All that Jaz
 

On Sun, 29 Dec 2013 18:56:31 +0000, Bill Wright
wrote:

Scott wrote:
On Sun, 29 Dec 2013 16:12:21 +0000, Bill Wright
wrote:

Does anyone know the political and financial reasons why Al Jazeera
occupies one of the prized HD slots on UK terrestrial TV? Its presence
seems to have little to do with proving the public with the best
possible service.

How do you know? I think it provides good quality journalism with no
obvious signs of bias. Educating and informing the public follows the
best traditions of broadcasting and a plurality of sources of news can
only be a good thing.

You are obviously a Reithian, and to some extent so am I. "Don't give
them what they want, give them what (we the intelligensia) believe they
need."

Indeed, though I would not take it to extremes. There is room for
some light entertainment but not on a Sunday :-)

However if you think the masses should be offered diverse news sources I
would have thought you'd want to spread the sources across the political
spectrum. I wonder if Fox News would be prepared to produce a UK
version, to balance the BBC News? Nothing too extreme of course:
'Telegraph' to balance 'Guardian'.

Actually, I think such a channel would perform a more useful function
than some of the shopping channels!

I wonder where Al Jaz would have figured if one of the TV listings mags
had conducted a poll of their readers: What extra channels would like
like in HD?

I must say Al Jaz's picture quality puts some other HD channels to shame.

It remains though, astonishing to someone brought up with the principles
of public service broadcasting that a minority interest foreign channel
gets such prominence.

I would argue that Aljazeera qualifies as public service broadcasting.
After all, I am sure we would consider the BBC World Service to be a
public service broadcaster.

All that Jaz
 

On 29/12/2013 16:12, Bill Wright wrote:
Does anyone know the political and financial reasons why Al Jazeera
occupies one of the prized HD slots on UK terrestrial TV? Its presence
seems to have little to do with proving the public with the best
possible service.


It counters then BBCs very biased reporting and therefore plays a very
important part in British broadcasting.




--
mailto:news{at}admac(dot}myzen{dot}co{dot}uk

All that Jaz
 

Scott wrote:

Actually, I think such a channel would perform a more useful function
than some of the shopping channels!

They should be taken off.

I would argue that Aljazeera qualifies as public service broadcasting.
After all, I am sure we would consider the BBC World Service to be a
public service broadcaster.

It will be interesting to see what audience they get. Also, very
interesting to see if opinions about bias on the various news channels
start to develop amongst the great British public. At present I think
the majority take the BBC line as gospel, scarcely ever stopping to
wonder why the BBC news they are served sometimes seems at odds with the
world as they experience it (eg: the BBC's line on immigration 'it's a
good thing' versus everything their friends, relations and workmates say
'it's ruining the country'.

Bill

All that Jaz
 

On Sun, 29 Dec 2013 19:09:53 +0000, Bill Wright
wrote:

Scott wrote:

Actually, I think such a channel would perform a more useful function
than some of the shopping channels!

They should be taken off.

I would argue that Aljazeera qualifies as public service broadcasting.
After all, I am sure we would consider the BBC World Service to be a
public service broadcaster.

It will be interesting to see what audience they get. Also, very
interesting to see if opinions about bias on the various news channels
start to develop amongst the great British public. At present I think
the majority take the BBC line as gospel, scarcely ever stopping to
wonder why the BBC news they are served sometimes seems at odds with the
world as they experience it (eg: the BBC's line on immigration 'it's a
good thing' versus everything their friends, relations and workmates say
'it's ruining the country'.

Indeed, I have concerns about the BBC though I think they are probably
more selective than biased. I like to get my news from more than one
source.

All that Jaz
 

And yet those airwaves belong to the people.

You may well think so but Parliament is not obliged to agree - eg if you
decide to start broadcasting "Wright is Right" 24/7 on all muxes ;)

In any event, I am a little surprised you subscribe to the "public
ownership of the airwaves" concept which I thought largely an invention
of the left who wanted public funding of broadcasting in an attempt to
balance what they perceived (with some justification) as a largely
right-wing press.



--
Robin
reply to address is (meant to be) valid

All that Jaz
 

"Ian Jackson" wrote
in message ...
In message ,
Scott writes
On Sun, 29 Dec 2013 16:12:21 +0000, Bill Wright

wrote:

Does anyone know the political and financial reasons why
Al Jazeera
occupies one of the prized HD slots on UK terrestrial TV?
Its presence
seems to have little to do with proving the public with
the best
possible service.

How do you know? I think it provides good quality
journalism with no
obvious signs of bias. Educating and informing the public
follows the
best traditions of broadcasting and a plurality of sources
of news can
only be a good thing.

There is quite a lot of alternative news and other items
on Al Jazeera (and on Russia Today) - stuff you (will)
never get on the BBC or ITV.


+1 and Euronews as well.


--
Woody

harrogate three at ntlworld dot com

All that Jaz
 

Bill Wright wrote:

Prized? AIUI COM7 isn't full yet, COM8 is (or will soon be)
available, channels like Five and Film4 that arguably would benefit
more from HD aren't queueing up to pay ...


And yet according to OFCOM spectrum is so very scarce. Like gold it is.
Hence we have no mux 7 or 8 on many transmitters for fear of CCI.

Muxes (aka COM) 7 and 8 are just a means to promote the sale of DVB-T2
equipped receivers, because in a few years, when even more spectrum has
been flogged off, the remaining services will probably need to migrate to T2,
thus obsoletifing [1] T1 kit.

I don't really understand the logic, because to date, we've not exactly
received any 'hard sell' for the services, in fact there's been virtually
no publicity at all.

Anyway, all the BBC TV channels (except BBC Parliament and Alba) are now
duplicated in HD, so it's not as if Al J is displacing them in any way ?

[1] Made up word


--
Mark
Please replace invalid and invalid with gmx and net to reply.

All that Jaz
 

On Sun, 29 Dec 2013 20:11:53 +0000, Mark Carver
wrote:

Bill Wright wrote:

Prized? AIUI COM7 isn't full yet, COM8 is (or will soon be)
available, channels like Five and Film4 that arguably would benefit
more from HD aren't queueing up to pay ...


And yet according to OFCOM spectrum is so very scarce. Like gold it is.
Hence we have no mux 7 or 8 on many transmitters for fear of CCI.

Muxes (aka COM) 7 and 8 are just a means to promote the sale of DVB-T2
equipped receivers, because in a few years, when even more spectrum has
been flogged off, the remaining services will probably need to migrate to T2,
thus obsoletifing [1] T1 kit.

I don't really understand the logic, because to date, we've not exactly
received any 'hard sell' for the services, in fact there's been virtually
no publicity at all.

I don't think it's as well conceived as your first paragraph. As only
some transmitters will carry the new multiplex, any publicity is
likely to antagonise those outside the coverage area therefore the
scope for promotion must be limited.

Anyway, all the BBC TV channels (except BBC Parliament and Alba) are now
duplicated in HD, so it's not as if Al J is displacing them in any way ?

[1] Made up word

All that Jaz
 

On 29/12/2013 17:19, Ian Jackson wrote:
In message , Scott
writes
On Sun, 29 Dec 2013 16:12:21 +0000, Bill Wright
wrote:

Does anyone know the political and financial reasons why Al Jazeera
occupies one of the prized HD slots on UK terrestrial TV? Its presence
seems to have little to do with proving the public with the best
possible service.

How do you know? I think it provides good quality journalism with no
obvious signs of bias. Educating and informing the public follows the
best traditions of broadcasting and a plurality of sources of news can
only be a good thing.

Agreed, it's a more comprehensive and interesting service than BBC News.
Russia Today however is a completely differnt kettle of borscht.

All that Jaz
 

On Sun, 29 Dec 2013 21:07:21 +0000, Mike O'Sullivan
wrote:

On 29/12/2013 17:19, Ian Jackson wrote:
In message , Scott
writes
On Sun, 29 Dec 2013 16:12:21 +0000, Bill Wright
wrote:

Does anyone know the political and financial reasons why Al Jazeera
occupies one of the prized HD slots on UK terrestrial TV? Its presence
seems to have little to do with proving the public with the best
possible service.

How do you know? I think it provides good quality journalism with no
obvious signs of bias. Educating and informing the public follows the
best traditions of broadcasting and a plurality of sources of news can
only be a good thing.

Agreed, it's a more comprehensive and interesting service than BBC News.
Russia Today however is a completely differnt kettle of borscht.

Kaiser Report is quite entertaining though!