Scottish TV at the expense of the English and Welsh

In message , Graham Murray
writes
Peter Duncanson writes:

Surely any relationship the BBC would have with an independent Scotland
would be a matter for Parliament. The BBC Charter would have to be
amended to fit the new situation. The BBC bigwigs might be able to make
suggestions but they wouldn't have the power to make decisions.

I disagree. The relationship between the BBC and an independent Scotland
should not be decided by parliament, but as a commercial/contractual
relationship between the BBC and Scottish broadcasters. If a Scottish
broadcaster wishes transmit BBC programming to viewers/listeners in
Scotland then they should negotiate the rights to do so. The BBC sells
its programming to other foreign stations, so an independent Scotland
should be treated in the same way.

At the moment, in the border area, several transmitters deliberately
provide signals to both England and Scotland. After independence, would
the BBC want to re-engineer the aerials so that the amount of overspill
into the neighbouring foreign country was minimised?
--
Ian

Ian Jackson wrote:

At the moment, in the border area, several transmitters deliberately
provide signals to both England and Scotland. After independence, would
the BBC want to re-engineer the aerials so that the amount of overspill
into the neighbouring foreign country was minimised?

I don't think it's worth the bother ? The only Tx with any large
(geographical) scale overlap is Caldbeck, and in population terms its
audience is small. It not like the Wenvoe/Mendip situation in the
Bristol Channel, that would present a problem, and in fact
is the primary reason the ITA/IBA made the West of England and Wales
a single ITV franchise back in the 50s.


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

In article , Mark Carver
wrote:
Richard Tobin wrote:
In article , JohnT
wrote:
I don't think that the BBC can offer any opinion on this.

The BBC shouldn't have an *opinion*. They should be, and probably
are, making plans to deal with various possibilities. If so they
should tell us what they are. They shouldn't be keeping anything
secret.

The worry (for them) is a significant number of people in Scotland will
use the question of whether BBC programmes will still be available or
not, to influence their voting choice.

You really can't have such an important democratic decision such as
independence, influenced by a public fear they won't get to see
EastEnders and SCD ever again. It's absolutely right the BBC remain
tight lipped IMHO.

I'd agree entirely except for changing your last statement by adding a
*must not*. i.e. I'd say

It's absolutely right the BBC MUST NOT remain tight lipped IMHO.

As I keep pointing out, their refusal *does* influence the debate -
applying pressure towards a 'no' for exactly the reasons you summarise. A
lack of relevant info promotes the fear that BBC access will be lost.

Jim

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Armstrong Audio http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/Armstrong/armstrong.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

In article , Mark Carver
wrote:
lid wrote:
On Sat, 30 Nov 2013 18:47:22 +0000, Mark Carver

You really can't have such an important democratic decision such as
independence, influenced by a public fear they won't get to see
EastEnders and SCD ever again. It's absolutely right the BBC remain
tight lipped IMHO.

Are you speaking tongue in cheek? Surely the voters have every right
to know ALL the implications of their choice.

Yes they do, but if the matter of which TV programmes it will still be
possible to view post separation distorts the choice is that a good
thing ?

I'm not sure why your personal bias that this would "distort" the process
should be enforced on everyone else.

It's democracy in play I agree, but clouded with the emotion of trivial
matters,

Ditto for your personal decision to rule this "trivial".

Make your mind up. If this is "trivial" then no harm will be done if they
provide the info. If it is *not* "trivial" then the info is necessary for a
fully informed choice to be made by those who wish to take it into account.

Jim

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Armstrong Audio http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/Armstrong/armstrong.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

lid wrote:
On Sat, 30 Nov 2013 21:16:34 +0000, Mark Carver

It's democracy in play I agree, but clouded with the emotion of trivial
matters, The very fact EE and SCD were mentioned by name in the SNP's document
could be interpreted as emotional manipulation. However, it is a frequently
used political tool.

Those programmes are trivial matters to you, and to me. But who are we
to judge what is important to the voters of Scotland?

We're not, but what do the Beeb do then ?

Whatever they say, will reveal an opinion, which could make them appear
partisan ? They are supposed to be an impartial organisation, perhaps it's
time to stop pretending to have a neutral stance on every matter,
and to redefine themselves as a State Broadcaster ? Just like our other
national institutions ?

If we know better than them what is really important we might as well
call off the election and make the decision for them.

Indeed, I agree, that's certainly not cricket.


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

On Sat, 30 Nov 2013 18:42:52 +0000 (GMT), Jim Lesurf
wrote:

In article ,
wrote:
On Fri, 29 Nov 2013 18:15:05 +0000 (GMT), Jim Lesurf
wrote:

In article , Michael
Chare [email protected] wrote:


The problem is the one that runs though all their statements. They are
sweeping 'apirations', not a promise they can guarantee to fulfill.

Exactly, it's a wish list, nothing more.

Indeed.

snip

I'm ignoring quite what happens wrt satellite, of course. But I wonder what
games could be played there as well.

That's the catch. The argument will be, "We can always watch it on
satellite, so you can't charge us much for terrestrial".
The bigger question will be who pays Arqiva to maintain the
transmission network to the Highlands and Islands.
And post 2022, they'll all be watching on satellite anyway, apart from
the unlucky few with topographical screening.

On Sun, 01 Dec 2013 10:24:29 +0000, brightside S9
wrote:

On Sun, 01 Dec 2013 02:46:09 +0000, Bill Wright
wrote:

wrote:

Those programmes are trivial matters to you, and to me. But who are we
to judge what is important to the voters of Scotland?
If we know better than them what is really important we might as well
call off the election and make the decision for them.

Here's an extract from the SNP's manifesto for independence:

1. Fried Mars bars on the NHS
2. Whisky on the NHS
3. Fags on the NHS
4. Send all the midges to England.

5. Join the EU
6. Implement the Schengen rules as part of the pre-existing body of
EU law, which every new entrant is required to accept.

That should make for some interesting activity around the England
Scotland border!

- especially since the differing tax regimes mean that there will be a
huge amount of cross-boarder commuting and shopping.

brightside S9 writes:

No there shouldn' be. Schengen rules won't apply to England Wales and
all Ireland (the rules don't apply to the UK and Eire now) after
Scotland joins the EU. Schengen rules would apply to Scotland, there
is currently no choice in the matter (and the rest of the EU and some
non EU countries), and Scotland won't need border controls for
travellers from countries that accept the Schengen rules.

That means England will need border controls and customs at the
England Scotland border.

Or England could join Schengen. Not only would this solve the
Scottish/English border issues but also greatly reduce the bureaucracy
of Cross-channel travel.

In article ,
Richard Tobin wrote:

I'm not sure what SCD is

Some Celebrity Dance-thing.

Apparently quite popular with the general public m'lud.
--
--------------------------------------+------------------------------------
Mike Brown: mjb[-at-]signal11.org.uk | http://www.signal11.org.uk

--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: ---

In article , Mark Carver
wrote:
lid wrote:
On Sat, 30 Nov 2013 21:16:34 +0000, Mark Carver

It's democracy in play I agree, but clouded with the emotion of
trivial matters, The very fact EE and SCD were mentioned by name in
the SNP's document could be interpreted as emotional manipulation.
However, it is a frequently used political tool.

Those programmes are trivial matters to you, and to me. But who are we
to judge what is important to the voters of Scotland?

We're not, but what do the Beeb do then ?

Be honest and open. I know that approach can be a bit of a shock for a
civil-service-like body like the BBC management class. :-) But the reality
is that stubborn silence is just as 'political' in its effect as speaking
up in a situation where ignorance *will* affect the results.

They have to explain what they think the practicalities and costs, etc,
will be and stick to dealing with factual-based things. Not give an opinion
on what they'd 'like' the vote to be. But if one decision is likely to
affect costs or access for any technical or organisational reasons they
must explain so people can take that into account.

Whatever they say, will reveal an opinion, which could make them appear
partisan ?

Its their day job to give information *without* adding their opinions. If
they can't do that then they shouldn't be the BBC. That's their role. if
they are such shinking violets we can't trust them to stand up to power on
other issues, either.

Jim

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Armstrong Audio http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/Armstrong/armstrong.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html