Wednesday 22 January 2020

Four cheers for the BBC


I squirm with embarrassment  whenever one of our politicians claims that this that or the other British institution or attribute is "the best in the world and the envy of the world,"  when it patently isn't. Candidates for this misplaced accolade are variously our justice system , our "Mother" of parliaments, our football leagues, our sense of "fair play"(sic), our inventiveness and maybe even our sense of humour.

The one  institution which actually deserves the accolade is the BBC, respected throughput the world  for its impartial news services and admired for its creative dramas.  So why are our politicians, particularly Tories with puffed up illusions about our importance on the world stage, so keen to trash it ?

One answer in respect of the Tories is that the success of the BBC demonstrates that their central belief, that capitalist institutions motivated by the urge to maximise profits are the best and indeed only effective way to keep the wheels of the world turning, is a fake.  The BBC's continued success  is a constant reminder of the falsity of their core belief.

Not that I believe the BBC to be perfect.  Their mistaken belief that "balance" requires that minority cranks (Normal Lamont on climate change, Patrick Minford on Economics, Nigel Farage on Europe)  be given equal  time  along with the established views of "experts" has done considerable harm.  Their interviewers are as often harassing as they are enlightening.  Too much time is spent by the BBC on advertising itself.  Radio 3 broadcasts as much prattle as it used to do music, presumably in order to compete with Classic FM.  "The Archers" characters and their stories become more unrealistic every day, in order, I presume, to attract younger listeners.  And thy pay their male stars too much in comparison to their  female ones.

Of course the BBC needs to adapt in both its financing and organisation, to accommodate to developments in technology and the availability of streaming devices.  But this should be done in a co-operative and friendly way, not by bullying threats to its licence fee.  I note  that both France and Germany finance their public service broadcasting with licence fees,  You can see the details, along with other countries, here.

In my year in France I was moved by an elderly couple, fellow members of the church choir, who confided that as youngsters during the war  they had crowded round their illict radio to gain the truth about what was happening from the BBC World Service.  Frankly I would make that service totally independent of the Foreign Office and give it a virtually blank cheque.

As to the rest of this wonderful institution, it should negotiate necessary change in the knowledge that it is a cherished part of our national life and an invaluable source of international influence.  And The Johnson government should take that on board.

5 comments:

  1. The Tory 'Core belief'is as you say profit orientated.It sticks in their throat that the Beeb is not in their clutches. It should stay Independant.If anybody moans about the licence fee point out that other countries also have it and show how it is value for money.If we went down the US way whilst Tories capitalists would be happy minority programmes may not be made cheapening the beebs value. It also acts as an educational station.
    I also note that PBS America is a BRITISH company that is very educational Our broadcasting services are good. They must not be cheapened by Tory capitalists who just want to cream off services for their own financial benefit.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. As you say, value for money. About £3 a week, less than the cost of a pint in London, or half a bottle of Co-op Fairly Traded wine here in Yorkshire.

      Delete
  2. Candidates for this misplaced accolade are variously our justice system , our "Mother" of parliaments, our football leagues, our sense of "fair play"(sic), our inventiveness and maybe even our sense of humour

    The NHS is a particularly tiresome one.

    The one institution which actually deserves the accolade is the BBC, respected throughput the world for its impartial news services and admired for its creative dramas.

    Maybe in times gone by; but nowadays BBC dramas worth watching are few and far between. Most are absolute tosh. It's a far cry from the days of House of Cards and Edge of Darkness.

    But then, I guess if your funding is guaranteed no matter what rubbish you produce, there's no incentive to do better. So they don't.

    ReplyDelete
  3. The tabloids always seem to be keen on "our fighting men" as being the best in the world. As an old snowflake, I would prefer it to be "our caring, thinking people".

    With regard to the obsession with "balance", some months ago I was laughing my socks off at an edition of "Dateline London" on BBC News, as the four foreign correspondents proceeded to trash Trump, Brexit and the Royal family. It was left to the host, poor Shaun Lay, to try and provide some "balance".

    ReplyDelete
  4. Take from a posting on Liberal Democrat Voiec by a Lloyd Harris on 6th February:

    "Salaries – I want to know how they compare to ITV, Sky, Netflix etc. I bet you get paid less at the BBC, but you won’t know as BBC is required by law to publish salaries and other companies are not. From what I can see the Chief Exec of Sky gets £16 million a year; Netflix £7.5 million a year (before bonus), ITV £3.7 million and the Director General of the BBC £450k. So at that level the BBC pays significantly less."

    Maybe the BBC is even better value than we thought.

    ReplyDelete