You are arguing against yourself. By audience driven you mean stuff that people want to see. Whether you like it or not audience figures show that a lot of people want to watch the dross you refer to and the BBC cannot be immune from that. The big difference is that ITV, for example, only cater for that dross at all times of the day. I agree that during the day a lot of antiques, buying and selling or consumer programmes appear on BBC but look at ITV. Jeremy Kyle - need I say any more!!! More importantly, at peak times it is rare to have the situation that you could not find anything decent to watch on BBC1,2,3 or 4. Look at the same ITV channels. Dross or repeats of dross!!! Get rid of the licence fee and you finish the BBC. Get rid of the BBC and you will end up with American style TV with more and more advert breaks.
I certainly think that BBC standards have dropped alarmingly 1950, what I ideally want is to see them climb back higher and hopefully that will drag the mutant channels with them. That is what I am really hoping for, it won't happen though!
In on-topic news, Australia just knocked Brazil out of the world cup with Brazil conceding their first goal of the tournament.
To be fair to them, it is not at all surprising that the quality of football is so bad. A lot of them are employed near enough full-time outside of football or are studying full-time. Starkly different from the professional standard of the men, who eat, sleep, and breath football basically 24/7.
Not sure about that! Maybe 23/7 with a bit of time set aside for breathing laughing gas! As for the Women's game Those who are centrally contracted can make a decent living from it; "England players have been awarded central contracts since 2009, with 27 currently on a yearly deal worth up to about £26,000. England players in the Women's Super League can earn up to about £35,000 from their clubs." The club game is where it will grow or die. Average attendances for 2013 were 573. If the top is so uninspiring maybe only a world cup win could really boost the viewing numbers required for some money to filter down to have a large enough playing base to generate improved quality. I liked the idea of giving them smaller pitches. i just can't ever see a fast enough game being generated by women to bring any of the traditional viewing public across without some sort of innovation to give it a hand. And back on topic. The BBC is gradually sliding. I think it comes from overpaying some of the top earners because of the competition from other stations and leaving the cupboard a bit bare for making the more mentally stimulating stuff it is famous for. I probably developed a lot of my interest in science and tech from tomorrow's world and whilst there are shows out there none come close to the interest that used to generate for me. Bah!
I think that the BBC has a unique position in that it can choose to create programmes on the basis of something other than what sponsors will shell out cash for as this will only lead to tv of the lowest denomination. It would take a very brave independent exec to try to sell a 3-part documentary series on Napoleon or the life of sharks whereas the BBC is obliged to cover less popular areas such as history and the natural sciences. BBC documentaries are still far less speculative and shouty than their independent counterparts as they do not need to be "exciting" to the masses to allow them to be made. The trouble with any form of the media is that what is popular sells and what is popular is not necessarily what is good (I know that this is a judgement call but frankly I don't care). Maybe I am being a bit elitist in saying that endless reality shows, game shows and talk shows hosted by B listers talking to C listers is not good for the general mental health of the population. We all have shows we watch which are not exactly high-brow but surely there must be an outlet somewhere where you can watch good quality broadcasting on a range of topics. I ask myself would I be happy with my daughter watching this and I have to say looking at most of the rubbish that comes form ITV and, to be fair a lot of other channels, the answer is usually a resounding "no". I appreciate that some of the older posters on here can complain about the drop in standards at the BBC but compared to what else is out there they are a beacon of hope and sanity. I also feel that their contribution to the wider media in terms of an impartial news service, excellent web-site and wide range of radio channels is somewhat overlooked. Realistically could Radio 4 ever be made commercially and I know we laugh at Radio Norfolk but compare it to local independent stations and the joke is less funny. The BBC is imperfect but I think it has coped reasonably well given the huge shift in the operation of the media over the past 15 years or so and that if it ceased to exist then a whole trenches of areas would lose what little exposure they have to the wider public.
Lazy bastard has strong opinions about women’s football WOMEN cannot play football, a plump and uncoordinated man has claimed. 42-year-old car park attendant Wayne Hayes has heavily criticised players in the Women’s World Cup, despite not having got off his fat arse and run around for decades. Largely sedentary Hayes said: “The women are doing it all wrong.“Yes, they appear to be running around and kicking the ball in a football-playing manner, but you can bet they are all thinking about pretty vintage tea parties rather than goals. “They are ruining the game, and if I had the conviction or physical vigour to play sport on any level then I would show them what a man can do. “However because of my dodgy knee, my opinions are purely theoretical. A bit like Einstein, if Einstein had some kebab juice on his shirt and only said things that he felt confident his mates would agree with.” http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/sport...-opinions-about-womens-football-2015060899013
Logging on to this site is a little bit like travelling back in time to view French and Saunders sketch- the old gits
Never watched French and Saunders more than once so I can't be sure but wasn't "the old gits" Harry Enfield and Paul Whitehouse? Weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee Bah!
Congratulations to OUR ladies beating Norway 2-1,coming from 0-1. I think it's about time there was a lot more encouragement on this site for the girls. FFS they are representing England. Get behind the team and stop slagging them off
Unfortunately watching England reminded me of the mens team so I turned over through boredom. I watched the French the other day and it was so much more interesting. I'm beginning to wonder if flair and technique have been genetically removed from anyone born on these shores. Why is it we are only good at anything that involves size, power and strength. It has to be genetic and not just a cultural interest those things.
I don't buy into the club game neccesarily being where it will grow or die. Much like cricket it could be the Internationals that make the money to fund it. Womans football doesn't have to be huge and expensive to be a success, how many on here harp on about how money has ruined the mens game? People should stop comparing it to mens football, its a completely different kettle of fish, very early in development, it doesn't have to be branded and packaged and conform to how the mens game is. I really wish that it is left to women to develop it how they want, it should be geared for women to watch and enjoy. Plus it would be very interesting to see how it develops.
When you see the ****e that is shown on Thai TV KIO, you will soon appreciate what you have got back in the UK. It is simply dreadful here and most decent programmes are imported from Australia or America with a small handful from the UK (Mostly wildlife stuff). Even the "soaps" in the UK are superb compared to what passes off as the same here.
How does a thread about Womens World Cup degenerate into a discussion on World TV quality? The girls are now in the Semi,FFS lets have some support
