Save our BBC!
Posted by: Kevin-W on 26 February 2010
Read this
If this story - which, let us not forget, emanates from a Murdoch paper, but which feels like the kind of panicked move Mark Thompson/BBC Trust would make - has any truth in it, then we have a national scandal on our hands.
The closure of 6 Music sticks in my craw particularly, as it represents the best of the BBC. It plays some really interesting music (on shows like Cocker, Garvey, Stuart Maconie's Freak Zone, Don Letts, the Funk & Soul Show etc) that you won't hear anywhere else and certainly not on the feeble format radio emanating from the commercial sector.
I think this is the other scandalous element - the commercial broadcasters (radio and TV) along with their friends in other media have been whingeing for years about the "unfair competition" posed by the BBC. The problem they have is that in their pursuit of mammon and the quick buck, they've forgotten about the viewers and listeners. The BBC is too good. So, rather than the commercial sector getting off its arse
and improve itself, the BBC must be sacrificed.
If the Beeb should be closing anything, it's the godawful "yoof" channel BBC3, home to some of the most dreadful comedies of recent years.
Mark Thompson is fast becoming one of the worst DGs in BBC history.
Not only is he vastly overpaid, and hugely disrespectful of hard-pressed licence payers with his crass expense claims, but he is utterly craven towards bullying politicians who aren't even in power yet.
The BBC is the only truly world-class brand this country has, and is by far our most important cultural institution. It deserves a better man than Thompson at the helm.
I'm absolutely fuming!
If this story - which, let us not forget, emanates from a Murdoch paper, but which feels like the kind of panicked move Mark Thompson/BBC Trust would make - has any truth in it, then we have a national scandal on our hands.
The closure of 6 Music sticks in my craw particularly, as it represents the best of the BBC. It plays some really interesting music (on shows like Cocker, Garvey, Stuart Maconie's Freak Zone, Don Letts, the Funk & Soul Show etc) that you won't hear anywhere else and certainly not on the feeble format radio emanating from the commercial sector.
I think this is the other scandalous element - the commercial broadcasters (radio and TV) along with their friends in other media have been whingeing for years about the "unfair competition" posed by the BBC. The problem they have is that in their pursuit of mammon and the quick buck, they've forgotten about the viewers and listeners. The BBC is too good. So, rather than the commercial sector getting off its arse
and improve itself, the BBC must be sacrificed.
If the Beeb should be closing anything, it's the godawful "yoof" channel BBC3, home to some of the most dreadful comedies of recent years.
Mark Thompson is fast becoming one of the worst DGs in BBC history.
Not only is he vastly overpaid, and hugely disrespectful of hard-pressed licence payers with his crass expense claims, but he is utterly craven towards bullying politicians who aren't even in power yet.
The BBC is the only truly world-class brand this country has, and is by far our most important cultural institution. It deserves a better man than Thompson at the helm.
I'm absolutely fuming!
Posted on: 26 February 2010 by gone
I saw this too, and immediately became suspicious that it was Murdoch spin. I hope it's not true - 6 Music plays a lot of interesting stuff, and, although I'm not a listener, I'm sure the Asian Network has value.
When Dave gets in, his cosy alliance with Murdoch will not help either.
Maybe I am in the minority, but I think my licence fee is one of the best value-for-money items in my expenditure - it's less than half a Powerline!
Cheers
John
When Dave gets in, his cosy alliance with Murdoch will not help either.
Maybe I am in the minority, but I think my licence fee is one of the best value-for-money items in my expenditure - it's less than half a Powerline!
Cheers
John
Posted on: 26 February 2010 by mongo
Gentlemen.
At the risk of incurring some formidable wrath here, I beleive the BBC to which you refer died a fair old while ago.
It now appears much the same as the excretable 'competition' but with an enormous and guaranteed income.
At the risk of incurring some formidable wrath here, I beleive the BBC to which you refer died a fair old while ago.
It now appears much the same as the excretable 'competition' but with an enormous and guaranteed income.
Posted on: 26 February 2010 by Officer DBL
I pay the TV licence as I have no choice but to do so, however I don't watch the BBC channels that often and my radio listening consists of the occasional Radio 4 show during my drive home. On this basis the licence fee does not seem value for money in my experience and household.
This week on the BBC News website we have been introduced to the word "Tobogganers" and today we are informed that a ship "crashed" into a jetty. I much prefer the use of "Tobogganists" to describe those who court death in a toboggan and as for ships, they have collisions with jetties; they do not crash into them. It occurs to me that a better use of my licence fee would be to provide the BBC's web copy writers with an Oxford English Dictionary than to line the pockets of the Jonathan Rosses of this world.
In the programming arena, I hate it when scheduled series programmes are postponed for a week or two to permit sports coverage. I would much prefer the BBC to leave BBC1 programming schedule intact and ruin the BBC2 scheduling with sports coverage; not all of us are sports fans or specifically, football fans.
Maybe the BBC is a throwback to an earlier time and in the new world order, perhaps it ought to compete with the commercial stations and let us keep the licence fee in our own pockets. I am not convinced the world is going to end the moment the BBC ceases to exist but I am sure that I have better uses for the licence fee money. Certainly I am unmoved when it is announced that minority interest radio channels are to be axed. OK some may argue that axing such channels is the thin end of the wedge and ought to be the source of righteuous moral indignation, but when the wedge in question is made of mouldy out of date cheese, well, the incentive isn't there is it?
B
This week on the BBC News website we have been introduced to the word "Tobogganers" and today we are informed that a ship "crashed" into a jetty. I much prefer the use of "Tobogganists" to describe those who court death in a toboggan and as for ships, they have collisions with jetties; they do not crash into them. It occurs to me that a better use of my licence fee would be to provide the BBC's web copy writers with an Oxford English Dictionary than to line the pockets of the Jonathan Rosses of this world.
In the programming arena, I hate it when scheduled series programmes are postponed for a week or two to permit sports coverage. I would much prefer the BBC to leave BBC1 programming schedule intact and ruin the BBC2 scheduling with sports coverage; not all of us are sports fans or specifically, football fans.
Maybe the BBC is a throwback to an earlier time and in the new world order, perhaps it ought to compete with the commercial stations and let us keep the licence fee in our own pockets. I am not convinced the world is going to end the moment the BBC ceases to exist but I am sure that I have better uses for the licence fee money. Certainly I am unmoved when it is announced that minority interest radio channels are to be axed. OK some may argue that axing such channels is the thin end of the wedge and ought to be the source of righteuous moral indignation, but when the wedge in question is made of mouldy out of date cheese, well, the incentive isn't there is it?
B
Posted on: 26 February 2010 by Mike-B
If you have been following the digital britain & swith off FM fiasco, you might have seen this coming as a possible scenario.
Interesting that no one in BBC has so far made a noise about this link.
Interesting also is it is claimed it will release funds to improve quality in other areas. DAB-Quality ?? hmm
A space to watch as I am sure this has some way to go
Interesting that no one in BBC has so far made a noise about this link.
Interesting also is it is claimed it will release funds to improve quality in other areas. DAB-Quality ?? hmm
A space to watch as I am sure this has some way to go
Posted on: 26 February 2010 by mongo
Officer DBL.
Sir, I do wish I'd written that.
Sir, I do wish I'd written that.
Posted on: 26 February 2010 by Officer DBL
Posted on: 26 February 2010 by gone
....David Bowie issued a statement saying: "6 Music keeps the spirit of broadcasters like John Peel alive and for new artists to lose this station would be a great shame."....
Inclined to agree
Inclined to agree
Posted on: 26 February 2010 by Kevin-W
quote:Originally posted by Officer DBL:
I pay the TV licence as I have no choice but to do so, however I don't watch the BBC channels that often and my radio listening consists of the occasional Radio 4 show during my drive home. On this basis the licence fee does not seem value for money in my experience and household.
This week on the BBC News website we have been introduced to the word "Tobogganers" and today we are informed that a ship "crashed" into a jetty. I much prefer the use of "Tobogganists" to describe those who court death in a toboggan and as for ships, they have collisions with jetties; they do not crash into them. It occurs to me that a better use of my licence fee would be to provide the BBC's web copy writers with an Oxford English Dictionary than to line the pockets of the Jonathan Rosses of this world.
In the programming arena, I hate it when scheduled series programmes are postponed for a week or two to permit sports coverage. I would much prefer the BBC to leave BBC1 programming schedule intact and ruin the BBC2 scheduling with sports coverage; not all of us are sports fans or specifically, football fans.
Maybe the BBC is a throwback to an earlier time and in the new world order, perhaps it ought to compete with the commercial stations and let us keep the licence fee in our own pockets. I am not convinced the world is going to end the moment the BBC ceases to exist but I am sure that I have better uses for the licence fee money. Certainly I am unmoved when it is announced that minority interest radio channels are to be axed. OK some may argue that axing such channels is the thin end of the wedge and ought to be the source of righteuous moral indignation, but when the wedge in question is made of mouldy out of date cheese, well, the incentive isn't there is it?
B
Sorry Officer, but that is rubbish. You are taking a very narrow, and if I might say, small-minded view. I don't have children, but I am perfectly happy to pay for other kids' education. It benefits society. As does the BBC.
The BBC is the most important cultural institution in the UK. Nobody else supports music (and classical and new music particularly), for example, as much as the Beeb. It is also an important innovator - NICAM, hi-def (in the 1930s sense of 425 lines) TV, the iPlayer - all things that may never have happened (or happened much later) if it had been left purely to the market.
Leaving aside ITV and Channel 4 (and perhaps Five) the commercial broadcasters (radio especially) find it difficult to compete with the BBC not because the BBC has an unfair advantage, but because it's mostly garbage. Rather than the commercial sector getting better and raising its standards, the BBC, which still - despite the dreck on BBC3 - still provides most of the nation's quality broadcasting.
You can always measure someone by the quality of their enemies. Amoong those lined up against the BBC (the only world-class, world-famous brand this country still possesses) are: Rupert Murdoch - pays no tax in the UK, yet attempts to dictate UK media policy; Lord Rothermere and Paul Dacre - owner and editor respectively of a low-life newspaper; various vested interests including the commercial radio lobby, who have alienated listeners by the imposition of bland format radio; Officer DBL, who doesn't like snooker overrunning or tobogganers; Richard Desmond, a porn baron; and so on.
Far from Auntie being a throwback to an earlier era, I would argue it is more necessary than ever. Certainly, the licence fee is increasingly difficult to justify in this multi-channel era, but it still remains the best solution to a difficult problem.
The cultural life of this country - and indeed the rest of the world - would be a lot less rich without the Beeb. Long live the BBC I say!
Kx
PS - someone started a "Save 6 Music" group on Facebook this morning. It already has 60,000+ members. So somebody cares.
Posted on: 26 February 2010 by Joe Bibb
quote:Originally posted by Kevin-W:
Sorry Officer, but that is rubbish. You are taking a very narrow, and if I might say, small-minded view. I don't have children, but I am perfectly happy to pay for other kids' education. It benefits society. As does the BBC.
The BBC is the most important cultural institution in the UK. Nobody else supports music (and classical and new music particularly), for example, as much as the Beeb. It is also an important innovator - NICAM, hi-def (in the 1930s sense of 425 lines) TV, the iPlayer - all things that may never have happened (or happened much later) if it had been left purely to the market.
Leaving aside ITV and Channel 4 (and perhaps Five) the commercial broadcasters (radio especially) find it difficult to compete with the BBC not because the BBC has an unfair advantage, but because it's mostly garbage. Rather than the commercial sector getting better and raising its standards, the BBC, which still - despite the dreck on BBC3 - still provides most of the nation's quality broadcasting.
You can always measure someone by the quality of their enemies. Amoong those lined up against the BBC (the only world-class, world-famous brand this country still possesses) are: Rupert Murdoch - pays no tax in the UK, yet attempts to dictate UK media policy; Lord Rothermere and Paul Dacre - owner and editor respectively of a low-life newspaper; various vested interests including the commercial radio lobby, who have alienated listeners by the imposition of bland format radio; Officer DBL, who doesn't like snooker overrunning or tobogganers; Richard Desmond, a porn baron; and so on.
Far from Auntie being a throwback to an earlier era, I would argue it is more necessary than ever. Certainly, the licence fee is increasingly difficult to justify in this multi-channel era, but it still remains the best solution to a difficult problem.
The cultural life of this country - and indeed the rest of the world - would be a lot less rich without the Beeb. Long live the BBC I say!
Kx
PS - someone started a "Save 6 Music" group on Facebook this morning. It already has 60,000+ members. So somebody cares.
Well said. The breadth of BBC output is outstanding, whether TV, radio or online. The dumbing down is to be regretted. But make no mistake, that is entirely led by commercial broadcasting.
Murdoch can only dream of the quality that the BBC manage. Which is why his rags are used to peddle mischief at every opportunity. I don't watch everything the BBC outputs - but that is the whole point.
Joe
Posted on: 26 February 2010 by Jet Johnson
quote:Far from Auntie being a throwback to an earlier era, I would argue it is more necessary than ever. Certainly, the licence fee is increasingly difficult to justify in this multi-channel era, but it still remains the best solution to a difficult problem.
The cultural life of this country - and indeed the rest of the world - would be a lot less rich without the Beeb. Long live the BBC I say!
Well said! ...I used to wonder if it was just myself who (generally) admired the beeb in all it's various forms so it gladden's my heart to realise others are of a similar opinion.
I also worry about the constant attacks on the BBC's web presence ...I've had BBC News as my homepage since I first accessed T'internet and rely on the beeb's web pages for solid useful info amongst the flotsom and jetsom of the other providers, I hear that the beeb have already agreed to scale down their various sites ..why?
I think we like-minded folk have a battle on our hands .......
Posted on: 26 February 2010 by graham55
I shall be meeting Mark Thompson at a College Reunion next month. Anyone have anything that they'd like me to pass on?
Posted on: 26 February 2010 by David Scott
Kevin W is right on the money here. The other point to pnder is how we feel about political and current affairs broadcasting being under control of a few very rich men.
On the original point though, BBC Blast do a fantastic roadshow across the country putting on free high quality arts and media workshops for young people. It'll be a great shame if this goes.
On the original point though, BBC Blast do a fantastic roadshow across the country putting on free high quality arts and media workshops for young people. It'll be a great shame if this goes.
Posted on: 26 February 2010 by Kevin-W
quote:Originally posted by graham55:
I shall be meeting Mark Thompson at a College Reunion next month. Anyone have anything that they'd like me to pass on?
Where would you like me to start?
Ask him why he's so unwilling to fight for the organisation he heads? Ask him why BBC3 exists, and why the dismal "Two Pints of Lager and a Packet of Crisps" keeps getting recommissioned? Ask him if he's proud to be the worst DG in living memory, even worse than John Birt?
Etc.
Posted on: 27 February 2010 by JMB
The existence of the BBC is one of the reasons it is so great to live in this country. The idea of turning over all broadcasting to the commercial operators like Murdoch with their vested interests is an anathema to those of us who can't stand advertising and junk in our programmes. Who wants American style radio and TV ?
Keep the licence fee - it is fantastic value for money.
Of course the BBC's income must be well managed and waste cut out but the principle of the licence fee should remain.
Mike
Keep the licence fee - it is fantastic value for money.
Of course the BBC's income must be well managed and waste cut out but the principle of the licence fee should remain.
Mike
Posted on: 27 February 2010 by mongo
quote:Originally posted by Michael Brian:
The existence of the BBC is one of the reasons it is so great to live in this country. The idea of turning over all broadcasting to the commercial operators like Murdoch with their vested interests is an anathema to those of us who can't stand advertising and junk in our programmes. Who wants American style radio and TV ?
Keep the licence fee - it is fantastic value for money.
Of course the BBC's income must be well managed and waste cut out but the principle of the licence fee should remain.
Mike
Hi Mike.
That's all very well, but there is no sign of cutting the monstrous waste or even of reasonable resource management. It's also difficult to see where or when there will be when they are simply handed enormous wads gratis.
Paul.
Posted on: 27 February 2010 by Richard S
Well said Kevin.
I agree with all your points.
An organisation as large as the BBC is bound to put stuff out that I (or anyone else) doesn't like; I don't mind that in the least providing they cater for my tastes somewhere along the line.
In the last 2 weeks I have enjoyed and learnt from programming as diverse as this;
Natural World BBC2
Mad Men BBC4
The Corridors of Power BBC4
Radcliffe & Maconie R2
Marc Riley 6music
Steve Lamacq 6music
I hope to be able to continue to enjoy this level of quality in the future. I've added my voice to the Facebook campaign; 66,773 members and counting.
I agree with all your points.
An organisation as large as the BBC is bound to put stuff out that I (or anyone else) doesn't like; I don't mind that in the least providing they cater for my tastes somewhere along the line.
In the last 2 weeks I have enjoyed and learnt from programming as diverse as this;
Natural World BBC2
Mad Men BBC4
The Corridors of Power BBC4
Radcliffe & Maconie R2
Marc Riley 6music
Steve Lamacq 6music
I hope to be able to continue to enjoy this level of quality in the future. I've added my voice to the Facebook campaign; 66,773 members and counting.
Posted on: 27 February 2010 by JMB
quote:That's all very well, but there is no sign of cutting the monstrous waste or even of reasonable resource management. It's also difficult to see where or when there will be when they are simply handed enormous wads gratis.
Paul,
Fine - let's sort out the management. Put in a better DG and board but let's not throw out the baby with the bath water.
The principle of retaining the Beeb's independence in programme making has served us well over the years and must be protected from narrow commercial interests.
Mike
Posted on: 27 February 2010 by tonym
The thought of the BBC going the way of the commercial stations fills me with horror. The innovative approach some of the latter demonstrated in the past has been dumbed down and reduced to the lowest common denominator by the needs of the advertisers.
The likes of Murdoch look at the audiences the BBC gets with envious eyes and the media barons never overlook an opportunity to push out negative propaganda about them.
Sure there's much I dislike in their prodigious output and they're undoubtedly not as efficient as they should be but you've only got to travel elsewhere in the world to appreciate just how good the Beeb really is.
I've added my support to the Facebook campaign.
The likes of Murdoch look at the audiences the BBC gets with envious eyes and the media barons never overlook an opportunity to push out negative propaganda about them.
Sure there's much I dislike in their prodigious output and they're undoubtedly not as efficient as they should be but you've only got to travel elsewhere in the world to appreciate just how good the Beeb really is.
I've added my support to the Facebook campaign.
Posted on: 27 February 2010 by mongo
quote:Originally posted by Michael Brian:quote:That's all very well, but there is no sign of cutting the monstrous waste or even of reasonable resource management. It's also difficult to see where or when there will be when they are simply handed enormous wads gratis.
Paul,
Fine - let's sort out the management. Put in a better DG and board but let's not throw out the baby with the bath water.
The principle of retaining the Beeb's independence in programme making has served us well over the years and must be protected from narrow commercial interests.
Mike
Hi Mike.
I agree that some of the BBC's output is world class. I also think it very obvious that an awful lot is simply dross.
A new DG and Board is clearly necessary but, I think, insufficient.
I would also like to state that I have no idea what the answer may be.
My problem with the sprawling mess is that as vfm it is simply a non starter.
Anually, Four thousand million pounds (plus)is a lot of money. I think it would do no harm for more people to ponder that number; especially those that spend it and those that keep voting it.
Posted on: 27 February 2010 by JamieL_v2
Having worked on BBC productions, as well as ITV and films, I would say that unlike independents the BBC feels like a part of the civil service that happens to make Television and radio programmes.
Consequently there is a lot of organisation, some/much waste, nepotism and dead wood. All that is negative, but any organisation as big as that has that.
On the positive side the BBC makes some of the best programming in the world.
Try comparing the BBC news with Fox news if you have both stations, one is news, and one is biased opinion.
If you look at any station, television or radio, you will find a large amount of its output to be of no interest to you, and it is easy to then consider that as poor quality content. Some of it is, but much is just what you do not like.
I do agree that the BBC have commissioned, and bizarrely re-commissioned "Two Pints of Lager and a Packet of Crisps" and from the same team the most puerile show I have ever seen "Coming of Age" (which I watched in disbelief as I had previously worked with two of the cast), but on the positive side over the years the BBC has made, or co-produced:
BBC News and documentaries.
Horizon
Life on Earth and all the ensuing wildlife documentaries
QI
Band of Brothers
Wimbledon Tennis
Radio 4 as a whole, or specifically, documentaries, arts programmes, News Quiz, Just a Minute, I'm Sorry I haven't a Clue.
The Proms
BBC Sessions
and that is just off the top of my head.
ITV is dying, no more drama to be made, just soaps, games shows and reality. Sky is starting to make some good dramas, and improving, but does not scratch the surface of the quality output of the BBC.
Channel four is a pale shadow of its formers self, and Channel five, I don't actually know what Channel 5 is, it used to show US sports at night.
Frankly for the cost we pay the BBC is bargain, not perfect, but about as good as it gets.
Consequently there is a lot of organisation, some/much waste, nepotism and dead wood. All that is negative, but any organisation as big as that has that.
On the positive side the BBC makes some of the best programming in the world.
Try comparing the BBC news with Fox news if you have both stations, one is news, and one is biased opinion.
If you look at any station, television or radio, you will find a large amount of its output to be of no interest to you, and it is easy to then consider that as poor quality content. Some of it is, but much is just what you do not like.
I do agree that the BBC have commissioned, and bizarrely re-commissioned "Two Pints of Lager and a Packet of Crisps" and from the same team the most puerile show I have ever seen "Coming of Age" (which I watched in disbelief as I had previously worked with two of the cast), but on the positive side over the years the BBC has made, or co-produced:
BBC News and documentaries.
Horizon
Life on Earth and all the ensuing wildlife documentaries
QI
Band of Brothers
Wimbledon Tennis
Radio 4 as a whole, or specifically, documentaries, arts programmes, News Quiz, Just a Minute, I'm Sorry I haven't a Clue.
The Proms
BBC Sessions
and that is just off the top of my head.
ITV is dying, no more drama to be made, just soaps, games shows and reality. Sky is starting to make some good dramas, and improving, but does not scratch the surface of the quality output of the BBC.
Channel four is a pale shadow of its formers self, and Channel five, I don't actually know what Channel 5 is, it used to show US sports at night.
Frankly for the cost we pay the BBC is bargain, not perfect, but about as good as it gets.
Posted on: 27 February 2010 by mongo
Hi Jamie.
All good points, but it's hard to see how £4,300,000,000 (2007) is considered a bargain. And I certainly hope it is not really as good as it gets. But I suspect that it is, hence my gloomy posts on the matter.
Also, BBC news really is nothing special. I find it largely trite to the point of shameful.
I haven't measured it (because I don't know how to) but I suspect the average 'soundbite' has become even shorter over recent years. The whole effort seems patronising, if not insulting.
That it is better than Fox or Sky is praise only because they are even worse.
Paul.
All good points, but it's hard to see how £4,300,000,000 (2007) is considered a bargain. And I certainly hope it is not really as good as it gets. But I suspect that it is, hence my gloomy posts on the matter.
Also, BBC news really is nothing special. I find it largely trite to the point of shameful.
I haven't measured it (because I don't know how to) but I suspect the average 'soundbite' has become even shorter over recent years. The whole effort seems patronising, if not insulting.
That it is better than Fox or Sky is praise only because they are even worse.
Paul.
Posted on: 27 February 2010 by JMB
quote:Frankly for the cost we pay the BBC is bargain, not perfect, but about as good as it gets.
Absolutely. £140 p.a., an incredible bargain.
Given what we audiophiles spend on our systems each year it is peanuts.
And my most used source ? - my Tuner tuned into Radio 3 or 4 most hours of the day.
Mike
Posted on: 27 February 2010 by El Guapo
If they cut 6 music then I won't be getting a Unitiqute because I won't need a DAB tuner. In fact I won't need an FM tuner either as there's nothing I ever lsiten to at home on FM.So in one sense it will save me a lot of money. The downside is that I will never get to listen to the radio
Posted on: 27 February 2010 by David Scott
quote:That it is better than Fox or Sky is praise only because they are even worse.
But it is better isn't it.
My concern isn't to do with your judgement of quality, it's to do with the possibility of a small number of rich men - who may not even set foot in this country - having control of broadcast news and using that control to support their own business interests.
Posted on: 27 February 2010 by JamieL_v2
quote:Originally posted by David Scott?:quote:That it is better than Fox or Sky is praise only because they are even worse.
But it is better isn't it.
My concern isn't to do with your judgement of quality, it's to do with the possibility of a small number of rich men - who may not even set foot in this country - having control of broadcast news and using that control to support their own business interests.
I would say that Sky News is only as good as it is because they have the BBC News to compete with. I would agree that the 6 and 9 O'clock news are not what they were at times in the past, but with programmes like Newsnight there is the quality if you do want it.
Channel 4 News do also manage that quality, and interestingly I know that fifteen years ago that was one of the most expensive advertising slots, far more than Coronation Street (lower viewing figures, but far, far higher disposabel income per viewer). So quality can be made to pay.
I am sure figures for the cost of making television can be found, but again out of date, but ten years ago, 1 hour of cheap TV, games shows, studio chat cost around £60,000 to make, drama from around £120,000. £4,300,000,000 for four TV channels, two of 24hours, a 24 news service, 5 or more 24 hour radio stations, international news bureaus, it does go pretty quickly.
David is quite right, the bottom line is we really do not want to be only hearing the television news from what someone like Rupert Murdock wants us to hear.