Paxman voices concerns over BBC

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by Psypher, Aug 25, 2007.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:


    I have to agree with most of what Paxman says. But I'm surprised by his comments on the license fee which, to me, contradicts his own fears about the BBC management being more concerned with profits over quality programming. Removing the TV license to make the BBC self-sufficient will only increase the obsession with ratings and producing popularist television to maximise advertising revenue.

    The BBC needs to take a long look at itself and what it's purpose is. Its main concern should be with making quality programming. Rather than farming out all the television production to outside, profit-making, production companies, it should invest in its own production facilities, run those efficiently and make sure it employs staff based on experience and talent. However, the wider television industry would not like and much prefers a weakened BBC that has become a publisher rather than a programme maker.
  2. 'Twas fun listening to two (Humphrys and Paxman) of the three rudest men in broadcasting, trying to score points over each other. I didn't listen to what they were saying, just to the way they said it!

    PS The missing 'third rude man' - Naughtie.
  3. Biped

    Biped LE Book Reviewer

    £3.5 billion in guaranteed income. That is a budget that HAS to be spent, or the licence fee must come down. So, how to go about it? Spank the money on extra, unnecessary channels that are shut down for most of the time, thousands of 'spare' radio stations, large salaries for thousands of hangers on, dross programming by the mindless, for the brainless . . . . oh, and a very small number of 'informative' programs that actually help people.

    The serious programs that 'inform' and 'entertain', rather than being the mainstay of the BBC (which has well and truly lost its way), is the bread and butter for Sky Discovery, Sky News, National Geographic and such.

    Time to throw them out into the wilderness, or reduce the fee with huge cutbacks.
  4. Agreed. That's an awful lot of money, with a declining output in terms of both quality, integrity and presentation, to show for it. There's no justification for the Licence Fee any longer, and hasn't been for a long time. Let them sink or swim.

    Paxman is about the only BBC-head left who has any credibility, and his stance must jar with those in the Big Leather Chairs. But he's right, and forthright with it, so his days are probably numbered.

    I watched the caving programme featuring Kate Humble last night. It must have taken a great logistical exercise to make it, over an extended period and at (our) great expense. Technically marvellous, no doubt, but I was struck by the BBC's irresistable urge to trivialise at every opportunity. It could have been a really interesting, unusual and informative programme, but seemed to be more about the good Ms Humble's personal struggle with confined spaces, heights (depths?), and filth. Emotional drivel. Infact at one point she made a reference to the 'X-Cave Factor' or something similar, she recognised the preponderence of hand wringing luvviness for herself.

    John Noakes would have done it in a weekend with a Woolie's torch, a bottle of Tizer, and a couple of Spam sandwiches, and been a lot more 'entertaining and informative' while he was about it.

    Edited to add - And Shep, ofcourse.