Options
If the Tories win the election ,will they kill of the BBC
![[Deleted User]](https://we.vanillicon.com/v2/e7efcfed08b4de0a55090200dab8b651.svg)
[Deleted User]
Posts: 435 Forum Member
✭
I suspect ,using the excuse of passing the stewardship of the BBC trust to Ofcom , David Cameron's agenda is to kill of the BBC ,by piecemeal privatisation of sections of the BBC.
0
Comments
We will have to wait and see, no good second guessing.
Sadly the tories hate any public sector and love to sell it off cheaply for profits for their supporters. ...
Go ahead. I like hearing the opinions of others.
The only issue I have is where those opinions are based on mistruths or just totally incorrect.
In that case I would correct the person.
The Channel 4 setup is as outlined in Labour's June 1978 White Paper (following the recommendations of the 1977 Annan Report).
When the Tories came to office in 1979 they handed control to the IBA (rather than an OBA) but they didn't alter Annan's funding or programming proposals.
Tory = hell.
It would only benefit the pay TV companies, the subscription free services would suffer unless funding was maintained.
Tbh, if they want to save at least the same amount as money as the last 5 years, then there are only a few areas big enough to cut which would make a worthwhile move in that direction. BBC is one of them....
The most likely outcome would be that BBC chs would go on a monthly subscription service, self funding similar to sky.
That raises a few technical and financial questions.....
Most freeview tv's & freeview boxes are limited to free to air reception. In other words, most have no pay card slot or upgrade option. Many people would need to either replace like for like with new equipment which featured such a card reader, or buy an additional box with card reader to hook up to their existing TV. Ironically, sky and cable subscribers could simply have the BBC bundle added to their existing package/card. Regardless of rights or wrongs of such a move, I would urge this move to be combined with a full HD compliance move as well. Just so we don't encounter 2 upgrades in the space of a few years.
Freesat boxes & freesat enabled tv's face more or less the same challenge, the only difference being how the signal reaches the household. I actually think, a higher % of freesat boxes have an upgrade slot for a possible retro fit card reader (mostly thanks to humax for having such a large slice of the freesat market and the foresight to include it).
But what about BBC radio. I would think radio 5 is a prime candidate for selling, but the others would have a funding issue. If people had to choose to subscribe to the BBC TV chs, everyone inc non payers would still be able to tune into free radio. Maybe the radio stations would have to go down the commercial route with adverts.
Then there is the little fact that itv and ch4 get some money from the current license fee - how to replace that?
ITV and Channel 4 don't get any income from the licence fee. It was suggested in 2009 but it didn't happen.
I didn't think they did. I believe it was suggested, as was top-slicing for broadband roll out, but none of the suggestions ever went through.
The BBC is no longer needed, There are many worldwide providers of TV content now that we can access 24 hours a day. For example just the average youtube channel like Vsauce in one 10 minute video provides more intelligent insight than watching 6 months of BBC1 primetime output.
So the sooner the BBC goes the better. To waste nearly £4 Billion every year on frivolous TV entertainment is sick, when there are other more worthwhile things to spend money on. So scrap it please Mr. Cameron.
Oh wait, you're serious!
Read Barwise and Picard https://reutersinstitute.politics.ox.ac.uk/sites/default/files/What%20if%20there%20were%20no%20BBC%20TV.pdf
It is called "What if there were no BBC TV "
Also note that BBC TV is only about 2/3 of BBC expenditure .,,
And you might like to see this from 2013 showing how much more the BCc dues fir less money unreal terms than 20 years ago http://downloads.bbc.co.uk/mediacentre/bbc-20-years-comp.pdf
In those days BBC Was 40 % of UK broadcast income
It us now under 22% ...
You can say 40p a day ....
But another way is to say that sky paid for football coverage about the BBC total ANNUAL income ..
. And that football output hours is about the BBC DAILY TV hours output
The BBC must therefore be a prime target.
I expect the only bit to survive free to air would be the parliament ch (paid for by gen tax and delivered thru the BBC, but free to air).
I see no return to its heyday.
You also see value in paying $100 to watch two guys fighting in HD. Everybody should disregard your posts as they are absolute rubbish.
We also need to remember that the BBC plays a vital role in the wider broadcasting sector. It forces the ad-channels to compete on quality. If there was no BBC, the poor standard of the commercial sector would be even poorer.
There is also the matter of technology as raised up thread. There isn't the technology available to scramble the channels. Then there is BBC radio. Which government is going to come out and say that everyone needs to replace their TVs and boxes etc (at huge cost) oh and your brilliant BBC will now be infected by ads and/or a huge rise in charges...for a much poorer service. The terrible Tories are nasty, but I don't believe they will destroy one of our finest institutions.
Vote for parties who believe in public services. Don't vote for right-wing outfits. It is that easy.
Value is placed on the individual.
One thing is definitely not nonsense and that is there's no way ever the BBC will get to screen a big time fight!