h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

The Tory government in the UK are seeking to neutralise one of the perennial thorns in their side - the BBC. For many years they have perceived the corporation as being run by a bunch of pinko homosexuals who peddle their Marxist propaganda at every opportunity.

As the BBC's been established by a Royal Commission they can't just shut the thing down, however they can get its charter reviewed every ten years. That time is now.

BBC viewers and listeners are represented by a bunch of grey-haired people known as the BBC Trust, and they have kicked off a public consultation. They have invited the public to air their views here:

http://consultations.external.bbc.co.uk/bbc/tomorrows-bbc

I'd like to respond on the lines of the BBC remaining a loosely-regulated creative organisation free from the influence of the government of the day, but I'd like to hear the views of the h2g2 community too.

What kind of BBC do you want to see in the future?

I'm an American, but I must say that the shift to an isolationist stance with BBC since the conservative regime got into power is disturbing.

BBC's international efforts have been potent builders of good will for the UK.

Not so extreme a case as say the German isolationism of the pre WW I era which doomed the German war effort of the period, but disturbing, especially since it extends to endorsement of internal separatism within the UK.

I'm pretty much happy with the BBC as it is.

I see the problem mainly as a matter of how it is funded. Currently my license costs me £3 per week (ish)and that funds radio (local and national), TV from news through the Clangers to Norrell and Strange and a whole lot of web content.

I have never understood the objection to paying the license fee. It is worth it just to keep adverts off the screen. If you subscribe to Sky not only does it cost MORE than the BBC but you get to watch adverts too but people seem to fall for this time after time.

I am concerned about PPV for the BBC since I can't see how that can be made to work with radio - my car and little DAB radios would be difficult to track.

I probably listen to more radio than I watch TV. I think that radio is pretty cheap to produce compared to TV. My pensioner neighbours watch masses more TV than I do so I am probably subsidising them. that's fine by me.

Perhaps the best option is to beef up the mechanisms that protect it from government and fund out of general taxation. That's not going to happen under this government.

PP.

Change.org or www.change.org

I agree to do this I would you start a petition on Change, it is an online world wide petition organisation.

The results have been excellent they have changed government policy in countries such as France and Germany on some very serious human rights issues.
Stopped individuals becoming victims of state bureaucracy, and brought Google to heel with a world wide campaign to prevent an alteration of their public domain platform.

The BBC is of worldwide importance and support for his issue will also be worldwide. See what you think

Something that came up near the beginning of the current administration, BBC content being blocked for foreign internet circulation.

Not very sensible and policy on this has been significantly relaxed again since.

It's not my country, but I'd like to see a BBC that was a bit more neutral and not so obviously pro-government.

I'd also like to see less 'balance'. When you interview a sensible man on the street for his view, you don't have to also interview a complete loony 'for balance'.

In the States, the conservatives have been endlessly waging a similar battle against our public broadcasters, PBS and NPR, especially NPR.

They keep claiming liberal bias, but I think what disturbs them more is they are free from CORPORATE bias. It's not that they may take sides on a political topic, but that they may COVER stories that corporately owned and financed media will not, lest they bite the hand that feeds them. It's not the stance media outlets take but the selection of news stories they cover. The privately owned media outlets will feed you plenty of Kardashians, but never mention the stories of oil companies wantonly polluting nations in Western Africa and South America and buying off regulators and judges to keep doing so. Would you rather get news that Sells or Informs?

That's an interesting point, BG. It sounds like the sort of thing which might be behind this current issue with the BBC - a desire to make it more controllable by the corporations that fund the Tory Party.

And I agree entirely with Gnomon's point about the conspicuous 'balance' in reporting. But I'll take that if it means there's no creeping infiltration by corporates.

Well, a lot of that false equivalency serves those corporate interests. Just remember how the big tobacco companies and their PR teams disputed all claims that tobacco caused cancer. Many of those same PR teams are now sending "experts" on to panel shows to dispute anthropogenic global warming for the benefit of the fossil fuel industry.

I love the fact that the BBC has some sort of independence, and when it's on form, it can make some of the best shows. Radio in particular is unparalleled.
However, I'm increasingly finding that commercial TV channels produce better stuff. Sometimes I look through iPlayer and find nothing of interest; endless history shows which all look the same, puerile BBC3 comedy, and of course, repeats.

Innovation is severely lacking, yet this is exactly the area it should excel in, given that it has no commercial sponsors to keep happy.

Too much government influence to innovate. Governments never innovate; they don't need to.

BBC payed by government. BBC not need to attract customers. BBC paycheck guaranteed. BBC have little motivation to innovate.

Ugh. Me, Tarzan. You, Jane.



Putting aside the whithertoos and the whyfores: Isn't trying to shut down the BBC sort of like, say.... poking a dragon in the eye?

The world watches the BBC, Britain's best propaganda

I'm currently listening to the BBC World newscast on my local NPR radio and 90% of the stories will not air on the evening news on my TV. Folks in the US typically never hear any news that doesn't directly effect the US. (No matter how many died in a plane crash or ferry sinking, the big question is how many Americans were on board. None? Then who cares!?)

Yeah, I don't pay a license fee, but I'd be very saddened if the BBC was privatized or shut down.

The fact is that all political parties in the UK complain about the bias of the BBC Which to my mind proves the BBC is doing a good job..Frankly it IS NOT broken so it doesn't need fixing.

The main reason so many complain about the licence fee is the perennial one of expecting to get something for next to nothing.

If the BBC disappears Murdoch and his ilk are free to peddle their version of events and issues and gain even more influence over British politics than they do already.

The BBC has a global news coverage, but its TV news is not particularly internationalist, editorially, although some of its radio shows come closer ( like 'From Our Own Correspondent)

The best Internationalist news in the UK is Channel Four News (provided by ITN, a commercial organisation).

The BBC news channel goes international after midnight..

I get most of my news, excepting local events, over BBCA on SiriusXM radio, which also carries CNN and NBC.

CNN and NBC carry next to nothing in international journalistic reporting, while BBCA is superlative.

Bob:"The world watches the BBC, Britain's best propaganda"

That´s what I thought when I couldn´t access to many contents of the cbeebies ( I use them for my pupils) or when I found that some pages had been supressed, like one on Nature and schools. H2 wasn´t the only branch cut those days.

I see the BBC as a great ecosystem, every creature matters, with the cuts, BBC is loosing biodiversity, richness, colour, life...

and money . Imagine how many teachers out of Britain can use the BBC as a resource bank of varied contents. There are a lot of items that can be sold, like books, toys.... related to the contents children out of Britain see. And there are more fields other than teaching.



The time when there has been more freedom and success for the public spanish radio and tv, was during the last socialist period of Zapatero. No adverts, and most important, the director was consensuated by all parties. RTVE,(radio televisión española) received several international prizes during that period.

Now, the conservatives behave as expected, suppressed a consensuated director the public tv is just a propaganda tool for the government.

Do schools still use recorded BBC programmes instead of teaching to allow teachers time to go off for a fly fag and a gossip?

Open University did that too.

But as I was teaching myself, I set them running, then took the opportunity to pop out for a break.