All corps have an agenda, remember the sun switching sides back in the mids 90’s? I have always said and will always maintain everyone has an agenda and thats what drives up, whether its transparent is the key, most people are not with theirs.
I was told by a wise man if you want the news buy the Guardian and the Telegraph (equally good papers at opposite ends) and form an opinion in the middle of both papers.
More than 100 people at the BBC knew what Savile was up to, according to a leaked report that Exaro News managed to get hold of.
If that’s true it’s un-fukin-believeable. If that had happened anywhere else he’s have been locked up years ago…or I’d like to think so.
I think this is quite clearly evidence that rich white folk are incompatible with Western society. Send 'em all back.
In all seriousness, that is fucking disgusting, though sadly not at all surprising.
I love it, I have all the channels of others but I would easily miss this the most and I’d scrap eveything else before this, the World service, Five live and Radio 2 are brilliant services, BBC1 and 2 are good but need to be a bit more risque on their programming and the Radio 1 should stop being fascinated with the age demographic and play music what people want ot hear.
Originally posted by @Barry-Sanchez
Radio 1 should stop being fascinated with the age demographic and play music what people want ot hear.
They do, they play music that their demographic want to hear.
That demographic probably isn’t me or you. There’s other good stations though. As most on here probably know, I adore 6music. Perfect for me and what I want.
The kids can have Radio 1.
And they all stand up at that pointless back-slapping awards fiasco last night and talk about how brilliant the writing is in Eastenders.
Really?
I thought it was a tired old formula being scraped from the bottom of a barrel to cheaply fill a hole.
No show has ever eked out so many hours from “Wass goin’ on?”
Originally posted by @Rallyboy
And they all stand up at that pointless back-slapping awards fiasco last night and talk about how brilliant the writing is in Eastenders.
Really?
I thought it was a tired old formula being scraped from the bottom of a barrel to cheaply fill a hole.
They take a moving and sensitive subject and fuck it up like all scenarios on that crap.
I love 6 Music too…it plays music I loved as a kid and challenges you with new stuff you’re not likely to hear anywhere else. What’s not to love about the BBC. 
Originally posted by @lifeintheslowlane
I love 6 Music too…it plays music I loved as a kid and challenges you with new stuff you’re not likely to hear anywhere else. What’s not to love about the BBC.
They’re not perfect 
Originally posted by @lifeintheslowlane
I love 6 Music too…it plays music I loved as a kid and challenges you with new stuff you’re not likely to hear anywhere else. What’s not to love about the BBC.
The best example I have was last summer when Mary a Anne Hobbs played The Ronettes, Mastodon & Kendrick Lamar back to back. I cannot think of any other station that would do that.
It’s what I do like about the beeb, is that they are in a position where they can concentrate content for demographics in a way not many other providers can here.
This is a big reason the decision to scrap bbc3 pisses me off. The station does get a lot of stick, and yeah there’s some crap on there. But the people knocking it aren’t the demographic the station is aimed at. So of course decision makers can’t understand it. But of course, younger people are of less value. As 'kin always.
Obviously we both represent the 6 Music demographic Lewis. 
TV is in a new era, and I am not certain Sky is actually there yet.
Perhaps the GoT/Homeland syndrome (others can debate what started it) but all of a sudden TV in the US became sexy.
Before that, it was the Beeb that primarily led the World in creating great drama (of course ITV pitched in with many crackers) while the US was chugging out Knight Rider and Baywatch 
But in the new world, HBO is king. No idea how that happened, in fact some TV stuff makes Big Budget movies seem rubbish (and TV is in fact now rushing to create shows based on old movies). Of course others like Fox, NBC and even SyFy are putting out quality shows.
Which is great but the CHANGE is how these shows reach GLOBAL audiences. TV is now truly global, Star across Asia, OSN over here plus of course Sky have hours of programming to fill and so the key now is about buying the best CONTENT.
The BBC has, to be honest missed that dynamic. Probably because of the way it’s charter is protected, it had always seemed almost apologetic when one of it’s shows EARNED money being shown abroad - as in Top Gear for example.
The Luvvies don’t (or maybe didn’t) like the idea that money could be made, and so over here I get to watch 3 year old repeats of David Tennant as Doctor Who, or Bruce on Strictly without a wig, when I would happily pay an extra fiver a month to watch more current stuff. But no, selling is dirty.
So you little Englanders make shows like Luther and Sherlock and hoarde them until they are out of date before slipping them un-noticed into late night slots on BBC Entertainment. 
My point being that the BBC needs to move with the times, by all means make programmes for you lot, BUT get them onto a global platform MUCH quicker, and for the money they are worth. Just because you lot do NOT have competition on Satellite Broadcasters doesn’t mean other parts of the world don’t. Bouquet providers bid ZILLIONS and fight each other for the rights to show Football, and that same market exists for SHOWS. Not zillions but easily enough world wide revenue to pay for the next series. The world NEEDS CONTENT!
There is a hybrid model the BBC needs to use. It is POSSIBLE that the 1st February this year will see that change with the launch of BBC FIRST Worldwide.
So to sum up, there is a bandwagon that will PAY for what the BBC makes (NOT you lot) and it should NOT hurt it’s charter. IMHO they need to stop being scared and move. Fast.
Because your streaming market is miniscule - it is minute. Even the market Murdoch addresses in the UK is pitiful.
The GLOBAL Streaming market is worth billions. Stop being so parochial. Keep the licence and let English Speaking people in China, Africa, America etc PAY FOR THE BBC on your behalf.
(But FFS don’t let them sell Eastenders)
Apparently W1A and twenty twelve are absolutely bang on the money and some weren’t happy with it so close to home, its something that actually does unite us all and brilliantly so, the tories are after it but that is something we should never concede on.
I’d be happy to pay for it as I struggle to see what I get out of Sky etc etc, Netflix is good but nothing to the beeb.
Decent piece here on how the BBC has become a mouthpiece for the 1%. Written by Occupy, just to give it its proper context.
The billionaires’ ownership and sponsorship of corporate media helps explain why the corporate media narrative serves their interests. In Britain, five billionaires own 80% of print media. This represents a trend happening in Britain and globally. And here’s why it matters.
For one, despite bloodshed occurring across the planet, our mainstream media is constantly beating the drums of war, because war profits the 1%. The mainstream media cheerleads for fossil fuels despite the intensifying climate crisis. It ignores endemic corruption and it prevents the public from truly understanding how austerity policies have failed society.
But the corruption of our news media isn’t happening only in private hands: it is a standard feature of state-owned media as well, which is arguably worse since that media carries an air of impartiality. In 2014, Occupy.com reported how the globally respected British state broadcasters, the BBC, have effectively become news by and for the 1%. Recent charges against the broadcaster include rigging the 2015 UK General Election and exhibiting a blatant pro-union bias in the 2014 Scottish Independence referendum.
Come on Pap, its subjective and even in the header it has a question mark, the BBC has been hammered for being too left or right since the dawn of time, occupy would say that wouldn’t they?
Originally posted by @Barry-Sanchez
Come on Pap, its subjective and even in the header it has a question mark, the BBC has been hammered for being too left or right since the dawn of time, occupy would say that wouldn’t they?
Barry, the days of you becoming a master of comprehension don’t look like they’re arriving any sooner.
Sir will have noticed that I included the source of the story in my introduction. The purpose was two-fold. First, I wanted to avoid any accusations of trying to slip something in under the radar, Adam Smith Institute style.
Second, I had hoped that by doing so, anyone rocking mental capabilities higher than “unthinking fuckmuppet” wouldn’t say “well Occupy would say that, wouldn’t they?”.
I’m starting to feel I was successful on both fronts.
