Save the BBC: stop the cuts! [Link]

On Sat, 06 Mar 2010 01:41:50 GMT, SpamTrapSeeSig
wrote:

In article , Graham.
writes
I received this "save the BBC" petition. link by email from a friend.

http://www.avaaz.org/en/save_the_bbc/97.php?CLICKTF

I am not aware of these proponents being in any way influential in the UK,
and no doubt they have their own political agenda, but I thought some
may be interested here.

Sorry, but I think the cuts are very sensible (provided new music
returns to Radio One).

I would agree. Eliminating two radio stations should allow the
bitrate for the main stations to be returned to acceptable levels.

Maybe 6 Music should be kept and Radio 1Xtra go as some people seem to
listen to 6 Music but I have never heard of anyone listening to 1Xtra.

In message , Light of Arsa
writes:

"J G Miller" wrote in message ...
On Sat, 06 Mar 2010 18:48:32 +0000, Grimly Curmudgeon wrote:

No government is happy with the BBC, which is as it should be.
Agreed, and neither should any opposition party be happy with
the BBC either.
In fact no politician should be happy with the BBC if the BBC
was doing its job in reporting the truth.



What a load of drivel.


As opposed to the sense politicians dispense (-:?

In what way is what GC and JGM said drivel? I think they're right, that
the Beeb tends to be slightly against whoever's in power, which is
reasonable since whoever's in power has more clout by virtue of being on
power - and ideally it won't "pander" completely to whoever's in
opposition either, but will check their output too.
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G.5AL-IS-P--Ch++(p)[email protected]+Sh0!:`)DNAf
** http://www.soft255.demon.co.uk/G6JPG-PC/JPGminPC.htm for ludicrously
outdated thoughts on PCs. **

If you are afraid of being lonely, don't try to be right. - Jules Renard,
writer (1864-1910)

"Scott" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 06 Mar 2010 01:41:50 GMT, SpamTrapSeeSig
wrote:

In article , Graham.
writes
I received this "save the BBC" petition. link by email from a
friend.

http://www.avaaz.org/en/save_the_bbc/97.php?CLICKTF

I am not aware of these proponents being in any way
influential in the UK,
and no doubt they have their own political agenda, but I
thought some
may be interested here.

Sorry, but I think the cuts are very sensible (provided new
music
returns to Radio One).

I would agree. Eliminating two radio stations should allow the
bitrate for the main stations to be returned to acceptable
levels.

Maybe 6 Music should be kept and Radio 1Xtra go as some people
seem to
listen to 6 Music but I have never heard of anyone listening to
1Xtra.



100% agree re 6 and 1X, but don't hold your breath waiting for
data rates to improve, it just won't happen.

For that matter why do we need BFBS and BBC World Service on DAB
in the UK? I can understand troops overseas listening to BFBS but
I bet they don't here, and the WS could be heard easily on 648KHz
for the sake of a bit of aerial changing at Orford Ness!


--
Woody

harrogate three at ntlworld dot com

Woody wrote:

wrote:

Eliminating two radio stations should allow the
bitrate for the main stations to be returned to acceptable
levels.

don't hold your breath waiting for
data rates to improve, it just won't happen.

If the chops go ahead (I can see 6 being saved) wonder if BBC's DAB
licence permits them to offer the bandwidth commercially ... presumably
Bauer would buy up a national stream?

On Sun, 07 Mar 2010 10:14:47 +0000, Andy Burns
wrote:

Woody wrote:

wrote:

Eliminating two radio stations should allow the
bitrate for the main stations to be returned to acceptable
levels.

don't hold your breath waiting for
data rates to improve, it just won't happen.

If the chops go ahead (I can see 6 being saved) wonder if BBC's DAB
licence permits them to offer the bandwidth commercially ... presumably
Bauer would buy up a national stream?

Is there any shortage of capacity on commercial multiplexes? I
thought they were struggling to fill the space.

On Sun, 07 Mar 2010 01:23:14 +0000, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:

that the Beeb tends to be slightly against whoever's in power, which is
reasonable since whoever's in power has more clout by virtue of being on
power

But the BBC could be more critical of the current administration than
it has been.

The problem is twofold --

1) If they are seen to be too anti-government then they will more
readily be accused of being politically biased

2) One has to be very careful about biting the hand that feeds one,
a lesson that the BBC learnt to its cost over the Gilligan affair.

On Sun, 07 Mar 2010 11:13:10 +0000, Mike Henry
wrote:

In , Scott
wrote:

On Sun, 07 Mar 2010 10:14:47 +0000, Andy Burns
wrote:
If the chops go ahead (I can see 6 being saved) wonder if BBC's DAB
licence permits them to offer the bandwidth commercially ... presumably
Bauer would buy up a national stream?

Is there any shortage of capacity on commercial multiplexes? I
thought they were struggling to fill the space.

There's obviously a desperate shortage of capacity, which is what is
forcing them to broadcast at parsimonious bitrates.

Why then were three 'slots' left vacant for many months then? Why did
we have birdsong. Is it not more likely that they had to cut the cost
to fill the space?

Also, Band III is a huge band that once provided independent
television for the whole nation. Only a small part is allocated to
DAB. Why not create another multiplex?

Save the bbc? It needs castrating!

I would advocate cutting its budget by 90% or privatising it
completely and imposing the public service obligation on the buyer.

The current TV licence fee should be diverted into creating a
nationwide fibre optic network for the internet.

The BBC has run out of control on salaries and expenses because all
the politicians are scared of cutting it back.

The result is that the BBC has been empire building and expanding into
areas far beyond its brief eg Lonely Planet. It has gone on a massive
drive for ratings at the expense of the taxpayer with the result that
commercial TV and radio providers have been virtually bankrupted.

The self-indulgent madness at the BBC should be curtailed ASAP.

"Vet Tech" wrote in message
...
Save the bbc? It needs castrating!

I would advocate cutting its budget by 90% or privatising it
completely and imposing the public service obligation on the buyer.

The current TV licence fee should be diverted into creating a
nationwide fibre optic network for the internet.

The BBC has run out of control on salaries and expenses because all
the politicians are scared of cutting it back.

The result is that the BBC has been empire building and expanding into
areas far beyond its brief eg Lonely Planet. It has gone on a massive
drive for ratings at the expense of the taxpayer with the result that
commercial TV and radio providers have been virtually bankrupted.

The self-indulgent madness at the BBC should be curtailed ASAP.


I recall hearing the news many years ago that the BBC would be showing the
national lottery on a Saturday night.

As I wondered how much Camelot were paying to get the BBC to show their
drivel, you can imagine my horror to find out that the BBC were actually
paying Camelot in a bid to increase ratings! Er, why?
If this is still the case it should cease forthwith. Let ITV show the
lottery and the BBC can save some money and show something that interests
the rest of us!

"SpamTrapSeeSig" wrote in message
...
In article , Graham.
writes
I received this "save the BBC" petition. link by email from a friend.

http://www.avaaz.org/en/save_the_bbc/97.php?CLICKTF

I am not aware of these proponents being in any way influential in the UK,
and no doubt they have their own political agenda, but I thought some may
be interested here.

Sorry, but I think the cuts are very sensible (provided new music returns
to Radio One).

No it isn't. The cuts are in the wrong place. Instead of cutting all the
popularlist crap inclding soap operas and reality and quiz shows they are
cutting stuff which they are obliges to provide as part of their public
service mandate.

These cuts are yet again another indication that the people running the BBC
don't have the remotest clue of what public service television is. All they
think is about ratings and only attracting specific advertiser demographics
for their shows as if they were working for commercial television.


They could have gone much further...

They should have gone in different areas including top management and the
capping of salaries and contracts to £200,000 per individual per-annum over
all work they carry out.