Happy 90th Birthday!

+1

In addition, any organisation that brings us Susan Rae, Harriet Cass, the sainted Charlotte Green and Corrie Corfield can't be all bad.

Or do you see it as a black and white world? (edit: er, quite clearly you do, so no need to answer, not that it will stop you!)

Chris

Would you include the BBC World Service in this?

( He asked rhetorically )

Also, we are not subsidising those malcontents and miscreants abroad who want the Beeb for free. This is what BBC Worldwide is for.

"BBC Worldwide, the commercial arm of the BBC, is a fast-growing media and entertainment company. Our mission is to maximise profits on behalf of the BBC bycreating, acquiring, developing and exploiting media content and media brands around the world. We are self-funded and return profits to the BBC to be reinvested in programmes and services to help keep the UK licence fee as low as possible."

I am pretty sure they make money from both re-selling content / production and advertising on their own channels too.

In 2011/12 their revenue was £1085m and profit £155m. Sounds alright?

The despicable Saville apparently had an office at Leeds hospital.

Shut down the NHS?

Dear Adam,

The World Service was formerly financed from general Taxation via the F&CO.

Now it financed from the UK Television License fee. Obviously the Foreign Office does not consider it justified to finance the World Service from the general Tax take, and neither do I as it happens. I also think it unjustified to run the World Service on the UK TV License fee, and I would have closed it down when the F&CO decided to withdraw the funding. The World Service has now left Bush House in the Strand, and there was no reason to actually move it at all. Better to have disbanded it when the Bush House site was given up.

That was before this scandal, and yes I would love to see the World Service removed from being a burden on UK residents.

So to answer your question, "Yes!"

ATB from George

I am lost for words...

Sister xx

As I said on another thread Sis, it's a good job George has no say in broadcasting policy.

I suspect that his, er, eccentric views are not just out of step with most UK members of this forum, but, I'd wager, most of Blighty's citizens.

or any other area of public policy....Im sure these views would find favour across the Atlantic...

Sister xx

George, the BBC World Service is not financed from the license fee. Funding comes from the Foreign Office and is subject to cutbacks. They may withdraw part or all funding in 2014.

Clearly part of the role of the service is in the national interest. It is now selling advertising on its websites (through which many listen). It will also act as a leader into other paid-for content from BBC Worldwide. With a weekly audience north of 150 million is canning it the right thing? Maybe better to develop ways to finance it. Sell external PSU's to listeners for example.

PS If we must shut something, what about IKEA?  http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-20356945

Dear Mark,

The external Service of the BBC should be self-financing via subscription in my opinion if it is to continue at all, or the output could, in some instances, be licensed to and paid for by the government of the country where it is made available through the local broadcasting infrastructure, if that is thought to be a good thing in any country concerned.

The United Kingdom is no longer the centre of an empire, or even a significant economic or military power in Worldwide terms nowadays, and year by year the country becomes less of either of these.

What business is it of ours telling the rest of the World, the News according to the UK perspective? 

To cling to the notion that the World needs the World Service of the BBC is as outmoded a way of thinking as any other associated with attempting to maintain the influence that we had in the World until 1939 - for good or ill in many ways.

There are fine international News Agencies: For two examples, Reuters and Associated Press, who provide a good alternative in English. 

Gradually the foreign language services are being cut back as the local audiences move to home produced services. I think that the historic aspect to the Empire Service, the General Overseas Service and then the World Service of the BBC has been of extra-ordinary significance in the past, but the World is a changed place, where the UK has much less of significance to offer. 

ATB from George

That'll work.

(not)

Ciao Georgio

Agree with all points about diminishing role of UK. However, I do think we have some things which should be preserved rather than meekly accepting decline. At the opening of the recent Olympics (a success in both hosting and sporting terms) Danny Boyle highlighted the valued status of the NHS and our music culture. To this we might add other strong suits such as the BBC, literature, education, football, computing, bio-science and high-end manufacturing. Perhaps controversially at times, we're also a major centre for global financial trade. The point of this is not flag-waving so much as to say you don't just throw away the few things you do well. People around the world certainly recognise the Beeb as one of these.

On this and with regard to your specific point above, the 150m listeners are choosing to listen rather than being forced to do so. This is because there is value to them in the news from 'the UK perspective'. Perhaps their local news service is so limited / poor / corrupt / whatever? Equally, when I have seen alternative news broadcasts in hotel rooms like Fox News my brain has fallen out. I don't turn over to the Beeb for some banal patriotic comfort but simply because it is better. Something worth preserving if possible?

BR, Mark.

Of course it will not work!

That is my point.

The UK has been meddling in other countries' business for centuries until the Second World War [the last morally justifiable full scale war in my opinion] brought home the economic reality that we were no longer top nation! According to 1066 And All That, the US became top nation in 1918, which is arguably true!

If an overseas government wants the UK to meddle with its internal affairs then it will license the World Service. There will be no takers! Not one. Democratic or otherwise.

ATB from George

Dear Mark,

Yours is the first really compelling post for me in reply to the points I raised that I have seen so far. 

The UK has a lot to offer even now as you say, but we are very much down the second league of nations in influence these days, and like others nations of similar World significance, we ought to be somewhat more aware of our current position. Both in terms of actual Warfare, and pushing our propaganda. There are fully fledged organisations that work at the international level such as the UN. Far better to keep with that Forum than go it alone as we are nowadays.

The BBC should be offered and then subscribed to in a voluntary way, for those who find value in it. That would be an individual choice, just as choosing any other News Media source. I do agree that there are much less - to our UK eyes - less good outlets, but one must respect choice as well. I guess some people may actually appreciate Fox News for example! And it is their choice, not something to be meddled with either at the TAX payers' expense, or even eventually at the expense of UK TV License payers, either, IMHO.

ATB from George

The free-spirited of Aghanistan will be delighted at being left with much-loved local station Taleban Talk 97.3 FM.

Dear Mark,

If the Afghans really wanted to be rid of the Taliban, then we have already given them every chance.

That is another little War that should be left to the World Community [via the UN] to sort out. 

We can then make a proportionate contribution to whatever is worked out in that Forum, representative of every viewpoint in the World at governmental level.

ATB from George

George,

It IS the UN that is sorting out Afghanistan. The UN works through various "contracted" bodies such as NATO.

Take at look at all the nations who are providing manpower/equipment to the UN effort.

OTOH, I do agree that the Afghan gov should be more effective. and from a personal perspective, I'm not entirely sure that the UN decision to get invoved (other than the search for Bin-Laden) was wise. Time will tell.

Meanwhile, your views re the BBC seem to me to be more and more vindictive by the post and your views re the UK standing in the global community seem to be heading in the same emotional direction, rather than concern. This appears to be somewhat out of character ? Hope all is well in general.

Cheers

Don

Dear Don,

All is fine here. 2012 is going out far better than she came in! I always speak my mind on this here Forum [that or keep completely silent], and this is not always comfortable for those who see things less rigorously!

Yes, I am typically more Scandinavian than British in seeing things in black and white, right or wrong. And wrong is wrong as far as I am concerned. I am not here to be liked, but I hope I may make people consider the uncomfortable from time to time. Population is one where we have agreed on some uncomfortable truths, I suspect!

I find the covering up of peadophilia as being reprehensible beyond most lies, or in fact other criminal offenses. Peadophilia itself I count on the same level as murder, and worse than adult rape, for the obvious reason that the victim has the rest of his or her life to consider the wrecked soul that they have been made by some totally sick other, whilst still less mature than an normal adult.

I find self-satisfaction something to be attacked with the sharpest intellectual implement handy. I find the vindictiveness - for whatever reason, including a false sense of loyalty - of those working for organisations that are found out trying to cover lies and peadophilia, about the most disreputable of the actions of institutional organisations going! The difference between say the Irish version of the Roman Catholic Church and the BBC is that the BBC can take money from the poor with the full support of legislation!

And has the "Aunty" comfy image that is a mile from the truth in reality. It is another media organisation, just as happy to stoop to conquer as the News Of The World was. Yes it has some good points, but how about some of the people involved in the good points having the guts to stand up for right and stand against the lies and the protection of the Saviles of this World ...

Otherwise I can see little difference, between the BBC and the now fortunately defunct News Of The World.

ATB from George

+1

I've thought this for a while. Wouldn't attribute this to the whole of the BBC, but BBC 24 hour news and some of Live 5 I certainly would. Definitely on a par with the tabloid press. A good example was the coverage of the girl from Wales who went missing, pure voyeuristic titillation.

I suspect the BBC decided to compete with Sky 24 hour news, both formats are similar, a lot of it dumbed down dross. They could quite easily fit an hours news output into 15minutes and use the other 45 minutes to broadcast even more news.

George,

I have you in great esteem and respect  your opinions, even if I fail to fully comprehend your arguments from time to time. I sincerely hope you are not comparing the BBC with NOTW.  Did you mean BBC and News International?

Respectfully,

Tony

As in stoops to conquer, I do mean the News Of The World, I do mean to compare, and equate ...

Steeling mobile phone messages is certainly less evil than covering up peadophilia, and lashing out at an innocent third party to deflect attention is just as bad.

The Murdoch empire is a stinker for sure, but even more so is the BBC empire, and not because every part of it is rotten, but because in a barrel of apples it only takes a small proportion to ruin the whole thing.

The proportion of rotten parts in the BBC is not even small. It is far too large to simply over look after at least forty of its ninety years of noble service.

ATB from George

Tony,

In Nazi Germany, I expect that I'd have been marched off to a concentration camp by 1935. And that would have been just if the Nazis had won, at least according to the history books, if they bothered to mention it all, which they would not..

ATB from George

PS: In Nazi occupied Norway my grandfather had to "disappear" for the last eighteen months. He never spoke of it, but it left my grandmother with children less than four for eighteen months on her own. He would never finsih the story before he died, but moral courage to speak one's mind at the right moment is not something I am frightened of, because I admired him above any human. so please don't expect me to accept moral depravity - not countered for nearly forty years in the BBC - without comment.

I think we have fulfilled Godwin's Law with this thread. It is getting more ridiculous by the minute.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwins_law

The BBC is one of the many things that makes me proud to be British. Anyone with even the slightest criticism would do well to live abroad for awhile and see what is on offer elsewhere. 

Don't feed the Troll...