3 ms·

I don't think they do create a lot of the programming, I thought they mostly licensed it from production companies. I can't find stats on it. Can anyone else?

pbhjpbhj 11y ago
My [cynical] view is that people in the BBC tend to work through a production company so they can profit from the BBC rather than the BBC producing the show as a public producer that merely pays wages. They can then lock up IP in their own company rather than being the BBC's work-for-hire employees. Shows like Gardeners Question Time (GQT) are stalwarts of BBC programming. The BBC could easily produce it, or commission it from a production company on the basis that it's made direct in to the public domain [in copyright terms]. But that would presumably result in less money to the producers/talent. There was scandal some time back that BBC were paying "talent" upwards of £1 million per series to do a single show a week. Thing is at the time the talent of course were also the owners of the production company for their show and so the BBC were paying their company some greater amount. The BBC promotion of such independent production companies makes them world ranking sellers whilst there seems no reason that such shows couldn't be produced with only a name change and done under the BBC as producer. Shows like Graham Norton aren't exactly ground breaking, you get an ex-hospital radio presenter (or whoever) to chat inanely with people who are there to popularise their latest book; you get the interviews because who doesn't want to advertise their film on primetime BBC, it's not rocket science. Why can't the BBC own a show like that? Why isn't Mr Norton, or whoever, employed by the BBC and hired out if they're in demand for other shows? In short it all seems like a huge nepotistic mess of old-boy networks, and smoke and mirrors rather than a corporation that works for the people using their taxes and license fee money. As if the divisional managers in a corporation got together and said, hangabout we can make our divisions private enterprises and charge the parent company double to do what we do now?? But I'm probably completely mistaken ...

pbhjpbhj 11y ago

My [cynical] view is that people in the BBC tend to work through a production company so they can profit from the BBC rather than the BBC producing the show as a public producer that merely pays wages. They can then lock up IP in their own company rather than being the BBC's work-for-hire employees. Shows like Gardeners Question Time (GQT) are stalwarts of BBC programming. The BBC could easily produce it, or commission it from a production company on the basis that it's made direct in to the public domain [in copyright terms]. But that would presumably result in less money to the producers/talent. There was scandal some time back that BBC were paying "talent" upwards of £1 million per series to do a single show a week. Thing is at the time the talent of course were also the owners of the production company for their show and so the BBC were paying their company some greater amount. The BBC promotion of such independent production companies makes them world ranking sellers whilst there seems no reason that such shows couldn't be produced with only a name change and done under the BBC as producer. Shows like Graham Norton aren't exactly ground breaking, you get an ex-hospital radio presenter (or whoever) to chat inanely with people who are there to popularise their latest book; you get the interviews because who doesn't want to advertise their film on primetime BBC, it's not rocket science. Why can't the BBC own a show like that? Why isn't Mr Norton, or whoever, employed by the BBC and hired out if they're in demand for other shows? In short it all seems like a huge nepotistic mess of old-boy networks, and smoke and mirrors rather than a corporation that works for the people using their taxes and license fee money. As if the divisional managers in a corporation got together and said, hangabout we can make our divisions private enterprises and charge the parent company double to do what we do now?? But I'm probably completely mistaken ...