We no longer need the BBC...

[Albion]

The BBC is supposed to be impartial and not to have a political view or agenda, yet we see the organisation take rather a left-wing stance on many issues such as multiculturalism, immigration and welfare payments whilst coming across a quite right-wing in many of its broadcasts.
Other organisations, both free and paid for can provide a similar service – ITV, Channel 4 and Sky for example.
The BBC has become an oversized monstrosity and dominates a large proportion of broadcasting.



The BBC’s stranglehold of broadcasting goes much further with radio, of which it has control over the majority of national stations and many local stations.
The British public have to pay close to £150 a year for a service which they may not even use and which isn’t needed. In essence the public are forced to fund a channel which broadcasts left-wing, often anti-government propaganda.
The license fee mainly funds the BBC channels, not the transmitters.
The commercial channels such as ITV pay transmitter companies to broadcast their channels and make money whilst offering services for free by advertising. Sky broadcasts the majority of its channels for a fee to make money alongside the advertising revenue.
The BBC could be funded through advertising or a smaller license fee combined with advertising.

In such times when the private sector can offer the same services for free or for a fee why are we still forced to fund a propaganda broadcaster which is supposed to be impartial? A broadcaster which has a stranglehold over the broadcasting media?

The BBC should be privatised and the license fee phased out. If we really do need British programming protected then a small government expenditure on subsidising a quota of British programming on the five original channels (BBC, ITV, C4 and Five) would be good enough.

Regional TV is a lame duck and comes at considerable expense to the likes of the BBC and ITV. We should abolish the requirement for regional broadcasts whilst making it easier for local TV channels to be set up, especially by local newspapers. This could be possible via tax brakes and low cost broadcast capacity. That way we’d get a better, local news service and local programming instead of a poor service from regional broadcasters covering a large area and favouring certain towns (i.e. BBC NW – Manchester).


Those are just some of my views towards the BBC. Whilst I recognise that it does provide some good programming, it is not needed, nor is it's biased agenda.







Some good articles from the BBC's favourite political party

[Joe McCarthy]

Seems to be the British version of PBS (and both left leaning) - a once useful medium when we had like three TV channels. With satellite and nine million channels, it's a dinosaur.

[Albion]

Seems to be the British version of PBS (and both left leaning) - a once useful medium when we had like three TV channels. With satellite and nine million channels, it's a dinosaur.

I think PBS tries to be an American BBC. I agree, it was once useful, it's gone to ruin now and has an unfair advantage.
It would have been better if the BBC had been designed to have people from a range of political backgrounds in the first place.

The only difference between PBS and the BBC is that the BBC has massive influence and hold over UK broadcasting and media.
Murdoch's Sky hate them of course and the BBC return that gesture.

[Logan]

Anything which might induce them to return to being a 'British Broadcasting Service'.

[Beorn]

Anything which might induce them to return to being a British Broadcasting Service.

I'd much prefer the creation of a completely new and unbiased broadcasting corporation. The BBC has always been the arm of the British government, so to wish for a "return" to whichever glory era of the BBC you reflected upon is, to me, a folly.

[AussieScott]

Just like the ABC(SBC=Socialist Broadcasting Channel).

Privatise them, theoretically this should force them to cater towards both audiences.

[The Lawspeaker]

What about getting rid of the BBC and instead of privatising it and handing it all over to Murdoch on a silver platter (which should be surely be looking forward to expand his empire and take over ALL British media) look for a new system ? One that has already been tried and tested and has proven to be relatively reliable and stable. Maybe you Brits could take a good look at the Dutch public broadcasting system.

Unlike most other countries' public broadcasting organizations – which are either national corporations (such as the BBC and France Télévisions / Radio France), federations of regional public-law bodies (for example, ARD, SRG SSR idée suisse), or governmental and member-based institutions with their own channels and facilities (such as PBS) – those in the Netherlands are member-based broadcasting associations that share common facilities. This arrangement has its origins in the system developed in the Netherlands early in the 20th century and known as pillarisation. Under this system the different confessional and political streams of Dutch society (Catholics, Protestants, socialists, etc.) all had their own separate associations, newspapers, sports clubs, educational institutions, and also broadcasting organizations.

[_______]

other than the 'brainwashing', it is a real gem

[Logan]

I'd much prefer the creation of a completely new and unbiased broadcasting corporation. The BBC has always been the arm of the British government, so to wish for a "return" to whichever glory era of the BBC you reflected upon is, to me, a folly.

Neither yours nor mine is likely to soon happen. Either would be better. Despite its faults still the world's best.

[The Lawspeaker]

other than the 'brainwashing', it is a real gem

Fact: No commercial broadcaster owned by Murdoch would or could ever make a decent documentary. It's something that only a public broadcasting service like the BBC could provide.