IMM fodder

Page 11 of 16  


*You* might have a problem with this, but the reality is that perhaps the majority of the viewing public want soap operas, etc, given the viewing figures. And since the BBC is funded by all those who possess a TV, it's only fair the majority is catered for.
Perhaps there's space for a subscription channel that only makes the programmes you want to watch, but I'd guess you'll have to set it up and run it yourself. ;-)
--
*Why is the time of day with the slowest traffic called rush hour?

Dave Plowman snipped-for-privacy@argonet.co.uk London SW 12
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sat, 31 Jan 2004 13:17:58 +0000 (GMT), Dave Plowman

That is not, though, what the BBC is there for, nor what its licence fee funding is intended to achieve. Commerical channels chase ratings in order to generate advertising revenue: that's the right place for mindless/populist "entertainment". The BBC does not *need* to compete with such dross, and it would be entirely within its charter not to do so.

Actually, it appears that the BBC is increasingly putting the programming that I would prefer to watch on channels that are funded from the licence fee, but I cannot receive ... :-(
Julian
--
Julian Fowler
julian (at) bellevue-barn (dot) org (dot) uk
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

The BBC does not pander to advertisers. They changed light entertainment in the early 1960s with Steptoe & Son, Till Death Us Part etc, Programmes copies in others countries. You want then to be a news channel only.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Nope - the programmes you cite here are two (of many) examples of BBC excellence - these have/had artistic, cultural, and intellectual merit: something that I defy anyone to claim for any of the current "reality TV" abominations, etc. The BBC continues to make many, many good programmes across a wide spectrum: drama, entertainment, N&CA, documentary, ... I just don't see why (over the last 10-15 years) they have found a need to compete with the kinds of output from ITV and Sky that may attract big audiences but are entirely devoid of any recognizable merit.
Julian
--
Julian Fowler
julian (at) bellevue-barn (dot) org (dot) uk
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

I can't remember the exact wording of the BBC charter (perhaps Dave P does) but it goes something like ...to inform, educate and entertain...
Now you might not like the order in which it does those things but the BBC has as much right to do them as any other broadcaster. What does annoy me is how BBC 1 and BBC 2 are competing with each other, if you watch the 10 pm news on BBC 1 (including your own regions news out put etc.) you than miss the start of newsnight on BBC 2 for example.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

This argument is put many times, but if the BBC concentrated on minority interests, its funding would be withdrawn in short order - there is already a high level of public opinion that would like to see the end of the licence.

Things like the Clark Diaries? Very good it is too, It's scheduled for a repeat on BBC2, IIRC.
--
*Pride is what we have. Vanity is what others have.

Dave Plowman snipped-for-privacy@argonet.co.uk London SW 12
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Indeed. Believing the end justifies the means tends to be more a right wing thing - and of course the leadership of new labour is very right wing.
But IMM simply disagrees with everyone, since only he is infallible. He should be the next pope.
--
*I yell because I care

Dave Plowman snipped-for-privacy@argonet.co.uk London SW 12
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Dave Plowman wrote:

I thought he WAS the last pope...
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
writes

Given the fact that (as I wrote earlier) that Hutton came from what you call a snotty university, how can YOU of all people have any faith in what he says?
--
geoff

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

If a snot says they were above board, it means they could not prove otherwise. If they could they would. Duh!
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

this
You really do not understand what 'Terms of reference' mean. Under the terms of reference Load Hutton had to work to (imposed by HMG and himself) he came to almost the only conclusion he could.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Jerry. wrote:

No even unde hose terms, he could have been a lot more critical of bliar and Campbell. He chose not to be.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

And the tories are? bwahahahahahahah
Errrrrr, you wouldn't be a tory perchance?
A recent Murray poll indicated that - the only good tories are dead ones.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Did you mean Mori perchance?
--
geoff

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Noooooooooooo, the mint people
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Bertie, I agree.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Capitol wrote:

Absolutely, and nearly every other media organisation had a similar conclusion. By charter the BBC can't voice an opinion or take a stance, if Gilligan had just written his original piece in The Daily Mail none of this would have happened. A lot of this is down to Alastair Campbell and his ongoing dispute(s) with the BBC. It seems to jar to hear Tessa Jowell[1] distance herself by stating that AC's comments were 'just those of a private individual'

Hopefully you meant like the _inverse_ of Fox News, and it's "yee-hah we shot up them eee-rah-keys good an' proper" jingoism.
Toby.
[1] Said Britons need lessons in understanding television so they can differentiate between opinion and fact. "Everyone needs to be able to decode the way the media works, questioning everything in order to understand everything"
As minister for public health, she was at the centre of the Ecclestone affair over tobacco sponsorship of Formula One.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

had
LOL ! I hadn't heard her say that, she (HMG) might like to think the 'Man on the Clapham Omli-bus' has the memory span of a newt but she is very wrong if she thinks the public have forgotten that Campbell was employed by Blair at the time of those complaints (the ones that started the whole sorry (Kelly) state of affairs.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

But 10% was hopelessly wrong and wrong big time.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
<snip>

I hope you meant broadcaster, surely Reuters (a news gathering, as is the BBC, organization) is also internationally recognized to cover the views of all sides without bias ?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.