Scottish TV at the expense of the English and Welsh

On Sun, 01 Dec 2013 18:25:09 +0000 (GMT), Jim Lesurf
wrote:

In article , JohnT
wrote:

"Jim Lesurf" wrote in message
...



Jim clearly doesn't get the point that the BBC cannot express any
opinion

Whereas you've clearly not understood or read what I've already actually
said. e.g.

On 01 Dec in uk.tech.digital-tv, Jim Lesurf wrote:
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.

and similar statements in other postings.

I'm explicitly not asking for their 'opinions' on how people should vote.
But if they have any plans or examinations of the costs / options /
practicalities following a 'yes' then that may affect how people decide to
vote. Its a matter of being able to make an *informed* choice.

Like it or not, a refusal to even discuss such matters in public will mean
that some people will be deterred from voting 'yes' out of a worry that
they'd lose access to things they wish to keep on being able to view/hear.
Saying nothing is not 'neutral', it biasses consideration by denying people
information.

Afraid they can't simply pass this off as "for the Government to say"
because both the costs, changes in provision, and practicalities would
depend on how the BBC would impliment any changes.

But Salmond has already given his bland assurance that "everything
will be all right", on this as on so many other topics.
Would the Scottish voters listen to or understand any more
detailed/technical statement from the BBC, do you think?

In article ,
JohnT wrote:

Jim clearly doesn't get the point that the BBC cannot express any opinion
about what may happen in the event of a "yes" vote.

We don't want the BBC's opinion. It shouldn't even have an opinion.
We want to know what advice it has received and what plans it is
making. If it hasn't taken any advice, it should tell us that. If
it isn't making any plans, it should tell us that too.

-- Richard

"Jim Lesurf" wrote in message
...
In article , JohnT
wrote:

"Jim Lesurf" wrote in message
...



Jim clearly doesn't get the point that the BBC cannot express any
opinion

Whereas you've clearly not understood or read what I've already actually
said. e.g.

On 01 Dec in uk.tech.digital-tv, Jim Lesurf wrote:
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.

and similar statements in other postings.

I'm explicitly not asking for their 'opinions' on how people should vote.
But if they have any plans or examinations of the costs / options /
practicalities following a 'yes' then that may affect how people decide to
vote. Its a matter of being able to make an *informed* choice.

Like it or not, a refusal to even discuss such matters in public will mean
that some people will be deterred from voting 'yes' out of a worry that
they'd lose access to things they wish to keep on being able to view/hear.
Saying nothing is not 'neutral', it biasses consideration by denying
people
information.

Afraid they can't simply pass this off as "for the Government to say"
because both the costs, changes in provision, and practicalities would
depend on how the BBC would impliment any changes.

I did read and fully understand what you said. You just can't accept that
the BBC is unable to offer any comment or opinion on the matter at all. The
ITV Companies are not under similar constraints but it seems unlikely to me
that they will offer any opinion either.

--
JohnT

On 27/11/2013 17:46, Mark Carver wrote:
On 27/11/2013 16:44, Michael Chare wrote:
I Scotland becomes a separate country how will we stop them from
benefiting from free satellite TV paid for by the English and Welsh?

The problems and anomalies surrounding TV in the proposed separation of
Scotland from the UK are a relatively minor microcosm of the enormity
of the task to create its own stand alone national infrastructure.

Believe it or not, Scotland already has a national infrastructure in
place. I can't think of anything that I have to go to England for. :-)

Z

In article ,
wrote:
On Sun, 01 Dec 2013 18:25:09 +0000 (GMT), Jim Lesurf
wrote:


Afraid they can't simply pass this off as "for the Government to say"
because both the costs, changes in provision, and practicalities would
depend on how the BBC would impliment any changes.

But Salmond has already given his bland assurance that "everything will
be all right", on this as on so many other topics. Would the Scottish
voters listen to or understand any more detailed/technical statement
from the BBC, do you think?


Some would, others not. That's for them to decide *given* the info. If the
BBC won't provide the info they are limiting the ability for people who
wish to be able to take it into consideration.

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 , Richard Tobin
wrote:
In article , JohnT
wrote:

Jim clearly doesn't get the point that the BBC cannot express any
opinion about what may happen in the event of a "yes" vote.

We don't want the BBC's opinion. It shouldn't even have an opinion. We
want to know what advice it has received and what plans it is making.
If it hasn't taken any advice, it should tell us that. If it isn't
making any plans, it should tell us that too.

Indeed.

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 , JohnT
wrote:

"Jim Lesurf" wrote in message
...
In article , JohnT
wrote:

"Jim Lesurf" wrote in message
...



Jim clearly doesn't get the point that the BBC cannot express any
opinion

Whereas you've clearly not understood or read what I've already
actually said. e.g.

On 01 Dec in uk.tech.digital-tv, Jim Lesurf
wrote:
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.

and similar statements in other postings.


I did read and fully understand what you said.

So why did you claim that

Jim clearly doesn't get the point that the BBC cannot express any
opinion

when you'd understood that assertion was false?

You just can't accept that the BBC is unable to offer any comment or
opinion on the matter at all.

Once again, what I've actually said has passed you by. Sorry I can't help
if you are unable to comprehend the relevant distinctions.

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 , Zimmy wrote:
On 27/11/2013 17:46, Mark Carver wrote:
On 27/11/2013 16:44, Michael Chare wrote:
I Scotland becomes a separate country how will we stop them from
benefiting from free satellite TV paid for by the English and Welsh?

The problems and anomalies surrounding TV in the proposed separation
of Scotland from the UK are a relatively minor microcosm of the
enormity of the task to create its own stand alone national
infrastructure.

Believe it or not, Scotland already has a national infrastructure in
place. I can't think of anything that I have to go to England for. :-)

Well, my ISP is in England.

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 ,
Zimmy wrote:
On 27/11/2013 17:46, Mark Carver wrote:
On 27/11/2013 16:44, Michael Chare wrote:
I Scotland becomes a separate country how will we stop them from
benefiting from free satellite TV paid for by the English and Welsh?

The problems and anomalies surrounding TV in the proposed separation of
Scotland from the UK are a relatively minor microcosm of the enormity
of the task to create its own stand alone national infrastructure.

Believe it or not, Scotland already has a national infrastructure in
place. I can't think of anything that I have to go to England for. :-)

If you live in Dumfries & Galloway, your tv (and radio) signals come via
England. But I believe out-of-country broadcasts happen on continental
Europe, too.

--
From KT24

Using a RISC OS computer running v5.18

"Zimmy" wrote in message ...
On 27/11/2013 17:46, Mark Carver wrote:
On 27/11/2013 16:44, Michael Chare wrote:
I Scotland becomes a separate country how will we stop them from
benefiting from free satellite TV paid for by the English and Welsh?

The problems and anomalies surrounding TV in the proposed separation of
Scotland from the UK are a relatively minor microcosm of the enormity
of the task to create its own stand alone national infrastructure.

Believe it or not, Scotland already has a national infrastructure in
place. I can't think of anything that I have to go to England for. :-)

It isn't a Scottish infrastructure. It is a UK infastructure.
--
JohnT