Chit Chat
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
What hold does the BBC have over the 3 main political parties?
The BBC receives over 3 billion a year every year from the British people, yet over the last few years when essential services have been cut including defence, not only was the BBC not touched they were never even considered for any cuts.
Also there is the aragent hoity manner in which their presenters speke down to many of the politicians that paper on their programs, it's as though they know they can't be touched.
Looks like they have something big on the big three something that could sink labour the torys and the lib dens something that would make Savile look like a walk in the park.
The BBC receives over 3 billion a year every year from the British people, yet over the last few years when essential services have been cut including defence, not only was the BBC not touched they were never even considered for any cuts.
Also there is the aragent hoity manner in which their presenters speke down to many of the politicians that paper on their programs, it's as though they know they can't be touched.
Looks like they have something big on the big three something that could sink labour the torys and the lib dens something that would make Savile look like a walk in the park.
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 5
|
By:
mmm
|
|
By:
Dire, Soviet-like, monolithic organization convinced of their own greatness...like Rangers FC on a bigger scale.
|
|
By:
They make a lot of money selling programmes/books/services abroad, so it isn't all licence fee money.
That said, the BBC is almost entirely being run by its diversity policies. Hence crowbarring as many Asian and black and disabled journalists and reporters as they can, having predominantly women now reporting on sport and generally promoting positive discrimination. Whether these people are the best for their job or not! There MUST be at least one woman in every panel show and the most heinous offence seems to be ANY form of racism (real, implied or otherwise). Positive discrimination is STILL discrimination. I reckon some of the biggest wastage is spent on the sheer numbers of people they employ for every job, especially outside broadcasts. Every sports event has 2 or 3 commentators and a few "pundits" added to a programme host. As for the politicians, I have to disagree. I don't think they give them a hard enough time. Especially whoever's in power at the time. It would be lovely if they had "something on them that would sink them", I think they haven't though. |
|
By:
Good post study..agree 100% with your observations.
|
|
By:
A few weeks back, they showed the first two series of an Aussie soap called A PLACE TO CALL HOME. They stuck it on BBC2 on weekday afternoons, with no regular time-slot ; it would move around, depending on political shows, or whatever.
They didn't trail it, so it just kind of appeared with no fanfare, and mainly women viewers started watching it eventually, and became hooked. Meanwhile, the DVD of the first series was selling for £40 on ebay and you had to send to Aus. for it. Women go nuts for this series - like Breaking Bad for women. So why didn't they show it at prime-time on a Sunday? The BBC could have a huge hit on their hands! Big enough to compete with Downton Abbey... But no - they'd be damned by comparisons...for the same reason they buried Mad Men and The Wire...none of these shows are BBC shows so they got very little promotion from the BBC...DOCTORS, anyone...? |