BBC license fee



As sad as it is, it also needs to massively trim staff and share resource across departments.

I wouldn't disagree with this for all i'm in favour of the licence fee. It's not like there is a shortage of people who want to be on TV and radio and there would be a mile long queue of people willing to do Chris Evans' or Graham Norton's job for a fraction of the cost.
 
Having lived in the states , the tv was crap so , spent more time reading and listening to music , Sunday's listening to Jonny Walker on catch up , after the pub, was glad to get back to the BBC, watched blue planet on BBC America, was shit full of adverts, binned sky because the price kept going up so they could pay more for football , and as I don't watch football didn't see why I should pay more to watch got.
 
I don't mind the license fee however their Radio structure needs a radical overhaul.

Radio 1 - More bothered about their You Tube hits and pandering to kids.
Radio 2 - Stuck in an time warp and loses a large chunk of the 29-39 demographic to commercial radio. Get rid of the 1980's/90's R1 presenters for starters.
Radio 3 - I've not met anyone who listens to it.
Radio 4 - Excellent station but too close to 5 Live, merge with Radio 3 and fix the 25-39 demographic output with new output.
5 Live - Remain as is
6 Music - Sort of leave it as it, it can be too far up its own arse at times but has some great output.

BBC Local Radio - the least said the better. They can change the name of BBC Newcastle for starters.

You don't need a TV license for a radio so that's irrelevant.
 
I'm very pro BBC and think it's great value for money and personality think it makes programs that no other broadcaster would touch. But whenever these threads come up it always seems to fall down to how good the radio output is, the quality of the journalism (all sides will argue that its biased) and Attenborough. Maybe it is time to change although I'm in no rush.

Maybe the radio could become a non profit organisation which relies on grants and minimal advertising, the main stations should be subscription based. I have no idea how you would protect the impartial news output though.
 
I'm very pro BBC and think it's great value for money and personality think it makes programs that no other broadcaster would touch. But whenever these threads come up it always seems to fall down to how good the radio output is, the quality of the journalism (all sides will argue that its biased) and Attenborough. Maybe it is time to change although I'm in no rush.

Maybe the radio could become a non profit organisation which relies on grants and minimal advertising, the main stations should be subscription based. I have no idea how you would protect the impartial news output though.
Bhahahaha
 
Difficult to argue with any of that. Bit harsh on the local stations side of things, but I only have BBC Radio Mancheter as a pre-set incase City or United are playing and they have it on and I'm driving and fancy listening to it.
That's a pretty rare occurrence mind you. And if I had DAB in the car, I'd have 5Live or one of the others on

There's no reason that the BBC should be paying for BBC Manchester (where I used to work) and 5 Live to have commentary rights - with separate staff covering both games on different station - it's insane and this massive waste of cash would never happen in the commercial sector - the resource should be shared!

The local stations are horrid - expensive and staffed generally by people who shouldn't ever be on the radio. They try to be all things to all people and end up being nothing to anybody really. Closing them down would be harsh - but they need to identify what they stand for - probably what is the gap left by the local commercials.

Radio 2 may the 2nd or 3rd largest but there is still a demographic gap between itself and Radio 1. Radio 1 is 15 to 29 while Radio 2 is supposed to be 35 and above. I'm 38 and I can't stand Radio 2, it's like gods waiting room at times. I'll switch to 5 live, 6 music and sometimes (albeit very rarely) Radio 4 for for the comedy shows, that all said I don't have a default go to radio station with the BBC. 10 years ago it was Radio 1, without question.

While I take do take your other points, there is definitely scope to deliver more focused programming meeting the needs of population at a reduced budget.

I'm 36 and love radio 2. There specialist stuff is world class - the daytime is catchall, and can understand why you don't like it. But get rid of the dinosaurs on air and you'd love it - at 38 I imagine you don't care about 60+ Ken Bruce, 60+ Steve Wright etc. They will eventually - and by then Zoe Ball will be gone from Breakfast and it will become a colossus of station.

I wouldn't disagree with this for all i'm in favour of the licence fee. It's not like there is a shortage of people who want to be on TV and radio and there would be a mile long queue of people willing to do Chris Evans' or Graham Norton's job for a fraction of the cost.

Yes but you get what you pay for.

Like them or not, they're both very talented and generate a massive audience.

Pay less, you get Dave Double Decks from Local FM - and when that happens on decent sized stations, they really stand out as being shit.

I'm not sure that Radio 3 and Classic FM are direct competitors, although both play classical music. That's like saying that Heartbeat and The Wire are similar because both are dramas featuring the police.

They've identified their niche - Classic could never afford to go highbrow because it couldn't generate an audience. R3 couldn't go mainstream because people would kick off. It's a win win for the commercial and public sector.

The reason they are competitors is because Classic could go highbrow if they wanted within the realms of their license - they'd just be fools to do that.
 
Last edited:
And I will make it clear to you that you don't need a TV license if you only have a radio and no equipment capable of watching BBC TV.
I am totally aware of that, and have been for many years. I even made that clear to you a few posts ago.

The discussion is about the license fee which and how it is funded. Any change in funding would have an affect on TV and Radio.

It's honestly like having a discussion with a small child.
 
I’m a fan of the BBC but the amount of money wasted is scandoulous. Take the last World Cup. The amount of reporters and news presenters out there was mental.

5 live must have had about 100 staff alone.
 
I’m a fan of the BBC but the amount of money wasted is scandoulous. Take the last World Cup. The amount of reporters and news presenters out there was mental.

5 live must have had about 100 staff alone.
You're right but they do have superb coverage. The 5-Live coverage of the London Olympics was my favourite 2 weeks of radio, there would have been hundreds working on that.
 

Back
Top