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, 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.

Toby brown post_id=63566 time= user_id=1251 Wrote:

BBCMeridian post_id=63565 time= user_id=2083 Wrote:

LoganStuff post_id=63560 time= user_id=1524 Wrote: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

BBCMeridian post_id=63568 time= user_id=2083 Wrote:

Toby brown post_id=63566 time= user_id=1251 Wrote:

BBCMeridian post_id=63565 time= user_id=2083 Wrote: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

Yes I believe it was a big mistake, you don't have to agree with me but what's the point of having one channel named Children's BBC and a separated channel for toddlers when they're actually children too. I believe having one children's channel is enough.

Toby brown post_id=63570 time= user_id=1251 Wrote:

BBCMeridian post_id=63568 time= user_id=2083 Wrote:

Toby brown post_id=63566 time= user_id=1251 Wrote:So do you think launching all the new services in greg dyke time was a mistake

Yes I believe it was a big mistake, you don't have to agree with me but what's the point of having one channel named Children's BBC and a separated channel for toddlers when they're actually children too. I believe having one children's channel is enough.

What about the other digital channels bbc3 bbc4 etc

Radio_man post_id=63562 time= user_id=1477 Wrote: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.

Voters will face stark choices in May 2024.

BBCMeridian post_id=63565 time= user_id=2083 Wrote: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.

Brekkie post_id=63576 time= user_id=976 Wrote:

BBCMeridian post_id=63565 time= user_id=2083 Wrote: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.

It is no longer 2002. Television has changed dramatically in the last two years, never mind the last 20. CBBC and CBeebies will continue to exist for many years to come I'm sure as they both have distinct purposes - indeed arguably of all the BBC TV and radio channels no two channels have a clearer defined purpose than these two.

Both channels run too with very little new programming - perhaps one or two shows a day. If they were combined they'd still be a need to produce those shows to cater for all ages, so savings would be minimal.

Keith post_id=63557 time= user_id=1115 Wrote: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.

Radio_man post_id=63562 time= user_id=1477 Wrote: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

London Lite post_id=63580 time= user_id=953 Wrote:We've had at least 30 years of certain sections of the press going for the BBC for being supposedly not serving the public or at least a section of them. They also did the same for Europe and alas the country is no longer in a political and trading union.

But as Aaron keeps on saying, there's an election in just over two years time where another administration could be in charge or even sooner than that if the current PM leaves office in the near future where Nadine Dorries may have to change her mind on her proposals to freeze the licence fee and then scrap it altogether in an attempt to please other sections of the electorate who support the BBC.

BBCMeridian post_id=63583 time= user_id=2083 Wrote:

London Lite post_id=63580 time= user_id=953 Wrote:We've had at least 30 years of certain sections of the press going for the BBC for being supposedly not serving the public or at least a section of them. They also did the same for Europe and alas the country is no longer in a political and trading union.

But as Aaron keeps on saying, there's an election in just over two years time where another administration could be in charge or even sooner than that if the current PM leaves office in the near future where Nadine Dorries may have to change her mind on her proposals to freeze the licence fee and then scrap it altogether in an attempt to please other sections of the electorate who support the BBC.

Well what ever happens, I don't want to see the BBC we know and love end, I know it's not perfect and there have been times when the organisation has not got things right but it is part of British Culture and I don't want to see it disappear.

London Lite post_id=63580 time= user_id=953 Wrote:We've had at least 30 years of certain sections of the press going for the BBC for being supposedly not serving the public or at least a section of them. They also did the same for Europe and alas the country is no longer in a political and trading union.

But as Aaron keeps on saying, there's an election in just over two years time where another administration could be in charge or even sooner than that if the current PM leaves office in the near future where Nadine Dorries may have to change her mind on her proposals to freeze the licence fee and then scrap it altogether in an attempt to please other sections of the electorate who support the BBC.

LoganStuff post_id=63447 time= user_id=1524 Wrote:Those articles are deeply worrying. I don't see why the government is hellbent on attacking public services like the BBC.