PC or what?

Ren Frew – interesting reading. But questions of “trust” are not what I am debating here. And I probably fall into the approximate 33% who would prefer the BBC was funded by public subscription by those who wished to watch it.

In terms of sheer output of course it is good value for money. But that doesn’t necessarily mean the quality is good. But more in tune with my arguments here is the 50%-60% who think quality has been reduced.

And as in many polls the answers to two questions contradict each other. Broadcasters should be impartial – 80% yes. Broadcasters should hold political opinions – 60%-70% yes.

Naturally your bosses will put the best gloss on any poll but trying to be objective I would say the jury is still out and there is a large debate to be had when the key questions have to be set out in more detail.

I should say that, for me, the BBC could do no wrong up to about 15 years ago. It clearly still is “an institution” for many, particularly the older populace and they will often forgive its transgressions. But the BBC is torn between that image it would still like to project and the modern broadcaster it really wants to be.

I am not sure that it can be both.

Who cares so long as I get the news.

I have to nip into town now, but shall continue this fascinating debate later. In the meantime here is some reading for you issued to BBC staff internally in September from Director-General, Mark Thomson… later issued to licence payers…

Dear All,

You may have seen that this weekend, the Guardian published a new poll about public attitudes to the BBC. It showed very strong public support for us. 4 out of 5 people said that the UK should be proud of the BBC – a much higher figure than when ICM asked the same question five years ago. Our score for trustworthiness was up too: 69% agreed that the BBC was trustworthy, compared to 60% in 2004.

None of this comes as a surprise to us – our own tracking research has indicated that, at a time when public faith in many other British institutions is eroding fast, belief in the BBC is actually strengthening. Our services have never been stronger – just look at the summer of music, drama and sport we’ve been able to deliver to the public. And our approach to the editorial problems of the past two years and to the wider issue of openness and candour in public life seems to have struck a real chord with the public.

But the poll must have made uncomfortable reading for those critics who would like the world to believe that trust and pride in the BBC is getting weaker rather than stronger. We’ve seen a pretty relentless onslaught from the press over the summer, culminating in James Murdoch’s MacTaggart lecture. The most important thing to say about that lecture and about many of the recent attacks on the BBC is that they are desperately out of touch with what the audience themselves are telling us.

The public also have clear and strong views about the Government’s proposal to top-slice some of the licence-fee and give it to commercial players to provide various kinds of public service content. Today the Chairman of the BBC Trust, Sir Michael Lyons, is writing to licence-payers about the wider broadcasting debate in which he will include the results of independent research the Trust commissioned on public attitudes to top-slicing.

Based on emerging findings from new survey research, the Trust believes that if in future licence fee settlements there was money the BBC did not need, the public would not want it given to other media outlets. The Trust’s research offered six possible options for what should happen to the licence fee once current spending on digital switchover is complete. Around half of those asked would prefer the licence fee to be lowered by £5.50, compared to just six percent who wanted additional money to be spent on regional news on other channels.

But the fact that the public support our stand on top-slicing and reject many of the most extreme attacks on us does not mean that we should shut our ears to criticism nor that the BBC can stand still.

Digital switchover will mean new audience needs and demands. The media landscape is changing beyond recognition – the old balance between the BBC and the rest of media has been upset as commercial business models are under severe pressure. The wider economy and the public finances as a whole look profoundly different than they did when we launched Creative Future.

All of these things pose big questions for the BBC, and that means it is the right time to take a searching look at what the BBC should look like in the post-2012, post-switchover world. Back in June I agreed with the Trust that this autumn we would do just that, examining the way the BBC can best serve the public in the future, assessing the scale and scope of our operations, and – without compromising on our fundamental duty to serve the public – look at how we can help promote the right environment for the creative industries as a whole, an environment in which other media providers can grow and succeed and plurality can flourish.

As this work progresses, I will write to you again. In the meantime, my thanks and congratulations to everyone who helped make our summer such a success on air and on the web and good luck with the autumn.

All the best,

Mark Thompson

Director-General

The link in full: http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbctrust/news/press_releases/september/strategic_review.shtml

Where are the “blindly doting BBC acolytes” here Sky High ?

I’d like to know how exactly you conclude the BBC is “hugely overstaffed” when we have been subject to consistent rounds of redundancies and ‘post closures’ for several years now. My own particular department has seen it’s number cut by 50% in the past five years, too the point we have to rely on the freelance market just to get by. I spoke to some of my London colleagues recently who could recall a time when they worked amongst camera operators in their hundreds, now down to less than twenty staff employees still on the books.

Researchers, producers, directors have been getting laid off in their droves for years too, make up and wardrobe departments privatised way back in the early 90’s, graphic designers forced to form a PLC in order to survive. BBC’s Pebble Mill studios closed, BBC North merged with Granada’s studios and staff made redundant. And yet somehow we are still expected to produce content over several television channels, umpteen radio stations and arguably one of the most informative websites in the world.

Recent research* concluded that most licence payers are very happy with the services the BBC offers and would NOT like to see it broken up. Whilst I would be the first to admit that any massive publically funded body should not be immune from criticism and debate. I do feel passionate enough (as a licence fee payer) about the BBC to stick my neck above the parapet and defend it from the naysayers, like yourself, News International and the Conservative party, who cannot see a good thing when they have it.

By all means join the campaign to bring down the BBC, and then enjoy watching “impartial” broadcasters like Murdoch’s Sky or Branson’s Virgin once it’s gone… Of course you could always tune in to declining ITV and it’s steady programme of late night phone in quizzes and repeats of Murder She Wrote…:rolleyes:;):(

* I’ll dig it out if you really don’t believe me… 😎

Just a few points in response, Renfrew.

By all means dig out the research – much depends on how the questions are framed and by whom.

Surely one of the reasons for the reduced staff levels you refer to is that the BBC, once a justifiably proud producer of programmes now buys in much of its output. Correct me if I am wrong but my sources suggest that, as with much of public funded activity these days, the BBC is weighted in favour of administrators rather than programme makers.

I firmly maintain that the BBC should be broken up to the extent that any production company can make populist programmes for large audiences, both television and radio. The BBC has become in areas of activity for which it was never intended and, in general, its raison d’etre has become ratings driven programmes. The point is that the BBC should be able to broadcast to 100,000 people at peak time.

I would happily pay a license fee for 2 TV channels, and 2 radio channels broadcasting for 12 hours a day, no more, a range of high quality drama, documentary, and current affairs.

. No, I am not Cameron, but rather him than a continuation of the bunch of loonies we now have. .

I’ve changed my mind on that theory, judging by your moniker here, you must be either James or Rupert Murdoch ??? :D:diablo:

. I number 5 ex-BBC employees amongst my good friends, all of whom share my feelings.

But I thought the BBC was “hugely overstaffed” Sky High ?

I have sympathy for your friends, I’d be surprised if I wasn’t in the same predicament within five years. And that is a scenario that’s fanned by people like yourself. At the end of the day breaking up the BBC puts a lot of talented people on the dole, something the Conservative party in particular seem to have a wonderful track record of…

There is so much nonsense being posted here by blindly doting BBC acolytes, that I am in despair. Yes I do know how much the BBC costs us, only too much – I help to pay for it! It has been wasting my money and yours for years. The great institution was long ago consigned to the scrap heap of ratings chasing. I(t is hugely overstaffed and hugely inefficient. No, I am not Cameron, but rather him than a continuation of the bunch of loonies we now have. And at least there are signs that he realises what bis wrong with the BC and aims to put it right.

Where are the “blindly doting BBC acolytes” here Sky High ?

I’d like to know how exactly you conclude the BBC is “hugely overstaffed” when we have been subject to consistent rounds of redundancies and ‘post closures’ for several years now. My own particular department has seen it’s number cut by 50% in the past five years, to the point we have to heavily rely on the freelance market just to get by. I spoke to some of my London colleagues recently who could recall a time when they worked amongst camera operators in their hundreds, now down to less than twenty staff employees still on the books.

Researchers, producers, directors have been getting laid off in their droves for years too, make up and wardrobe departments privatised way back in the early 90’s, graphic designers forced to form a PLC in order to survive. BBC’s Pebble Mill studios closed, BBC North merged with Granada’s studios and staff made redundant. And yet somehow we are still expected to produce content over several television channels, umpteen radio stations and arguably one of the most informative websites in the world.

Recent research* concluded that most licence payers are very happy with the services the BBC offers and would NOT like to see it broken up. Whilst I would be the first to admit that any massive publically funded body should not be immune from criticism and debate. I do feel passionate enough (as a licence fee payer) about the BBC to stick my neck above the parapet and defend it from the naysayers, like yourself, News International and the Conservative party, who cannot see a good thing when they have it.

By all means join the campaign to bring down the BBC, and then enjoy watching “impartial” broadcasters like Murdoch’s Sky or Branson’s Virgin once it’s gone… Of course you could always tune in to declining ITV and it’s steady programme of late night phone in quizzes and repeats of Murder She Wrote…:rolleyes:;):(

* I’ll dig it out if you really don’t believe me… 😎

Can’t see you getting much sympathy on here with that attitude, but of course we are all entitled to our own opinions! May not be wise to voice yours as strongly as you are though….

Anyway, before I moved away from the place I was quite happy paying my TV licence for shows such as Doctor Who, Top Gear and comedies such as Mitchell and Webb. Plus, I did enjoy not having ad-breaks! Just realised that a lot of, if not all, of Doctor Who is filmed in Cardiff. So I for one have no issues with the Beeb moving operations away from London if they can produce shows of that calibre away from the place.

Indeed, Symon we are all entitled to our opinions and I am certainly not looking for sympathy. Are we precluded for voicing strong opinions here?

I am just deeply saddened by the BBC we have now have and the way it is now run and the fact that it has strayed so far from its core remit, with little being done to control it. I number 5 ex-BBC employees amongst my good friends, all of whom share my feelings.

There is so much nonsense being posted here by blindly doting BBC acolytes, that I am in despair. Yes I do know how much the BBC costs us, only too much – I help to pay for it! It has been wasting my money and yours for years. The great institution was long ago consigned to the scrap heap of ratings chasing. I(t is hugely overstaffed and hugely inefficient. No, I am not Cameron, but rather him than a continuation of the bunch of loonies we now have. And at least there are signs that he realises what bis wrong with the BC and aims to put it right.

Can’t see you getting much sympathy on here with that attitude, but of course we are all entitled to our own opinions! May not be wise to voice yours as strongly as you are though….

Anyway, before I moved away from the place I was quite happy paying my TV licence for shows such as Doctor Who, Top Gear and comedies such as Mitchell and Webb. Plus, I did enjoy not having ad-breaks! Just realised that a lot of, if not all, of Doctor Who is filmed in Cardiff. So I for one have no issues with the Beeb moving operations away from London if they can produce shows of that calibre away from the place.

There is so much nonsense being posted here by blindly doting BBC acolytes, that I am in despair. Yes I do know how much the BBC costs us, only too much – I help to pay for it! It has been wasting my money and yours for years. The great institution was long ago consigned to the scrap heap of ratings chasing. I(t is hugely overstaffed and hugely inefficient. No, I am not Cameron, but rather him than a continuation of the bunch of loonies we now have. And at least there are signs that he realises what bis wrong with the BC and aims to put it right.

SO THERE IS A NORTH/SOUTH DIVIDE. We were always told by certain members of parliment that THERE WAS NOT ??? :D:D

Of course, because he said so. You don’t really imagine that BBC employees know any more than we do about the management’s decisions, do you? The other part of the argument is about matters of opinion and those of us who do not work for the BBC are more likely to form an opinion objectively.

Are you David Cameron by any chance ? :D;)

If that was the reason there MIGHT be an argument for it. But it is not. We are all forking out a billion pounds in building, relocation and redundancy costs because the management of the British Broadcasting Corporation, based in the capital city of Britain, London, have decided it is too “London-centric”. I guarantee that if you asked a random selection of people in the street if they cared where their programmes were produced they would not give a hoot.

The BBC is a cash cow for my money and I fervently hope the Tories, if they win next Spring, break it up.

If a random selection of people on the street don’t care where the BBC makes it’s programmes then why do you ? Have you ever heard of ‘London-weighting’ ? Do you have any idea what it costs the licence payer to support an infrastructure that’s largely London based ?

Take a look at other large corporations moving out of London for the same reasons. As for the Tories winning the election, god help us all, and yes you may as well say goodbye to the BBC as the institution we’ve come to know over the years. Such is the Conservative party’s track record for killing off great British institutions…

You don’t really imagine that BBC employees know any more than we do about the management’s decisions, do you?

Errrr…… yes?

You don’t really imagine that BBC employees know any more than we do about the management’s decisions, do you?

Actually, yes. I imagine they know infinitely more about the inner workings of their own company than ‘we’ do, especially if they’ve been there for a good few years.

Paul

Are you aware that Ren Frew actually works for the BBC?

I think we can reasonably assume that he knows what he’s talking about.

Of course, because he said so. You don’t really imagine that BBC employees know any more than we do about the management’s decisions, do you? The other part of the argument is about matters of opinion and those of us who do not work for the BBC are more likely to form an opinion objectively.

Are you aware that Ren Frew actually works for the BBC?

I think we can reasonably assume that he knows what he’s talking about.

The BBC is moving parts of it’s operations out of London to new centres in Manchester and Glasgow (where I work) largely because of the crippling costs of redeveloping and maintaining sites in London, notably a technologically outdated Television Centre in West London. Certain flagship productions are moving north as well, for example, here in Glasgow we have been making most of those bulk standard Saturday night lottery shows for a couple of years, things like The Weakest Link, Eggheads, and The Wall are also being made here or will be in 2010, to name but a few…

Last time I checked the first ‘B’ in BBC stood for British, not London. For far too long the BBC has been considered to be ‘London-centric’ and I for one are pleased that those of us plucky Jocks, Taffs, Micks and flat-caps outside of the M25 are finally being given the chance to prove we are also capable of producing ‘prime-time’ content for the corporation.

Personally I couldn’t care one way or another if Big Ben features in the News at Ten’s opening titles. It’s up to the programme’s editor to decide whether or not the bulletin itself is ‘London-centric’ or not. I believe the London area, like most UK regions still has it’s own dedicated news programmes for it’s catchment area on both ITV and the BBC.

If that was the reason there MIGHT be an argument for it. But it is not. We are all forking out a billion pounds in building, relocation and redundancy costs because the management of the British Broadcasting Corporation, based in the capital city of Britain, London, have decided it is too “London-centric”. I guarantee that if you asked a random selection of people in the street if they cared where their programmes were produced they would not give a hoot.

The BBC is a cash cow for my money and I fervently hope the Tories, if they win next Spring, break it up.

The BBC is moving parts of it’s operations out of London to new centres in Manchester and Glasgow (where I work) largely because of the crippling costs of redeveloping and maintaining sites in London, notably a technologically outdated Television Centre in West London. Certain flagship productions are moving north as well, for example, here in Glasgow we have been making most of those bulk standard Saturday night lottery shows for a couple of years, things like The Weakest Link, Eggheads, and The Wall are also being made here or will be in 2010, to name but a few…

Last time I checked the first ‘B’ in BBC stood for British, not London. For far too long the BBC has been considered to be ‘London-centric’ and I for one are pleased that those of us plucky Jocks, Taffs, Micks and flat-caps outside of the M25 are finally being given the chance to prove we are also capable of producing ‘prime-time’ content for the corporation.

Personally I couldn’t care one way or another if Big Ben features in the News at Ten’s opening titles. It’s up to the programme’s editor to decide whether or not the bulletin itself is ‘London-centric’ or not. I believe the London area, like most UK regions still has it’s own dedicated news programmes for it’s catchment area on both ITV and the BBC.