As the BBC shoots itself in the foot again and again, pressure is mounting with questions about its governance, structure and funding being asked…again and again.
This from the Spectator:
How to save the BBC? Privatise it
A reckoning is long overdue. The BBC may not know the value of money, but those prosecuted for not paying its fines certainly do. Many of them struggle to make ends meet and would not dream of paying £145.50 for BBC services that they could happily go without. Sky now produces some of the best arts coverage in Britain. The market for drama is now global, and British living rooms are filled with American (and even Danish) DVD box sets.
The BBC can easily compete in such a market, its programmes have a global appeal. It could easily find people willing to pay to watch or listen. But if it wants to be tax-funded, it should restrict itself to a public service remit and focus on reducing the license fee — and the fancy salaries must go for good.
‘Is the BBC biased’ has come up with the ‘real politik’ analysis of just when the BBC will be privatised:
Where would the existing BBC employees, both mind setters and the set, go? They would remain in their jobs wouldn’t they? Decision makers would still be BBC personnel. It should simply be removed. Be no more. I wonder if ex BBC would get jobs in the real private sector?
The privatisation bill would need to be carefully drawn up.
From what I can gather, news and analysis is pretty popular, even abroad on international matters, for all its bias. This could be hived off like another CNN, complete with radio station and website.
Other channels could be created and sold off out of various types of programme – history, children’s stuff, culture, drama etc. Programmes which don’t fit into any particular category could just be sold to existing private providers, or junked.
If broadcasting was really opened up, newspapers might like to buy some of these channels or programmes. Imagine Guardian TV. Naturally the Telegraph would want to compete, but I can’t see it buying much BBC content.
If senior executives were to be paid a small percentage of the privatisation profits they would have an incentive to sack cretins and bureaucratic fat before the sale, as the various channels and programmes would then fetch more money.
The privatisation bill would offer this percentage take to senior executives in lieu of pension, redundancy and golden handshake money, as they will of course be redundant after privatisation.
Now what should we the public do with our share……?
I like the idea of breaking it up into it’s component parts and privatising them individually rather than as one huge unit, which would, in effect, change very little. The Pop Music stations, both R1 and R2 and the various similar TV channels should, as is proved by the many successful existing commercial Pop Outlets. Similarly with R5, there is no reason that should not be able to stand on it’s own two feet without the need to be firmly attached to the teat of enforced tax payer funding.
I’ve no doubt others have ideas of how things can be changed by privatising and breaking up the BBC. One thing is certain, in it’s present form it’s size gives it a near monopoly position in broadcast news and current affairs programmes which it then uses to attempt to indoctrinate the public with it’s own vision of how the public should think and how they should view the BBC’s concept of the future of the world. It’s time the Almighty BBC was reined in and made to stand or fall without being propped up by a massive Government imposed penalty for wishing to view TV transmissions which is then used to benefit one particular section of it to the detriment of all other broadcasters.
Imagine Graudian TV? Thanks to the current bBC output, imagination is not required.
😉
Wouldn’t it be fun, and ironic, if Rupert Murdoch won the bid for the BBC.
They could actually make series of the whole takeover drama, and its aftermath. It would make a riveting watch.
The idea of a public service broadcaster is seriously anachronistic. Having said that, abolishing or privatising the BBC is simply too radical a policy for most of the general population as, for better or worst, it is ingrained in the national psyche. The practical solution is to downsize it, resulting in a sustainable, affordable, core service. This could consist of BBC1 and a combined BBC2/News channel, along with a handful of national radio stations. All of these would have a general British feel and be designed to add to national life. There is no reason for the BBC to operate children’s channels, pop music stations, local radio stations, ethnic radio et al as all of these niches are adequately addressed by the private sector and hence they should be sold off. However, there is no reason why the commercial wing of the BBC could not operate these channels on a subscription basis a la Sky.
This more traditional BBC would cost around £1.5-£1.8 billion to run. It would be financed by direct taxation, achieved by the equivalent of cutting the Foreign Aid budget by some 15%. The TV Licence Fee would obviously be scrapped, with pardons issued to those who have been prosecuted for non-payment. They would also receive compensation from a fund financed by the sale of the the surplus channels.
Its not just that the BBC is ingrained in the national psyche. The other reason is that government of the day has a ready made and subservient global channel to spread its view.
The BBC was invaluable tool in WWII, and so it is now in all national and international crisis. It will continue to be so, as long as the BBC is a trusted source, and not just a lefty propaganda instrument. In fact that is why the left has spent so much effort in infiltrating the BBC. If they had not, then I don’t think we would be having this debate.
Practically, it is necessary to clean the House of BBC, so that it reflects all views, and not just that of the left.
“… it is necessary to clean the House of BBC …”
Like Hercules cleaning out the Augean Stables. Would all the waters of the Thames be enough to wash away the filth and corruption? And think of the water pollution too! I’m sure the Greens and the EU would have something to say about that.
Craig’s cost-benefit analysis is about a depressingly pithy an accurate summary of the options as one might expect, and especially the reactions of any path-of-least-resistance conviction pol filling out an expense form or relatively non-market over-rated employee contract today.
Beyond this, on matters of sales, there’s also the not so small matter of brand value.
‘British’ Before Christ still carries some weight, while Multicultural Sovereign Nation Broadcasting Company may lead to confusion.
It’s not unheard of for a private outfit to retain unwarranted national status of course, as BA stands testament to.
So I will still be vexed when I am spoken for by unprofessional, inaccurate, partial twerps like Tulip, without being asked or sharing by association her skewed views in my name.
But at least I wouldn’t be paying for her, and could watch broadcast TV again without being compelled to fund her bosses’ indulgences first.
How would the Bbc loving C. Toynbee`s square this circle ? They worship at alter of state biased broadcasting , but they love tax payer funded single mothers , ethnic`s, etc who don`t or can`t pay the licence fee , but they wouldn`t want them prosecuted either & fined or jailed ,so whats the answer ?In her view they would be all exempted, & the tv tax,& fines hiked,& put onto good old English Whitey !New Bbc Charter & job done !
The first step is to de-crimminalise non-payment of the TV-tax. That should go someway to focus minds. When fewer and fewer people are paying, the BBC itself will call for it to move too subscription. We can then begin the process of breaking it up.
“The obvious solution to the incompetence, arrogance and elitism of senior corporation figures is to scrap the licence fee,
writes George Kerevan.”
http://www.scotsman.com/news/george-kerevan-bbc-chiefs-like-bankers-1-3090653
“Governing the BBC”
Lights, action, meltdown.
“A row over pay-offs by the national broadcaster has produced an establishment clash”
http://www.economist.com/news/britain/21586331-row-over-pay-offs-national-broadcaster-has-produced-establishment-clash-lights?