About Us ThisisBigBrother.com

lostalex · 20-03-2014, 04:01 PM

i used to listen to BBC "world have your say" radio program everyday, but they don't even give that for free online any more. BBC is getting cheap and going down hill even before they have their license fee taken away.

Marsh. · 20-03-2014, 04:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lostalex

i used to listen to BBC "world have your say" radio program everyday, but they don't even give that for free online any more. BBC is getting cheap and going down hill even before they have their license fee taken away.

Yes, that's part of the crisis their facing. Where've you been?

BBC Three's been axed too. The license fee was frozen and costs are rising. Not to mention the Tories are taking the piss with forcing the BBC to pay for more and more besides.

Also BBC World News doesn't come from the license fee. That is subscription and advertiser funded.

Kizzy · 20-03-2014, 10:17 PM

Marsh are you Chris Patten?.....

Marsh. · 20-03-2014, 10:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kizzy

Marsh are you Chris Patten?.....

Yes.

armand.kay · 20-03-2014, 10:29 PM

This will mean adverts during doctor who and East Enders :'(

Samm · 20-03-2014, 11:08 PM

Omg I only like the BBC because they don't have adverts :/

Marsh. · 20-03-2014, 11:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sam <3

Omg I only like the BBC because they don't have adverts :/

Well you must like them for some other reason otherwise you wouldn't care if they had adverts or not.

joeysteele · 21-03-2014, 12:15 AM

I can accept to a good number of people the advertisemants would be an annoyance, however I rarely watch the BBC myself so since watching more commercial channels,I find the adverts not a problem at all.

In fact I welcome them as I can,for instance, let the dog out when a break comes if I am watching something I really am concentrating on.

For me, I would rather have adverts on the BBC and not have to pay nearly £150 a year to watch the BBC in my own place on the TV I have bought.

Nedusa · 21-03-2014, 07:02 AM

What I normally do to take the pain out of adverts is to let the programme start and immediately put it on live pause for about 10 mins then start watching it. Every time adverts come I fast forward past them and wind down the 10 mins of recorded programme.

Usually by the end of the programme I am back on live broadcast after the last of the adverts.

Or I guess you could just record the whole programme and flip through the adverts when they come on.

user104658 · 21-03-2014, 10:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nedusa

What I normally do to take the pain out of adverts is to let the programme start and immediately put it on live pause for about 10 mins then start watching it. Every time adverts come I fast forward past them and wind down the 10 mins of recorded programme.

Usually by the end of the programme I am back on live broadcast after the last of the adverts.

Or I guess you could just record the whole programme and flip through the adverts when they come on.

Exactly! Although these days I find an hour long show needs more like 15-20 mins ad allowance. Things like X Factor often need 30-45

.

Does anyone remember when Ant & Dec used to say "see you in two" before ad breaks? Now it's "see you in five"!

Both the TV licensing and Commercial versions of broadcast television are pretty broken these days. The future is downloads, OnDemand and live streaming. Scheduled TV is hopefully on the way out altogether.

Nedusa · 21-03-2014, 10:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

Exactly! Although these days I find an hour long show needs more like 15-20 mins ad allowance. Things like X Factor often need 30-45

.

Does anyone remember when Ant & Dec used to say "see you in two" before ad breaks? Now it's "see you in five"!

Both the TV licensing and Commercial versions of broadcast television are pretty broken these days. The future is downloads, OnDemand and live streaming. Scheduled TV is hopefully on the way out altogether.

Agree the whole idea of somebody scheduling programmes for you or in the case of the BBC for a whole nation is a bit old fashioned.

With a more Multicultural society the diversity and range of programmes being watched could never seriously be scheduled by one single broadcaster.

The future has arrived with downloads, YouTube, Pay TV, Satellite TV, Cable TV etc..

We have so much choice over what we watch and the medium through which we watch. The idea of somebody deciding a shedule of programmes is now a bit quaint.

I usually cherry pick the programmes I wish to view record them and watch them as I please fast forwarding through Ad breaks.

So I think the BBC needs a massive revamp and the idea of a TV licence is now not sustainable. Better perhaps to charge a fixed monthly fee like Sky or BT and then at least people have the choice to pay for BBC programmes or not.

Kizzy · 21-03-2014, 11:50 AM

I couldn't be bothered scanning viewing guides and pre planning a schedule, if I catch it I catch it, if I don't I don't

user104658 · 21-03-2014, 11:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nedusa

So I think the BBC needs a massive revamp and the idea of a TV licence is now not sustainable. Better perhaps to charge a fixed monthly fee like Sky or BT and then at least people have the choice to pay for BBC programmes or not.

The problem is, they're afraid that not enough people would be interested in signing up for them not to have to massively scale back. Lots of people would sign up to receive BBC programmes, sure, but... Definitely not the entire country. Probably not even half. Lots of households would happily do without BBC shows.

And that says it all really. We're all being forced to pay for a service that isn't actually justified by public demand. The quality of BBC television isn't SO high that people would willingly pay a monthly subscription for it. So how can a "licence" fee be justified?

Plus all of the big-selling properties would be snapped up if the BBC went under. Something like Doctor Who would have purchase offers stacked to the ceiling, its worth a fortune. There are essentially a FEW good shows scattered amongst endless hours of mindless dross that often verges on propaganda.

To showcase the point: Channel 4 might be in the pan currently, but take a look over the last 10 to 15 years. They made some of (the bulk of, in my opinion) the best British TV shows ever made. Production quality, acting, humour and "edginess" that the BBC has not come close to with the majority of its shows. Even now they have a couple of shows that are above most BBC productions on many levels.

...and dont even get me STARTED on the quality of BBC "journalism".

Nedusa · 21-03-2014, 12:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

The problem is, they're afraid that not enough people would be interested in signing up for them not to have to massively scale back. Lots of people would sign up to receive BBC programmes, sure, but... Definitely not the entire country. Probably not even half. Lots of households would happily do without BBC shows.

And that says it all really. We're all being forced to pay for a service that isn't actually justified by public demand. The quality of BBC television isn't SO high that people would willingly pay a monthly subscription for it. So how can a "licence" fee be justified?

Plus all of the big-selling properties would be snapped up if the BBC went under. Something like Doctor Who would have purchase offers stacked to the ceiling, its worth a fortune. There are essentially a FEW good shows scattered amongst endless hours of mindless dross that often verges on propaganda.

To showcase the point: Channel 4 might be in the pan currently, but take a look over the last 10 to 15 years. They some of (the bulk of, in my opinion) the best British TV shows ever made. Production quality, acting, humour and "edginess" that the BBC has not come close to with the majority of its shows. Even now they have a couple of shows that are above most BBC productions on many levels.

...and dont even get me STARTED on the quality of BBC "journalism".

Yes I think the BBC would have to look at which programmes it could sell to the public and like the other mainstream TV channels include adverts or product placement but a lot of programmes would have to go, but at least supply would reflect demand and the quality of programmes made would have to kept high in order to compete with advertisers and viewing figures.

The days of Public service broadcasting have I think now ended. The BBC would survive in the long run as it does have a massive back catalogue of programmes and a wealth of quality, expertise and resources to allow it to continue to make good programmes.

But it will look so different to the overbloated behemoth it currently is.

If ever change was needed at the BBC it is now

arista · 21-03-2014, 12:38 PM

New carpets at BBC's £1bn HQ... just 18 months after it opened

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...#ixzz2wbHILOX6

Fecking Bloated BBC burning public money

Marsh. · 21-03-2014, 01:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kizzy

I couldn't be bothered scanning viewing guides and pre planning a schedule, if I catch it I catch it, if I don't I don't

Easy going. That's the way to be.

joeysteele · 21-03-2014, 07:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by arista

New carpets at BBC's £1bn HQ... just 18 months after it opened

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...#ixzz2wbHILOX6

Fecking Bloated BBC burning public money

They've been doing that for ages in my view arista.

arista · 22-03-2014, 10:08 AM

The Times has how they want to block TV signals to Non payers
if they are on sky or virgin.

Not sure if that would work.

And I am sure they could not block a house from getting Freeview or Freesat
as it would block other homes near the non payer etc.

Cherie · 22-03-2014, 10:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by arista

The Times has how they want to block TV signals to Non payers
if they are on sky or virgin.

Not sure if that would work.

And I am sure they could not block a house from getting Freeview or Freesat
as it would block other homes near the non payer etc.

They guy in charge of strategy was interviewed on 5live yesterday evening he said it would not be possible to block signals, he never mentioned Sky or Virgin subs holders.

arista · 22-03-2014, 10:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cherie

They guy in charge of strategy was interviewed on 5live yesterday evening he said it would not be possible to block signals, he never mentioned Sky or Virgin subs holders.

Yes but lots of Ideas are being put Forward
Blocking is still under debate.

Soon The MP's Vote changing
the Non payers from criminal to civil

lostalex · 22-03-2014, 11:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 08marsh

Yes, that's part of the crisis their facing. Where've you been?

BBC Three's been axed too. The license fee was frozen and costs are rising. Not to mention the Tories are taking the piss with forcing the BBC to pay for more and more besides.

Also BBC World News doesn't come from the license fee. That is subscription and advertiser funded.

well i miss my daily dose of "world have your say". i can't imagine that it's that expensive to put up daily podcasts. a daily 1 hour show that's supposedly for the whole world not just the UK, so i don't know why they took it down. it can't be that expensive to host a 1 hour radio show. there are tons of free ones on iTunes podcasts from people in their basements, so why the BBC can't do it i don't know.