4 ms·

Actually the BBC had it's remit massively widened by the last government so that it had to fill sections of DAB, a large amount of Radio channels, Freeview, set

by iuguy 15y ago

Actually the BBC had it's remit massively widened by the last government so that it had to fill sections of DAB, a large amount of Radio channels, Freeview, set up iPlayer and run a whole load of channels that aren't even targeted at the UK (such as BBC Persian), largely to meet the FCO's propaganda needs. Additionally, the dodgy dossier episode has emasculated and distorted large chunks of the BBC's programming leading to some completely bizarre side effects[1]. The BBC still does produce a large amount of quality progamming, but budgets and purposes have been affected. Top Gear for example used to be about cars but is now an entertainment show - a wildly successful entertainment show, but no longer something you'd seriously watch to get an idea of what cars to buy and what to avoid. The BBC is also responsible for the One Show, which one day will be recognised by the UN as a crime against humanity. There's also been considerable dumbing down of shows like the Apprentice and Dragon's Den over time, eschewing quality in favour of personalities and entertainment. The natural history unit still put out good documentaries, but even they're not entirely untarnished[2]. The quality of news has also suffered, particularly thanks to spin doctors in previous administrations, the simon gilligan dodgy dossier affair and other stresses on the BBC. When was the last time you saw a proper debate? The other week I saw Alastair Campbell jogging around forests, talking up the end of civilisation through alcoholic poisoning brought on by drinking at home, demanding minimum pricing as the only way out but completely ignoring the impact of the smoking ban as a factor in home drinking increases. It was a terrible attempt at a documentary and a case study in what's wrong with the BBC at the moment. I do apologise for getting on my soap box about this, you didn't deserve it for pointing out the good stuff. Still, the BBC is not a perfect organisation and the amount of media it has to produce combined with political interference has meant that quality has dropped, perhaps not as much considering the volume of material it puts out, but it isn't immune. [1] - http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/jun/08/today-programme-the-ladykillers-graham-linehan http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/jun/08/today-pr... [2] - http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/bbc/8950070/Frozen-Planet-BBC-faked-polar-bear-birth.html http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/bbc/8950070/Fr...

DanI-S 15y ago
You definitely make some fair points. The BBC is definitely not a perfect organisation, although most of its value comes from the fact that it is intended to strive to be one. I'd certainly take commentary from the commercial UK press with a pinch of salt, though. They have a tremendous amount to gain from the BBC's demise.
someone_welsh 15y ago
Good points. I generally agree. But I don't think your second reference is really a fair criticism, and I think this was blown completely out of proportion in the UK. I certainly didn't feel that the series was "tarnished". After all, getting a camera inside an actual polar bear den in the arctic? I think that'd be somewhat invasive. Still a beautifully shot, enjoyable and educational series. The BBC has also been responsible for all of Adam Curtis's documentaries, which are often excellent, and still get made (although the most recent one was perhaps not so good, but I digress). Proper debate occasionally happens on Newsnight, although I think Jeremy Paxman's role has developed into some sort of entertainer of late. They did spend a lot of time paying vast amounts to... Jonathan Ross.
- eru 15y ago
  About Adam Curtis: Watching, say, "All Watched Over by Machines of Loving Grace" was fun. But I don't see any reason to believe that his other documentaries about subjects I know less about are any more trustworthy than that piece on computers.

by iuguy 15y ago

DanI-S 15y ago

You definitely make some fair points. The BBC is definitely not a perfect organisation, although most of its value comes from the fact that it is intended to strive to be one. I'd certainly take commentary from the commercial UK press with a pinch of salt, though. They have a tremendous amount to gain from the BBC's demise.

someone_welsh 15y ago

Good points. I generally agree. But I don't think your second reference is really a fair criticism, and I think this was blown completely out of proportion in the UK. I certainly didn't feel that the series was "tarnished". After all, getting a camera inside an actual polar bear den in the arctic? I think that'd be somewhat invasive. Still a beautifully shot, enjoyable and educational series. The BBC has also been responsible for all of Adam Curtis's documentaries, which are often excellent, and still get made (although the most recent one was perhaps not so good, but I digress). Proper debate occasionally happens on Newsnight, although I think Jeremy Paxman's role has developed into some sort of entertainer of late. They did spend a lot of time paying vast amounts to... Jonathan Ross.

eru 15y ago
About Adam Curtis: Watching, say, "All Watched Over by Machines of Loving Grace" was fun. But I don't see any reason to believe that his other documentaries about subjects I know less about are any more trustworthy than that piece on computers.