BBC could fall apart

[molly bloom]

Originally posted by Fez


First off I never said I was interested in you. The problem I had was I always thought you were female. But I don't care. You definitely display an attitude that is not worth my time.

Ah, don't have another hissy fit, you great tortillera.

Funny, most of the gay South Americans I met in London had a great sense of humour. You must be the exception that proves the rule.

Still, no shirtless pics, thank you. We need to keep our food down, Saint Fez of the Puppy Look.

[Giancarlo]

Originally posted by Odin


Just because it said of the european dissent? Good news is SUPPOSED to give both sides, dimwit. Then again, fascists don't believe in a free media.

I'm European. So don't even try speaking for others dimwit. Baghdad, I mean British Broadcasting Corporation does not give both sides.

[Giancarlo]

Originally posted by molly bloom


Ah, don't have another hissy fit, you great tortillera.

Funny, most of the gay South Americans I met in London had a great sense of humour. You must be the exception that proves the rule.

Still, no shirtless pics, thank you. We need to keep our food down, Saint Fez of the Puppy Look.

I'm from Spain... Have you ever met a Spanish guy?

First off I wasn't going to post one as I don't have one anyways.

[molly bloom]

Originally posted by Fez


I'm from Spain... Have you ever met a Spanish guy?

First off I wasn't going to post one as I don't have one anyways.

No. The Great Cauliflower, Franco wouldn't let them visit Great Britain. He was afraid they might be infected with strange notions of modernity, democracy, public sanitation and freedom.

Yes, I have been to Spain, and yes, I have met Spanish men.

Good news about the photograph there.

[Giancarlo]

Originally posted by molly bloom


No. The Great Cauliflower, Franco wouldn't let them visit Great Britain. He was afraid they might be infected with strange notions of modernity, democracy, public sanitation and freedom.

Yes, I have been to Spain, and yes, I have met Spanish men.

Good news about the photograph there.

Franco has been gone since 1975. A lot has changed. Ask my parents who were there in the last years of Franco... and about how the country is now.

So don't be a moron.

[Caligastia]

Hey Molly, why don't you pick on someone your own size?

[Tingkai]

Originally posted by notyoueither
The only question I would have then, is why is the term 'Baghdad Broadcasting Corp.' widespread?

I had the same question. Guess it passes for wit in some parts.

[Solly]

I listen to the BBC for news. For political commentary I look elsewhere.

The licence fee is effectively a tax, and a very unfair one.

[Cruddy]

Originally posted by Park Avenue
...
The licence fee is effectively a tax, and a very unfair one.

Ah, but if you just LISTEN to the BBC, you could bin your TV, listen to the radio, and NOT PAY A PENNY.

Seems fair to me (TV isn't worth it for me).

[Bugs ****ing Bunny]

Originally posted by DanS

The strength of the BBC is its breadth of coverage. Personally, I don't find much value to the BBC beyond that. Further, even if I did find value beyond that, I would object to so much of my tax money being spent on it. Why is the BBC being paid to compete against established, respected news source like the FT, for instance?

Firstly- the BBC isn't funded by taxation. It's a licence fee. If you don't own a TV you pay nothing towards it, and can listen to BBC radio free of charge.

Secondly, the BBC is not just a news channel. Its charter commits it to certain levels of educational/religious/local programming- unprofitable things, to be blunt. It's a public service.

That ties in with the old Reithian values that the BBC should add value to the nation. It's never been simply an entertainment medium alone. It also means that we get unquestionably great features such as the BBC's magnificent Natural History unit which has produced genuinely groundbreaking TV, and changed the medium as we know it (remember "Life on Earth"?). If you want my opinion that justifies its existance alone.

[Dauphin]

Originally posted by Lazarus and the Gimp


Firstly- the BBC isn't funded by taxation. It's a licence fee. If you don't own a TV you pay nothing towards it, and can listen to BBC radio free of charge.

Televisions are practically a standard household good. You could live without a television, but it would put a big impingement on your options. There are many people who would not want to watch the BBC or listen to BBC radio, but would want a television to watch subscription channels, DVDs or videos etc.

I personally believe in the licence system, but to use that argument is pretty weak I think.

[Bugs ****ing Bunny]

Though 100% accurate.

[Dauphin]

By analogy, the argument that you can avoid income tax by not earning more than £4,615 per year is 100% accurate. Its not really a good argument for claiming that income tax isn't really a tax.

[Bereta_Eder]

The BBC is a decent medium. That doesn't mean it's always objective or even that it always tries to be or that it's devoided of the provincial british (or any other country's) character or that it always has caught the whole picture. But most of the time it does.

Its reporters seem to be relatively good at their work. And it does have an admirable independance. For example the state chanels traditionally will follow the government line and it's the job of some of the private chanels to "act" as opposition.

However it does follow an "Aglosaxon" point of view and writing (I wonder why, can't escape it, they invented it) in its way of viewing everything from economics to politics. But the good thing is, its inherent culture of as much objectivity as possible maybe doesn't let this aglosaxon aspect get the better of it to the point it will critically influence its perspective.

All in all a decent medium althoug no match for Le Monde Diplomatique but this isn't its mission I think.

It also gets lots of points for having an innovative character and to a large degree independence and in depth look based on simple trusted pluralism to the matters that "catch" its attention from what it looks like.

[DanS]

Like Crunch, I think that's making a distinction in the absence of a difference, at least for my purposes.

As for the other stuff that the BBC does, the world is even more full of commercial and donation-driven choices in these areas than in news. The BBC has the unfair advantage of a captive funding source.

As for adding value to the nation, I think that the BBC can add a lot of value, even if it is broken up or its funding sources change. Why are you being so conservative about this?