BBC is looking warily at the net

[Rik]

According to El Reg,

The government is likely to change TV licensing laws to address the increasing number of viewers who choose to watch only via the internet, according to the BBC Trust.

In its review of TV licence collection (pdf) this week, the Trust said it was watching closely whether the availability of iPlayer and live streams of BBC channels was prompting households to abandon TV sets in favour of computers.

"Legislative change is likely to be required in order to reflect technology changes in the licence fee regulations," it said.

At present, no licence is required to watch catch-up TV on iPlayer. Live streaming services are covered by the same legislation as broadcast TV, and requires a colour licence, which as of today costs £142.50 anually.

They should have thought of that before they started pushing the iPlayer and threatening to name and shame ISPs. It would be ironic if their attitude then comes back to bite them.

[john]

I know I've said thihs before but the present licencing system was designed when there was only one channel and relatively few households with TV sets. It is increasingly unsuitable to cope with the disparate ways of watching TV programs, not just at home but recieving them whilst mobile too. The old radio licence was abandoned mainly because of the introduction of the small portable radio and also because they were fitted as standard in cars and I can see the TV licence eventually being abandoned for the same reason. The sooner the Government and the BBC come up with a more appropriate method of paying for it without the overhead of paying a third party to try to collect and prosecute those who avoid it the better.

[Rik]

I'm with you there, John. Payment to be made from general taxation, with an independent body setting the annual budget?

[Sebby]

I really don't think that there is a significant number of people who are abandoning televisions because of iPlayer. It's just another way to squeeze more money out of us... Introduce a free service that's really handy, and when it's popular, tax it.

[Rik]

First rule of all ventures, speculate to accumulate.

[cavillas]

disparate ways of watching TV programs

Don't you really mean DESPERATE ways of watching tv.

[bobleslie]

Perhaps some kind wizard will make the TV Licensing tax disappear, along with the BBC.   

[David]

 

[bobleslie]

 

I know. I know.

But one can only dream especially when you read this sort of stuff.

[David]

One veteran BBC executive said: 'There was widespread acknowledgement that we may have gone too far in the direction of political correctness.

Understatement or what 

[john]

I know. I know.

But one can only dream especially when you read this sort of stuff.

I agree Bob except that I would prefer the BBC to reform rather than disappear. There are some programs such as it's nature documentaries and drama that the BBC do very well but there is a lot of stuff which only appeals to a minority audience. Not that there's anything wrong with broadcasting some programmes which have a minority interest but they should not dominate the schedule. I also think that it tries to hard to compete for audience share with ITV with things like soaps and reality TV.

'Unfortunately, much of it is so deeply embedded in the BBC's culture, that it is very hard to change it.'

Time for to put some people in charge that will make changes and insist that the others produce unbiased programmes then.

[Dopamine]

Not that there's anything wrong with broadcasting some programmes which have a minority interest but they should not dominate the schedule. I also think that it tries to hard to compete for audience share with ITV with things like soaps and reality TV.

You can't have it both ways. If you don't like the BBC trying hard to produce majority interest programmes, soaps/reality etc, in order to compete with the down-market channels (ITV, SKY etc), nor want it to fill its schedules with minority interest programmes, what do you suggest instead? This just illustrates how incredibly hard it is for any channel to produce universally popular output and scheduling.

Until a few months ago I didn't watch much TV, but a protracted period of ill health changed all that and also made me a strong supporter of the BBC. Their output is huge, varied, provided me with much that I enjoyed watching (and much that didn't appeal), available on TV, the web, radio, all for a yearly fee of £142.50 which, although a lot of money, is still excellent value when compared to SKY subscriptions, DVD hire etc. that many people voluntarily pay.

The BBC is uniquely funded and its ability not to have to chase advertising revenue and therefore ratings ensures that it's able to stay away from a diet of only lowest common denominator, mass market, junk programming. That then encourages/forces the commercial stations to try a little to compete with the high quality segment of the BBC's output.

Without the BBC, our choices would be substantially reduced. The licence fee is one tax that I'm completely happy to pay, and feel it offers excellent value.

[Rik]

I disagree to some extent, Dopamine. The BBC does chase ratings, in order to justify the licence fee, and it is full of empire builders - do we really need four 'main' digital channels and two dedicated to children when they aren't making or buying sufficient programmes to fill them, leading to endless repeats. Their best work, now, is only produced if they can find a co-production deal as they cannot afford to fund high quality programmes themselves.

[David]

I simply feel we no longer need to have the BBC I think it fails the people that are "Forced" to pay for it whether or not they want it. its all sunbjective but they churn out so much dumbed down programmes ,do are unfair in what they choose to make annd broadcast and for me it should be a matter of choice,No matter how much you feel about Sky if you dont want it then fine....................
The BBC waste so much of the licence fee imo and it really is a matter of time before this corporation is,in its present form made to do what it is paid to do and that is to provide a TV service.

All I want is choice choice to see what I want to and not face prison because I own a TV set its no longer a licence fee its a tax and a fund for the fat cats at the BBC   

[Gary]

With ITV cutting back due to financial issues maybe the BBC should do the same and unburden the fee we have to pay for poor TV, I find myself watching less and less on BBC apart from BBC4 with shows like Charlie Brookers Newwipe, which shows just how bent out of shape modern viewing is, America seems to be brave enough to try new things, like Heroes for instance which proved to be a big hit and shows like the Wire, and with decent scripts and effects (where needed) it all just makes the BBC look like something that needs saving itself.

[Rik]

I'm all in favour of that, Gary. I find I watch more on Ch5 than I do the BBC these days.

[Simon]

If there was no licence fee, where would the BBC get it's funding from?  I certainly think most people would miss the BBC if it wasn't there, and equally, we don't want it funded by commercials either.  I don't object to paying the licence fee, but obviously, wouldn't complain if it was cheaper.

[Rik]

For me, Simon, the question is scale. Does the BBC need to have so many channels, so many radio stations, so many highly paid presenters. A 'core BBC', which spent its money on programme quality, not endless repeats to fill multiple channels, would represent better value for money.

[David]

Quality and not quantity ? I think this is the answer but there is those that say they have to compete ?I think they were best when They set the standard and not followed the others....

[Rik]

They were, but now it's a numbers game.

[Simon]

Radio is 'free', isn't it?  I agree, there's a lot of repeats, but over lots of channels, the effect of these are watered down, and they are sometimes handy for missed programmes.  Of the two children's channels, each are aimed at different age groups, so I don't think that's a waste.  What I would like to see is a dedicated sports channel, especially for big events, so that it doesn't disrupt normal viewing for those that are not sports minded.

[David]

Its a good idea Simon but I think this should be extra for this channel especially if it includes Football,Cricket,Rugby and anything to do with balls.which covers most of my posts 

[Gary]

I never understand the issue with adverts, all other channels have them and we cope give it a week or so and no one would notice, so why worry if the BBC has some, it may even provide interesting viewing between shows

[Gary]

Its a good idea Simon but I think this should be extra for this channel especially if it includes Football,Cricket,Rugby and anything to do with balls.which covers most of my posts 

[David]

 

[Rik]

Radio is 'free', isn't it?

No, it's paid for by the licence fee, there's just no indication of the cost anymore.

I agree, there's a lot of repeats, but over lots of channels, the effect of these are watered down, and they are sometimes handy for missed programmes.

So's Sky+. IAC, how does the BBC justify putting a chat show on HD line, and repeating it the next night. It benefits little from HD, and if you only have one HD channel, why not use it better?

Of the two children's channels, each are aimed at different age groups, so I don't think that's a waste.

As a kid, we got along fine without TV, and when it did arrive, there was an hour or two of programming a day. Do we really want to sedate our kids with constant TV?

What I would like to see is a dedicated sports channel, especially for big events, so that it doesn't disrupt normal viewing for those that are not sports minded.

I agree with you, though they'd need more than one such channel to satisfy everyone.

[Gary]

Alagamate them into one organisation with lots of slots channels, then you just choose the station you want via genre or sport etc, be done with all of this competition and maybe we would get something decent by everyone working together for once

[john]

You can't have it both ways. If you don't like the BBC trying hard to produce majority interest programmes, soaps/reality etc, in order to compete with the down-market channels (ITV, SKY etc), nor want it to fill its schedules with minority interest programmes, what do you suggest instead? This just illustrates how incredibly hard it is for any channel to produce universally popular output and scheduling.

Surely there is more to attract majority audiences than soaps and Reality programmes. As I said in a previous post the BBC is capable of producing excellent Dramas and Documentaries. It has in the past also led the way in comedy programmes and I think these together with news, current affairs, arts/culture, history, films and sport (even though I personally don't watch it) should feature more prominently in its schedules and there would then be much to satisfy majority tastes. Those who like soaps and reality TV, and I agree there are many who do, are in my opinion adequately catered for with the independent channels. Whilst I admit it is difficult for the BBC to please everyone their present output attracts so much criticism that they appear to be pleasing very few.

[Rik]

It's the classic attempt to please everyone, John, you end up pleasing no-one. Back in the 80s, BBC2 and Channel 4 regularly showed operas, neither channel now do (or only very rarely), yet Sky manages to run a couple of arts channels which can do just that.

[bobleslie]

I think the problem with the BBC is not so much its output as its involvement in politics and political correctness.

We should not be forced to pay for any broadcaster whose views are anathema to most people in this country.

It is a truly awful organisation which is clearly an anachronism.

[Rik]

I wouldn't argue with that.

[john]

I agree that the BBC does try too hard to be politically correct with the presumed intention of not offending anyone but with the result that it instead pleases very few.

I don't however believe it is beyond hope of reform yet but I would like it to accept that it needs reforming and the BBC and the Government should discuss a more efficient method of paying for it out of general taxation without incurring political interference. I would not like to see adverts on the BBC and anyway I believe the independent channels are struggling to attract sufficient advertising revenue. Even in its present state there are still things that BBC do well and it should build on these.

[Gary]

I agree that the BBC does try too hard to be politically correct with the presumed intention of not offending anyone but with the result that it instead pleases very few.

I don't however believe it is beyond hope of reform yet but I would like it to accept that it needs reforming and the BBC and the Government should discuss a more efficient method of paying for it out of general taxation without incurring political interference. I would not like to see adverts on the BBC and anyway I believe the independent channels are struggling to attract sufficient advertising revenue. Even in its present state there are still things that BBC do well and it should build on these.

I find the end credits to many of their programs to be very good or is that relieving, anyway maybe they should build on that idea 

[Rik]

I just find credits confusing.

[Gary]

I just find credits confusing.

Maybe that's why I like them Rik, its like a game show trying to guess what its all about, and why they need so many damn flash backs and oddities, watching the program to find out the answers though would be boring cheating

[Rik]

I've never understood, for example, what a 'best boy' is, or a standby carpenter. The credits above the title are even worse, with so many names I'm never quite sure who actually made the film.

[Gary]

I've never understood, for example, what a 'best boy' is, or a standby carpenter. The credits above the title are even worse, with so many names I'm never quite sure who actually made the film.

I don't think even they are half the time, Rik  Best boys are assistants to department heads basically. Everyone involved in production pretty much gets a mention, which I suppose makes a change when so many like to take credit for so little these days.

[Rik]

Though the unit accountants are not worthy of mention. 

[Gary]

Though the unit accountants are not worthy of mention. 

Accountant is a dirty word, Rik 

[Rik]

We know... 

[Sebby]

[bobleslie]

However, there are exceptions...

[Rik]

You're learning.

[bobleslie]

Oh, I'm quick 

[Rik]

Around here, that's very wise - especially if you hear Jill approaching on her broomstick.

[bobleslie]

Forewarned is forearmed. 

[Rik]

We don't all carry shovels for no reason.