BBC
Gnome de PPRuNe
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Too close to Croydon for comfort
Age: 57
Posts: 8,000
Sightly perplexed that the BBC website heading menu features "iplayer" and "sounds" rather than "TV" and "Radio" - I wanted to see if Radio 4 had a particular progamme on the other night and rather expected to find it rather more classically signposted and eventually discovered I could find schedules through "sounds"... Surely iplayer and sounds are "products" of their particular medium rather than the other way round...? "There is a "more" button - why not include links to TV and radio schedules there? Type Radio 4 into search and you get a list of recent programmes to listen to - click one of those opens the programme page, then you can click the station page and find the schedule. Doh... What is wrong with keeping things simple?
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: West Wiltshire, UK
Age: 68
Posts: 412
Originally Posted by treadigraph
Sightly perplexed that the BBC website heading menu features "iplayer" and "sounds" rather than "TV" and "Radio" - I wanted to see if Radio 4 had a particular progamme on the other night and rather expected to find it rather more classically signposted and eventually discovered I could find schedules through "sounds"... Surely iplayer and sounds are "products" of their particular medium rather than the other way round...? "There is a "more" button - why not include links to TV and radio schedules there? Type Radio 4 into search and you get a list of recent programmes to listen to - click one of those opens the programme page, then you can click the station page and find the schedule. Doh... What is wrong with keeping things simple?
This is a pet gripe of mine. Finding particular programmes from the BBC isn't as easy as it could be. I tend to use the "site:" function in a search engine now, as a quicker way to navigate to a specific programme. For example, to find "The Archers", typing this into a search engine (most seem to support the "site:" option) finds the right part of the site quickly (it's in code tags below just for text formatting reasons):
Code:
"The Archers" site:https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds
Gnome de PPRuNe
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Too close to Croydon for comfort
Age: 57
Posts: 8,000
Originally Posted by VP959
This is a pet gripe of mine. Finding particular programmes from the BBC isn't as easy as it could be. I tend to use the "site:" function in a search engine now, as a quicker way to navigate to a specific programme. For example, to find "The Archers", typing this into a search engine (most seem to support the "site:" option) finds the right part of the site quickly (it's in code tags below just for text formatting reasons):
Code:
"The Archers" site:https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: cheshire
Posts: 245
Originally Posted by Torquetalk
No let‘s fund both and have two fantastic national institutions with the public interest and not commercial interest at heart.
The BBC is OUR national broadcaster and provides unrivaled public service that it‘s reference peers in other countries can only dream of (ask an NPR or a Deutschland Funk employee). Much of it is also available to overseas consumers (radio especially) for free and thereby acts as a key cultural exporter and importer of knowledge, ideas and culture. The sheer scale, diversity and depth of what the BBC puts out in television, radio and other peripheral material (language learning, for example) absolutely dwarfs the likes of Netflix and Sky. Also in an age of complete stupidity where the dummest unaccountable shite goes for an equal opinion and possible fact, you can still rely on the BBC to be a pretty reasonable reporter of affairs according to well trodden journalistic standards. That is why boneheads like Trump, China and Putin and sometimes even the UK government don‘t like it. They are, in fact, scared of it.
When it came to holding the government of the day to account when the second Gulf War was in the offing, it wasn‘t HM‘s Opposition who did their job; it was the BBC, the public broadcaster, that drove due diligence and exposed the inadequacy of the government‘s case. Would you expect that of one of Murdoch‘s mouthpieces? Not bleeding likely.
The BBC certainly has its faults, but it is by a thousand nautical miles better than its commercial rivals in its core brief to serve the public interest and be an independent provider of media. It‘s detractors really need to take a cold bath and get a grip.
The BBC is OUR national broadcaster and provides unrivaled public service that it‘s reference peers in other countries can only dream of (ask an NPR or a Deutschland Funk employee). Much of it is also available to overseas consumers (radio especially) for free and thereby acts as a key cultural exporter and importer of knowledge, ideas and culture. The sheer scale, diversity and depth of what the BBC puts out in television, radio and other peripheral material (language learning, for example) absolutely dwarfs the likes of Netflix and Sky. Also in an age of complete stupidity where the dummest unaccountable shite goes for an equal opinion and possible fact, you can still rely on the BBC to be a pretty reasonable reporter of affairs according to well trodden journalistic standards. That is why boneheads like Trump, China and Putin and sometimes even the UK government don‘t like it. They are, in fact, scared of it.
When it came to holding the government of the day to account when the second Gulf War was in the offing, it wasn‘t HM‘s Opposition who did their job; it was the BBC, the public broadcaster, that drove due diligence and exposed the inadequacy of the government‘s case. Would you expect that of one of Murdoch‘s mouthpieces? Not bleeding likely.
The BBC certainly has its faults, but it is by a thousand nautical miles better than its commercial rivals in its core brief to serve the public interest and be an independent provider of media. It‘s detractors really need to take a cold bath and get a grip.
However, not sure what's changed, society, the BBC or me, but I couldn't care a less about it now would happily see the license fee scrapped and let the BBC fight it out on a purely voluntary, subscription basis a la Sky, Netflix, etc
Thinking about my reasons more, there's a few:
Quality of journalism and variety of other content available:
In the internet age there's no shortage of news outlets, available 24/7 and tailored to your needs, in terms of content (and political leaning of course). I was reading something the other day some news event or other and the BBC "in depth" journalism was appalling, clear bias and with all the "in depth analysis" of a primary school kid. Conversely, I picked up the same topic on the Guardian online and it was poles apart, factual, analytical, well written - and FYI The Guardian isn't really a good fit for my politics, traditionally at least.
What I'd only describe as abject woke'ism:
Yes I know we live in a multicultural society, I know that gender is becoming increasingly blurred, I know we have a housing "crisis", I know fast trains are amazing, and I know how vile we've been to other nations in our long and not always proud history. Therefore I don't need the national publically funded broadcaster ramming all the above down my throat on what seems like a constant basis!
The quality of original programming:
I personally find very little original content of interest to me on the BBC these days; I used to enjoy the F1 but that's well gone, likewise things like Panorama and many of the classic comedies and stand up comedians, but they're pretty much gone as well. So you're left with a diet of soaps, reality TV and propaganda masquerading as news.
So my view is why should I be forced by law to pay for those dubious privileges?
Last edited by andrewn; 16th Feb 2021 at 07:48.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: south of Cirencester, north of Lyneham
Age: 73
Posts: 1,252
Radio 4 seems to have more adverts - ok, 'trailers' for BBC programmes - than Classic FM does with paid commercial adverts. The other really annoying thing is to be told the names of the producer, director, studio engineer etc, Surprised they don't include the tea lady, receptionist and security guard. It's just unnecessary ego stroking of people with big enough egos already!
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Lemonia. Best Greek in the world
Posts: 1,702
I would shrink the BBC massively.
No local radio or tv.
4 TV stations.
4 or 5 radio stations.
All news from Central BBC News, based in Stockton on Tees.
No HQ in London. Base it in Sunderland.
A salary cap for everyone of the PM 's salary. Not a penny more.
No Pension scheme beyond the one given by the average retailer.
No local radio or tv.
4 TV stations.
4 or 5 radio stations.
All news from Central BBC News, based in Stockton on Tees.
No HQ in London. Base it in Sunderland.
A salary cap for everyone of the PM 's salary. Not a penny more.
No Pension scheme beyond the one given by the average retailer.
Thought police antagonist
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Where I always have been...firmly in the real world
Posts: 83
For those somewhat obsessed with their myopia about the BBC and bias, given, as been mentioned previously, it's anything but plus the diversity of broadcasting it provides, presumably you've already commenced stocking up on popcorn, and Gordon's, in preparation for the when these two channels start to air.....
News UK TV and GB News: new channels stoke fears of more partisan journalism (theconversation.com)
News UK TV and GB News: new channels stoke fears of more partisan journalism (theconversation.com)
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: cheshire
Posts: 245
Originally Posted by Krystal n chips
For those somewhat obsessed with their myopia about the BBC and bias, given, as been mentioned previously, it's anything but plus the diversity of broadcasting it provides, presumably you've already commenced stocking up on popcorn, and Gordon's, in preparation for the when these two channels start to air.....
News UK TV and GB News: new channels stoke fears of more partisan journalism (theconversation.com)
News UK TV and GB News: new channels stoke fears of more partisan journalism (theconversation.com)
Thought police antagonist
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Where I always have been...firmly in the real world
Posts: 83
Originally Posted by andrewn
What's the problem though? Sure, I'll dip into those, if I like them will watch more, and maybe even pay for the privilege. If I don't like I'll skip and move on. No-one is forcing me (or you) to pay to view.
And then there's the agenda. Although the claim, obviously, is to be "impartial ", other MSM, inc the FT, have pointed out the prominence of right wing commentary.
There's another problem as well. The dangerous influences of Faux news are well documented and not something that appeals to any left or right centric viewer, only to those who prefer their ideology to be readily available to sate their appetites ........and hence the disinformation campaigns begin
You can almost write the planning "script " here. Start low key, with a few token gestures of left wing issues, but then suddenly escalate when a controversial issue arises, which will ensure a rise in viewing numbers. Or, less likely, go for controversy from the onset to establish the brand.
What is amusing is, when the BBC does one of their "pomp and ceremony " events saturation coverage many of the detractors will tune in regardless ....
Last edited by Krystal n chips; 17th Feb 2021 at 07:15.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: cheshire
Posts: 245
Originally Posted by Krystal n chips
What is amusing is, when the BBC does one of their "pomp and ceremony " events saturation coverage many of the detractors will tune in regardless ....
Thought police antagonist
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Where I always have been...firmly in the real world
Posts: 83
Originally Posted by andrewn
There are still things the BBC does well, such as those events of national significance and pomp and ceremony, agreed. And maybe that's the point, instead of trying to be all things to all people in a crowded marketplace, the BBC should go back to focussing on its core public service broadcast responsibilities. For example, do we really need all these radio stations such as 1xtra and the like?
I'd never heard of the radio station you mentioned, no reason to after all, however, after a quick search I can't see any reason it should be closed given it's synonymous with, for some, JB's least favourite word........diversity.
I do agree they should stop trying to emulate commercial channels in some respects, notably with the abundance of reality shows and the vomit inducing melodrama as yapped by the judges.
I actually like watching BBC Alba, being completely unable to understand a word of Gaelic , but the sub-titles kindly help here and the programmes tend to be about real people and life events, rather than "celeb" fronted with the "celeb " in question doing their best to ensure they have prominence over the content.
Boris's well known mantra "world beating " is, therefore, very much applicable to the BBC per se.....although he probably didn't have them in mind when the phrase was coined.
And given his marked reluctance, well ok, absolute refusal, to be interviewed by a Mr O'Neil during the electioneering, it will be interesting to see if he has a change of heart if asked to appear on one of the new channels, more specifically, the one fronted by Mr O'Neil given the content is orientated towards those who have a very strong empathy, and deeper still given a remote chance, with far from centric right wing ideology
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 1,620
Very easy for a television presenter or journalist to hector or trip up a politician and make them look unsure or otherwise bumbling. Remember Jeremy Paxman and Michael Howard? Also it is very easy to ask a simple question that has a very complicated answer involving many factors, and show the questionee to be hesitating or uncertain as they try to condense policy containing many factors into a pithy reply.
I don't blame a politician - especially a Prime Minister - for not wishing to risk being made to look foolish. They are not in their job for our entertainment.
The PM should be quizzed by Parliament and the opposition, whose job it is to call them to account, not a clever TV presenter with an agenda and a time limit.
I don't blame a politician - especially a Prime Minister - for not wishing to risk being made to look foolish. They are not in their job for our entertainment.
The PM should be quizzed by Parliament and the opposition, whose job it is to call them to account, not a clever TV presenter with an agenda and a time limit.
Thought police antagonist
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Where I always have been...firmly in the real world
Posts: 83
Originally Posted by Uplinker
Very easy for a television presenter or journalist to hector or trip up a politician and make them look unsure or otherwise bumbling. Remember Jeremy Paxman and Michael Howard? Also it is very easy to ask a simple question that has a very complicated answer involving many factors, and show the questionee to be hesitating or uncertain as they try to condense policy containing many factors into a pithy reply.
I don't blame a politician - especially a Prime Minister - for not wishing to risk being made to look foolish. They are not in their job for our entertainment.
The PM should be quizzed by Parliament and the opposition, whose job it is to call them to account, not a clever TV presenter with an agenda and a time limit.
I don't blame a politician - especially a Prime Minister - for not wishing to risk being made to look foolish. They are not in their job for our entertainment.
The PM should be quizzed by Parliament and the opposition, whose job it is to call them to account, not a clever TV presenter with an agenda and a time limit.
Staying with Boris, briefly, when he deliberately chose not to be interviewed by Mr O'Neil and C4 News he did so for one well established reason. Himself and his own self interests. He's long been, for a politician, recognised as liability with his "gaffes and quips " along with blustering in public thus with his objective as PM in sight, he wasn't going to be allowed to be exposed by interviewers who would ask questions that he would find difficult if not impossible, to answer.
The BBC has been fortunate to have within the organisation some very capable and incisive political commentators and interviewers over the years, Sir Robin Day being one of the most prominent and certainly John Knott flouncing out of an interview was one of his more memorable interviews.
Which leads to this interesting juxtaposition. "Panorama " covered the fake news / anti-vax morons earlier this week.
However, it appears the charter prevents them participating in this event,
I have no idea as to why because given its role as a public service broadcaster, I would have thought this would be within the Corporations remit.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-56101990
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 1,620
But a Prime Minister's job is running the country, not providing entertainment for millions of people lazing on their sofas.
In the surroundings of a television studio, with the lights, the script, the timing countdowns, the video tape clips etc; a seasoned presenter who is expert and used to talking to the nearest second, and talking while listening to their editor on their earpiece, can if they want, run rings around anyone not used to it and make them look foolish or indecisive.
In the surroundings of a television studio, with the lights, the script, the timing countdowns, the video tape clips etc; a seasoned presenter who is expert and used to talking to the nearest second, and talking while listening to their editor on their earpiece, can if they want, run rings around anyone not used to it and make them look foolish or indecisive.
Thought police antagonist
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Where I always have been...firmly in the real world
Posts: 83
Originally Posted by Uplinker
But a Prime Minister's job is running the country, not providing entertainment for millions of people lazing on their sofas.
In the surroundings of a television studio, with the lights, the script, the timing countdowns, the video tape clips etc; a seasoned presenter who is expert and used to talking to the nearest second, and talking while listening to their editor on their earpiece, can if they want, run rings around anyone not used to it and make them look foolish or indecisive.
In the surroundings of a television studio, with the lights, the script, the timing countdowns, the video tape clips etc; a seasoned presenter who is expert and used to talking to the nearest second, and talking while listening to their editor on their earpiece, can if they want, run rings around anyone not used to it and make them look foolish or indecisive.
As for the studio environment and being questioned, I understand it's now standard policy for many who are likely to face such questions, including press conferences, to be given realistic training as to what to expect and how to respond.....which is fine until their ego's intervene or they are confronted with questions for which there is no easy answer or can't be evaded, at which point the dynamic of the interview becomes far more intense and interesting for the viewer.
Cunning Artificer
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: The spiritual home of DeHavilland
Age: 73
Posts: 3,124
The BBC isn't lefty, it's Woke - and it's not alone in that. Channel 4 is so woken that even the BBC has noticed.
These days we mostly watch Amazon Prime and Netflix for entertainment and Sky News or Al Jazeera for news. There are occasional outbreaks of things worth watching on iPlayer, but over all, until this lockdown we didn't do much screen time.
Missus is rather fond of using the horrible QVC as background during the day-time, but thankfully I'm not in the living room during working hours.
These days we mostly watch Amazon Prime and Netflix for entertainment and Sky News or Al Jazeera for news. There are occasional outbreaks of things worth watching on iPlayer, but over all, until this lockdown we didn't do much screen time.
Missus is rather fond of using the horrible QVC as background during the day-time, but thankfully I'm not in the living room during working hours.
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: UK
Posts: 752
Now that Brexit is “done” watch the right wing media, their friends, supporters and cronies start targeting the BBC now as their new pet project to remain relevant.
We are lucky that we have a regulator and a broadcaster that has as much balance as it does.
We are lucky that we have a regulator and a broadcaster that has as much balance as it does.
