The BBC

[monty]

What do you think of the Beeb, is it worth the license money, do they get involved in matters they shouldn't, are they over staffed and is their coverage biased.

I can't understand why the Beeb is so involved with its website especially when it is claimed far fewer than half its subscribers use the thing. Why do they need so many reporters covering the one event even matches have two or three beeb journo's covering them for radio and tv. I honestly believe that the country may be better off scrapping the Beeb or making it go commercial as it coverage of politics and sport carry a bias when it should be strictly neutral in all aspects.....................what do you think

 

[McBain]

They should change their name to something flash.

The BBC sounds so 1925.

 

[DENNIS STEVENS]

The BBC is certainly an easy target for criticism & I certainly have a few favourites of my own (over-paying "stars" for example) but in many ways it does a good job & I prefer to have it than not have it. As regards the issue of political bias, it seems they are criticised on all sides so they've probably got it about right, generally. I feel that the BBC is at it's worst when it tries to compete with the commercial channels, when the way it's structured & funded should enable it to plough it's own furrow even more than it does - be different, be bold. One aspect where it does succeed in this is in the degree of diversity of programming across the different mediums. So I'd say a qualified

 

[Bundy]

Scap it.

 

[linglong]

Have to agree scrap it..its just not worth the money

 

[Bruce Wayne]

The Beeb aren't perfect by any means but then I don't think much of any of the bilge that often fills out television screens. When you compare them to other channels they are by far my favourite. It's a shame they have so much reality nonsense but then it gives a good excuse to do something worthwhile with the time that could have been wasted in front ot the tube.

It could always be worse, they could be ITV *shudder*

 

[Whitebootman]

The BBC should Inform, Educate, & Entertain. Generally happy with the first two, but my own opinion is they need a good kick up the backside on the entertainment front. Maybe I'm just a grumpy old fool, but so called reality TV, Celebrity dishwashing shows, and talent shows that focus more on public ridicule than showcasing talent just don't interest me. I am surprised at how little I now watch on the BBC.

The BBC needs to get back in touch with all its audience, including the grumpy old fools.



Early morning rant over.

Oh yes and make it pay for itself.

 

[Gerard_Francis]

If were given the choice I would not pay a subscription fee for the BBC, so best get rid and let them survive in the real world

 

[Sharpys top lip]

I pay enough for Sky.....


The BBC should pay for it's self.

 

[daza_1973]

The BBC should pay for itself - It has become a publicly funded joke over the years, okay you can't deny it was a pioneer back in its time, but in the age of Sky, Virgin media, etc,etc. Why should they get our money to bankroll self righteous employee's and push there own personal agenda's into our faces.

p.s part of this vitriolic rant was fuelled by the patronising email I recieved from them about the treatment of Fellaini on MOTD 2 last season.

 

[chicoazul]

I think the BBC does a marvelous job from the stuff I see, a lot of it's TV, Radio and documentaries are really value adding as opposed to the absolute tosh that is served up elsewhere.

British TV has gone awful, its [Poor language removed] celebrity obsessed.

 

[heatmeiser]

BBC radio is still brilliant. Sports coverage, comedy and drama are still probably the best around.

It's a shame they feel they have to scrape the imbecile barrel with some of the dross they churn out in prime time though.

 

[kenada_blue]

They do a good job but also can do a terrible one.

BBC 3 is awful. They're trying to find the new Little Britain with these new, hip comedy programmes and they're a waste of time.

I worked on "sketch show" they did a few years ago called Spacehopper. The script wasnt funny, the odd bit was (even met the new Doctor Who while I was there as he auditioned for a part but didnt get it). Anyway, the outcome wasnt very good. But you know what happened? They remade it! Changed the name to its original name "scallywagger" re-cast it, kept the majority of the same jokes....and you know what? It was still [Poor language removed]!!! Waste of money.

If that happens often, you can see why they waste money on tosh and not developing good stuff.

They're also a bit behind in getting quality US shows imported over. Channel 5 established themselves on the back of doing that, Channel 4 and Sky, even ITV all have good imports. BBC rarely have any.

 

[Cahill's Metatarsal]

I don't see how they can justify forcing everyone with a working telly to pay for 2 channels (& a few freeview ones, whether they have a digi box or not & a load of radio stations, whether they listen or not) when there are so many other options out there. As mentioned, it was a pioneer back in the day & served it's purpose then, no question, but times have moved on & now I think it's wrong that people are forced into paying for a service they might never even use. I think they should bin their policy of no adverts & give people the choice of paying for the service in the same way that all of the other channel companies do now.

On a positive note though, if anybody's been paying attention to the local news over the past couple of days they'd have heard about Margaret Haywood, a nurse who was struck off by the NHS because after being constantly ignored by people in charge, she secretly filmed shoddy treatment of patients & got sacked because of it. She was filming for the BBC & since then they've been absolutely brilliant to her so since I got to know her & her story I've had a lot more respect for the organisation

 

[Gazdalf]

BBC should come up with More content, and Less Channels.