Slashdot Mirror
British Goverment to Reshape BBC Governance
AtariAmarok writes "The British government recently announced plans to reshape how the BBC is governed.. The changes are said to scrap the system that has been in place for 77 years. Some are worried that the independence of the "Beeb" could be compromised, and Conservative lawmakers are worried that it does not allow for enough oversight (leaves it too independent?)."
They weren't reserved; the Chairman spoke up and lost his job. Funny how no one has pointed out that he could do them for unfair dismissal now we know that the 45 minute was, in fact, as we knew all along, complete bollocks.
The Governors at present are appointed directly by the government -- and the last Labour and Tory administrations have made partly-political appointments; in the future, their replacements will be appointed by a more independent executive.
I'd also just like to say this : as a License Fee payer, I believe firmly that the BBC works, and having travelled a fair amount, I've never seen a media organisation produce comparable amounts of quality output.
Athletic Scholarships to universities make as much sense as academic scholarships to sports teams.
How much do you pay for sky and still have adverts and biased news? 20 a month? 30 a month? It's still 2-300 per year. ITV is full of adverts. CH4 shows some great programming and can buy the US imports, but the BBC has value not only as an independant but I dont see Sky 1 showing Open University level stuff, or exposes on corruption.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/info/licencefee/
--
Each household's colour TV licence cost £9.67 every month in 2003/2004. On average each month, this was how the BBC spent your money:
Average monthly licence fee spend
This chart shows that £9.67 was the average monthly cost of each household's licence fee in 2003/2004. It breaks it down visually into components.
* BBC One £3.37
* BBC Two £1.45
* Digital television channels £0.98
* Transmission and collection costs £0.98
* BBC Radio 1, 2, 3, 4 and Five Live £0.99
* Digital radio stations £0.08
* Nations & English Regions television £0.90
* Local radio £0.61
* bbc.co.uk £0.31
--
Also there is the BBC Imp project which will allow people in the UK (restricted by IP numbers and authorisation) to download a high percentage of BBC TV and radio in >1mmbit DRM'ed wmv for playing on your PC or laptop up to 8 days after broadcast (as allowed by copyright laws)
I had a mate on the trial and it was awesome to be able to watch Top Gear on a laptop over lunch
The BBC is pretty free from the government, if there was any political censorship going on then other channels would be all over it. Watching things like question time, journalists are not known for being polite and letting politicians get away with bullshitting - if a question is asked, a proper answer is expected no matter what part of the political spectrum. There have been plenty of occasions when the BBC has done things that pissed off the government and even other governments (Israel, Vanunu) they are absolutely not afraid to broadcast things that need to be seen, from lists of dead soldiers (censored in the US by some stations) to prisoner abuse (censored in the US for at least 2 weeks before it came out) to just taking the piss out of the establishment - if this was china every employee would have been publicly hanged - which is why i love the BBC.
As for decency standards, I really don't understand why the FCC is so tight assed, the BBC recently came under fire from Christian groups over Jerry Springer the Opera (with about 8000 fuck, shit, cunts etc and a gay Jesus), but the BBC did not cave in because they understood that they had to appeal to everyone but _not_ at the same time, so they showed it, the FCC would have had a heart attack.
This comment does not represent the views or opinions of the user.
Because it was on their front page yesterday :)
Theres's a few articles/discussion on the subject, here here and here
Funny?
This was proposed by the previous BBC chairman (Greg Dyke).
Interesting model if the BBC starts to produce more software (current chairman was very careful to talk about "content" and "devices" this morning).
There is no such thing as Freedom of speech or press legally in the UK, get used to it.
Not true.
Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms
as amended by Protocol No. 11
Rome, 4.XI.1950
Article 9 - Freedom of thought, conscience and religion1
Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief, in worship, teaching, practice and observance.
Freedom to manifest one's religion or beliefs shall be subject only to such limitations as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society in the interests of public safety, for the protection of public order, health or morals, or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others.
Article 10 - Freedom of expression
Everyone has the right to freedom of expression. This right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers. This article shall not prevent States from requiring the licensing of broadcasting, television or cinema enterprises. The exercise of these freedoms, since it carries with it duties and responsibilities, may be subject to such formalities, conditions, restrictions or penalties as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society, in the interests of national security, territorial integrity or public safety, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, for the protection of the reputation or rights of others, for preventing the disclosure of information received in confidence, or for maintaining the authority and impartiality of the judiciary.
"As a writer / novelist you might want to spellcheck your sig.
Actually, evidence that came to light into the media at later times showed that Downing Street had, in fact, been told that the information they were basing the attack on was false.
It was known that the WMD information was at best unreliable, but it was the sole piece of information that was available that allowed Phony Tony to leap into the fray over the express wishes (70% against at the start) of the public opinion.
When multiple sources investigated the same leads as the journalist, but under greater scrutiny again, not only were the documents proved to be 'sexed up', but the meat of it was obtained by a forged document intended for other purposes.
So, the journalist was, in truth, correct. His information and assumptions were correct.
Yet Downing Street now expect the BBC to reform because of this political travesty of revealing to the world what was really going on.
So much for journalistic freedom.
Yes, that's right, people who watch BBC have no interruptions to their viewing. No advertisements at all. Nada, zilch. The station, although funded by the government, is paid for by the people. It's worked flawlessly so far -- the BBC is world renowned as a fair, balanced and insightful news organization. I can say this truthfully as an Dublin-born Irishman living in Canada for the last few years -- anytime there has been trouble in the North [of Ireland] and I needed a truthful report, I went to the BBC, a British station. CBC -- a Canadian station -- would always show inaccurate and plainly wrong reports, heavily biased toward in favour of the crown. Whether this has anything to do with Canada's membership in the Commonwealth, I don't know.
Regardless, any change in the running of the BBC should have a watchful eye kept on it. Just my 2 [euro]cents.
- Oisin
PGP KeyId: 0x08D63965