Axing of BBC Singers and related cuts

[mopsus]

The non-English orchestras (and the National Chorus of Wales, which has been threatened before) escaped under the current proposals but I would not be surprised if they were included in future ones.

[RichardB]

The axing of the BBCS makes no sense, so is it a deliberate ploy? Throw it out there, see who (ie big and/or important names) responds, make pretence of reconsidering, sort of relent but attach "well if we don't do this we'll have to do that" conditions, and end up with what management wanted in the first place but dressed up as having listened and re-considered.

That wouldn't surprise me at all. One doesn't have to be a cynic to see this kind of strategy in operation all around us. The response could have been (and no doubt was) predicted in detail.

[EnemyoftheStoat]

Number of the Day: 425,000

Question 1: How many (soon to be sacked) BBC Singer salaries does this figure represent? (Answer to the nearest 10.)

Question 2: How many (20% soon to be made either voluntarily redundant or sacked) BBC Symphony Orchestra, BBC Philharmonic Orchestra or BBC Concert Orchestra salaries does this figure represent? (Answer to the nearest 10.)

Question 3: How many BBC chief content officer salaries does this figure represent? (Clue: it's a figure less than two.)

Question 4: Which pen-pusher in the above-mentioned categories described the above-mentioned sackings and redundancies as "good for the sector and for audiences who love classical music”? (Clue: she's called Charlotte Moore and she's the BBC’s chief content officer. After her little display of cultural vandalism I do hope she's content.)

[Ein Heldenleben]

But it's the PR that matters - sends populist message, reinforces the misperception and ignorance.
Just a thought, and I accept that I am inclined to the cynical when looking at such things . The axing of the BBCS makes no sense, so is it a deliberate ploy? Throw it out there, see who(ie big and/or important names) responds, make pretence of reconsidering, sort of relent but attach "well if we don't do this we'll have to do that" conditions, and end up with what management wanted in the first place but dressed up as having listened and re-considered.

Have to say I don’t think that will happen if though that is a tried and trusted management ploy . The BBC Singers don’t have the cultural status of the main BBC orchestras - I suspect that’s why they were chosen . They are also much easier to replace with relatively inexpensive professionals. Replacing the BBC SO with a London based band of freelances would cost a fortune and not be worth the huge outcry. I hate to say it but the frequent criticism of the Singers on this forum probably hasn’t helped but it won’t have made a huge amount of difference. When you have 20 per cent cuts you have to start cutting core services and that’s what’s happening. This is a tiny cut compared to what’s happening on local radio and television services.

[Barbirollians]

This is the full press release:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/mediacentre/2023/bbc-new-strategy-for-classical-music

"Taking the difficult decision to close the BBC Singers in order to invest more widely in the future of choral singing across the UK, working with a wide range of choral groups alongside launching a major choral development programme for new talent."

It's hard to see what immediate relevance investing BBC* licence fee money 'more widely in the future of choral singing across the UK' has to do with broadcasting. At best it can only be spreading a few millions more widely and making less of an impact.

*BBC = British Broadcasting Corporation

It is I suppose consistent with the Arts Council's cut the ENO , WNO and Glydebourne grants in favour of opera in car parks policy. It is no more than substantial cuts dressed up as quality , agiity etc - as Dame Sarah Connolly has scathingly pointed out on twitter what is the role of agility ? But if you are complaining but voted Tory this is what you get.

[DracoM]

A tentative suggestion:

Decades ago, the BBCS were critical to keep so much repertoire alive in tricky circs. i.e. BBC taking its responsibility very seriously.
BUT, now, so many other and more specialist ensembles have blossomed that one wonders how necessary they are except in delivering very modern material that requires their very special gifts. That material has a somewhat 'limited appeal', perhaps?

[Ein Heldenleben]

It is I suppose consistent with the Arts Council's cut the ENO , WNO and Glydebourne grants in favour of opera in car parks policy. It is no more than substantial cuts dressed up as quality , agiity etc - as Dame Sarah Connolly has scathingly pointed out on twitter what is the role of agility ? But if you are complaining but voted Tory this is what you get.

“Agile” is management speak for getting people to work harder and multi skill more.

[Ein Heldenleben]

Ooh there’s a bit of under the radar warfare going on with a request on Essential Classics for the BBC Singers described by a listener as this “treasure”. Reminds me of the local radio stations who would put out the email address of who to complain to in the BBC about cuts. For connoisseurs of this sort of thing the usual phrase “efficiency savings “ wasn’t used - it was branded as some sort of enhancement.

[Jazzrook]

This all stems from a philistine and vindictive Tory government and their placemen in the BBC.

JR

[Ein Heldenleben]

This all stems from a philistine and vindictive Tory government and their placemen in the BBC.

JR

Under Blair the licence fee was RPI linked for a few years. Bliss was it in that dawn etc . Then Iraq 2 , David Kelly , Gilligan and it all got very nasty indeed.

[JasonPalmer]

The release indicates the money will be spent on different things vs not spent at all.

[JasonPalmer]

Lots of tweets about this on twitter, will be interesting to see what exactly the bbc are intending to spend the money now available on.

[Barbirollians]

Under Blair the licence fee was RPI linked for a few years. Bliss was it in that dawn etc . Then Iraq 2 , David Kelly , Gilligan and it all got very nasty indeed.

Nowhere near as nasty as since 2010 and Dorries , BBC being forced to pay for the World Service and pensioners TV licences etc.

[Ein Heldenleben]

Nowhere near as nasty as since 2010 and Dorries , BBC being forced to pay for the World Service and pensioners TV licences etc.

The mistake was under Gordon Brown when the BBC agreed to , in effect , take money from the government in compensation for free over 75 licences.At the time a lot in the industry thought this was the BBC getting too cosy with No.10 - almost becoming an adjunct of the benefit system . We were proved right when it came back to bite the BBC quite badly when they were told to take the money directly out of the licence fee. The World Service move from FO grant to licence fee happened under Cameron / Osborne. It’s very questionable whether licence fee payers should be paying for services they can’t receive.

[teamsaint]

The mistake was under Gordon Brown when the BBC agreed to , in effect , take money from the government in compensation for free over 75 licences.At the time a lot in the industry thought this was the BBC getting too cosy with No.10 - almost becoming an adjunct of the benefit system . We were proved right when it came back to bite the BBC quite badly when they were told to take the money directly out of the licence fee. The World Service move from FO grant to licence fee happened under Cameron / Osborne. It’s very questionable whether licence fee payers should be paying for services they can’t receive.

And of course people are forced to pay the licence fee if they want to watch any live television, regardless of whether they ever watch BBC TV.
Edit; Shame about the BBCS. I bet we could find the savings needed by moving on a couple of overpaid newsreaders.