Don't let any actual facts get in the way any time, please.
What facts are those then? Did I imagine the bit about entertainment and sports?
A Sky-like package could be offered, for more than the current license fee for anyone wanting the lot.
Is that one of the facts or your own view?
Personally I don't watch much on the BBC
and I certainly wouldn't pay for the ridiculous political coverage.
Yet under UKIP you would still be paying for the ridiculous political coverage. Unless Mr. Farage said he is going to do away with that as well? Is that one of the facts I've missed? Entertainment, sports and now all political programming.
Let me choose to pay for it if I want, and charge me a small fee for the basics.
Nope. Facts are what's in the Bbc's annual accounts. That's a boring legal requirement and shows the Bbc's a £5bn+ cancer on the broadcasting world that wants to keep growing.
The Bbc's paid plenty of outrageous salaries to it's staff and broadcast 'talent' it's wanted to poach off it's competitors. As you should know. And if it's really cheaper to run, then we shouldn't need to give it as much money. As you should also know.
It's sometimes the answer, but only if you contract carefully. Uncontrolled and unaccountable public spending is also not the answer, as you should know.
(unless you've never worked in the private sector. You have some.. odd views. What do you actually do for a living?)
Inform, educate & entertain. That covers just about everything. So a quick look at the TV guide and what do we have?
Nothing in it's flagship channel. Snooker on 2. A comedian doing news on 3. Some 'comedian' on 4 who just happens to be standing against UKIP.. Or you could just look at it's most popular section in iPlayer to see just how much of it's output is really new and original.
The BBC gets £3.5 billion from the licence fee, although some of it goes to broadband roleout etc. Sky's income is what? £7 billion? You happy handing more power and all power to Murdoch?
Your description of the BBC as a cancer (which is absolutely untrue given the huge contribution it makes to our country) is extremely offensive and should be withdrawn.
The BBC is cheaper, better value and pays much, much less than the private sector which is why talent defects 'to the other side'.
Public services (including the BBC) are always run cheaper than the private sector, but, programming especially all the public service programming which the BBC producers is very expensive.
The purpose of the BBC is...to inform, educate and entertain, which it does brilliantly...covering at least two out of the three all the time.
Just tonight during peak time on BBC Television... The One Show, The Mekong River with Sue Perkins, Railways Of The Great War, The Leadership Interviews, Election Tonight, Daily Politics, EastEnders, Panorama, Daily Politics Special, Masterchef, Inside Harley Street, Reggie Yates Extreme Russia (informative but disturing documentary series), Kim Philby, BBC News At Ten, Russell Howard, Jack Dee, Newsnight... informative, educational and / or entertaining. Documentaries, News and Current Affairs, Drama and Comedy. All brilliant public service broadcasting... and that was just tonight, April 21st... cost = 40p per household. Absolute bargain and value for money. You wouldn't get all this quality UK content from a private sector provider and certainly not for 40p!
About the first sensible policy UKIP have managed, the BBC is a national disgrace, the vast majority of it services are funded more cheaply and at better quality in the commercial sector
If people love the BBC so much they are perfectly free to pay for it. The problem with the current set up is that everyone with a TV is forced to pay nearly £150 a year to fund the BBC whether they watch it or not.
If people love the BBC so much they are perfectly free to pay for it. The problem with the current set up is that everyone with a TV is forced to pay nearly £150 a year to fund the BBC whether they watch it or not.
It's called letting the viewer choose.
Why for example can't they have adverts?
Precisely. Make it subscription, if people want to pay for the BBC then fine, but at the moment the £150 BBC tax just hits everyone.
I'm sure millions would be happy with the other free to air channels supported by adverts
About the first sensible policy UKIP have managed, the BBC is a national disgrace, the vast majority of it services are funded more cheaply and at better quality in the commercial sector
Speaking as someone who has worked on productions for the BBC and various commercial broadcasters...what is the basis of fact for your comment?
About the first sensible policy UKIP have managed, the BBC is a national disgrace, the vast majority of it services are funded more cheaply and at better quality in the commercial sector
A "national disgrace" which attracts large audiences. Can't be that bad!
Be interested to know where you find better quality more cheaply in the commercial sector.
If people love the BBC so much they are perfectly free to pay for it. The problem with the current set up is that everyone with a TV is forced to pay nearly £150 a year to fund the BBC whether they watch it or not.
It's called letting the viewer choose.
Why for example can't they have adverts?
Because it's the BBC. Being free from ads and commercial pressures is one of the BBC's huge advantages. If it had adverts there would be nothing special about it, and it would become just like any other channel.
Precisely. Make it subscription, if people want to pay for the BBC then fine, but at the moment the £150 BBC tax just hits everyone.
I'm sure millions would be happy with the other free to air channels supported by adverts
That is the most idiotic statement....as it would create an even greater divide between the well off and the poor. Maybe that's your plan...let them eat cake?
Sky entertainment alone costs over £250 a year and for that Sky spends less than ITV on new programming. Of those who subscribe they spend 70% of their viewing time watching Public Broadcasting Services and if you bother to check the facts night after night it's BBC programming the vast majority choose to watch.
Even radio.....
1.BBC Radio 2 (15.3m listeners every week)
2.BBC Radio 4 (10.8m)
3.BBC Radio 1 (10.4m)
If they can't select an unbiased audience at election time debate then they almost deserve to be privatised and be pay per view. The licence fee needs abolishing anyway and people can have the choice not to watch their programmes
Because it's the BBC. Being free from ads and commercial pressures is one of the BBC's huge advantages. If it had adverts there would be nothing special about it, and it would become just like any other channel.
One only has to look at ITV over the years, less & less controversial programmes I don't think they even have a regular high profile current affairs or documentary programme....they'd rather give Jeremy Kyle an additional 4-5 hours airtime at weekends.
If they can't select an unbiased audience at election time debate then they almost deserve to be privatised and be pay per view. The licence fee needs abolishing anyway and people can have the choice not to watch their programmes
Are you really unable to absorb the facts into your brain ICM selected the audience, on the same basis they were selected for the ITV & Sky/C4 debates.
There is a broadcasting committee that goes over and agrees the audience selection process with the political parties. The loudest cheer and applause I heard during the ITV debate was for Leanne Wood who attacked Nigel Farage for his disgusting and inaccurate remarks regarding AIDs sufferers.
For a party that says it wants to defend all that is British....he wants to scrap very British programmes such as The Archers, Countryfile, Antiques Roadshow, Call The Midwife, Poldark, Secret Britain, Deset Island Discs, Just A Minute, Book at bedtime, Dr Who.
All will be swept away by the effluent Farage leaving just the shipping forecast.
That's why UKIP want to slash BBC funding, so the 30% becomes a 100% audience of bussed in pin striped UKIP members. Anyone who watched their intimidation of journalists at their manifesto launch will realise what they are about.
For a party that says it wants to defend all that is British....he wants to scrap very British programmes such as The Archers, Countryfile, Antiques Roadshow, Call The Midwife, Poldark, Secret Britain, Deset Island Discs, Just A Minute, Book at bedtime, Dr Who.
All will be swept away by the effluent Farage leaving just the shipping forecast.
Good thing too. He could kill off tripe like Eastenders and save another couple of million a year. All those ridiculous talent shows could go too.
Comments
What facts are those then? Did I imagine the bit about entertainment and sports?
Is that one of the facts or your own view?
Yet under UKIP you would still be paying for the ridiculous political coverage. Unless Mr. Farage said he is going to do away with that as well? Is that one of the facts I've missed? Entertainment, sports and now all political programming.
What do you class as the basics?
The BBC gets £3.5 billion from the licence fee, although some of it goes to broadband roleout etc. Sky's income is what? £7 billion? You happy handing more power and all power to Murdoch?
Your description of the BBC as a cancer (which is absolutely untrue given the huge contribution it makes to our country) is extremely offensive and should be withdrawn.
The BBC is cheaper, better value and pays much, much less than the private sector which is why talent defects 'to the other side'.
Public services (including the BBC) are always run cheaper than the private sector, but, programming especially all the public service programming which the BBC producers is very expensive.
The purpose of the BBC is...to inform, educate and entertain, which it does brilliantly...covering at least two out of the three all the time.
Just tonight during peak time on BBC Television... The One Show, The Mekong River with Sue Perkins, Railways Of The Great War, The Leadership Interviews, Election Tonight, Daily Politics, EastEnders, Panorama, Daily Politics Special, Masterchef, Inside Harley Street, Reggie Yates Extreme Russia (informative but disturing documentary series), Kim Philby, BBC News At Ten, Russell Howard, Jack Dee, Newsnight... informative, educational and / or entertaining. Documentaries, News and Current Affairs, Drama and Comedy. All brilliant public service broadcasting... and that was just tonight, April 21st... cost = 40p per household. Absolute bargain and value for money. You wouldn't get all this quality UK content from a private sector provider and certainly not for 40p!
He really does have you lot braying like a bunch of pack animals.
I'm not a Kipper...far from it.
You're not banging Farage's drum either...
I completely agree
Not much of that happening here? and btw, I'm a 'kipper' and disagree with him, go figure that out ;-)
It's called letting the viewer choose.
Why for example can't they have adverts?
I'm sure millions would be happy with the other free to air channels supported by adverts
One thing that is going to be cut to the size is Nigel's ego on 7th May.
Speaking as someone who has worked on productions for the BBC and various commercial broadcasters...what is the basis of fact for your comment?
A "national disgrace" which attracts large audiences. Can't be that bad!
Be interested to know where you find better quality more cheaply in the commercial sector.
I want the BBC to be cut to the bone too and I don't support UKIP.
I support prudent spending of the money that I provide to the BBC.
I also support the BBC's sticking to the principles of its founding Charter.
Because it's the BBC. Being free from ads and commercial pressures is one of the BBC's huge advantages. If it had adverts there would be nothing special about it, and it would become just like any other channel.
That is the most idiotic statement....as it would create an even greater divide between the well off and the poor. Maybe that's your plan...let them eat cake?
Sky entertainment alone costs over £250 a year and for that Sky spends less than ITV on new programming. Of those who subscribe they spend 70% of their viewing time watching Public Broadcasting Services and if you bother to check the facts night after night it's BBC programming the vast majority choose to watch.
Even radio.....
1.BBC Radio 2 (15.3m listeners every week)
2.BBC Radio 4 (10.8m)
3.BBC Radio 1 (10.4m)
One only has to look at ITV over the years, less & less controversial programmes I don't think they even have a regular high profile current affairs or documentary programme....they'd rather give Jeremy Kyle an additional 4-5 hours airtime at weekends.
Are you really unable to absorb the facts into your brain ICM selected the audience, on the same basis they were selected for the ITV & Sky/C4 debates.
There is a broadcasting committee that goes over and agrees the audience selection process with the political parties. The loudest cheer and applause I heard during the ITV debate was for Leanne Wood who attacked Nigel Farage for his disgusting and inaccurate remarks regarding AIDs sufferers.
it was a 70/30 Bias. Is there a link to that.
All will be swept away by the effluent Farage leaving just the shipping forecast.
Doesn't sound quite right. In any case the BBC didn't choose the audience. They generally take great care to be impartial.
That's why UKIP want to slash BBC funding, so the 30% becomes a 100% audience of bussed in pin striped UKIP members. Anyone who watched their intimidation of journalists at their manifesto launch will realise what they are about.
Good thing too. He could kill off tripe like Eastenders and save another couple of million a year. All those ridiculous talent shows could go too.
Common sense really.