BBC4: the arts channel....not

[oddoneout]

The powers that be have decided that today and BBC4 are the ideal conjunction for the showing of two and a half hours of tennis.
I haven't as yet made up my mind whether that's worse than repeats of TOTP and pop 'icon' documentaries but it certainly does nothing to alter my view that those at the top don't know what arts and culture are - and have no shame in accepting money to supposedly provide same.

[gurnemanz]

Is an "arts channel"? It seems to have a wide brief but include mainly documentaries - travel, science, history, art, nature. Some music but certainly not nearly enough classical. I'm generally grateful for what they broadcast and watch it quite a lot. I don't mind too much if it occasionally becomes a repository for live tennis which they do rarely enough. It must be is the only place they can fit it. It is a big event which they must have paid a lot for and did not wish to sideline behind the red button.

PS I note Treasures of the Anglo-Saxons is being repeated after the tennis. I shall probably watch that again with a visit (yesterday) to the British Library's unmissable current exhibition still fresh in my mind.

[ardcarp]

Oddoneout, the almost total lack of 'proper' music on BBC4 is a scandal. They just chase audience figures with pop stuff plus endless repeats of so-called cultural programmes in which we are talked down to by the likes of Alice Roberts [she of the funny vowels] Neil somebody-or-other [even funnier vowels] Brian Cox and Lucy Worsley. At least the latter can be amusing at times.

[LMcD]

As far as I'm aware, it's not intended to be exclusively an arts channel. And the prospect of seeing Roger Federer in action is surely preferable to yet another re-run of TOTP?

[teamsaint]

Here is what it is supposed to do, and presumably does.

http://downloads.bbc.co.uk/bbctrust/assets/files/pdf/regulatory_framework/service_licences/tv/2016/bbcfour_apr16.pdf

150 hours of new musi and arts programmes per year, which would include the Proms and Glastonbury.

[oddoneout]

Here is what it is supposed to do, and presumably does.

http://downloads.bbc.co.uk/bbctrust/assets/files/pdf/regulatory_framework/service_licences/tv/2016/bbcfour_apr16.pdf

150 hours of new musi and arts programmes per year, which would include the Proms and Glastonbury.

Doesn't say anything about tennis.

[oddoneout]

As far as I'm aware, it's not intended to be exclusively an arts channel. And the prospect of seeing Roger Federer in action is surely preferable to yet another re-run of TOTP?

No there's supposed to be some music and culture in there as well.

BBC Four’s primary role is to reflect a range of UK and international arts, music and
culture. It should provide an ambitious range of innovative, high quality programming
that is intellectually and culturally enriching, taking an expert and in-depth approach
to a wide range of subjects.

I don't know about the relative merits of the choice you suggest since I wouldn't watch either. I just thought, given the significance of the day and date that something appropriate might have been put on, but I suppose the risks of upsetting the BBC1 and 2 audiences by putting the tennis on either of those channels was too great. I imagine the argument, if any, will be that relevant programming is being put on throughout the next week on BBC4, so missing the big day doesn't matter.
As you can tell I'm taking a while to accept( possibly because I've already given up on BBC1&2) that what I expect and would like to see on such a channel is not going to materialise to any significant extent!

[ardcarp]

BBC Four’s primary role is to reflect a range of UK and international arts, music and
culture. It should provide an ambitious range of innovative, high quality programming
that is intellectually and culturally enriching, taking an expert and in-depth approach
to a wide range of subjects.

Failing on most points, I think, not just the ones I've highlighted.

I wonder if the weasel words 'impact' and 'reach' in Annex 1 actually mean 'viewing figures' ?

[french frank]

I wonder if the weasel word 'impact' in Annex 1 actually means 'viewing figures' ?

Viewing figures and evidence of people discussing programmes. So BBC Four programmes which are discussed here are evidence that, for better or worse, a programme has 'impact'. I trust people will discuss Roger Federer's performance, in depth.

[jayne lee wilson]

I did enjoy the recent Queen and Marc Bolan films on BBC4, I must say. Got Boy George on Soul v Suburbia lined up for later....

...And you have the Egon Schiele film on BBC2 of course, and the unmissable Peter Jackson They Shall Not Grow Old later tonight...

But the ATP Finals on BBC4 does look bit of an odd, inessential match, really....(though they switch to BBC2 tomorrow, not that I'll be watching.)

[LMcD]

With the exception of the final, the remainder of the BBC's coverage from the O2 is in the afternoon on BBC 2. I suspect that the decision to broadcast this evening session on BBC4 and the Peter Jackson documentary on BBC2 rather than the other way round was based o a desire to attract a bigger audience for the documentary. While this does nothing to promote BBC4 to a wider audience, it is in line with the established BBC practice of trying to maximize viewing figures for selected events and programmes, as anybody who's tried to follow or record matches at Wimbledon will testify. ('This match can now be seen on BBC1/the redbutton/online').
I'm happy to watch the tennis and record or catch up with 'They Shall Not Grow Old'.

[Old Grumpy]

Perhaps the BBC think that tennis is of more interest to the licence paying public than classic music.

I personally would be quite happy if ALL sport was relegated to pay TV and the BBC 4 restricted its output to "arts and culture", but I suspect I would be in a minority amongst licence payers.

OG

[teamsaint]

Perhaps the BBC think that tennis is of more interest to the licence paying public than classic music.

I personally would be quite happy if ALL sport was relegated to pay TV and the BBC 4 restricted its output to "arts and culture", but I suspect I would be in a minority amongst licence payers.

OG

Most live coverage of any sports that actually attract large paying attendances is already pretty much restricted to pay tv.

I’d like both decent sport and also music / arts coverage.

[gurnemanz]

Pleasant from time to time for sports fans to be able to watch their sport without being subjected to pay TV's incessant gambling ads.

[french frank]

Perhaps the BBC think that tennis is of more interest to the licence paying public than classic music.

I personally would be quite happy if ALL sport was relegated to pay TV and the BBC 4 restricted its output to "arts and culture", but I suspect I would be in a minority amongst licence payers.

As far as the BBC is concerned, it seems that the more alternatives it provides (radio and television), the more they get filled up with popular entertainment. And, yes, I do consider mainstream sport 'popular entertainment', even if it's not of the same kind as Strictly Come Dancing.