The BBC: An Existential Crisis?

[MrGongGong]

What about those who aren't familiar with such things - especially music - and wouldn't know where/how to seek it out? Why not seriously educative introductions, not frivolous ones which assume people who are ignorant of such things are also stupid?

A good point
though I doubt that many will find this on the BBC these days
which is a sad thing in some ways
but maybe the greater diversity of other places is a good thing
I can't see much chance of the BBC putting on in depth programmes about much of the music I listen to
but I don't think it would do it well anyway (with a few exceptions)

and

Fine, then don't make us pay for something which doesn't come up to snuff.

no one is MAKING you pay for anything
you might choose to have a TV if you want
personally I'm a big fan of the BBC , so don't mind paying even though I don't watch much TV
but for R3, The Proms, BBCSO etc etc it's a good deal IMV

I don't think BS is really the arbiter of great taste , he makes great play of it but comes across (like most folk on TV ) like a ham actor (unlike Tony Pappano who seems to manage to be the same person on TV and in person )

[Sir Velo]

no one is MAKING you pay for anything

Nonsense! If you want to watch any TV you have to have a licence, regardless of whether you watch the BBC. I am sick to death of paying through the nose for a service I use less and less. There is no accountability to produce quality programming and that is undeniable.

Moreover, as you said in your previous post, times they have a-changed. The days when the BBC was the arbiter of the nation's taste and the sole broadcaster have well and truly vanished. Subscription based broadcasting is the way ahead, and probably the only way to get the BBC to re-examine its commitment to quality.

[Sir Velo]

Sewell's own travelogues - what's the difference
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y26vRuvsv44

Good point. Brian "Marmite" Sewell is a classic case of do as I say, not as I do. Not even BS' greatest admirers could say that these programmes were other than mildly entertaining vehicles (pardon the pun) for his particular brand of waspish weltschmerz. However, this does not detract from his argument.

[MrGongGong]

Nonsense! If you want to watch any TV you have to have a licence, regardless of whether you watch the BBC. I am sick to death of paying through the nose for a service I use less and less. There is no accountability to produce quality programming and that is undeniable.

Moreover, as you said in your previous post, times they have a-changed. The days when the BBC was the arbiter of the nation's taste and the sole broadcaster have well and truly vanished. Subscription based broadcasting is the way ahead, and probably the only way to get the BBC to re-examine its commitment to quality.

I think they key phrase is "If you WANT"
Having re read the BS article I would conclude that it's mostly BS with a bit of homespun "wisdom" thrown in

[Thropplenoggin]

Nonsense! If you want to watch any TV you have to have a licence, regardless of whether you watch the BBC. I am sick to death of paying through the nose for a service I use less and less. There is no accountability to produce quality programming and that is undeniable.

Moreover, as you said in your previous post, times they have a-changed. The days when the BBC was the arbiter of the nation's taste and the sole broadcaster have well and truly vanished. Subscription based broadcasting is the way ahead, and probably the only way to get the BBC to re-examine its commitment to quality.

I've only been back since May 7th and I've only watched Have I Got News For You, itself a shadow of its former self, and Symphony. Our Gamalan friend is off the mark on this one.

[aka Calum Da Jazbo]

“I don’t want to boast but I’ve been doing this for 40 years and I’ve been involved in some pretty good things across a huge variety of genres but I’ve still got to sit and listen to someone who’s never done five minutes of stand-up, who’s never written a funny line, who’s never produced a sitcom,” he said.
There is no point, or need, for half a dozen people or hierarchies or committees of people to sit around bothering the producer or the director or the stand-up comedian – they know best; it’s their necks on the line."

John Lloyd veteran comedy producer on the BBC


ah yes Committees and who was it, ah yes Thompson and the management speak explosion ...

[amateur51]

The National Audit Office has criticised by the BBC for paying out £25m to 150 senior BBC managers in severance payments. It has uncovered that the BBC broke its own rules on severance pay.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-23125494

Lord Hall the new DG has responded "These payments were from another era and we are putting a stop to them."

"I believe the BBC lost its way on payments in recent years. I have already said that we will be capping severance payments at £150,000 and we have now begun to improve our processes."

To which I can only respond with "Nice work if you can get it" and "About time too"

What on earth were BBC Trustees and senior management at the time thing of?

[french frank]

It has uncovered that the BBC broke its own rules on severance pay.

You omitted the words 'already generous': had breached "its own already generous policies on severance payments".

'The BBC said the savings it had made from senior manager redundancies exceeded the cost of severance pay.'

But presumably they would have made greater 'savings' if they'd paid out less? The Trust seems to be blaming the Executive.

[amateur51]

You omitted the words 'already generous': had breached "its own already generous policies on severance payments".

'The BBC said the savings it had made from senior manager redundancies exceeded the cost of severance pay.'

But presumably they would have made greater 'savings' if they'd paid out less? The Trust seems to be blaming the Executive.

It wasn't a willful act of omission, just a mistake after reading the article. In principle to break such a policy is crime enough where public money is concerned, surely

[aka Calum Da Jazbo]

You omitted the words 'already generous': had breached "its own already generous policies on severance payments".

'The BBC said the savings it had made from senior manager redundancies exceeded the cost of severance pay.'

But presumably they would have made greater 'savings' if they'd paid out less? The Trust seems to be blaming the Executive.

Very hard to spot any real difference between the Trust and the Executive ... much the same sort of person media execs and busted politicos ... do they count as real people any more?

[french frank]

Very hard to spot any real difference between the Trust and the Executive ... much the same sort of person media execs and busted politicos ... do they count as real people any more?

So, the executive who handed back his severance pay (£376,000) speaks out.

"The NAO's report said the BBC had entered a mutually agreed severance arrangement at a time when Mr Keating's post had not been made redundant and he was in discussions with another organisation about a prospective job offer."

[Great BBC journalism: they refer to the DG as 'Mr Hall' ...]


Double ...

[amateur51]

Former BBC director general Mark Thompson will face further scrutiny over his eight-year tenure at the BBC after a damning report by the public spending watchdog into the corporation's six-figure payoffs to former members of its top management.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2013/jul/01/bbc-chief-payoffs-mark-thompson

"Anthony Fry, BBC Trustee and chair of the trust's finance committee, admitted the size of the payouts "from a licence-fee payers' perspective appear to be shocking".

He told Radio 4's The World At One that what was "particularly worrying" was that the payments were being made outside of BBC policy and "without the proper authority"."

Is this man implying that as Chair of the trust's finance committee he didn't know or sanction the payments in question?

This stuff is truly shocking and appears to show an arrogant disregard for probity and prudence.

[french frank]

Considering the amounts of money involved, there certainly should have been some scrutiny. Thompson again in charge as head of management (as with the £100m that went down the drain on the Digital Media Initiative.) I wonder how many millions he cost the licence fee payer in all with his various decisions?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/8536356.stm

[amateur51]

Given that some MPs are getting stuck into the NAO's findings, is there any chance that other apparently bizarre situations such a Botney's twin salaries might be investigated too? For me this all started years ago when, I think, it was revealed that the DG John Birt wasn't actually employed by the BBC but his company had a contract with them - have I remembered that right? These people are very well paid, they don't need special arrangements or perks, surely.

[aka Calum Da Jazbo]

this lists the challenges facing Hall but fails to mention the audience at all .... interesting that, even in the Indie they do not see any audience issues .....