'Subsidising' the Proms?

[NickWraight]

The BBC is having to cut costs in the near future by a significant amount due to various factors including the Licence Fee pitiable increases; general economic climate and the extra expenditure it is having to taken on at the wish of the Government.

EIF concerts are indeed broadcast on the Radio but not on TV and presumably by BBC Scotland who I'm sure could TV some events providing extra budget could be found - unlikely at present I feel.

Quality and diversity does exist on Radio 3 not perhaps in areas of the country, venues or the repertoire on which everyone agrees but personal prejudices are not what it is about. London-centric perhaps (the largest city with a huge catchment area of residents and visitors) but I know of no other suitable (pace 'aeolium' and many other peoples' view of the Kensington Drum) UK venue which could take the Proms and receive audiences of the same size. To fill a space twice the audience capacity of the RFH for a significant number of nights is no mean feat which draws in much income to start to cover expenditure and balance the books. It would be interesting to see a set of Proms Accounts but I doubt if that exists.

The BBC Proms (Henry Wood's name vanished years ago) are here to stay largely in the same format with perhaps a change to the balance and make-up of the events and the season length.

As to 'aeoliums' interpretaion of cultural vandalism, I was not just referring to cutting the Proms season as very little savings, if any, would be made with that alone. In order to make major savings orchestras would need to be cut along with a radio and tv channel or two and that is what the BBC must achieve. The headline grabbing high salary earners, and expense claimers, are an easy soft target (pandering to the tabloid media prejudices and the general public's jealousy - if they can have it why can't I?) but the BBC are in the general market place for the field and have to act accordingly.

[aeolium]

The BBC Proms (Henry Wood's name vanished years ago) are here to stay largely in the same format with perhaps a change to the balance and make-up of the events and the season length.

NickWraight, I suspect you're right at least in the short term, but I think it's a pity. I hope that, as concert halls start to consider their own direct-to-internet broadcasting (as some are now doing) there will be sufficient diversity provided in that way.

Btw, I apologise for misunderstanding your reference to 'cultural vandalism' - I thought you were referring just to cutting the Proms season, but reading what you wrote again I see that you were talking about more savage cuts including potentially orchestras, and on that I am in agreement with you. On the other hand, radio still remains incredibly cheap in comparison with TV, and generally is of higher quality. There are surely savings that could be made in the latter which would have much less damaging impact, not just the obvious reduction in excessive executive and celebrity salaries, but also on things like having 500 or so staff being flown to Beijing to cover the Olympics, newscasters flown out to the scene of a major news story even though a specialist correspondent is already there, documentaries where the presenter is pointlessly flown to many different parts of the world etc. The BBC in the last couple of decades (at least up to 2009) got into the habit of spending money lavishly in a way it never used to previously, not least because its revenue was increasing by above inflation every year.

[NickWraight]

True enough "aeolium" and a period of re-balancing is always a good idea: minds get concentrated on what is actually the business of an organisation. The BBC has rather spread its wings into areas it should not have on the pretence of raising income and losing sight of its core and what it should be doing is broadcasting in its various modern guises. Would I include the plethora of websites? Possibly only those of an informative nature that support programming as well as digital broadcast platforms.

Personally, there is no broadcasting facility that approaches attendance at a live event but I willingly appreciate many do not have that opportunity, or the funds, to do so. The growing net broadcast, both "live" and "recorded", is another threat to the BBC's output in someways but might be better looked at as being diverse.