“The truth is, most “quality” BBC programmes aren’t paid out of our license fee, but make a profit,” says James Graham of Qaequam blog. “What you pay for out of your license fee is the uncommercial stuff, which with the exception of things such as educational programming and news, normally means low grade crap such as soap operas and reality TV.”
Is that right? Reading the comments on the Quaequam post, I found one by Michael Jennings, a blogger with a good knowledge of how industries work, suggesting that James Graham’s argument is correct.
I would, in fact, still support the abolition of the licence fee on principle even if is not. Grown-up countries need state-run TV stations the way they need state-run newspapers.
However if Qaequam Blog is correct, it is a good counter-argument to those such as Oliver Kamm, who argues that the abolition of the BBC licence fee would drive the BBC downmarket.
-All via Jackie Danicki.
P.S. I have to defend the BBC on one point. I’m practically ready to fight a duel to defend the BBC on one point! Dad’s Army is not low-grade pap. And I believe it still pulls in a steady profit on repeat fees.
It’s a very interesting argument but one which, I suspect, it would be almost impossible to prove one way or another.
Getting to the truth behind a PLC’s annual statement is next to impossible and the BBC’s size and complexity leaves plenty of room for creativity.
Which leaves us with inspired guesswork – and I’m with Ms. Solent about Dad’s Army, which will, I’m sure, have made a small fortune.
Moreover, the suggestion that soaps lose money is surely wrong too. The leading soaps are widely sold throughout the Anglosphere, along with the best drama and surprise hits, like the Teletubbies and The Antiques Roadshow. I’m sure they are very profitable,too.
Areas where the BBC loses huge sums must include its vanity brodcasting – regional programming – ‘news’, sport and buying major films to compete with ITV.
If quality programmes are so profitable, how come ITV makes so few?
Maybe becuase ITV are a badly run company surviving in an over-regulated (i.e .state created niche) market?
I totally agree Natalie-
On Dad’s Army.
Oh, I also agree about the rest, and with AntiCitizenOne’s point. It’s a totally spooked out market ITV operate in, a ghost town.
you can see just how bad things have gotten with ITV after 9pm each evening – endless phone-in quiz shows on premium rate lines.
(and to think, we used to laugh at the quality of American TV. how times have changed…)
OT:
The oliver kamm link was to a piece on the use of the diminutive of a name as a form of condescension.
This reminded me of a rule I would like implemented. The Conservative Party should announce that any future reference to them as tories would be taken as deliberate insult.
This would smoke out a few broadcasters – the ones who earnestly adopted changes such as new labour and eu instead of Common Market.
“Oh, I also agree about the rest, and with AntiCitizenOne’s point. It’s a totally spooked out market ITV operate in, a ghost town.”
by way of contrast, Ireland, with a population of only 4 million , supports a market in which no four terrestrial channels exist, RTE 1, RTE2, TV3, TG4
here is also channel 6 on cable
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Channel_6
this is in addition to the usual cable/satellite channels (Sky , Chorus, NTL etc).
maybe it less regulatated over there. the radio certainly appears to have far more channels broadcasting, and the quality is more varied than in England.
(i counted about 15 on FM once.. including 2 pirates)
arrgh – typos.
“less regulated”
“and the stations are more varied than in England.”
I also support the notion of public-service broadcasting. In a patriotic nation which is comfortable with it’s culture it is a very powerful unifying force.
Unfortunately we aren’t living in such a country. In Britain we have an entrenched left-wing elite funded by public extortion whose aim is to tear down our culture. Consequently free-market broadcasting is our only hope of exerting some control over them.
More downmarket programming? So what? It would take a Cicero to argue and convince that what we currently have is even remotely ‘up-market’: who cares if it plunges another notch? We have bigger fish being fried.
Rob,
Public-service broadcasting should be funded by people who think it’s important, not by extortion.
best site
http://www.onlinedating.net.in/
best site
http://www.moviespoint.org/
cool site
http://www.moviespoint.org/