The Conservatives must intensify pressure on BBC to reform

Who feels sorry for the BBC and the loss of 1,700 jobs?  Guido doesn't.  He regards the job cuts as "a good start"!

A post on Platform10 calls for BBC3, BBC4 and other new services to be scrapped so that core public service broadcasting can be properly funded.

Dan Hannan thinks it's over for Auntie: "The revolution in communications technology is making the BBC, and every other nationalised television company, irrelevant. It’s over, boys. I’m sorry, but there’s nothing anyone can do."

Ted Brocklebank MSP, for the Scottish Tories, is concerned at the BBC's priorities: “I do genuinely think it is ridiculous that Scottish broadcasters and other staff will lose their jobs at a time when the BBC sees fit to pay out vastly inflated sums to so-called star network presenters."  He must be thinking of Jonathan Ross et al.

Jeremy Hunt MP, Shadow Culture Secretary, also wonders if the BBC is getting its priorities right.  In a statement just issued he said:

"Mark Thompson has a gargantuan task to persuade the public that quality in core areas such as news and documentaries will not be affected by the scale of the job cuts proposed. The recent purchase of the Lonely Planet guidebooks will also raise questions about whether the BBC is really committed to doing fewer things better."

The purchase of Lonely Planet has been estimated at £100m.  This is, I guess, what Iain Dale is worried about when he warns that the BBC must stay focused on its news gathering operations.

Mr Hunt has been more robust than his predecessor in commenting on the BBC.  In a Q&A with ConservativeHome in July,  he agreed that the Corporation evidenced a "tendency to be pro-European, anti-American, anti-politician, anti-capitalism etc".  He also described Robin Aitken's suggestion that a small portion of the licence fee - 2% - be allocated to a new speech-based radio station that could offer an "adversarial" public service broadcasting alternative to the BBC as "a practical way" to tackle these biases.  It would be great to hear more from Mr Hunt on this...

Comments

[Malcolm Dunn]

A few years ago I would have been tempted to defend the BBC to a much greater than I am now. It's hard not to feel a sense of satisfaction at the prospect of a large number of biased news people losing their jobs even though it's a personal tragedy for the individuals concerned. It does seem strange though that the other area where the greatest cuts are being made is in the 'factual documentary' department where many of the Horizon and Attenborough series are made. Surely this area has more than any other been responsible for the broadcasting of the BBC becoming world famous?
The Conservative party has been very quiet on the bias of their political reporting.On the principle of it's always easier to kick a man when he's down they should use the next few weeks and months to rectify that.

[still fed up]

"tendency to be pro-European, anti-American, anti-politician, anti-capitalism etc".

Sounds like Dave to me

[David Belchamber]

I believe the licence fee next comes up for consideration in 2012. It is very likely that a conservative government will have to deal with that, a fact which the BBC should ponder on.

[GT]

The BBC Charter renewal in 2006 was a wasted opportunity. The Government was focused on the bad publicity over its Iraq story and wished to avoid a repeat. The new Trust structure at the BBC appeared to be designed to put distance between ministers and the BBC for any bad news stories. Meanwhile, the trust has been packed with the usual quango-types, who are short on commercial media and technology experience, but have other axes to grind.
The BBC has too many priorities, it wishes to be regional, provide radio and television services to everyone, develop new media and a commercial arm (BBC Worldwide, which acquired Lonely Planet).
It has massive duplication, particularly in news - just compare the radio, local and national coverage of a large story, each using separate teams.
The BBC is trying to develop single channels, BBC 3 and BBC4, yet the audience is fragmenting and increasingly watching individual programmes using recording or download technology.
The BBC has also been stuffed with paying for the analogue to digital switchover. This has massive potential to be unpopular, as many existing televisions become obsolete.
The real questions that the BBC faces is how it can justify being the only beneficiary of the licence fee or even whether a poll tax is an appropriate method of paying for TV and radio.
The independent sector could probably spend much of the licence fee more efficiently. Independent local radio channels could exist, where they are currently crowded out by BBC channels without advertising.In 2016, the UK media market will be so vastly transformed that the licence model will be unsustainable.

Mark Thompson is trying his best to address these issues, but will run in to massive restance in the BBC and from its unions and is probably late in any case.

The Conservative Party was largely asleep during the Charter renewal debate and allowed the BBC to keep its current format for a further 10 years.

As a party we must avoid being drawn into the details of this BBC dispute, but should develop thoughts on planning for a digital era. We also need to be vigilant on digital switchover and be ready to put the blame for poor conversion firmly in the government's court.

[Tony Makara]

For decades I've dreamt of a government having the bottle to privatize the BBC and getting this dinosaur off our backs. The BBC is a tax and a tax that is wasted. The fact that they can offer an 18 million pound contract to Jonothan Ross shows the extent of their wasteful nature. what does the BBC give us of value? Very little outside of radio three and four. The television service is dreadful and the much vaunted self-promoted repuation for quality broadcasting is a myth.

What exactly is this quality we get from the BBC? Can anyone tell me? I have seen transvestites who were supposedly members of a Conservative Association vomiting in the face of a little girl on the BBC on the 'Little Britain' comedy show (Rumored to be a favourite show in the Blair household) yet I almost never see opera or ballet or arts programmes relating to higher culture.

If the BBC is dying we should all gather around it and give it a good kicking until it finally expires. The BBC has had its day and the sooner auntie beeb breathes her last the better for all of us.

[HF]

Why pick a fight when we are not in power and waste resources on this?

Let the BBC staff slug it out with their Management and the person who restricted their cash (Brown).

Deal with the BBC once we are in power.

[Patsy Sergeant]

In the newspapers today we are told that the 'cuts' will mean that the BBC will be showing more 'repeats', MORE repeats? They have been showing repeats for years now, anyone who does not know 'Only Fools and Horses' verbatim (well the people that actually watch repeats that is, and a lot of older people who are not into digital or the internet probably do), would have to have a gap bewtween the ears!

There are many other ways they could economise, as Ted Brocklebank MSP hinted, they could reduce J. Ross's footballer-style payment, he maybe 'in yer face' but is he really cost effective? And are bums on seats the only criterion?

[John Moss]

It is all over for "Broad"-casters everywhere.

The world is going digital and pretty soon we will all be able to download and watch what we want, where we want, when we want. The idea of channels will disappear with the exception of news and sport, but even news could be menuised.

The BBC should turn itself into a "super ISP", guaranteeing access to everybody to video and audio and data information, all for an individual small fee or annual subscription.

Just think what they could make from the archive alone. Forget scheduled programming of repeats. Instead, download and watch your favourite Fawlty Towers or Monty Python. In a few years the BBC could be contributing Billions to the Treasury rather than ripping off the public through the TV Tax.

[David]

Currently the BBC is the only UK channel to produce television any where near the quality of the US. You can make the case that Channel 4 is probably the only other one, and that too recieves public funding.

I'd be wary of a change which left us with TV of the quality of ITV or Sky in terms of home grown production.

[David]

"I almost never see opera or ballet or arts programmes relating to higher culture"

Check out BBC4.

[Tony Makara]

David, I wouldn't consider BBC4 as a providor of higher culture. There ought to have been a proper arts channel. Many people enjoy opera and classical music when exposed to it but the BBC thinks we would benefit more from seeing shows about the worst fifty pop records ever made.

Many fine British and American films were made before 1960, with great acting from the likes of British stars like Glynis Johns, Leo Glenn and Richard Todd but we almost never see those, instead we are treated to yet another re-run of 'Under Seige' or some other mass-killing flick.

On the subject of repeats the BBC could air some of the fine dramas in its vaults from years back. If we are going to have repeats lets have some variety and quality. Because a film or play is old it doesnt mean it isnt worth watching.

[David]

"I wouldn't consider BBC4 as a providor of higher culture. There ought to have been a proper arts channel"

Perhaps, although it does show programmes such that you referred to in your original comment, and as a whole, BBC4 tends to show more 'high end' niche programming.

"the BBC thinks we would benefit more from seeing shows about the worst fifty pop records ever made"

That's Channel 4....

"Many fine British and American films were made before 1960, with great acting from the likes of British stars like Glynis Johns, Leo Glenn and Richard Todd but we almost never see those, instead we are treated to yet another re-run of 'Under Seige' or some other mass-killing flick."

Generally speaking, the commercial channels are far worse for that sort of thing. Which brings me back to my concern.

[Angelo Basu]

I agree with HF. I can't see that criticising the BBC would be much of a vote winner while in opposition. At the same time, the general public still has (rightly or wrongly) some fondness and regard for the Beeb and so, without going into the deeper issues would be inclined perhaps to side with the "defenders" of the Beeb rather than a Conservative Party which it is only just beginning to start to trust again. The reality that New Labour has presided over the channel during a period when it has had to make significant job cuts means that it would be insane to give them the ability to present some guff about being "proud of the BRITISH Broadcasting corporation" and keen to protect it against nasty Tories who want to sell it to Rupert Murdoch.

In recent weeks there seems to have been a shift in the tone of Newsnight and Question Time towards being very sceptical and, in Paxman, contemptuous towards New Labour and their coverage of the Ming resignation suggested that they thought the Lib Dems a joke. Doesn't stop them being biased or being capable of having their sly digs at us too when the mood suits, but why encourage that mood?

Reform of the BBC is something that should be seriously considered as part of the agenda when in government, but it isn't the sort of thing to contribute positively to getting into government and I don't think it is something that would have to be a manifesto commitment to be achievable and indeed popular after election. But why let the Toynbees and Ashleys have a chance to stop rebuking Brown and start up a chorus of "Same old Tories, wanting to sell off the core of Britishness to pay for feathering the nests of the wealthy while depriving the relatively poor of a great public service" blah?

[Tony Makara]

David, I've seen these stupid 'Top 50' best/worse hits shows on the BBC too. A good channel for movies, and sadly no longer with us, was Carlton Cinema, Film4 is not bad but they do tend to repeat too often. A facinating film made by film4 which I havent seen for years was called 'Good and bad at games' it was all about the class system and although a bit left-leaning in its stereotypes was nontheless quite good.

One programme I must say that I enjoyed on the BBC was 'The lost world of Mitchell and Kenyon' which showed discovered footage of ordinary life in 1900. The films were facinating because there were almost no old people on film with life expectency being so short and it showed the level of poverty at the time. People walking past bow-legged with ricketts and little children pouring out of factories. The images were eerie and as I watched I felt as if I were watching ghosts but then another thought occupied me, that these were our ancestors and were the people who built Britain. Now more programmes like that would be worth the licence fee!

[Prentiz]

It is an absolute disgrace that the BBC has cut factual programme-making and news. It almost seems a spiteful response to their licence-fee demands not being fully met - a little vandalism to teach the politicians a lesson and discourage future non-compliance with their demands. These are actually the sort of programme that the BBC ought to be making more, not less of.

As another commenter has noted we are moving into a digital age. As available bandwidth increses, downloading your TV will inevitably become the norm. The idea that someone in an office in London choses what time you watch Eastenders or whatever, will seem as anachronistic as having only one channel, or closing down at night, seems now. This won't happen in the distant future - it will be a process taking place over the next 10-15 years.

In that context, the idea of a television channel, or station, will also be an anachronism - and the BBC just aren't gearing up for that. They will never compete with the popularity or effectiveness of commercial television, both domestic and US, in that market. Where they can, and where they could still add real value, is in news and factual programming - hence the stupidity of the focus here.

Conservatives also need to be a bit careful when calling for more "high" culture. Calls for more ballet and opera are too easy to paint as being not only elitist, but as being in reality a call for "more television I like". Arguments on that basis make it all the easier for the BBC to keep pumping money into populist nonsense.

[Tony Makara]

Prentiz, it is patronizing on the part of the BBC to think that people won't enjoy higher culture. How often we hear people say they have enjoyed theme music on a TV show or incidental music in a film only to discover that it is a famous piece of classical music. Many pop music artists such as Paul McCartney and Elvis Costello have made classical albums. So classical music and opera isn't elistist or not what people want. Its just that people rarely get achance to experience it. Same goes with ballet which can be a fantastic visual and musical experience, yet sadly most people are brought up to think that ballet is all about tutus and temperamental young women.

The BBC brought back 'Come Dancing' but spoilt it by infesting the show with celebrity culture, it would have been much better if the show had focused totally on real dancers rather than trying to teach celebs how to hesitate. As a collector of Hollywood musicals from the 30s/40s/50s it always amuses me to see how slow and clumsy the dancing is on 'Come Dancing' when compared to the likes of Fred Astaire, Ginger Rogers, Cyd Charisse and Gene Kelly.

One of the worst things on the BBC is situation comedy. How awful and base are shows like 'Goodnight Sweetheart' and 'My Hero' awful, woeful, so predictable and not at all funny. Incidently I don't blame the actors in such shows who do a good job under the circumstances, it is the scripwriting which is completely abysmal.

[David]

"Prentiz, it is patronizing on the part of the BBC to think that people won't enjoy higher culture."

The ratings would seem to back them up on that, save for the odd breakout. It's unfortunate, but there you are. High culture programmes tend to appeal to a niche; otherwise BBC4 would have much higher ratings.

"The BBC brought back 'Come Dancing' but spoilt it by infesting the show with celebrity culture, it would have been much better if the show had focused totally on real dancers rather than trying to teach celebs how to hesitate"

Rather than spoil it, it seems to have ensured that Ballroom dancing has become a lynchpin of prime time Saturday night viewing. Job well done I'd say. It's not my cup of tea, but I know a few families for whom it's become a show all members sit down together and watch; a rarity in this age.

"One of the worst things on the BBC is situation comedy. How awful and base are shows like 'Goodnight Sweetheart' and 'My Hero' awful, woeful, so predictable and not at all funny"

But on the other hand, you have 'The Thick of It' which is superb.

"In that context, the idea of a television channel, or station, will also be an anachronism - and the BBC just aren't gearing up for that. They will never compete with the popularity or effectiveness of commercial television, both domestic and US, in that market."

I'm not so sure. If you were to ask me to choose programmes that I would be willing to download, none would come from ITV, and quite a few from the BBC.

[Tony Makara]

David, ITV during the Lew Grade era used to produce some excellent programmes. A favourite of mine was 'Callan' with Edward Woodward and in latter years 'The Sandbaggers' with Roy Marsden. There were also slightly off-the-wall shows like 'The Prisoner' and 'The Avengers'. Sadly though ITV has degenerated beyond words and bears no relation to the service it provided before 1990. There is a theory that a TV show is only as good as its theme music and if that theory is true then I think ITV of the past would win that battle hands down. The last decent thing I saw on ITV was Robert Carlyles performance as Hitler in the mini-series 'The rise of evil' which had some stunning camera work. Hopefully there will be big changes at ITV so with the cutbacks at the BBC we might have interesting TV times ahead.

[Tanuki]

In my mind, the licence-tax-funded BBC is doomed; people in the 15-40 demographic no longer think of 'channels' for their media - they watch what they want when they want it, channel-surf in the ad-breaks and expect to be able to hit 'pause' when the pizza-delivery-guy comes then resume watching where they left off. The old 'broadcast' idea just doesn't fit this model. There is now no concept of channel-loyalty [and hasn't been for the last couple of decades]. If the BBC wants to survive it needs to transform itself into a premium-content self-supporting subscription service: some people might then be prepared to pay 30 quid a month for it like they do for the full sports-package on satellite. But that would be their choice - and for the rest of us "the BBC" [whose very name always brings back memories of being made to sit around at christmas with a bunch of aged relatives and watch some execrable 'christmas special'] - can sink or swim by virtue of the subscribers it can win.

[Comstock]

"If the BBC wants to survive it needs to transform itself into a premium-content self-supporting subscription service: some people might then be prepared to pay 30 quid a month for it like they do for the full sports-package on satellite."

Good telly for the rich, slop from the commercial networks for the poor?

No, thanks.

I must admit I agree about Lonely Planet though- don't see where that fits in.

[Tony Makara]

All this is nothing new! Heres an article from 2002 about DJs, remember that on a DJs show most of the time is taken up by the music and not the entertainment provided by the DJ.

Sara Cox, Radio 1's breakfast show DJ, has joined the premier league of broadcasting's high earners after signing a three-year deal believed to be worth £1m, despite losing 700,000 listeners during the past year.

Sara Cox, Radio 1's breakfast show DJ, has joined the premier league of broadcasting's high earners after signing a three-year deal believed to be worth £1m, despite losing 700,000 listeners during the past year.

Cox, 27, will be earning even more than Jeremy Vine, the 37-year-old Newsnight presenter turned Radio 2 DJ, who is to replace Jimmy Young at the start of next year on a salary of £250,000 a year.

TIME TO PRIVATIZE THE BBC!

[Patsy Sergeant]

I agree with you entirely Tony Makara and I think that 'David' must be something to do with the BBC! Everything is not awful on ITV, but a great deal is awful on the BBC, why even the camera work on some of the shows aimed at youth is tricksy-cutsy, as if the story-line wouldn't stand up on its own! Mind you I think that the series 'New Tricks' is one of the best anywhere - probably because it has some really professional actors that don't need gimmicks to impress!

And actually many of the late night films on BBC1 nowadays ARE quite violent, at least they appear or that sort fromt the synopsis - as I don't watch that type of film if I can avoid it.

Its a typical BBC line that everything on ITV is trash, and I think it stems from jealousy and an obssession with trying to beat ITV at bums on seats - BORING!

[Simon Denis]

Not only should the Beeb be privatised, it should be broken up. Nothing like it should be permitted to remain at large in the world of broadcasting. Otherwise, the lefties who currently run the show would be getting the free gift of a freshly privatised company, like a gaggle of post soviet "entrepreneurs". They would be able to trade on the "good name" and the contacts of the old Beeb to perpetuate their red message. The whole institution should suffer the death of a thousand cuts, sold off in tiny parcels. Only then would its marxist masters be defeated.

[Tony Makara]

Patsy Sergeant, I grew up in the 60s/70s in a house where ITV was definately king. We much prefered the commercial channel and found the BBC boring, it always felt like the BBC was talking down to people.

People should really pay more attention to the BBCs childrens output which is loaded with political propaganda and other nastynes. One time on the 'Dick and Dom' show some young children aged about eight to ten were 'Encouraged' to eat some very tarty and acidic food as fast as possible in what was meant to be a fun competition. One little girl became very distressed and was clearly gagging on the food and wretching, she paused and one of the presenters quickly stepped in to encourage her to continue. I thought this was appalling and wrote to the BBC to complain. All I got in return was a one sentence letter telling me that I had no sense of fun and that all the children had participated of their own free will. Its this sort of thing that makes me sick. The BBC seems to be beyond reproach.

The BBC seem to get away with everything. Their biased reporting of middle-east politics is a disgrace. The BBC world service which is meant to be the voice of Britain has a cosmopolitan internationalist agenda and content. The BBCs flagship programmes like eastenders deliberately set out to create and promote negative role-models.

Watching the BBC is often like having an open sewer running through the living-room. Can anyone claim that the show 'Little Britain' is anything but obscene? How can people claim this is entertainment. The problem is that standards have fallen so much that people have literally been corrupted and think that watching a transvestite vomiting is normal entertainment.

[Sam S]

I'm a bit baffled to why so many Tories want the BBC broken up. If you think they are biased, it doesnt mean that you break up the best broadcasting corporation in the world, it means that there should be some panel which regulates impartiality - which is quite impossible.

People seem to forget that our "Independent" television is utter rubbish and imports most its programmes. Perhaps if people want Britain Americanised even more, let's go for it!

[David]

"I think that 'David' must be something to do with the BBC!"

Not at all. Simply that when it comes to UK television, the BBC is currently beating ITV hands down in terms of providing what I would consider quality programming. Consider- State of Play vs Maximum Force.

"Everything is not awful on ITV, but a great deal is awful on the BBC, "

Actually, if you want to be fair, is's everything is not awful on ITV (although I can't for the life of me work out what...) and everything is not awful on the BBC. There are certainly problems with the BBC, but my point is that any changes must not jeopordise the things that are good, and I'm not quite sure that commercialising the BBC is quite, therefore, the way to go.

[David]

"The BBCs flagship programmes like eastenders deliberately set out to create and promote negative role-models. "

That's quite an amusing comment when you consider that if the BBC were commercialised, given Eastenders tends to attract some of the higher ratings, it would be programmes like this that would be more prevalent.

[David Lindsay]

The BBC could never be privatised. As with the railways, the only deal that would ever be politically acceptable would be one in which the profits of one or more supposedly private companies were guaranteed by public subsidies. That's not privatisation. Is it? The railways should never have been subjected to this, and nor should the BBC be.

Instead, elect the Trustees. In Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland and each of the nine English regions (I know, I know - but what other unit could you reasonably suggest?), licence-payers should each vote for up to one candidate, with the top two elected to serve a four-year term. There would also be a Chairman, appointed by the Secretary of State with the approval of the House of Commons.

The Trustees would meet in public under any circumstance when a local council would do so. And the candidates would be sufficiently independent to qualify in principle for the Remuneration Panels of their local authorities.

COMMENT EDITED FOR BAD LANGUAGE

This pattern should also be applied, with everyone having a vote, to Ofcom, to the Press Complaints Commission, and to the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority, just for a start.

[Dale]

'As a collector of Hollywood musicals from the 30s/40s/50s it always amuses me to see how slow and clumsy the dancing is on 'Come Dancing' when compared to the likes of Fred Astaire, Ginger Rogers, Cyd Charisse and Gene Kelly.'

Don't forget rita hayworth and donald o'conner