BBC Blog Network

User Profile

joshuamoran

Listed below are comments made by joshuamoran between Thursday, 15th May 2008 and Thursday, 18th September 2008.

«Newer
Older»

Does capitalism still work? 01:25am on 18 Sep 2008 I think an important part of the problem is with the British obsession with house ownership and investing in houses (instead of something else).

The Irish are similar to the British on this score but not other Europeans such as the French, The Spanish (and I think the Germans), and others.

We need a housing market where people can pay reasonable mortgages. People who want to invest in second homes should be persuaded from doing so (and persuaded to invest in something else) - higher capital gains tax for second homes, for example.

It's not just a moral issue that young people should be able to buy their first homes. It's, also, a practical economic issue as well.

And for those who can't afford to buy (for whatever reason) well it shouldn't be considered such a bad thing to have to rent (it's considered quite normal on the continent). And things should be put in place to make renting a more viable option than having to buy.

But at end of day something needs to be done about the absurdity in high house prices in this country. If the government doesn't do something in the future regarding this then we are just going to go through the same again - affecting everyone not just people who can't afford to buy a house / pay their mortgages.

Of course there are other factors involved but high house prices in ths country (compared to other countries in Europe, for example) certainly hasn't helped.
The end of economic niceness 3:36pm on 15 May 2008 Barrie

You too.

'I feel that life is divided into the horrible and the miserable. That's the two categories. The horrible be like, I don't know, terminal cases, you know, and blind people, crippled. I don't know how they get through life. It's amazing to me. And the miserable is everyone else. So you should be thankful that you're miserable, because that's very lucky, to be miserable' - Woody Allen

Apologies by the way: didn't mean to imply you were a pessimist! But I just wanted to make point that I am not about seeing all that is bad about the BBC (as I have said the BBC has achieved great things - and has the pontential to continue to achieve great things). Nor do I want to appear as if I am trying to stop people watching s*x on TV (if people choose to pay for porn / soft porn, or just watch titillation on a commercial channel - paid for by advertising - that is their choice) - but not the BBC putting on programmes of titillation with tax payers' money).

Paxman and Newsnight aren't that important in the big scheme of things. If the BBC (Mark Thompson) carries on as it is at the moment - dumbed down TV, telephone scandals and so on - then it will, eventually, be privatized. And programmes such as Newsnight would continue to exist, no doubt, but things would be very different (who knows, someone like Murdoch could become owner) - so the same in name but not in values. But it isn't just about Newsnight. It is, also, about comedy, documentaries, drama and so on.

Things started to go down hill, I think, in an important way, under Lord Birt. He achieved some things. But it was the dumbing-down of TV, and the BBC becoming more about empire-building than creating quality TV, that he is remembered for. Thompson has just carried on in this vein. He isn't as bad as Birt. But Thompson has done little, I think, to suggest to me, at least, that the BBC is much different under him than it was under Lord Birt.

I think Thompson has done more damage to the BBC than help it in the long-term

- failed to get increase in licence fee
- telephone scandals
- more dumbing down of TV

Just go to his personal BBC webpage and you will see a section on his achievements over ratings.
I quote:

'As Controller of BBC Two from 1996 to 1998 he saw the channel retain its share of viewing at a time of increased competition, rising from 11.2% in 1995 to 11.6% in both 1996 and 1997 and retaining a highly competitive 11.3% share in 1998'

It is incredible. Thompson's personal website talks about 'competition'. But the BBC has no competition because it is a public broadcaster. It is not meant to be competiting with commercial channels. Incredible I think. And just look at the language regarding ratings. Thompson might be a clever man. No doubt a clever broadcaster. But he should be in commercial broadcasting - not the BBC.

Thompson and co are all about short-term ratings as opposed to being all about the quality of programmes and their effect on the long-term respect and loyalty of viewers (yes, they may talk about it but it is just talk at the end of the day).

(and he failed to get increase in licence fee because, I think - and as do many others - the real reason being - that the BBC is too much like a commercial broadcaster).

Being an optimistic (as much as I love Woody Allen, I don't share his sense of pessimism ... ) I think that there is far more to life than the BBC! But by the same token, being an optimistic, I think that the BBC does have a promising future, if only those at the top began to show a bit of understanding about what the BBC and their viewers are really about - or, at least if they understand this, to demonstrate this - to demonstrate some imagination and strength of character. If not then they should go.

If you or anyone else feels / thinks the same as me, then I urge you / them to write into the BBC now - and voice your concerns. Write lots of letters. Be a complete pain. At the end of the day it is Thompson and co who are running down the BBC. And I think people should do what they can to stop this.
The end of economic niceness 12:57pm on 15 May 2008 Barrie

I think there is lots left. I am not a pessimist. The reason why I write to the BBC is because, I believe, if enough people make a noise - and make a sensible noise (not that I do, necessarily) then someone might listen.

The problem with the BBC is quite simple, in my view:

There are too many people in the organization who don't understand the BBC or who don't have the imagination and strength of character to implement the sort of television that license payers want, expect and pay for.

How many in the BBC now really care about programmes that are interesting, inspiring, creative, original, thought-provoking, and so on. A lot may talk about it. But, clearly, the people in the BBC who broadcast that programme last night where clearly out of touch.

The fact is that lots of people would love to see the BBC disappear. For example, lots of licence payers see the BBC as being indistinguishable from commerical TV (therefore why should the BBC be treated with special treatment)? Then there is the pressure from the commerical broadcasters. And people from within parliament too - both Tories and one or two Labour members too. I think even Jeremy Paxman suggested that the licence fee should be dropped (I think, perhaps, he could clarify that). Mark Thompson failed to get an increase in the licence fee. Not surprising.

The big picture is that if the BBC carries on broadcasting c**p like that last night then it won't be around much longer. That is my real point. And that would be a shame because the BBC has broadcast great programmes in the past. And because of its uinque set up (not being answerable to share holders) can do the same in the future.

Again, I am an optimist not a pessimist. But I am, also, a relaist (I hope). And the reality is that if the BBC carries on like this, then it won't be around for many more years to come. Yes it might still be called the BBC. But the big difference is that it would be a private commercial company answerable to share holders only. It would be like something between ITV / Channel 4 / Channel 5 / Sky (whoopeee).

Having lived in America, I don't want this country going further down the dumbed-down TV route. TV can have an insidious affect on people. We need a strong BBC to set standards. Not just that. But, also, to just to make and broadcast great programmes.

If the BBC (i.e Mark Thompson) doesn't get a grip, then the BBC will be privatized, and who knows - maybe we will see naked ladies reporting the news items, instead of Jeremy Paxman and co (great fun for one or two episodes, maybe - but I want more than just titillating / sensationalistic TV (I can get that on other channels - porn channel, even - that is my choice). But I, also, want substance. And only a public broadcaster, financed by a licence fee and free of commercial pressures and share-holder accountability can achieve that.

Thompson and co just have to realize that they can't pull the wool over people's eyes with short-term ratings over long-term respect and loyalty. I don't want them to lose their jobs. But at the same time I don't want the BBC to be privatized. If they carry on like this then there is no other alternative but for them to go.
The end of economic niceness 00:31am on 15 May 2008 Hi

I think Newsnight should do a programme on the way the BBC is being dumbed down.

Tonight a programme about people losing their virginity was shown (after Newsnight). It was about titillation (disguised in documentary form). The sort of programme that wouldn't have been broadcast, by previous Director Generals.

Now it is NOT the programme I object to. But the fact that it was broadcast by the BBC.

I have more respect for people on other channels showing these types of programmes - because they have to, at least, answer, ultimately, to share holders. But the broadcasters of this programme have to answer, ultimately, to viewers.
Clearly, the people who run BBC2 are more concerned about short-term ratings over long-term respect and loyalty.

I am sure many people watched that programme and didn't think too much about it. But whenever the future of the BBC comes into question, people are going to think (taking into account a broad range of programmes): mm, well, I don't think there is very much difference between the BBC and commcercial TV. Therefore why should the BBC receive special treatment (and it wouldn't be the viewers' fault for thinking this but the BBC itself).

What kind of a broadcasting organization is the BBC meant to be now. I thought it was meant to be about (innocent) entertainment - about being innovative, interesting, original, creative, inspiring and so on. 'Virgin Memories' left me feeling desperate and angry.

I am a big supporter of the BBC. Because of all that it has achieved in the past. And because of what it has the potential to achieve. But, clearly, there are senior people in the BBC who have no idea about what the BBC is meant to be about / or, at least, lack the imagination and strength of character to broadcast the sort of programmes that viewers want, expect - and pay for.

The BBC has been ripping people off (telephone scandals). It failed (and deservedly so) to land more money (again, I am a big fan of the idea of public broadcasting, independent of commercial interests - and support larger licence fees if the BBC is deserving of it). And it has been dumbing, even more, in recent years.

I think it is time for heads to roll. Starting off with those in senior positions in BBC2 (and I will be really p****d off if this post doesn't get posted).

«Newer
Older»

^ Back to top

BBC MMVI

The BBC is not responsible for the content of external internet sites

BBC.co.uk

BBC Blog Network

Find and talk to the BBC's bloggers.

User Profile

joshuamoran