The part I found more interesting than anything else was the bit about the BBC leading Digital Britain, it looks like, for the first time, the digital channels and services (including new media) will be an official part of the BBC's remit.
So I guess this puts an end to arguments along the lines of - the bbc shouldn't be doing... [insert digital channel/service/website here].
This is a positive step. The BBC can now move on from Hutton and also move on from the pursuit of ratings above all else on its analogue channels. I am also pleased that the BBC's internet services will continue in their current state.
For once, good news concerning government proposals for broadcasting!
I am glad the license fee is staying, because I think it does keep the quality threshold high programming wise compared to the rubbish we sometimes see on commercial TV. And considering how much you pay, would you rather see and hear adverts on all of the BBC terrestrial, satelite and radio stations? No neither would I!
Im pleased the license fee is remaining and to be honest Im quite happy with the BBC's programming ( -BBC One Idents). I think its important that the BBC remains independent and hope this "new" commision can restore some of the creditablity which was taken in the Hutton farse. Im very surprsied that Jowell actually kept this as I been preparing reasons why. I hope the BBC can moved even further forward and continue to broadcast quality to the UK and the World.
And while were on it will someone please change the BBC National News. Please. Im paying for it
I thought the BBC had been forced to close features such as Celebdaq (especially now the TV show isn't running!) but not only is this still running they've now opened a Sportdaq site as well.
It's always difficult to judge how the BBC should handle commercial affairs. I guess there are two main issues - the impact on commercial rivals and the "public service" value.
Personally I think the BBC should be encouraged to make money off screen - but these profits should be put back into the BBC and returned to the licence fee in form of a cut - or at least a freeze - on the licence fee.
The licence fee has increased by 30% in the last eight years - way above inflation!
I am glad the license fee is staying, because I think it does keep the quality threshold high programming wise compared to the rubbish we sometimes see on commercial TV. And considering how much you pay, would you rather see and hear adverts on all of the BBC terrestrial, satelite and radio stations? No neither would I!
Precisely.
After experiencing multichannel television for around half a decade, my conclusion is that the license fee is essential.
Without it, BBC Four wouldn't be financially viable. It is in my opinion the only channel to regularly broadcast thought provoking programming. From Curb Your Enthusiasm to Timeshift to The Desk, BBC Four almost consistently provides something which actually challenges the mind.
Yet BBC Four is marketed as a highbrow channel. The truth is that it broadcasts the sort of programming broadcast on BBC One and Two (and even ITV and Channel 4) 10 years + ago which is now considered too intelligent to gain decent ratings on the analogue terrestrial channels.
The BBC will hopefully take this nod from the establishment to appoint a heavyweight controller for BBC One and remove unintelligent dross from the schedule.
An example of why leaving television to market forces is a bad thing is the case of ITV. Before 1993, it was clearly the most commercialy driven network BUT a strong regulator (the IBA) combined with competition between the individual companies ensured that a lot of thought provoking NON-tabloid programming was also aired. Now, the network has become the Daily Mail of television.
The hard truth is that a large amount of the population is very poorly educated and thus accepts and even enjoys most of what is available on analogue terrestrial television.
This should not be accepted. As I have previously stated, Television should inform, educate and THEN ENTERTAIN.
Anyone wanting a constant stream of game shows, softcore pornography and US sitcoms should subscribe to SKY, or simply watch ITV.
The BBC's function as a PSB is more essential now than ever.
The licence fee has increased by 30% in the last eight years - way above inflation!
The licence fee would be a LOT higher than it is (or we wouldn't have some of the services we do) if it wasn't for the BBC's commercial arm BBC Worldwide, all of the profits from worldwide go back into the general BBC to help keep the licence fee low.
Look what you have had for your money (ok a matter of opinion whether it is good or not) over the past eight years, more TV channels, more radio stations, more local radio stations, a sensational website, wil websites serving a strong local community and soon local television.
My biggest problem with the BBC is as a day to day television service it is quite frankly pathetic - but for major events it can be outstanding.
Coverage of events like the Olympics and Six Nations re-enforce the need for the BBC - but programmes like You The Judge and Life of Grime New York just don't!
Its an interesting subject this one. We were talking about it in the office this afternoon. Most people in my office say that the licence fee should go as its a waste of money, but yet they are quite prepared to pay "other broadcasters" in excess of £40 a month for tv channels which are rammed full with adverts! When i pointed this out to them, a few of them actually changed their mind. Nothing can currently beat the quality of service the BBC provide for the money it costs you per month.
Well I think this Green Paper is exactly what was needed and hits the nail on the head in a number of respects:
At last an end to the governors, a body entirely divided by its conflict of interest. Something like the BBC Trust seems more seperate from management, hopefully less political too.
Management must include a number of non-executive directors and about time too. The private sector has been doing this for the past thirty years by means of practicing good corporate governance and most have been forced to this past 13 years, about time the BBC has caught up.
Licence fee stays, good move giving the present competition for advertising. A review of course to ensure it rises only in line with inflation is needed and this has more or less been promised, so looks good.
Thank goodness no services were cut after the great fanfare Ms. Jowell made during the BBC's attempts to get each of them approved. Even bbc.co.uk seemed to now feature within the BBC's new remit.
On the down side however,
Why must the quota of outsourced production rise above 25%? Surely making the very workers at the BBC who already have the facilities redundant and instead employing outside contractors goes against the Labour principle of putting people into jobs that are secure and with good pensions, etc like those at the BBC, not necessarily the private sector. Where was this public value based test when this decision was dealt?
Less London-centric is of course good for the image of the corporation but will it be critised every step along the way for the costs this will involve?
Overall, not a bad day for the BBC, a pat on the back perhaps for that grovelling apology they issued following Hutton and hopefully now the corporation can get ahead with the job in hand and all those anti-licence fee pundits can accept the state of play is continuing for the next decade so can finally take a siesta back under their stone!
At last an end to the governors, a body entirely divided by its conflict of interest. Something like the BBC Trust seems more seperate from management, hopefully less political too.