Heard today that there will be cuts to the BBC service, so they've only just brought back BBC Three to FreeView and now they plan to shut down CBBC, BBC Four and Radio 4 Extra to become online-only.
Well I watch BBC Four for the Euro detective programmes and BBC Four Extra is a god send on DAB on the commute or long journeys (not sure the point of this going online).
With so many 'extra' versions of their radio stations I wonder why they picked Four to cut?
|
|
Radio 4 Extra will be soon out-of-date as the Werthers in my glove box.
|
>> Radio 4 Extra will be soon out-of-date as the Werthers in my glove box.
>
I was listening to it today. It is already out of date. Desert Island disks from 2005? Jeez.
Last edited by: Zero on Thu 26 May 22 at 23:10
|
Fairly typical public sector response when faced with the prospect of imposed budget cuts - put forward those things that the decision makers value in the hope they will change their mind!
Radio 4 - decent quality news and current affairs, CBBC - socially worthy.
How many in the cabinet would regret the passing of East End Celebrity Get me Out of Here Chefs Got Talent shows.
|
I haven't been driving as much as I used to, but when I did, R4 and R4 Extra were invariably my go to stations for the return journey.
The documentaries on BBC4 are also very good. Perhaps they could broadcast BBC4 at night, when they show BBC News on BBC1. BBC News is already on its own channel so it shouldn't make too much of a difference.
For my work I have visited both major terrestrial broadcasters (or commercial divisions thereof) and I know who made the better financial choices.
Last edited by: zippy on Fri 27 May 22 at 00:30
|
I feel sure you are glued to The Great British Sewing Bee.
:o}
|
I'll be sad if BBC4 moves online only. We watch more of that than any other channel.
Whilst of course we can use iplayer, there is sufficient extra friction to get to what you want to see over just turning on the TV (and possibly changing the channel) that Mrs C probably won't do it.
And I guess many won't be able to do it. Can't see my 87 year old mother in law navigating iplayer.
|
Cant see your 87 year old mother as BBC 4 target audience either.
Online viewing is valid in todays society. BBC 4 output and schedules is tailor made for it. The "wot about the old" is spurious boat anchor thinking. If it was allowed to predominate we would still be traveling everywhere by Hansom cab, dressed like Turner in clothes made by spinning jennies.
|
Since BBC4 and R4extra predominently broadcast repeats, how much do they expect to save?
They should concentrate on duplicate bureaucracy, and excessive salaries there.
Last edited by: neiltoo on Fri 27 May 22 at 09:28
|
|
Whilst I have sympathy for the very old who were perhaps too old to grasp modern technology we surly have to stop allowing this excuse for change eventually. Anyone now the age of seventy is well capable of using a smart TV or paying for stuff electronically. They have had plenty of time to learn. They just chose to put their heads in the sand.
|
I'm astonished at the BBC4 proposal if true. If the higher (less low) quality stuff moves exclusively online, presumably fewer will find it.
I agree it is highly suited to on-demand. We watch things like 'Beck' when it is convenient for us.
R4X I listen to a lot, but almost always streamed. I don't care that it's old in many cases, the only problem is they seem to be running out of the old stuff!
Main thing is to protect the BBC as far as I'm concerned. It's the absolute worst broadcaster apart from all the others. Channel 4 does some good stuff too, but is about to be 'fixed' by Dorries.
My 85 year old aunt manages very well with on-demand.
Last edited by: Manatee on Fri 27 May 22 at 10:21
|
I would guess that 95% or more of the UK public know the BBC is funded by a licence fee and is part of the public sector.
I would also hazard a guess that before announcing Channel 4 was being sold, something less than 10% knew it was wholly owned public sector. Public sector broadcasters doing adverts?????
The quality output from the BBC does need protection. The rest can go - if I want (I don't generally) soaps, trivial quiz shows, talent (?) shows, etc I can find loads on commercial TV.
The world of broadcasting has changed since the original BBC charter. ~100 Freeview channels, countless others on subscription, Facebook, Instagram, You-tube, Netflix, online, etc etc.
The licence fee model created 80 years ago, worthy at the time, is no longer fit for purpose.
|
|
"if I want (I don't generally) soaps, trivial quiz shows, talent (?) shows" - nor do I want them but I guess as these are on a peak times we may be in the minority. One man's meat etc...
|
>> "if I want (I don't generally) soaps, trivial quiz shows, talent (?) shows" - nor
>> do I want them but I guess as these are on a peak times we
>> may be in the minority. One man's meat etc...
The BBC has always felt under pressure to compete for a large audience. If it could only do quality stuff the audience numbers wouldn't justify its existence. And reality TV in particular is cheaper to produce than quality drama.
Audience size is a daft way of measuring worth of course. The very existence of the BBC and the standards it sets are IMO a large part of the reason why British TV has been so much better than nearly every one else's.
There's also the point that artistic value doesn't necessarily correlate with potential for advertising revenue, and the twin drivers of ad revenue and production savings when everything is purely commercial is potentially a race to the bottom.
In the arts, subsidy of some kind is sometimes essential. You can't improve the productivity of a symphony orchestra for example, it's impossible to make a profit from one and it inevitably becomes more and more expensive in relative terms so they needsubsidy or sponsorship. Same goes for opera, and most fine art despite Hockney with his iPad.
Of course stories of BBC waste and inefficiency, especially in the TV duopoly days, are legion and mostly true. I have a couple of friends who were BBC employees. But its achievements have been extraordinary. As were ITV's which I don't think they would have been had the BBC not existed and set the standards it did.
|
I think there are still new programs on BBC4 which I guess will have to find spaces back on BBC1 & 2... I'm sure The Sky at Night is only on BBC4 or is it still very late on BBC2?
Going online may be great but no good when you listen via DAB.
|
Many more recent cars now link smartphones to car via Apple/Android. This is likely to be increasingly the case as sat nav, phone connectivity, etc becomes the norm.
Radio will use up some data allowance - but data via the internet is getting ever cheaper.
To carry on with terrestrial and internet broadcasts adds cost. They are both ways of getting data from broadcaster to watcher/listener. At some point, one will prevail and the other die.
As internet is far more versatile a means of communicating (it allows interaction and links etc), I think terrestrial will ultimately die. The only question is when?
|
>> The only question is when?
Some terrestrial free-view channels are disappearing in the near future as the bands have been sold to the mobile phone companies to make way for 5g. It seems the airwaves go to the highest bidder.
(COM7 mulitplex is being switched off in June 2022.)
|
>> Anyone now the age of seventy is well capable of using a smart TV or paying for stuff electronically. They have had plenty of time to learn. They just chose to put their heads in the sand.
My 90 year-old sister has recently been given an iPad by one of her daughters, so she can keep in touch with mum while she's in Tasmania.
She requires help from her 2 other 'children' of course, but she's getting there.
|
|
Blimey, how old is the 90 year old's mum then? :-)
|
|
...aye; the devil's in the detail...
|
BBC cuts - bathtub tom
