How many of you will take out a bbc subscription?

Was the fuel thing not reported across all media, Tory leaning included? The turkey thing, wasn’t that to do with a shortage of CO2 to help in the slaughter process? Again reported on other outlets. Continuous virtue signalling? By employing a more diverse workforce? I’ve not been at any of the interviews @rustbucket so I can’t say for certain they employ people on a diversity quota basis, presumably you have inside knowledge none of us are privy to?

 

You answered non of what I said, I’m sure plenty of average folks work for the bbc, not many politician come camera operators I expect

 

er yes. It was in just about every news paper a few weeks back and there were radio phone in shows about it. The bbc was forced to make several statements on the subject when it emerged they have been paying June Sarpong more than the Prime Minister, in fact more than the Director General if she actually worked a full week. Over a quarter of a million pounds of licence fee money. In fact at one point I believe they had allocated her a budget of over £100 million pounds just to get more minorities on to the screen, when surveys showed that they are already represented to a level over that of most private businesses. They laughably called it a department, when it actually emerged she was the only one in it. When it was asked how one part time person could spend £100 million by her self on diversity projects, they had to back track and give her four staff to cover the days that she’s not even there! So yes they very much employ people on a quota basis and they are very proud of it. Well they would be wouldn’t they. They are chucking our free money about to do it. I believe that people should get a job on merit and talent and not because they tick some box that a wokest has dreamt up to make the organisation look good.

 

Its complex. Some of the money pays for infrastructure . Kill the BBC and all "free" broadcast TV might vanish too.
A left wing bias may be anti government just we have forgotten anything except the Young Farmers in charge of the UK at present.. and from some postings here the UK still has a long way to go before the comstant woke nagging can stop....

 

It wouldn’t be so bad if they did actually invest in usable infrastructure. They are miles behind. The local news stations don’t even broadcast in HD for god sake. We’ve already got 8k sets being rolled out and yet the bbc still can’t manage 1080p across its network. Netflix, youtube, Sky etc all available in 4K with HDR. Not the bbc though, ten years behind everyone else yet billion of pounds of free money every year.

 

Ah yes, June Sarpong. Highly intelligent, talented woman she is too by all accounts

 

I’m glad somebody finally mentioned radio, trips out in the car would get pretty boring without it! Oh and obscene pay rises & bonuses don’t happen in private business eh? Take a look at what the banks pay out and yet where do we all keep our money?

 

I am happy to pay, especially for the radio, as others have said a Sky, Netflix, Amazon subscriptions costs more.


This isn't a wind up, but if you did work in one of these large corporations have to develop a more relaxed demeanor as to how these large businesses operate, you can't let their internal and external politics get to you, not day in day out.

 

But you aren’t forced to fund them are you? They are private businesses. Same with sky, it’s a choice to pay them or not. I pay for Sky, but not bt sport for example. I have no choice to pay for the bbc and they know that and they waste millions of pounds a year that simply wouldn’t be allowed in the private sector. Because it doesn’t matter cos they just be given the money again next year.

 

So you could then argue that shows that private business still has some way to go with regards to the diversity of their workforce. And that’s not just for ethnic minorities, it’s women too isn’t it? So, good on the BBC for trying to do something about this. Won’t please the Daily Mail of course.

 

I agree that Sky is, but my Netflix costs me £4 a month. Amazon is £80 a year, but that’s also offset by the fact you don’t then pay postage on Amazon purchases.

 

It wouldn’t be so bad if her department was trying to increase diversity in the whole organisation. But she’s responsible for on screen talent only. Remember that’s £100 million of tax payers money. Have you seriously turned on the bbc or the radio and thought, blimey it’s ages since a saw a woman on the bbc.?

 

I will concede that point but you don't get the sport for £12 odd a month. Last time I had Sky it was that a month for the family pack so the lads could watch cartoons etc.

 

The BBC is often claimed to be a poor business model, that wastes money, produces unwatched programmes and is biased. It is interesting that independent reviews have shown the BBC to be popular, winning multiple awards, trusted and generally good value. I wonder how the BBC would be viewed if it was built on the debt that Netflix has built its empire on of $15.5bn!

 

It’s a funny old world innit… I consider the bbc to be massively right wing biased / Tory government mouthpiece. It regularly lets the Tory of the day get away with talking ***** and avoiding difficult questions, and can be very selective about what it reports on. If they was to hold Boris to account every time he lied to us, he would have been sacked years ago.

Soo, I’m no fan of their cherry picked news, but the license fee still seems cheap in comparison to what you have to pay for subscription tv, much of which is dire American Marmitee

 

I like the BBC and the programs variety. BUT its turned into a gravy train where they waste our licence fee money paying their presenters millions. They are only presenters and mostly get paid vast amounts for just talking. Zoe Ball is a good example of this constant talking drivel and paid millions to boot.

These presenters know they are grossly overpaid and try to avoid disclosing what they earn

I hope they do away with the licence fee and force the BBC to become a proper commercial business and compete in the real world.

 

Interesting discussion. I haven't the time nor the will to invest in the research needed to keep up. Think its safe to say that i do have some frustrations with the BBC. I do think they pay large wages to the elite but I'm guessing those are to compete with other broadcasters salaries across the industry. (not saying that's right or should be funded from the public).

I don't recognise the word woke as a specific term as it seems to be being used as an insult really which is ironic and does bring into question the integrity of someone utilising it in that way as clearly they believe it to be a problem. I don't recognise any left wing bias myself and as said above I consistently see the government being let off the hook or indeed an absence of reporting on issues which are all over the media elsewhere. Clearly some research has gone into the OPs argument so good on you but I couldn't agree less!

It clearly needs some attention and a review of whether were getting value for money but its our BBC and its a Public Service Broadcaster which has proved its value on numerous occasions when called upon. It also shines as a beacon of light to some in the far flung corners of the world and despite any drawbacks isn't owned by a billionaire of ill repute or foreign corporation churning out political (and social) propaganda to the benefit of its owner or shareholders. Perhaps it needs to be something less than it currently is? Perhaps its services need to be more niche and move away from big money presenters on mindless entertainment shows and concentrate on the other great things it does

Also... it isn't really that expensive is it. I'm guessing its small change to most of those who moan about it but I don't believe that the "universal license fee" is appropriate and it should be free to those on low incomes.

Plus ... its our BBC and perhaps the views of those actually paying for it should be accounted for within and review. I say "should be" as its unlikely that it would remain and a-political debate and those with most to gain or an axe to grind (and the media and funds to get their view to the top of the pile) would be the loudest influencers!

BBC - like all large organisations it needs a kick up the wotsit from time to time to put it straight but don't throw the baby out with the bathwater or what's left... endless shows about policing, mindless dating and other shows featuring those who have nothing whatsoever to contribute to society yet with disproportionate influence on society, pointless gameshows. blah blah.. guess its down to personal taste but what I'm getting at is the media feel the need to fill our screens with so much rubbish all day and all night that it drives people to watch differently to the extent that TV advertising will become a thing of the past quite soon. Free to air commercial television will become, or is unviable leading to a gradual decrease of free to air content. The BBC is the only player who can fulfil that particular need with any certainty.

As i say. Its what I think and not based on any research. I will do that as and when someone asks me to contribute!

 

Guaranteed that a subscription would be more than the license fee and the quality and choice will drop , along with gaining twenty minutes an hour in advert.