[g-bhxu]

No they're not.

The BBC has a gaurunteed income from the TV Licience while the commercial stations rely on advertizing and programme sales

[cyril-furr]

Originally Posted by g-bhxu

No they're not.

The BBC has a gaurunteed income from the TV Licience while the commercial stations rely on advertizing and programme sales

The BBC makes plenty too by Licence payer funded Program sales abroad (& here)

[Harfynn Teuport]

If you believe everything you read on here, it's a miracle there's even a television industry left in the UK.

[TORPIDO 1]

well some view they are some say their not you can argue the debate anyway you want- we should let all of the relevant facts do the talking and listen to what they say of course what ever that is .

[TORPIDO 1]

why continually close my thread and not show balance by closing all of he other channel in crisis threads - i thought htis board was mention to be neutral and free of influnece from any broadcaster or any person thus endangering free speech which is our right as british citizens of course.

[dynamics]

Originally Posted by TORPIDO 1

why continually close my thread and not show balance by closing all of he other channel in crisis threads - i thought htis board was mention to be neutral and free of influnece from any broadcaster or any person thus endangering free speech which is our right as british citizens of course.

Your thread was closed because you kept posting indecipherable nonsense.

Your opinions, when their meaning could be figured out, we're continually changing, changing every time others posters pointed out the flaws. You even contradicted yourself.

So, basically you have been free to have your say, it's just that no one thinks it makes much sense and the mods thought it was starting to disrupt the forum.

So, from your post above, are you implying that this forum is controlled by the BBC?

[stevvy1986]

Originally Posted by TORPIDO 1

why continually close my thread and not show balance by closing all of he other channel in crisis threads - i thought htis board was mention to be neutral and free of influnece from any broadcaster or any person thus endangering free speech which is our right as british citizens of course.

Well it didn't exactly help when you started by saying you started the threads supposedly for a bit of balance, but never actually bothered saying why the BBC were (supposedly) in crisis. All you did was basically say "people say the other channels are in crisis, so the BBC must be too, I don't have anything to back it up but I'm saying it anyway".

[TORPIDO 1]

Originally Posted by stevvy1986

Well it didn't exactly help when you started by saying you started the threads supposedly for a bit of balance, but never actually bothered saying why the BBC were (supposedly) in crisis. All you did was basically say "people say the other channels are in crisis, so the BBC must be too, I don't have anything to back it up but I'm saying it anyway".

i did other evidence and never suggested this board has anything to do with the bbc my argument was that if thers a thread for an itv crisis which there isnt really then there should be one for the definite but also very small one both of which are negilible basically, all of this type of threads should be locked as evidence and interpretation are very subjective and understanding, so if they are to continue which thye shouldnt be allowed to we must have one for each broadcaster as all are in crisis to some degree and this site must remain balnced not biased in anyway. the point of this board is to encourage well informed debate and all of these threads about crisis are very tedious.the message is simply new threads with new rules about to all ow balanced discussion or lock them all and change the rules so that type of thread are not allowed. this is a sensible choice.

[dynamics]

Originally Posted by TORPIDO 1

i did other evidence and never suggested this board has anything to do with the bbc.

Erm....actually you did seem to imply just that...

"why continually close my thread and not show balance by closing all of he other channel in crisis threads - i thought htis board was mention to be neutral and free of influnece from any broadcaster"

Considering that your criticism was of the BBC, and you are complaining that the forum is being censored due to influence from a broadcaster........


Oh, and I am not sure you "did" [present] any actual evidence. It was just a random bunch of continually changing statements which apparantly all meant the BBC is "in crisis".

[dynamics]

Originally Posted by TORPIDO 1

my argument was that if thers a thread for an itv crisis which there isnt really then there should be one for the definite but also very small one both of which are negilible .

Firstly there is evidence to show that ITVs audience share is falling. Look at the graph below. BBC1 over the past 4 years has stayed constant. ITV is falling at what looks like a slightly accelerating rate.

http://www.barb.co.uk/viewing/trend-...mit=View+graph


Secondly you are not making much sense. If the BBCs alleged "crisis" is negligible, as you state, then how can it be a "crisis".

I certainly wouldnt call ITVs continuing trend of loss of audience share negligible.

[dynamics]

Originally Posted by TORPIDO 1

basically, all of this type of threads should be locked as evidence and interpretation are very subjective and understanding,

so if they are to continue which thye shouldnt be allowed to we must have one for each broadcaster as all are in crisis to some degree

and this site must remain balnced not biased in anyway. the point of this board is to encourage well informed debate and all of these threads about crisis are very tedious.

the message is simply new threads with new rules about to all ow balanced discussion or lock them all and change the rules so that type of thread are not allowed. this is a sensible choice.

No they shouldnt all be locked. Yours was locked because you kept posting indecipherable nonsense and the mods thought it was disrupting the forum.

There is nothing subjective about the graph I posted above, and no they are not "all in crisis".

The site is not biased, people are allowed to post their opinions. Most are based on reasoned thought and evidence. Yours havent been. All you seem to keep saying is that because there is a thread talking about an ITV ratings crisis, which there is solid evidence to suggest there is (even if IMO the terminology is a little strong), that there should be one about a "BBC ratings crisis", even though it doesnt exist.

Thats not balance, thats stupidity.

No its not a sensible choice to ban these types of thread and there is balanced discussion. Its just that you dont appear to understand the concept.

Do you realise you have just suggested censorship, contradicting your previous statements about freedom of speech

oh, so if you think these threads are tedious, it wont be a problem to you to do us all a favour and stop posting your confused nonsense in them.

[mikw]

Originally Posted by TORPIDO 1

why continually close my thread and not show balance by closing all of he other channel in crisis threads - i thought htis board was mention to be neutral and free of influnece from any broadcaster or any person thus endangering free speech which is our right as british citizens of course.

Of course the board is neutral and free from influnce - everyone can post and post what they like (within the T and C's of forum rules).

The reason why the "BBC in crisis" threads get shutdown is because the BBC is not in crisis - therefore the threads go into pointless arguments.

[KennyT]

Originally Posted by dynamics

Firstly there is evidence to show that ITVs audience share is falling. Look at the graph below. BBC1 over the past 4 years has stayed constant. ITV is falling at what looks like a slightly accelerating rate.

http://www.barb.co.uk/viewing/trend-...mit=View+graph
...
I certainly wouldnt call ITVs continuing trend of loss of audience share negligible.

Point of order, that graph is just ITV(1) and doesn't take into account the growth of ITV1HD and ITV+1. The share, when those channels are taken into account, is still falling, but not as fast as that graph implies.

K

[leicslad46]

Originally Posted by g-bhxu

No they're not.

The BBC has a gaurunteed income from the TV Licience while the commercial stations rely on advertizing and programme sales

The BBC totally fulfils its public service requirements in all areas. It has a politcial programme on everyday apart from saturday whereas ITV doesnt

There is a sunday evening religious slot with songs of praise on BBC1 whereas on itv they dont

They have a regional news programmes for where viewers actually live where as itv dont. ITV have cutback on its regional news

BBC offers a wider choice of programming in primetime whereas itv seem to depend on soaps

[Tassium]

If some local news, a few political programmes and a religious sing-a-long define public service broadcasting then why do we need all the other stuff on BBC1/2/3/4 ???

As for primetime, the whole of commercial TV is the BBCs competitor nowadays; not just ITV. It's not 1976 anymore.

[Glenn A]

If anything, Channel 4 is a mess, they seem to rely on Deal or no Deal, Come Dine With Me, Hollyoaks and The Simpsons too much, none of which get more than 1.5 million viewers. If it wasn't for the Paralympics and horse racing, they'd be completely sunk. Also the over reliance on Big Brother didn't help, by the end a fifth of their budget was spent on a show that was well past its peak, had no repeat potential and couldn't be made into DVDs. However, there was no defining replacement lined up.

[mikw]

Originally Posted by Tassium

If some local news, a few political programmes and a religious sing-a-long define public service broadcasting then why do we need all the other stuff on BBC1/2/3/4 ???

Much as always, a BALANCE is required - and there is more PSB than the things you list - "Africa" (which on now) is a good example.

[TORPIDO 1]

Originally Posted by dynamics

Firstly there is evidence to show that ITVs audience share is falling. Look at the graph below. BBC1 over the past 4 years has stayed constant. ITV is falling at what looks like a slightly accelerating rate.

http://www.barb.co.uk/viewing/trend-...mit=View+graph


Secondly you are not making much sense. If the BBCs alleged "crisis" is negligible, as you state, then how can it be a "crisis".

I certainly wouldnt call ITVs continuing trend of loss of audience share negligible.

there is a crisis not maybe in overall terms like there isnt with itv but in specific programmes like animal antics which has vanished without trace :- www.tvguide.co.uk/Animal_Antics cant ge ti og to blue sorry so cut and paste into browser please do the same with ... metro.co.uk/2012/01/04/david-jasons-the-royal-bodyguard...showing how bad the ratings are for this show were and these are 2 of many so i do have a point so why does nobody see it and allow my threads to stand on their own we live in a country with free speech and my free speech is being restricted in thisd way - i have a point but the board is unfairly treating me unlike people such a samuel w whose itv diatripe is allowed to continue unchecked please shwo balnce and dont be so qucik to lock threads please thanks, cheers.

[TORPIDO 1]

also do nt get me started on jimmy saville a real crisis but at least heads have rolled.

[mikw]

Originally Posted by TORPIDO 1

there is a crisis not maybe in overall terms like there isnt with itv but in specific programmes like animal antics which has vanished without trace :- www.tvguide.co.uk/Animal_Antics cant ge ti og to blue sorry so cut and paste into browser please do the same with ... metro.co.uk/2012/01/04/david-jasons-the-royal-bodyguard...showing how bad the ratings are for this show were and these are 2 of many so i do have a point so why does nobody see it and allow my threads to stand on their own we live in a country with free speech and my free speech is being restricted in thisd way - i have a point but the board is unfairly treating me unlike people such a samuel w whose itv diatripe is allowed to continue unchecked please shwo balnce and dont be so qucik to lock threads please thanks, cheers.

We've been through this before. "Animal Antics" was devised as a cheap filler show which could be dropped for the Rugby.

[dynamics]

Originally Posted by TORPIDO 1

there is a crisis not maybe in overall terms like there isnt with itv but in specific programmes like animal antics which has vanished without trace :- www.tvguide.co.uk/Animal_Antics cant ge ti og to blue sorry so cut and paste into browser please do the same with ... metro.co.uk/2012/01/04/david-jasons-the-royal-bodyguard...showing how bad the ratings are for this show were and these are 2 of many so i do have a point so why does nobody see it and allow my threads to stand on their own we live in a country with free speech and my free speech is being restricted in thisd way - i have a point but the board is unfairly treating me unlike people such a samuel w whose itv diatripe is allowed to continue unchecked please shwo balnce and dont be so qucik to lock threads please thanks, cheers.

Sorry, cant be bothered to decipher.

No there isnt a crisis.

[mikw]

Originally Posted by TORPIDO 1

also do nt get me started on jimmy saville a real crisis but at least heads have rolled.

Big Organisation employs a paeodophile shocker. Statiscally almost all big organisations employ paeodos without them knowing.

Several other organisations employed Savile as well.

Hey, if you work for a company chances are you will a paedo or two in it.

Heads may have rolled to satisy the newpapers, but were they they the right heads?

[Samthefootball]

No channel is in crisis. This is not 1980 any more with only 3-5 channels this is 2013 with more then 40 channels. BBC 1 and ITV still get very good ratings with 5m nearly every night. Channel 4 still gets good ratings for their documentrys same as channel 5.

i think some posters expect 20m to still tune in but thats never going to happen again

[Dazinho]

Originally Posted by TORPIDO 1

there is a crisis not maybe in overall terms like there isnt with itv but in specific programmes like animal antics which has vanished without trace :- www.tvguide.co.uk/Animal_Antics cant ge ti og to blue sorry so cut and paste into browser please do the same with ... metro.co.uk/2012/01/04/david-jasons-the-royal-bodyguard...showing how bad the ratings are for this show were and these are 2 of many so i do have a point so why does nobody see it and allow my threads to stand on their own we live in a country with free speech and my free speech is being restricted in thisd way - i have a point but the board is unfairly treating me unlike people such a samuel w whose itv diatripe is allowed to continue unchecked please shwo balnce and dont be so qucik to lock threads please thanks, cheers.

With all due respect, could you break this down into sentences as it is not only hard to read but also hard to determine the point you are making.

From my point of view, there is no crisis on either BBC or ITV but The Royal Bodyguard really did not float my boat. I am looking forward however to the Penguin series starting tomorrow night on BBC1 - I like the noise they make. PSB at its best surely?

[dynamics]

Originally Posted by KennyT

Point of order, that graph is just ITV(1) and doesn't take into account the growth of ITV1HD and ITV+1. The share, when those channels are taken into account, is still falling, but not as fast as that graph implies.

K

Fair point, but looking at the data available HD and +1 have only grown about 0.6% over the past few years.

I suppose in that case we should also add in iplayer and ITV player.

I dont have data for that, but I suspect BBC iplayer performs considerably better than ITV player

I wonder if the BBC1s share would then indicate an increase?