Slashdot Mirror
BBC to Put Entire Radio & TV Archive Online
An anonymous reader writes "The BBC is to to put it's entire radio and television archive online, free for everyone, as the BBC Creative Archive." The article is a little thin on how far back these archives go, but regardless, this is a gigantic amount of data, and to see it go online, and open to the public is very cool.
Real media is a sick, sick dog that people just aren't willing to put to sleep.
My friend used to use windows media player as his mp3 player. He stopped using it after we made fun of him.
Ahhhhh, elitist peer pressure, feels so good.
Anyways, back on tangent (cough). Australia Broadcasting Corporation also uses realmedia. They allow you to watch their shows here.
What kind of FUD is this? Why would the MPAA get "outraged" over the BBC giving it's own content away, and how would that ever stop the BBC from actually doing it? This comment is like when people use absolutely any topic on slashdot to make comments about SCO. Get over it.
sig:
See the "..for smart people" banners Wired runs here? Look elsewhere guys.
You are a FUCKING MORON.
They are offering up TERABYTES of some of the best TV in history, and you're whining about FORMAT!?
Mod me to hell, but that's asinine. The only appropriate response to the BBC is THANKYOUTHANKYOUTHANKYOU!
Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
OK, so this is now offtopic. But I think you misunderstood me.
Yes, the Hutton inqury is news, and very important news at that. But 1-2 months ago when Campbell et al. were busy writing to the board of governors before even Kelly's name appeared, that wasn't real news. It certainly wasn't more significant than troops being killed in the gulf and many other stories at the time.
My problem with the BBC in it is that I feel the BBC played the governments game. They wanted to assert their influence over public opinion and the nation, and perhaps prove their independence. In my opinion the BBC were just as responsible for raising the stakes as the government in continuing its campaign. They devoted huge amounts of airtime on their "upmarket" programs like Newsnight, the Today program, World At One, and so on to it. It was their top headline much of the time.
I don't know whether the government lied or not. The BBC says they did, over one small claim which I personally had never heard until the argument erupted. I don't think anyone has suggested that either the rest of the intelligence was faulty or that the claim was a significant factor in the decision to go to war.
On dumbing down, it may well be happenning across the spectrum. But with the BBC it's a far bigger problem because selling to the lowest common denominator is what the commercial press have always done. The point of the BBC is supposed to be that it's different. Why does the BBC seem to try to play this "commercial" game? Why does it seem that is it concerned over audience share to the point of making editorial decisions based on it?
Back on topic, I'm a bit worried that all their really good stuff --- that is, things like Hitch-Hiker's Guide, etc won't be included, because they already sell them -- on Video, DVD, CD, and Tape -- for exhorbitant prices, even in the UK. I have a feeling what we'll actually get (which will also be absolutely amazing and which I would love to see) will only be news archives, and older stuff. I suppose we'll see.