Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

British Goverment to Reshape BBC Governance

Posted by samzenpus on from the and-now-for-something-completely-different dept.

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?)."

3 of 587 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Punishment ? by REBloomfield · · Score: 5, Informative

    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.

  2. Sure, George by gowen · · Score: 5, Informative
    Some are worried that the independence of the "Beeb" could be compromised
    I haven't heard this much in the British media. In fact, these reforms seem likely to *increase* the Beeb's independence, since it adds another layer of distance between the Governors (now the BBC Trust) and the patronage of government.

    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.
  3. Re:what do you think? by malkavian · · Score: 5, Informative

    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.