Slashdot Mirror
BBC Launches APIs
Stefan Magdalinski writes "The BBC is opening up a slew of APIs to its content and applications via a new site, backstage.bbc.co.uk, and actively encouraging users to remix, mashup, and otherwise play with their content to create new applications.
Already there's a few cool featured apps, my own BBC News wikipedizing proxy, and a del.icio.us-enabled version of BBC News
"Use our stuff to create your stuff" is their slogan. Could a commercial broadcaster ever take a step like this?"
Well, there is this.
The pieces are there.
I do like the comments attached to wikiproxy stating that it underlines links because links are meant to be underlined.
It's all well and good being standing up for these sorts of things, just so long as you adhere to those standards too.
Checking out the authors' website shows an abundance of links that are not underlined. Ah, the irony.
Kicking the BBC is too easy - you really don't come across as all that revolutionary by laughing and pointing at the mistakes they make. So let's give a huge *well done* to those at the BBC who no doubt slayed the dragons and fought tooth and nail to get this out of the door.
Still, nice way to claim some easy credit in all their hard work. Way to bask in the reflected glory!
Not quite. The BBC has the right to charge a "licence fee" on all households with a TV set. It works the same way as a tax, but it doesn't flow through the Government.
Still, the main goal in the BBC Charter is to distribute information rather than to make money, so Step 3 still doesn't apply.
3. Profit!!!!
Actually, these services are for non-commercial use only.
Actually, the poor funding of NPR is only part of the problem. The Republicans have packed the board of directors with partisans and are actively interfering in programming decisions. I expect that the PBS will soon be "fair and balanced" just like Fox News.
I don't read your sig. Why are you reading mine?
As an actual employee of PBS, I can say that there might be one or two Republicans floating around here. Just about everyone here is a Democrat or otherwise anti-Republican.
BBC America isn't the same as it's UK cousins. It's a fully commercial network, not funded by any license fee. They're run by BBC Worldwide, which is the commercial arm of the BBC, and have to purchase the rights to any and all programming they air, just like any other American network. They also have commercials, which makes for slightly strange programming blocks, IMO.
Sean Daugherty "I have walked in Eternity -- and Eternity weeps."
The taxpayer doesn't pay for the BBC, it's funded by TV licenses which you only need if you have a TV.
And this:
http://kamaelia.sourceforge.net/
We wont be off air, although I'd expect the daily news (breakfast 1/6/10) to simulcast with News24 for the affected days, and radio 5 to have more phone ins and 4 to have more pre-recorded shows. There's enough non-unionised engineering effort (like myself) to cover.
Long term however, the biggest problem I see is the R&D move to Manchester. They'll lose a lot of R&D engineers, which would be bad, maybe even fatal for the department. TBH the BBC could pay Murdoch for a studio and aupport to run a news channel, and provide the editors to ensure it's impartial. We don't need the facilities we have to output the news we do output. Sky do it (techincally, not content) better, cheaper and faster.
But at least the commercial broadcasters don't steal money from people who don't watch their shows in order to make them. If you don't like it, you don't have to watch. If you're British and you don't like the BBC you don't have to watch that either - but you DO have to pay for it.
All movements for social change begin as missions, evolve into businesses, and end up as rackets.
Round the Horne?
Sir requires http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbc7. Wednesdays.