Here we go again, ITV has announced another poor set of results. To be fair to them they are actually a big improvement on the past year or two, which considering the current economic climate is an achievement.
However, ITV is in long-term decline and is seriously considering giving up its rights as a major broadcaster by having public service commitments. I don't blame it, every good idea is copied by the BBC and even ITV's best sports coverage (Formula 1) is nicked by the BBC.
The BBC, funded by a poll tax on TV owners, even pays its best stars better and is able to deliver better audiences.
There is no level playing field, even Channel 4 gets taxpayer subsidy to boot. Sky is funded by market means that ITV is no doubt looking into as a possible future.
Of course, changes in the market for TV and in viewing habits set a wider context for ITV's decline and ITV too is guilty of some horrible mistakes like the purchase of friends reunited; but do we want the UK market to be dominated by the Islington literati vs the Murdoch dynasty?
In current circumstances where every penny counts for us all, there is no moral justification for the BBC to have Government funding, as I have argued many times. I hope the Conservatives grab this nettle, scrapping such a hugely regressive tax would be popular and improve the health of the media market and save the private sector. If we people want specialised, quality TV entertainment then they will pay for it voluntarily; as SKY has proved with great success.
More tangential, but by my personal belief, is that the BBC employs hundreds (thousands?) of media studies graduates each year which sustains this market - all at taxpayer expense. This encourages Universities to offer such lightweight courses in the first place. Therefore these people are lost to the productive economy from the age of 17. I don't want less market regulation to re-balance the sector and reduce the artificial demand which hampers private companies and damages the economy.
16 comments:
What do you say to people who tell us that the tax-funded BBC is the only way to prevent our news market looking like the American one?
It's worth the money for tv without advertising!
Regularly working in the US I've seen where the market has taken them. It isn't towards enjoyable viewing.
BBC news is a valuable resource that we would soon miss if it we're removed.
BE/Anon - is BBC news better than sky news? really??
If the government want to subidise there are other models than a poll tax. Also there is an alternative for tv without adverts...have you ever seen sky movies for example?
The difference, as I said is that it is voluntary payment to a profit making, tax paying organisation (well, sky don't pay much tax but that is another story...)
I lived in the US for 2 years and thought the TV was much better overall; So I guess it depends on your own point of view.
celebrity come dancing etc does not need tax funding.
If we did not have BBC News, Sky News would soon resembe Fox, which is a joke or one of the Murdoch Papers which shamefully plug and cross subsidise (via news stories) other Murdoch businesses.
I totally diagree with your comment about BBC stealing ITV's best ideas. Where is the evidence for this. On my own blog I have before listed all the TV shows that ITV have stolen the formats from the BBC, and in every single case the ITV version has been massively inferior.
We ought to be proud of thwat the BBC produces. It sets a benchmark and whilst you may not like the poll tax, as you call it, to suggest that ITV could survive if the BBC starting taking adverts is a jopke. ITV would lose most of its revenue then you'd be left with less choice and would be probably be paying even more for goods as advertising budgets rise.
Don't take it as a personal attack on you. I like your blog a lot and regularly read it.
Regarding Friends Reunited - I wouldn't necessarily describe the purchase as a 'horrible mistake'.
The mistake was not reacting to the development of the social networking market by changing their model, enhancing the platform and leveraging the headstart they had from their (huge) subscriber base. In not doing so they surrendered pretty much all the value in the asset to Facebook et al. Stupid.
Given this (and the ITV digital fiasco), I'd question the extent to which their difficulties are down to poor strategy and management as opposed to 'by design'.
The BBC strives to be independent. How successful it is in achieving this is another debate, but Sky have no such covenant.
This is the 'public service' provided which justifies Government sponsorship.
@ Norfolk Blogger
"We ought to be proud of thwat the BBC produces. It sets a benchmark...."
a) Why should we be proud of mediocrity?
b) It does set a benchmark - a pretty low benchmark. See a) above.
Isn't the burden of complaint that the BBC's standards are generally awful, that the BBC remains glaringly biased, that therefore the BBC seriously fails those who are obliged to pay its outrageous fees? Just because this broadcaster appears to be slightly better than dross is no cause for celebration.
NB - I have answered your points on your fine blog too, thanks for the debating points.
I think £130 is a lot for what we get. I don't want it, it is pure state coercion. As such the BBC always defends the public service status quo. If it dare do otherwise it soon gets in trouble, see the Hutton inquiry.
Mike - I won;t disagree that Charles Allen was a poor CEO and ITV made some poor moves. The pressure they are under though is immense, any success is copied and used by the BBC. Without adverts the playing field is not level, see the viewing figures for major sporting events as an example.
ITV does undoubtedly have strategy issues, but these have a base in the disfigured regulatory state of the industry in which they operate.
Note how when we stopped subsidising the film industry two years ago to such a large extent the quality of our films improved.
Unsworth. Go abroad and watch some TV.
Remember that for the one US TV comedy hit, 20 fails and some don't even make it to the end of the first series.
CU - Thanks for the praise and addressing my points.
"...to suggest that ITV could survive if the BBC starting taking adverts is a jopke."
Who cares if they survive or not? The point is that taxpayers stop paying a poll tax whilst normal folk get to have a wee-wee break paid for by advertisers. If the BBC output is so good (and I enjoy some of it) then viewers (and advertisiers) will flock to it.
@ Norfolk Blogger.
a) Actually I have watched TV in many countries. You mention America, well yes, much of the output is pretty dire as it is in Japan, across much of the Far East, the Middle East, Australia, several European countries etc.
b) Once again, you are carefully avoiding the point - which is that it is simply not good enough to say that our crap is 'better than' their crap. It's still crap.
Clearly you believe that it's all wonderful. Sure, so it's 'high quality' garbage, then. This is not a comparative, it's an absolute. No wonder BBC TV audiences are diminishing. Maybe that's a reason to congratulate Al Beeb.
CU,
you keep saying bbc steal itv ideas. where is the proof to back this up. strictly come dancing = dancing on ice, dr who = primeval, the list could go on and on.
and for 130 quid you get 4 channels, 2 kids channels, the website, 5 nationwide radio stations and countless other local radio stations. how much is a sky subscription for wall to wall football and american imports?
i agree the beeb could do with some cost cutting. i.e. why send every tom dick and harry over to cover the olympics, and do they need the amount of admin staff that could run a small eastern european country? probably not, also they absolutely need to stop feeding the wage inflation for presenters, if some jonny come lately thinks he's worth 2 mill a year then let him sod off to the other channels. theres plenty of creative and entertaining talent out there.
ps what quality films are you talking about?
CU. Bashing the beeb is like criticising nurses, the RSPB, lifeboats, school fetes or the Church of England.
Its just not on! As well you know.
But I fully agree it is a hornets nest that needs kicking, If only so we realise that we are relatively well served. Waiting for a more in depth "BBC stand on your own feet" from you at another time.
I was doing some thinking about it and I just scanned the TV schedules for this week and totaled up the hours I MIGHT watch TV on each channel.
BBC 2 came top with 9 hours [mostly newsnight]
BBC 1 - 6-7 hours
C4 - 5 hours
C5 - 3 hours
ITV 4 - 2- 3 hours
ITV 2 - 4 hours [movies]
ITV 1 - BBC 4 - barely 1 hour each.
No sky for me, just freeview but I was much more likely to watch Dave than ITV.
* these are just rough of course but on this personal check of possible TV watching, ITV cant even get a possible viewing from me... nor MRs BQ either.
That I suspect is the real problem.
Roy - They take the presenters, they had some singing show thing. i don't remember the names as I don't watch them. of course ITV nicks the other way.
The difference is the BBC gets subsidy to beat the crap out of ITV.
Unsworth makes the point. This is about absolutes. There is no need for a telly tax and it affects the poorest the most.
I would happily pay for some BBC output, it can be good sometimes.
Why cannot I not choose to do that? Explain to me again the need for state sponsored channels in a free society?
There's a very good piece in this month's Standpoint, that suggests that ITV's biggest problem comes from putting a beancounter with no concept of quality in charge.
More GEC than Apple.
aaaa片, 免費聊天, 咆哮小老鼠影片分享區, 金瓶梅影片, av女優王國, 78論壇, 女同聊天室, 熟女貼圖, 1069壞朋友論壇gay, 淫蕩少女總部, 日本情色派, 平水相逢, 黑澀會美眉無名, 網路小說免費看, 999東洋成人, 免費視訊聊天, 情色電影分享區, 9k躺伯虎聊天室, 傑克論壇, 日本女星杉本彩寫真, 自拍電影免費下載, a片論壇, 情色短片試看, 素人自拍寫真, 免費成人影音, 彩虹自拍, 小魔女貼影片, 自拍裸體寫真, 禿頭俱樂部, 環球av影音城, 學生色情聊天室, 視訊美女, 辣妹情色圖, 性感卡通美女圖片, 影音, 情色照片 做愛, hilive tv , 忘年之交聊天室, 制服美女, 性感辣妹, ut 女同聊天室, 淫蕩自拍, 處女貼圖貼片區, 聊天ukiss tw, 亞亞成人館, 777成人, 秋瓷炫裸體寫真, 淫蕩天使貼圖, 十八禁成人影音, 禁地論壇, 洪爺淫蕩自拍, 秘書自拍圖片,
做愛的漫畫圖片, 情色電影分享區, 做愛ㄉ影片, 丁字褲美女寫真, 色美眉, 自拍俱樂部首頁, 日本偷自拍圖片, 色情做愛影片, 情色貼圖區, 八國聯軍情色網, 免費線上a片, 淫蕩女孩自拍, 美國a片, 都都成人站, 色情自拍, 本土自拍照片, 熊貓貼圖區, 色情影片, 5278影片網, 脫星寫真圖片, 粉喵聊天室, 金瓶梅18, sex888影片分享區, 1007視訊, 雙贏論壇, 爆爆爽a片免費看, 天堂私服論壇, 情色電影下載, 成人短片, 麗的線上情色小遊戲, 情色動畫免費下載, 日本女優, 小說論壇, 777成人區, showlive影音聊天網, 聊天室尋夢園, 義大利女星寫真集, 韓國a片, 熟女人妻援交, 0204成人, 性感內衣模特兒, 影片, 情色卡通, 85cc免費影城85cc, 本土自拍照片, 成人漫畫區, 18禁, 情人節阿性,
Post a Comment