… yesterday’s Radio Four Test Match Special (for foreign visitors, the BBC’s wonderful cricket show – cricket being a ball game) was the first time that a commentary box guest has picked up an accoustic guitar and sung a song about the pleasures of heroin, to appreciative applause from the commentary team.
Surely ….
Bookmark the permalink.
I’m trying (and failing) to square Cockney’s statement:
As pretty much everyone agrees though there’s a requirement for a truly Stalinesque purge of political correctness and indulgence of buffoonery. Bring back blokes with voices dripping with authority. Bring back a withering contempt for anyone indulging in unBritish behaviour.
with his vote for Nu Labour back in May. Getting rid of this bloody government is a small but essential step back to sanity.
Simon, sure if there were a gaggle of competing broadcast platforms then I could punish Sky for their cheek, but my point is that there isn’t.
Or are you suggesting that monopolies should be allowed to continue unchallenged along their own merry way in the name of free market capitalism?
The reason why I’ll (just about)defend the licence fee before it dies a natural death shortly is that the market for high quality, stimulating broadcast news and entertainment is clearly too small to justify a private investment of the scale required judging by what’s on offer elsewhere. We can either accept this or have a properly funded public service broadcaster.
Maybe I am authoritarian (or even a chattering class metropolitan elitist) but rather that than some die hard head in the sand libertarian ideologue endlessly chanting the mantra where it clearly won’t work to the country’s benefit.
Pete,
When there’s a remotely realistic alternative I’ll vote for it.
Cockney
You said:
The market has proved that it is incapable of producing anything of reasonable quality that educates and informs.
What about Channel 4?
“The market has proved that it is incapable of producing anything of reasonable quality that educates and informs.”
Translation
“I want other people who aren’t bothered to be forced to work harder and for longer to comply with my personal definitions of what constitutes quality.”
Why don’t you just pay more?
What’s wrong with the Discovery Channel, Cockney? The History Channel?
“The market has proved that it is incapable of producing anything of reasonable quality that educates and informs.”
Yet another translation: “The market doesn’t work. We want our Soviet Union back (and all the quality TV that came out of there) and the license fee to stay forever. Typical left-wing blah blah. If you want to watch a left-wing channel pay for it but leave decent people alone.
Cockney you are correct when you say that ‘the market for high quality, stimulating broadcast news and entertainment is clearly too small to justify a private investment of the scale required judging by what’s on offer elsewhere.’
That’s why the BBC doesn’t give us high quality, stimulating broadcast news and entertainment. It gives us the same rubbish as the commercial sector, except with worse sports coverage. Nobody needs the BBC. It is unnecessary duplication of what is done in the private sector. If only the BBC would duplicate the private TV sector’s non-unique way of funding ie pay us if you want our product, don’t if you don’t.
A ‘high quality’ BBC would have a tiny audience, most probably of affluent, well-educated people people who could afford to pay for it all themselves without help from a licence fee. The current dumbed down BBC doesn’t deserve our licence fee money. Either way the licence fee is an unnecessary tax.
The BBC knows full well that a lurch up market is its death knell, as many people would rebel against the licence fee if they weren’t give their dose of soaps, silly hospital dramas, antiques programs and decorating shows. The BBC has one purpose – to keep its employees in jobs.
WOW!
Another f***ing moron who thinks that the licence fee is justified.
Cockney, step forward. You are that Moron. Please explain why its OK to tax innocent people for biased news and unentertaining entetainment.
You have as long as you like, starting now……………………
Why don’t people like Kirsty Wark, James Naughtie and John Humphrys stand for Parliament ? They think they are politicians, thaat they bshould be taking the decisions. Why don’t they take the plunge ?
Or if they want to opinionise, why don’t they become leader writers at the Guardian or somewhere ?
When can we have some proper interviewers for our money ? And make no mistake, they get OODLES of money to preach at us.
I don’t really have any issues with the Licence Fee. I’m quite happy to pay for a State broadcaster (without adverts) if they produce good quality, impartial programmes.
The BBC is failing to do this and I am refusing to pay. Simple.
Some close observation of how the Cindy Sheehan circus actually works:
http://powerlineblog.com/archives/011505.php
JohninLondon wrote:
“Why don’t people like Kirsty Wark, James Naughtie and John Humphrys stand for Parliament ? They think they are politicians, thaat they bshould be taking the decisions. Why don’t they take the plunge ?”
The reason they don’t and won’t stand for Parliament is that a wannabee Kirsty Wark and James Naughtie and John Humphries would treat them in the same disgraceful manner in which they treat current politicians. I don’t mean attacking policies and views which is legitimate and a hallmark of liberty; I mean the contemptuous interviews and the invasion of privacy (the despicable slur against Ian Duncan Smith compared with Kirsty Wark holidaying with the family of the First Minister of Scotland). Does anyone really believe that these precious darlings would put up with the sh*t which they themselves dish out?
JohninLondon,
“All bad things are America’s fault” is a very negative image.
I wonder if that’s why despite the medja orgy it seems to be backfiring?
Allan@Aberdeen,
Perhaps it’s time for Blogs to start giving them a taste of their own medicine?
ho ho….Socialists think the BBC is lazy & pisspoor too!
The BBC has a licence to divide
http://www.socialistworker.co.uk/article.php?article_id=7289
On a more serious note: Anyone who wants to help the people in the areas so catastrophically affected by Hurricane Katrina go to https://www.redcross.org/donate/donation-form.asp
I’ve just donated 50 Dollars because I think our American friends deserve some solidarity from us now. Terrible pictures on Fox News, by the way.
Ritter
Nice one Sir!
“The reason why I’ll (just about)defend the licence fee before it dies a natural death shortly is that the market for high quality, stimulating broadcast news and entertainment is clearly too small to justify a private investment of the scale required judging by what’s on offer elsewhere. We can either accept this or have a properly funded public service broadcaster.”
Superb.
What you’re saying is that the demand for this type of service cannot independently financially support its provision at current levels. We either accept this or force the large majority that doesn’t demand the service to finance it for the tiny minority that does (such force including criminalising and imprisoning those who get caught failing to subsidise the minority).
I fully agree with your reasoning, but come to the opposite conclusion. I cannot support the licence fee. This would be like forcing Britney Spears fans to subsidise my collection of obscure baroque concerto and sonata recordings. I would be so utterly appalled and ashamed to think that people were being imprisoned and criminalised and threatened in order to subsidise my minority interest, despite the fact that I regard my music taste to be so much more stimulating than theirs.
I don’t think this has much to do with my being a “libertarian”. Rather more with my not being a completely reactionary, selfish arse.
(stuff like this and Paul Reynolds dropping by sure makes me wish I could spend more time here. I ought to get a job in the public sector)
rgds
Peter
marc astutely pointed out:
“Someone here said it best.”
Ah, ’twas me. And I’d like it stressed that such high quality, stimulating contribution came without threat to the liberty or property of anyone.
BTW, I must highly recommend the Belgian beer I’m currently enjoying. It’s called “Duvel”, and it’s a superb, grin-worthy brew capable of concurrently undermining and reinforcing your reality in both subtle and profound ways. An 8.5% proof, entirely natural sup that delivers all except a headache the next day.
This minority, speciality beer is available in bigger Asda, Tesco and Sainsbury stores; such easy availability brought to you via the mechanism of free market capitalism. The vast consumption of ‘populist trash’ like Carling Black Label enables mass-market stores to offer speciality lines at a profit; something to do with economies of scale.
Of course, the many other (literally hundreds and hundreds) of Belgian beers are available at specialist outlets like the “Beers of Europe Warehouse” near Kings Lynn.
All this high-quality joy is available to those willing to get off their arse and explore it; and nobody who just wants to get shit-faced and puke up on bilge is required to be inconvenienced.
rgds
Peter
Thanks, Joerg. That is much appreciated. It’s not often we in the US receive aid from anyone abroad when disasters like this strike us. If we ever do, I never hear of it. Where I live in Georgia, there were a few deaths caused by tornados created by Katrina. We had several tornado warnings last night and two twisters touched down not too far from where my sister lives, causing a bit of damage. Thankfully, it was nothing like Louisianna, Mississippi, and Alabama. They are in really bad shape over there. It’s so sad. I feel so sorry for those people.
Denise,
first of all I’m running a website which is pretty popular in the US (and I’m making money from it so it’s time to give something back). Secondly I’ve got a girlfriend in the US (Ohio to be specific, so therefore she’s not in any danger) which means I’m a lot closer to events over there than before. Thanks to Fox News – not the BBC – I get all the reports and Shepard Smith certainly hasn’t had any good news so far. Let’s just hope help can get into the devastated areas asap. There are a lot of good people in Europe who like to give as well – that’s why I put the URL of the American Red Cross here. I’m positive they’ll get record donations this time around and those will be needed urgently.
Excellent posts, Peter.
Surely, though, you’d agree that beer would be better if the state made it. The British Beer Corporation could be funded by a beer license, for the trifling sum of only 30p a day. You’d buy your beer license and then be allowed to buy and drink other beer, made by proper commercial breweries, provided they could survive against the monolithic “competitor” staffed by thousands of smug lefties on a guaranteed wage and final salary pension.
The piss made by the BBC would be poured out of the factory and straight down the sewers, for all they care. They still get paid either way.
If you bought and drank too much commercial beer and got publicly drunk, you’d risk going to prison, but you’d also risk prison if you didn’t pay for BBC beer whether you drank it or not.
Admit it. Wouldn’t that be better?
Joerg,
Yes, I hope so too. I’m glad your girlfriend is in no danger. As for Fox News, it’s about the only news source where I can get both sides of the story. I listen to Sean Hannity on talk radio sometimes, too. I didn’t know you had a website. Will you give me a link? I might drop by.
It’s a non-political / non-topical website, Denise and I’m not to keen to post the URL on political forums (you need to be especially careful when you’re anti-islam). If you have a (sorta) anonymous email address I can email the URL to you though.
I think the reason why paxo took the mickey out of Howard in the complained of piece is because paxo is a bully and a coward and he knows rhat Howard beat him in the original 14 question interview. Paxo even refers to that original interview in the new piece, so it is obviously still on his mind.
Although paxo preened himself in the glow of the praise and awards given him for the interview he knows within himself that man to man Howard crushed him.
Howard won in 2 ways.
First, although paxo asked the question 14 times he didn’t shake Howard, who gave the same answer 14 times.
Second, we know that the Newsnight editor told paxo via his earpiece to fill in to cover a delay with some VT but paxo (“THE GRAND INQUISITOR”) couldn’t even think of any more questions apart from the one he asked 14 times.
Paxo knows this, Howard knows this and many of us know this so, as I say, there is public contempt for paxo the bully/coward.
To put it another way, paxo got stuffed.
Allan:
I have to disagree with you about new BBC journalists dragging Kirsty Wark or James Naughtie over the coals if they were to run for Parliament.
I remember listening to the World Service when they covered the 1997 General Election and how they got almost orgasmic when they announced the victory of Martin Bell, the ex-Beebazoid who was running as an independent.
I am waiting for the DEC – the UK Disaster Emergency Committee of aid NGOs – to announce a big aid effort and to tell us how to send donations for the disastrous hurricane damage aand floods in the US.
But I am not holding my breath.
6:00 News BBC1 05 September 2005
Hurricane Katrina, The American Tsunami
As a response to the criticism levied at the UN concerning the appalling time delay in its response to the Asian Tsunami, a spokesman for the UN’s Disaster Rapid Response Team said,
” We now understand the importance of a fast, effective and coordinated response and that no amount of discussion will ever be a substitute for action”
Suppressing giggles of delight the BBC praised Kofi Annan and the UN for their swift decision and response to the disaster. When asked to clarify what that fast, effective and coordinated response would be a UN spokesman said, “They caused the problem in the first place plus they can afford it, so fuck em”
Ted, Martin Bell ran as an independent without any ties to a mainstream party. If one of their own were to run as, God forbid, a Tory, then the knives would be out.
‘I don’t really have any issues with the Licence Fee. I’m quite happy to pay for a State broadcaster (without adverts) if they produce good quality, impartial programmes.
The BBC is failing to do this and I am refusing to pay. Simple.
Rob | 30.08.05 – 8:43 pm | # ‘
It’s not simple. What you regard as good quality and impartial, others might find poor quality and partial. The best method is to let people pay for the TV thay want, and not pay for TV they don’t want. The BBC is terrified of such a prospect. I wonder why.
Allan:
I know Bell ran as an independent.
Why do you think any Beebazoid would run as a Tory? 🙂
We’re not holding our breaths
waiting dor international aid
either.
Ted, I concede.
Here in the states, we have PBS, that operates with public funding and private donations. Lately, they’ve been breaking their own rules by allowing the sponsors who “donated” to have airtime at the beginning and end of the program. This is basically a commercial. PBS has some pretty good programs, if you’re interested in scrap-booking or the mating habits of the tsetse fly, but their news is bunk. It’s because they rely so heavily on tax money! They’ve got a bias to protect their own asses. Who’s going to come up with more funding for them, the socialist Democrats or the capitalist Republicans. NPR or National Public Radio isn’t much better, either. But neither have the air of legitimacy and roster of viewers that the BBC has. It’s funny, but leftists over here actually watched BBC as an alternative source for American election news! As if they weren’t dreadfully ill-informed to begin with! Now they’re turning to an organization half-way around the world to tell us what’s going on in our own country! Funny.
The left always complain when they are out of power, in fact they never shut up.
The right on the otherhand has never until recent times complained. I think its a new chapter both in the UK and USA.
I know for a fact that i will no longer sit back and watch the left constantly moan and groan about everything, whilst most people think they’re a bunch of losers.
I think for the first time ever, i can thank the likes of the BBC and New Labour for making me stand up and make a difference, however small. Because i can say happily, i am trying to stand up for freedom, capitalism and proud of being British.
All these 3 things, the BBC has constantly portrayed as evil, or in some way shape or form a blight on society.
Re: people watching the BBC for news in the USA during election time, my goodness, talk about painfull. I had to turn it off over here in the UK it was that bad. 🙂
For me, the BBC has taken sides, and it is firmly left. But like anything, what goes around comes around.
What has concerned me in recent times is the fact that the BBC has, in some instances when reporting incidents abroad, interviews “Communist Party Member” for Country X or Y.
Personally i find that offensive and seriously worrying. Communism killed more people that TB or AIDS and quite frankly, i think the BBC needs to stop making out that Communism is “good”. Cos’ it ain’t.
And i think the sooner they stop trying to brainwash everyone the better.
Won’t be holding my breath though.
Can’t wait to see the cricket next week, should be a cracker…pitty the BBC didnt bother to bid for that. No surprises there.
Mr Barnes soon you will be able to pay for test cricket from Sky, and I won’t have to pay for it because I’m not interested in cricket. Such people do exist. That’s how it should be for cricket and all TV. You want to watch cricket, you pay. I don’t, I don’t pay. If the BBC went subscription it could show what interested its customers, perhaps even test cricket. In a free country I should have the right to pay any broadcaster nothing at all if I want none of its services. It’s staggering that we still have to beg for something so reasonable in 2005.
Bravo Ian Barnes.