<<No clearer indication of the difference between these two models can be found than in the sudden profusion of TV-based premium-rate phone scams, I'm sorry, phone-in pay-to-guess-the-answer quiz programmes; the BBC has no such offerings, nor would I expect them to have any, because they're just a mechanism for hoovering money from the pockets of the bored and the under-informed.>>
With respect, I think people turn to such pap because they are bored rigid by what the BBC has to offer. I'm at a loss to know where/what the quality programmes are on the BBC - I can't find them. -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Frank Wales Sent: Wednesday, December 20, 2006 12:25 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [backstage] democracyplayer Josh at GoUK.com wrote: > At one time, the BBC was needed as a distributor of content, but do > we still need the BBC to do that now if everyone has the ability > to publish and distribute on their own? The BBC is, and always has been, much more than a distributor, some mere series of tubes through which content passes from makers to viewers without touching the sides on the way through. > And of BBC programming - do we need it? Commercially there are plenty of > ways to get similar (and sometimes identical/repeat) content to what the BBC > provides. In general, the BBC sets the high-quality watermark for the entire British broadcasting industry, and has undoubtedly forced ITV and others to make better programmes than they would otherwise have done in a commercial-only marketplace. Also, don't forget that the BBC aren't the only broadcaster with a public service remit: Channel Four also has one, but they were only possible because of externally-mandated, entirely uncommercial funding arrangements with ITV. > I am not trying to be objectionable or malicious: I am genuinely > struggling to understand why the country needs a publicly funded broadcaster > .... or at least one as big and as powerful as the BBC. Very crudely, and wearing my Reithian-opinion hat, the BBC exists to deliver education, entertainment and information to the British public; commercial-supported broadcasters exist to make money by delivering the attention of viewers to advertisers. Only the first of these two scenarios is clearly of benefit to the public, you and me. In the other, we're just a natural resource to be harvested and sold off like so many varieties of attentional baked-beans; any benefits we might get are a side-effect of the process. No clearer indication of the difference between these two models can be found than in the sudden profusion of TV-based premium-rate phone scams, I'm sorry, phone-in pay-to-guess-the-answer quiz programmes; the BBC has no such offerings, nor would I expect them to have any, because they're just a mechanism for hoovering money from the pockets of the bored and the under-informed. Ultimately, commercial activities can only support a proportion of things that might be possible, and some of the most lucrative would be far from beneficial to the public. Moreover, many things worth doing are almost blitheringly uncommercial; try writing a credible business plan for the public library system, for example. Commercial activities also tend to favour the easy and the uncontroversial, which implicitly marginalizes unpopular views and hard-to-digest information; look at Fox News, if you don't believe me. As long as broadcasting holds an important sway over public attitudes and perceptions, it seems to me that public-service broadcasters, such as the BBC and Channel Four, are an essential part of maintaining the balance away from the most grotesque excesses of the market. They should act as providers of first-resort for that which is uncommercial, and for that which is difficult-but-important. And they should also act as the public's advocate in shaping the future of communication, both in their statements and in their behaviour. [Disclaimer: I don't work for the BBC, but I've seen them on television.] -- Frank Wales [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
