The Future of the BBC

[french frank]

do you expect R3 to exist by end of next charter renewal ? - your last 2 posts are somewhat pessimistic for its survival

When Andrew Marr interviewed George Osborne he reportedly said that 'another £500m could see the closure of Radio 2, Radio 5Live or a complete tv channel'.

[Gordon]

do you expect R3 to exist by end of next charter renewal ? - your last 2 posts are somewhat pessimistic for its survival

Hi Frances, yes I do feel somewhat pessimistic but I think it will survive for the next Charter period, it's the next one after that that concerns me and what may happen in between that will prepare the ground, it will not wait until 2026. Dealing a mortal blow to the BBC at this time is unlikely but it can be constrained and could be forced to lose or change some services under financial pressure. R3 will be caught up in the wash like all the other services.

To justify its funding the BBC has to provide popular content and so minority channels are vulnerable and will be measured on audience size. Nevertheless to make big savings popular channels may have to be targets – see #136 above. It is obvious that commercial interests would love it if the popular elements in the BBC output [R1, R2, BBC1 etc] were to be removed/reduced/privatised on the basis that commercial players can do it just as well without the need for public funding [the public pay ultimately anyway].

Whilst DCMS is the Culture Department which deals with issuing the broadcasting content licences the power of the Treasury will trump it every time so this Charter will be about money if only because the public finances need it so. It also needs to fix the governance issue, the Trust did not work well and its new chair has not impressed so far. The BBC is not in a strong position and has to be clear about what it's for.

It is up to the broadcasters themselves to make the case for whatever concessions government might make towards their interests in a market that is becoming increasingly competitive. IOW they have to make the case FOR PSB rather than it being an accepted feature of the media industry in the UK despite that industry contributing significantly to GDP. In recent years many of the older servants have retired and have been replaced by much younger [cheaper?] staff whose allegiance to values such as PSB are questionable.

PS: my apologies to FF and Alpie for tempting him off piste.

[MrGongGong]

I've said this before so apologies

No one ever suggests that the BBC should get rid of 'local' radio which is, in most places, a duplication of commercial services and has been more or less replaced as a source of news by online media.

How much could they 'save' by loosing this?

[Gordon]

I've said this before so apologies

No one ever suggests that the BBC should get rid of 'local' radio which is, in most places, a duplication of commercial services and has been more or less replaced as a source of news by online media.

How much could they 'save' by loosing this?

I would not disagree - I don't ever listen to local radio of any sort except when in the car and forced to cut to traffic news!! I keep turning the feature off but it always comes back.

I'd suggest "not enough" is the answer. But as they say at Tesco, "Every little helps".

In 2012 when there was a review the cost was £115M, see page 15 of this:

http://downloads.bbc.co.uk/aboutthebbc/insidethebbc/howwework/reports/pdf/bbclocalradio_myers.pdf

[Old Grumpy]

I do not listen to local radio, other than for traffic news, but I suspect there may be many who do. They probably listen for the music and the local interest features, as much as, if not more than, for the news.

OG

[Gordon]

I do not listen to local radio, other than for traffic news, but I suspect there may be many who do. They probably listen for the music and the local interest features, as much as, if not more than, for the news.

OG

You may be right OG that there are many who do appreciate LR - but I suppose that as MrGG says it could be done by the commercials.

I'm reminded that Hunt before he moved on to Health was an advocate of local Radio and TV and since his time a "DAB Light" system has been tried for that purpose. Don't know what has happened to that lately. If they turned FM off [as they have agreed to do in Norway in 2017 despite Sweden next door rejecting DAB!! Strange or what?] the spectrum has few other uses but could be used widely for more local radio giving an extended use for all those otherwise obsolete FM portables!

Anyway seems to me the BBC has a big funding issue to address and fiddling around the edges will not necessarily fix it. That £650M [18% of its current income] for the over 75s is a big ask - as is the £200M lost revenue predicted as a result of de-criminalisation - but there are some concessions like the broadband extension contribution will be reduced over 5 years ie £30Mpa. TV spends about 2/3rds of the total LF so is the greater target with radio about 1/5th so it is not immune as a whole. The 5 year period from now has some significant consequences for BBC funding as well as the other factors brewing [see my previous posts #125/132 above].

I wonder how much those celebrity presenters and pundits cost? According to the Guardian in 2012 all "earning" more than £0.5M cost £16M, it's probably inflated a bit by now? Clarkson's pay was £3M before he got the sack.

http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2011/jul/12/bbc-spending

BTW anyone read this?

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Is-BBC-Crisis-John-Mair/dp/1845496213

[french frank]

This has just been notified to me.

More 'the future of Radio 3'

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

This has just been notified to me.

More 'the future of Radio 3'

Well, it does refer to the obscene salaries paid the like of Chris Evans et al…

[french frank]

Well, it does refer to the obscene salaries paid the like of Chris Evans et al…

Chris Evans has a daily 3-hour show - how much must a Radio 3 presenter who has one weekly show of one hour have been paid?

Have they all been asked to have their pay cut to a third?

[Gordon]

This has just been notified to me.

More 'the future of Radio 3'

Hmm! Stealthy as she goes Mr Sulu. I wonder if Ms Klein has also been asked to, erm, take ein Klein less?

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

Chris Evans has a daily 3-hour show - how much must a Radio 3 presenter who has one weekly show of one hour have been paid?

Have they all been asked to have their pay cut to a third?

Personally I wouldn't pay C.E. anything at all, but that's just me… I mean "I"

[MrGongGong]

This has just been notified to me.

More 'the future of Radio 3'

One question I have about all these things ("wasteful BBC" Mail nonsense aside)

Many people are described in the media as "employees" but I was under the impression that most of the "highly paid" folks are actually freelance and self employed OR working for independent production companies?
Which means that the BBC can't, strictly speaking, "Sack" them BUT choose to go to someone else next time.

[MrGongGong]

Personally I wouldn't pay C.E. anything at all, but that's just me… I mean "I"

I wouldn't pay anything for CE either (but I hear one can sneak into most cathedrals these days without paying?)

[Gordon]

One question I have about all these things ("wasteful BBC" Mail nonsense aside)

Many people are described in the media as "employees" but I was under the impression that most of the "highly paid" folks are actually freelance and self employed OR working for independent production companies?
Which means that the BBC can't, strictly speaking, "Sack" them BUT choose to go to someone else next time.

Good point, they probably have contracts through agencies [or even their own companies that hire them out] but I would expect BBC lawyers to ensure that those contracts to have exit clauses - for both parties, at a negotiated price of course - in the event of unforeseen circumstances, force majeur, conflicts of interest, "bringing the BBC into disrepute", exit obligations, etc. One would like to think that those BBC lawyers would produce a suitably tight contract considering some of the egos they deal with.... then again....and those egos can surely find an alternative source of income? However they are employed some of them still seem to get a lot for not very much.

[MrGongGong]

Good point, they probably have contracts through agencies [or even their own companies that hire them out] but I would expect BBC lawyers to ensure that those contracts to have exit clauses - for both parties, at a negotiated price of course - in the event of unforeseen circumstances, force majeur, conflicts of interest, "bringing the BBC into disrepute", exit obligations, etc. One would like to think that those BBC lawyers would produce a suitably tight contract considering some of the egos they deal with.... then again....and those egos can surely find an alternative source of income? However they are employed some of them still seem to get a lot for not very much.

Indeed

I think many people don't understand self-employment at all.
These days one is often asked to prove status by answering a series of questions about the nature of contracts and responsibilities etc

You can't "sack" someone who is self employed
and you can't specify a number of hours etc

https://www.gov.uk/employment-status/selfemployed-contractor