 Wrote:AxiosBrit67 post_id=63465 time= user_id=1688 Wrote:Assuming that the cuts goes ahead at the time licence fee scrapped and replace with new model they will need to close, sold or merge some services that overlap the content or deemed unprofitable. For example, CBeebies needs to merge again with CBBC channel or Radio 1 spinoffs must merge with main Radio 1 into one station, on the other side, unprofitable service like Bitesize needs to close or sold out.
Time has changed for the BBC as it feels very different to those decades ago.
I would hate to see the reaction from parents if cbeebies was axed
Incase you forgotten, before 2002 all Cbeebies and CBBC programmes were merged under one name CBBC, I would most definitely support CBeebies closing if the BBC does need to make cuts and if it does it does.
BBCMeridian post_id=63552 time= user_id=2083 Wrote:Toby brown post_id=63546 time= user_id=1251 Wrote:AxiosBrit67 post_id=63465 time= user_id=1688 Wrote:Assuming that the cuts goes ahead at the time licence fee scrapped and replace with new model they will need to close, sold or merge some services that overlap the content or deemed unprofitable. For example, CBeebies needs to merge again with CBBC channel or Radio 1 spinoffs must merge with main Radio 1 into one station, on the other side, unprofitable service like Bitesize needs to close or sold out.
Time has changed for the BBC as it feels very different to those decades ago.
I would hate to see the reaction from parents if cbeebies was axed
Incase you forgotten, before 2002 all Cbeebies and CBBC programmes were merged under one name CBBC, I would most definitely support CBeebies closing if the BBC does need to make cuts and if it does it does.
If you really think that CBBC and Cbeebies merging together is a good idea in this current age, then you obviously have no idea just how distinct the two channels are from each other nowadays.
LoganStuff post_id=63553 time= user_id=1524 Wrote:BBCMeridian post_id=63552 time= user_id=2083 Wrote:Toby brown post_id=63546 time= user_id=1251 Wrote:I would hate to see the reaction from parents if cbeebies was axed
Incase you forgotten, before 2002 all Cbeebies and CBBC programmes were merged under one name CBBC, I would most definitely support CBeebies closing if the BBC does need to make cuts and if it does it does.
If you really think that CBBC and Cbeebies merging together is a good idea in this current age, then you obviously have no idea just how distinct the two channels are from each other nowadays.
Of course it's a good idea, having two children's channels is absolutely pointless and if the corporation needs to make cuts then I say the younger children's channel must go.
A greater chance of BBC1/2 becoming evening only services with CBBC/CBeebies during the day than there is of the BBC closing one of it's childrens channels IMO. Indeed childrens TV is one area where you can get away with repeats far more than any other area - and that's been the case for decades.
The BBC now is the principle funder of the UK childrens TV industry too, so these cuts will bite there, whether with one channel or two.
Aaron.TV post_id=63532 time= user_id=1940 Wrote:We will not know if the licence fee is to be abolished until after the next General Election in 2024.
We will not know if the licence fee is to be abolished until after the next General Election in 2024.
People are getting extremely carried away here, it’s like the facts don’t matter.
That is true. She said herself that "if the Conservatives are still in power" so your point here is very excellently put.
Brekkie post_id=63549 time= user_id=976 Wrote:I guess the options basically are:
[list=]Licence Fee
General Taxation
Broadband (or other media) levy
Subscription
Advertising[/list]
Or a combination of two or more of the above.
All the alternatives have their own issues which is ultimately why we keep coming back to the licence fee.
I think probably the simplest and fairest alternative to the licence fee would be collecting the £13.37 per month via the council tax. You could then have the single occupancy 25% off and other such discounts applied to the licence fee part.
Think it's fair to say under the existing licence fee the cheaper B&W mono licences really need scrapping. Hard to believe that many still have only B&W TVs, and might provide some additional income.
I wonder if the BBC might renew it's own threats to make cuts to World Services, which it was previously forced to fund. I seem to recall they got some additional funds in return for not aching them a while ago.
When it comes to cuts I wonder if the likes of 1 Xtra might go online/app only as per R1 Dance. Probably not a huge saving but every penny counts. I guess it'll also mean more simulcasts for the News Channel with World News. Pity they can't make BBC Parliament online/app only without hitting the political suicide button (the same applies for BBC Scotland channel).
BBCMeridian post_id=63554 time= user_id=2083 Wrote:Of course it's a good idea, having two children's channels is absolutely pointless and if the corporation needs to make cuts then I say the younger children's channel must go.
Let me lay it out a little clearer for you:
Cbeebies is for preschoolers and toddlers, and has programming relevant to them.
CBBC is for older children and young teens, and has programming relevant to them.
They are both children's channels, but they have very distinct audiences with different needs.
Someone who watches CBBC isn't going to be interested in whatever content is on Cbeebies, and vice versa.
Keith post_id=63557 time= user_id=1115 Wrote:Brekkie post_id=63549 time= user_id=976 Wrote:I guess the options basically are:
[list=]Licence Fee
General Taxation
Broadband (or other media) levy
Subscription
Advertising[/list]
Or a combination of two or more of the above.
All the alternatives have their own issues which is ultimately why we keep coming back to the licence fee.
I think probably the simplest and fairest alternative to the licence fee would be collecting the £13.37 per month via the council tax. You could then have the single occupancy 25% off and other such discounts applied to the licence fee part.
Think it's fair to say under the existing licence fee the cheaper B&W mono licences really need scrapping. Hard to believe that many still have only B&W TVs, and might provide some additional income.
I wonder if the BBC might renew it's own threats to make cuts to World Services, which it was previously forced to fund. I seem to recall they got some additional funds in return for not aching them a while ago.
When it comes to cuts I wonder if the likes of 1 Xtra might go online/app only as per R1 Dance. Probably not a huge saving but every penny counts. I guess it'll also mean more simulcasts for the News Channel with World News. Pity they can't make BBC Parliament online/app only without hitting the political suicide button (the same applies for BBC Scotland channel).
I hope 1xtra doesn't go online. I think the bbc have learned from their bbc three mistake
There are two institutions left in the UK that the Conservative party would dearly love to see privatised and/or abolished - the BBC and the NHS.
Even suggesting touching the NHS is still seen as political suicide (even though the NHS in England is being privatised from within, despite it still being 'free' at the point of access), but the BBC is obviously now seen as fair game.
The suggestions from Dorries that the BBC should have ignored the recent party-gate stories because they are undermining the Prime Minister by reporting on it, is obviously ludicrous. We are not Russia or China.
As for future cuts due to the license fee being frozen, there's no 'behind the scenes' 'waste' left to cut, especially in news. The UK News Channel operation is already part time, operating independently for just 11 hours a day. Anymore simulcasting with World News will compromise the editorial output of both channels. Political programmes on BBC 1 & 2 have also been slashed to the bare minimum since 2015.
As for drama/entertainment, will we be seeing repeats on BBC 1 & 2 regularly during 8 - 10pm throughout the year, including drama repeats at 9pm as there's no money to comission anything new? That will then lead to the "the BBC is not worth it / what am I paying for / time to abolish the BBC" etc, which no doubt is all part if the plan to soften up the public for an eventual BBC break-up/sell-off
Voters will face stark choices in May 2024.
Sabre ratting about the BBC in the Sunday papers is nothing new. Before the 2015 licence fee deal, The Sunday Times went for weeks running stories about all sorts of threats to the BBC. There were also threats before COVID-19.
A freeze in the licence fee was expected before current events. It has obviously been fed to the Sundays this week as a distraction as part of "Operation Red Meat".
For more than 10 years, the BBC has had a series of funding cuts imposed on it, largely by stealth and with no public consultation.
Each time the BBC has taken it on the chin - and it should have used all available measures to resist taking on free TV licences for the over 75s.
The BBC really needs to come out fighting and make its case. A few tweets from ex-employees and supportive journalists isn’t going to cut it.
LoganStuff post_id=63560 time= user_id=1524 Wrote:BBCMeridian post_id=63554 time= user_id=2083 Wrote:Of course it's a good idea, having two children's channels is absolutely pointless and if the corporation needs to make cuts then I say the younger children's channel must go.
Let me lay it out a little clearer for you:
Cbeebies is for preschoolers and toddlers, and has programming relevant to them.
CBBC is for older children and young teens, and has programming relevant to them.
They are both children's channels, but they have very distinct audiences with different needs.
Someone who watches CBBC isn't going to be interested in whatever content is on Cbeebies, and vice versa.
The point I'm trying to make is that before 2002 there was only one strand on the BBC that was used for both younger and older children's programmes, and that wouldn't have changed had it not been for Greg Dyke, Children's BBC otherwise known as CBBC, Children's BBC is the name used for both older and younger children, so the need to have a separate younger channel CBeebies is a waste of time, there is absolutelly no need for the BBC to have two children's channels as it's absolutely pointless.
BBCMeridian post_id=63565 time= user_id=2083 Wrote:LoganStuff post_id=63560 time= user_id=1524 Wrote:BBCMeridian post_id=63554 time= user_id=2083 Wrote:Of course it's a good idea, having two children's channels is absolutely pointless and if the corporation needs to make cuts then I say the younger children's channel must go.
Let me lay it out a little clearer for you:
Cbeebies is for preschoolers and toddlers, and has programming relevant to them.
CBBC is for older children and young teens, and has programming relevant to them.
They are both children's channels, but they have very distinct audiences with different needs.
Someone who watches CBBC isn't going to be interested in whatever content is on Cbeebies, and vice versa.
The point I'm trying to make is that before 2002 there was only one strand on the BBC that was used for both younger and older children's programmes, Children's BBC otherwise known as CBBC, Children's BBC is the name used for both older and younger children, so the need to have a separate younger channel CBeebies is a waste of time, there is absolutelly no need for the BBC to have two children's channels as it's absolutely pointless.
So do you think launching all the new services in greg dyke time was a mistake