1. Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!

Off Topic The next Dr Who.

Discussion in 'Queens Park Rangers' started by YappyR, Feb 26, 2017.

  1. sb_73

    sb_73 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2012
    Messages:
    29,195
    Likes Received:
    26,549
    Not at all, it gives me good value for the £145 a year, can't speak for others. I don't really watch much TV (as in really watch and concentrate on rather than it being on - it is all the time - but I'm reading or playing with the iPad), but what I do is usually BBC 2 or 4 (except for Family Guy, and that was funnier when it was on BBC). I listen to Radio 4, 4 Extra and 5 live, and use the sport and news apps a lot, especially when I'm travelling. I don't think it's current affairs stuff is especially biased either way, but even if it is I have the critical faculties to edit out the noise from the audience on QT or on election debates, which seems to be the main complaint, and listen to what the panel/participants are saying, or usually shouting over each other. Quality of what is on there is variable, and any channel which broadcasts unmitigated **** like Mrs Brown's Boys and the endless cooking shows does not merit unconditional support.

    But I do think the BBC is something uniquely British, and worth persevering with for that. I can't think of another broadcaster which gives the variety it does, ranging from trash to outstanding drama and documentaries, some superb investigative journalism (much rarer now than in the past), and including stuff like Watchdog, where I learned that you have a good chance of having 'fecal matter' in ice consumed along with your fizzy sugary drink in McDonalds, Burger King and KFC and most major coffee shop chains. What major commercial channel would invest in broadcasting stuff like that? And what advertiser would buy time in such a programme (if the fast food chains which are major advertisers permitted it anyway?)?

    Like any old, large corporation the BBC has huge challenges in adapting to a massively fragmented media environment and new market entrants. It's lost a virtual monopoly. But it's trying. The pay thing is just a stupid reflection of our stupid world at the moment, where entertainers and sportspeople are massively overvalued for reasons beyond my comprehension, and men valued more than women, though presumably someone is making a tidy profit from it. I'd be quite happy for the BBC to institute some arbitrary pay caps and see what happens to the 'talent' then.

    I just suggested that you actually do something about your serious issues with the BBC besides going on about it on here, which you have been doing for ages, well before today. I do think you should have the choice not to pay for it if you don't want to, as long as you are also prepared not to watch it. Perhaps the solution is restricting access to those who are happy to pay the licence fee. I'm sure they could work something out for TV at least, charge for apps etc. If loads of people choose not to pay, fine, the BBC is scuppered. I don't pay for Sky, I don't watch it's programmes (or even use it's apps) and wouldn't miss its disappearance. Would you miss the BBC?

    I did enjoy Huw Edwards' absence from the ten o'clock news tonight, absolving him from having to read out his own name in the list of high earners.
     
    #121
    Last edited: Jul 20, 2017
  2. sb_73

    sb_73 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2012
    Messages:
    29,195
    Likes Received:
    26,549
    The difference in terms of broadcasting. If you assume that success in a given field makes you a good broadcaster, then Gazza has been hard done by being ignored by the broadcasters, and Rooney will soon be taking over from Lineker. I don't mind Lineker, though he is a bit bland and wooden, but Balding does a lot more work across the BBC and earns a fraction of what he does.

    And at least I spelt his name correctly....
     
    #122
    Last edited: Jul 20, 2017
  3. Uber_Hoop

    Uber_Hoop Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2011
    Messages:
    17,850
    Likes Received:
    26,917
    I think Lineker is a lesbian. :)
     
    #123
    UTRs and Steelmonkey like this.
  4. Steelmonkey

    Steelmonkey Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2011
    Messages:
    22,766
    Likes Received:
    43,499
    Hahaha - nice to see you've not lost your touch!


    Screenshot_20170720-082538.jpg
     
    #124
    UTRs and kiwiqpr like this.
  5. UTRs

    UTRs Senile Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2013
    Messages:
    33,594
    Likes Received:
    71,694
    I personally don't read any of the daily rags, but now and then have a look at the front pages out of curiosity.

    Anyway some made me laugh this morning...
    _97010033_metro.jpg
    _97010417_star.jpg

    _97010040_guardian.jpg _97010042_mirror.jpg _97010034_telegraph.jpg
     
    #125
    kiwiqpr and Steelmonkey like this.
  6. UTRs

    UTRs Senile Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2013
    Messages:
    33,594
    Likes Received:
    71,694
    Anyway, back on topic!

    Now they have announced the new doctor Who, who do you all think will be the next doctor?

    I think Grace Jones would make a great time Lord/lady/lordett...

    A-13932-1435085854-8414.jpeg.jpg
     
    #126
    Last edited: Jul 20, 2017
    kiwiqpr, Steelmonkey and Uber_Hoop like this.
  7. GoldhawkRoad

    GoldhawkRoad Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2011
    Messages:
    9,739
    Likes Received:
    3,387
    I'm thinking Grayson Perry

    please log in to view this image
     
    #127
    Last edited: Jul 20, 2017
    kiwiqpr, Uber_Hoop and UTRs like this.
  8. Steelmonkey

    Steelmonkey Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2011
    Messages:
    22,766
    Likes Received:
    43,499

    Liz Carr would tick a few of those minority boxes....

    Screenshot_20170720-110834.jpg
     
    #128
    UTRs and kiwiqpr like this.
  9. GoldhawkRoad

    GoldhawkRoad Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2011
    Messages:
    9,739
    Likes Received:
    3,387
    You're right, I have been banging on about Blairite-BBC for ages. I'm more relaxed now the press and large parts of the (non-BBC) media are onto it. I hope the next area of the corporation to be illuminated will be the fat cat executive pay and jobs for the boys, paid for by all of us. Perhaps, if this is scoured, the process might even save the BBC from eventual oblivion.

    Would I miss the BBC? I'd miss elements. I'd miss some of the artistic content. But I've never said that should go, but hived off. The morally misguided's monolith should either be broken up (or radically reformed) so that we have something leaner, better value for money and perhaps give viewers a choice of subscribing in certain areas.
     
    #129
  10. sb_73

    sb_73 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2012
    Messages:
    29,195
    Likes Received:
    26,549
    I'm afraid you are in a pretty small minority Goldie, in the last consultation on the BBC 81% of the nearly 200,000 respondents (did you partake?) thought the BBC was doing an excellent job in terms of serving the public and programming, and most didn't give a toss about how it was regulated apart from remaining independent from government and Parliament, 76% felt it offers good value for money and 60% said no change needed to the way it is funded. A lot of the more negative responses were from competitors like ITV, which essentially wants BBC1 banned (fine with me) so it can dominate the ****tier end of broadcasting along with Sky.

    https://www.theguardian.com/media/2016/mar/01/4-percent-agree-ofcom-regulate-bbc

    Those figures may change a bit given the salary stuff, and would certainly change if everyone were forced to endure Mrs Browns Boys, but pretty convincing.

    But, as I said, quite happy for people to have the choice if that can be arranged, which would definitely reduce BBC income and make them think about what they spend it on. As for 'fat cat executive pay' in my book that includes anyone who earns more than me, and there certainly are a lot of them, but as I pointed out the highest earner, the Director General, gets a seventh of the CEO of ITV, the only real direct comparator, for running a much bigger organisation with a complicated public service and entertainment/education remit. In 2015 the CEO of Sky raked in £17m compared to the DGs £500k in 2016. I wonder if Sky subscribers are happy with how their monthly subscription is being spent. Not that I care.
     
    #130
    Last edited: Jul 20, 2017

  11. GoldhawkRoad

    GoldhawkRoad Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2011
    Messages:
    9,739
    Likes Received:
    3,387
    I suspect the figures will change quite a bit with the salary revelations, and more exposures to come, including executive pay and conflicts of interest. As I say, the current discovery process is healthy, and may be the BBC's ultimate salvation because it's clear it's been going in the wrong direction in some important areas.
     
    #131
  12. sb_73

    sb_73 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2012
    Messages:
    29,195
    Likes Received:
    26,549
    Ha, just added a bit on that to the original post.....
     
    #132
  13. GoldhawkRoad

    GoldhawkRoad Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2011
    Messages:
    9,739
    Likes Received:
    3,387
    I suspect it's not the DG of the BBC that will be focused upon, but the hierarchy below him that he inherited. But what you say highlights the problem. Choice. The public have no choice with the BBC, even if they don't watch the programs because even hermits living in the caves of Snowdonia have TV's these days. SKY subscribers can walk, and they have been doing so over sport recently, leading Sky to change its formatting.
     
    #133

Share This Page