BBC cuts: Times item today

On Thu, 24 Mar 2011 16:19:46 +0000 (UTC), J G Miller
wrote:

On Thursday, March 24th, 2011 at 14:58:29h +0000, Albert Ross wrote:

Not to mention BBC3

The digital TV station which is not afraid to try something new,
and offers helpful and practical advice to those with social problems.

Mondays at 21:00h, a show designed for those considering polygamy --

http://www.bbc.co.UK/programmes/b00z86ym

Why polygamy -- the answer is in the title --
"women" plural not "a women" singular.

Seems like Islamization by the back door, ne c'est pas?

Polygamy is far from unique to Islam.

My Dad told me that when he worked in West Africa in the 1950s local
Christians and Muslims were working together to discourage polygamy.

The only difference was that the Muslims were happy when a man had only
four wives the Christians wanted him to have only one.

Who can possibly claim that the BBC does not actively engage
in social engineering?

--
Peter Duncanson
(in uk.tech.digital-tv)

Bill Wright wrote:
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/11023364/BBC%20cuts.jpg

Bill

Scaremongering to get sympathy and maybe a hand out from the government.

--
David Kennedy

http://www.anindianinexile.com

"Peter Duncanson" wrote in message
news
On Thu, 24 Mar 2011 07:25:47 -0000, "Brian Gaff"
wrote:

Cut what, hint, jpgs are not textual.

Here are the headline and the first two patagraphs:

BBC could close TV channel at night in effort to make 20% licence-freeze
cuts.

The BBC is considering swingeing cuts to late-night programming on BBC
One or BBC Two, which could lead to one of the channels going off air
overnight, the corporation's Director-General warned yesterday.

Mark Thompson said that television programmes shown between 10.35pm and
6am, when many potential viewers are asleep, cost the broadcaster more
than £150 million a year to produce.

That's nonsense.

Given that another article said that "flagship" programmes such as Newsnight
and Question Time were not included in this plan lets look at what else they
are broadcasting in this slot

Tonight BBC1:

Question Time
This Week with Andrew Neil
Contryfile (repeated from Sunday?)
Antiques Roadshow (repeat)
Paedophile Hunters (repeat)
BBC News 24.

On BBC2

Newsnight
Cricket Highlights.
BBC News 24
Belief File (times 2)

Showing cricket highlight this week is a one off event so lets look at what
was in the same slot when there wasn't a match that day, Tuesday past:
Ronald Reagan: American Idol (repeat).

So apart from programs which aren't at risk to be cut, all that they are
showing that is specially made for the slot is "This Week" and 2 episodes of
a religious education program And that costs 150 million per year?!

Don't believe it.

tim

On Thursday, March 24th, 2011 at 17:38:45h +0000, Peter Duncanson wrote:

Polygamy is far from unique to Islam.

True, but I do not think that BBC has taken upon its-self to
promote the practices of the LDS/Mormons rather than those of
the large immigrant communities from the Commonwealth countries
of Pakistan and Bangladesh.

On 23/03/2011 19:27, Scott wrote:
On Wed, 23 Mar 2011 18:54:29 +0000, Clem wrote:

On 23/03/2011 17:06, Bill Wright wrote:
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/11023364/BBC%20cuts.jpg

Bill

Yeah, there was something similar in the Telegraph. TBH, I don't have a
problem with some programmes being repeated on another channel later in
the week -- I'm not a fan of iPlayer and I can't be arsed to connect my
TV et al to the internet. I would however object to BBC2 becoming a
part-time BBC News channel. IMHO, if the BBC needs to make cuts, get rid
of BBC Parliament and BBC News. I think that their news coverage on
BBC1/2/4 etc. is more than adequate -- BBC News was only launched as a
spoiler to Sky News anyway. If push came to shove, get rid of BBC Three
too -- that was supposed to fend-off the likes of E4, but as E4 shows
largely dross nowadays there's not a lot to choose between them. I have
watched a few programmes on BBC Three, but given the high number of
repeats now there's more than enough free airtime on the other channels
to take the few good programmes that do appear on BBC Three first, such
as Being Human. Cut a few radio channels too, come to think of it.

I would certainly not support losing BBC News. The function of
informing goes back to the days of Lord Reith. There may be some
savings, such as using more automated output at off-peak times.

News coverage is not 'more than adequate' through the night for
example on other channels - and certainly not on holidays such as
Christmas Day when the news virtually disappears from the main
channels even though events continue to take place throughout the
world (including places where there is not the same enthusiasm for
celebrating Christmas).

Just how much news do you want then? The BBC isn't the only source of
news. I like to keep informed regarding current affairs and I judge that
the existing cover, for me, is more than adequate on the other BBC
channels. That news coverage is reduced over the Christmas period is
hardly surprising.

The issue that I have with BBC News, is, unlike the other offerings, is
dedicated in its function, so in its remit there is no real scope for
change. We'll have to agree to disagree on this I guess, but if I get a
vote it's BBC News, BBC Parliament and then BBC Three for the chop in my
book.

Clem

On Fri, 25 Mar 2011 18:45:35 +0000, Clem Dye wrote:

On 23/03/2011 19:27, Scott wrote:
On Wed, 23 Mar 2011 18:54:29 +0000, Clem wrote:

On 23/03/2011 17:06, Bill Wright wrote:
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/11023364/BBC%20cuts.jpg

Bill

Yeah, there was something similar in the Telegraph. TBH, I don't have a
problem with some programmes being repeated on another channel later in
the week -- I'm not a fan of iPlayer and I can't be arsed to connect my
TV et al to the internet. I would however object to BBC2 becoming a
part-time BBC News channel. IMHO, if the BBC needs to make cuts, get rid
of BBC Parliament and BBC News. I think that their news coverage on
BBC1/2/4 etc. is more than adequate -- BBC News was only launched as a
spoiler to Sky News anyway. If push came to shove, get rid of BBC Three
too -- that was supposed to fend-off the likes of E4, but as E4 shows
largely dross nowadays there's not a lot to choose between them. I have
watched a few programmes on BBC Three, but given the high number of
repeats now there's more than enough free airtime on the other channels
to take the few good programmes that do appear on BBC Three first, such
as Being Human. Cut a few radio channels too, come to think of it.

I would certainly not support losing BBC News. The function of
informing goes back to the days of Lord Reith. There may be some
savings, such as using more automated output at off-peak times.

News coverage is not 'more than adequate' through the night for
example on other channels - and certainly not on holidays such as
Christmas Day when the news virtually disappears from the main
channels even though events continue to take place throughout the
world (including places where there is not the same enthusiasm for
celebrating Christmas).

Just how much news do you want then?
I'm not arguing for more than 24 hours. 24 hours is enough.

The BBC isn't the only source of
news.
True, but Al Jazeera is only on after 6 pm on Freeview.

I like to keep informed regarding current affairs and I judge that
the existing cover, for me, is more than adequate on the other BBC
channels. That news coverage is reduced over the Christmas period is
hardly surprising.
I'm not surprised either but it does make the case for a dedicated
news channel to fill the gaps.

The issue that I have with BBC News, is, unlike the other offerings, is
dedicated in its function, so in its remit there is no real scope for
change.
It has evolved over the years from a pure rolling news channel to
including other current affairs output on the half hour.

We'll have to agree to disagree on this I guess, but if I get a
vote it's BBC News, BBC Parliament and then BBC Three for the chop in my
book.
I argue the exact opposite in fact. As a public service broadcaster
news and parliament should be priorities. BBC Three exists to serve
younger people, which is important too. I would apply the cuts to
programmes where we can be confident the commercial sector will fill
the gaps. That means sport, entertainment and celebrity stuff.

On Thu, 24 Mar 2011 20:30:52 -0000, "tim...."
wrote:


So apart from programs which aren't at risk to be cut, all that they are
showing that is specially made for the slot is "This Week" and 2 episodes of
a religious education program And that costs 150 million per year?!

The arm waver guy is being overpaid

Aren't many of these late night repeats also accompanied by Audio
Description? If so, surely dropping the repeats with signing and audio
description could be seen as discriminatory?