| 
Posted Mar 2, 2005 by And then, again, it's Mrs Zen
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/bsp/hi/pdfs/02_03_05_bbcgreen.pdf
I wanted to look at today's Green Paper with reference to the BBC web presence in general, and us in particular
Page 9 -
Programmes should aim to be excellent, distinctive and entertaining – that means, more specifically, that they should be:
• of high quality
• challenging
• original
• innovative
• engaging
All BBC services should strive to fulfil the full range of public purposes. Not every individual programme (or interactive service, or piece of internet content) will fulfil such a purpose – although the vast majority should. However every programme should display at least one of the above characteristics of excellence and distinctiveness.
 Well - I think we get a [check] on all those, don't you? But can we demonstrate it?
Page 17 -
The BBC is no longer exclusively a broadcaster. A large amount of its creative output now appears online, and it undertakes a wide range of community interest and educational activity.
Much of the text of this Green Paper uses the terms ‘programmes’ or ‘programming’ as shorthand for what the BBC does. However, where we want to emphasise other activity we have sometimes used terms such as ‘content’ and ‘output’ (to specifically include the internet) or ‘activity’ and ‘services’ (to cover everything that the BBC does).
Oka-a-a-ay. So sometimes we should apply what they say about tv and radio to us, and sometimes we shouldn't? Hmmmm.
Page 21 -
...the internet is an increasingly important source of information for millions, and the BBC has established itself as a central, trusted presence in the online world. BBC Online is the most popular site in the UK. In this context, the independent review of BBC Online conducted by Philip Graf identified some clear purposes for BBC Online that place it alongside the BBC’s television and radio services – sustaining social values and providing high quality, innovative and accessible content for UK users. In addition, that review noted that BBC Online plays a valuable role in the development of the web itself: using the BBC’s position as a trusted guide to bring new users to the internet; encouraging users to try new interactive technology; and setting a benchmark of innovation and creativity.
'bring new users to the internet?' - probably not us
'encouraging users to try new interactive technology' - [check]
'setting a benchmark of innovation and creativity' - [check]  but is it *known* that we do that?
Page 25-26
Ofcom’s purposes and characteristics will be the basis on which the programming output of the other major terrestrial television broadcasters is judged. But for the BBC, they do not represent the whole picture. The BBC also runs radio and internet services alongside its television operation, and in some areas it has a role as a public institution that goes beyond programming, into community development, education and cultural patronage. Ofcom has itself acknowledged that there may be a different set of public purposes for radio, and is conducting further work to consider what these might be.
 Huh?
Page 28
In addition, publicly-funded programmes should be excellent, distinctive and entertaining. In delivering public purposes, therefore, BBC content, in radio and new media as well as television, should aim to follow Ofcom’s suggestion that it be:
• of high quality;
• challenging;
• original;
• innovative;
• engaging.
All BBC services should strive to fulfil the full range of public purposes. Not every individual programme (or piece of internet content) will always fulfil such a purpose – although the vast majority should. However every programme should display at least one of the characteristics listed above.
of high quality; [check - but how to demonstrate it?]
challenging; [check]
original; [check, check, check]
innovative; [check]
engaging. [check
(This is cheering me up. The challenge of course is to show that we are all of these things...)
Page 46
The BBC’s view is that to fulfil its international remit it must continue to provide a trimedia service: in other words to maintain a global presence across radio, television and internet services. The Government is sympathetic to this ambition. It cannot, however, be taken as given.
 That's a shame. One of our strengths is our internationalism, isn't it?
Page 80 - this IS interesting:
Principles
The BBC should remain a cultural institution of real scale and ambition... It is a cultural powerhouse ... To fulfil its public purposes the BBC will need to maintain
significant audiences. To satisfy every licence fee payer it must provide a wide range of content for a wide range of different audiences.
[Check - though the danger of being seen as a cult site is very real with nasty consequences]
There is broad public support for the existing range of BBC services – across television, radio and the internet. There are no plans to require the BBC to shut down ot privatise any of these services. New governance and accountability arrangements should ensure that they are focused on public purposes and on the public interest.
So we should make it clear that h2g2 is focused on public purposes and on the public interests? *sigh* That feels a little general to me. But I am relieved that there are no plans to shut down or privatise the internet services. Ish.
Page 96 onwards discusses New media - ie us.
Its public service objectives were ‘to act as an essential resource offering wide-ranging, unique content; to use the internet to forge a new relationship with licence fee payers and strengthen accountability; and to provide a home for licence fee payers on the internet and act as a trusted guide to the new media environment.’
Fairy nuff.
The service also aims to bring new users online, providing them with simple and safe navigation tools and content.
 The DNA engine may be safe, but it ain't simple!
Page 97
While committing to focus resources on content that has educational and democratic value, the service must continue to cater for the tastes of all licence fee payers. It should play a key role as a benchmark of innovation and quality, developing original and engaging content to attract new users and give those with more experience the opportunity to engage creatively with the site. The BBC will also have to continue to monitor the balance of content and services on the site to ensure that they remain in keeping with the principles and purposes of the Corporation eventually enshrined in the new Charter next year. We expect the service licence developed for bbc.co.uk to provide a high level of clarity, for all interested parties, about the boundaries of the site.
What does that mean? I hate these big, fluffy, imprecise words.
Comments, anyone?
Ben
|
 
|  | |
| |
Posted Mar 2, 2005 by anhaga
It sort of all comes down to 'the new Charter next year', doesn't it.
|
| | |
| |
Posted Mar 2, 2005 by And then, again, it's Mrs Zen
It does, of course. But this is the government setting out its stall on what constitutes a 'good' BBC.
I've filleted the thing for its comments on the Internet, Online content and New Media.
The conclusions that I come to are that we are a good example of what the Government claims to want from the BBC, *but that it is difficult to demonstrate this* either to The Powers Behind The Towers within the BBC or outwith the BBC.
However, this makes me feel that demonstrating how we align with the Government's stated objectives for the BBC to the Powers Behind The Towers would be (a) possible and (b) worth doing.
I want the site to survive.
Ben
|
| | |
| |
Posted Mar 2, 2005 by Ferrettbadger, 30 years old arrggghhh.... On the plus side looks like we have a deal to solve the Royal Mail dispute....
Well I think we are safe insofar as the charter is renewed on this basis.
Trouble is there is an election between now and then and if the governemnt changes (unlikely I know) then this could all be pie in the sky.
|
| | |
| |
Posted Mar 2, 2005 by GreyDesk
Yes B, I agree, it is all looking rather good. It's down to the staff and their mangement to give the push to show how different and innovative we are.
My one fear is that with the forthcoming release of the h2g2 movie that we will be innundated with the movie's fans. This for a period of time could give the impression to an outside observer that we are in some way a fan site, with all the negative connotations that that delivers.
Oh and FB, there is no chance of a change of government at the next election. The Lib-Dems will do well I'm sure, but not well enough to form the next governemnt.
|
| | |
| |
Posted Mar 2, 2005 by BouncyBitInTheMiddle
I can't help but wonder if Hootoo hasn't been pushed into obsolescence by Wikipedia. Is this an unfair comparison?
|
| | |
| |
| |
Posted Mar 2, 2005 by Dr Zen now with PhD Funding.
Interesting 
Generally I'm reassured, if the Charter was renewed on this basis I'd feel fairly happy for the safety of h2g2. I can't see why a White Paper would be radically different from a Green Paper, unless of course we get a change of government.
It's certainly the best we could realistically expect isn't it?
This is another reason for me to vote Labour. I know they started a war for no reason, but the NHS is doing well, and I like this white paper. Call me selfish but I spent 90% of my time either in an NHS hospital or on H2G2, well maybe not 90%, but it certainly sometimes feels like that.
*hides from Ben*
I think there are two issues to be discussed here.
1. Is the new Charter likely to be based on this Green Paper. Is this green paper sufficently likely to become relatity for us to be able to make plans on it.
2. What Do we need to do to ensure h2g2's survival in this Brave New BBC? How do we meet the above points.
Jimster said on a different thread that the italics are spending more time evalagising the H2G2 message within the BBC. This seems to me to be A Good Thing. If the Powers That Be, and by that I mean the italics bosses, like, and get h2g2 then we are more likely to survive.
Budget cuts are invevitable, but if we are achiving all this with only three members of staff then we're less vunerable than other sites doing less with more staff.
I think we do bring new users to the internet, we do seem to have a lot of users who are new to the internet, we certainly make people seem to stay around.
I think one of the things that could be done is to take a long hard look at the information provided for new users. Lets see the site as a newbie and see what information is provided, which of it needs up dating and which of it. That could make it easier for new internet users to stick around.
GD makes a good point about not being seen to be a fan site. I think the emphasis needs to be on encouraging the new influx of newbies to get involved in the site as it is.
What role to do we, as hootizens have to play in Project Save H2G2?
|
| | |
| |
Posted Mar 2, 2005 by And then, again, it's Mrs Zen
I heard someone recently describe h2g2 as 'intimidating', and of all the people I have recommended the site to, only one is a regular contributer, though she has defected to the Collective. I think I am going to start a thread somewhere on "what puts people off h2g2?"
B
|
| | |
| |
Posted Mar 2, 2005 by WanderingAlbatross - Wing-tipping down the rollers of life's ocean.
I think you have to go with providing value for money to the license payer. I'm sure there are users out there, probably older ones, who have learned to surf from the secure base of a BBC site. Some might even have done some XML programming without realising it, now thats what you call education. I rail against the value for money I am getting when football is all over BBC2 and I can't watch Newsnight and when Sunday's Radio 4 is virtually 70% repeats. But I consider h2g2 is free. That's good value.
I've been h2g2ing for over a year and have never really got to grips with the encyclopaedia thing. A big mistake made by many early online educationalists was to assume that 'content is king'. It isn't. It's how access to content is made possible and personal and hootoo is great for that.
We can protect against the Cult jibe by advertisng more. I sailed in on the back of the Save the Albatross Voyage but I have stayed. However I can't recall having seen any advertisng outwith of h2g2 itself.
|
| | |
| |
Posted Mar 2, 2005 by Dr Zen now with PhD Funding.
That's true.
I can think of several researchers who are fairly new to the internet, or were when they joined h2g2. Terri and Yoda for example, Ancient Brit, etc. We seem to be a far less tech savy crowd then we get at say, slashdot.
I think there's two groups of users here.
Those that use h2g2 to read the Guide Entries, and don't get involved because they don't think that they can contribute and don't want the community aspect of it.
Those involved users and regulars, who get involved in writting the Guide.
I'd like to know the proportions of the two actually?
|
| | |
| |
Posted Mar 2, 2005 by GreyDesk
"I rail against the value for money I am getting when football is all over BBC2 and I can't watch Newsnight"
As a Sheffield United supporter who was enthralled with the football all over BBC2, and was lepaing up and down, and shouting at his TV in his support of his team as its game was being shown live on terrestrial TV. Can I just say 
But I do get your point. Each to his own as it were.
|
| | |
| |
Posted Mar 2, 2005 by autumnrue
Actually, speaking as a returning researcher with various lost passwords and so on from a year or two ago, I think that the idea of re-immersing myself in the Hootoo community is a bit daunting.
I've noticed this problem on some other sites with large numbers of members, too, and I've thought that perhaps the solution would be to group researchers together in some way or another, by area, or by hootoo 'age', or something less discriminatory, like interests; then, at least, newer members would have some idea of where to start, who to begin talking to and making friends with, and, well, stuff.
Good idea? Bad idea?
|
| | |
| |
Posted Mar 2, 2005 by BouncyBitInTheMiddle
 I've just realised my personal space is the second Google entry for 'yowser'. Might have to take measures to make myself a little more anonymous.
|
| | |
| |
Posted Mar 3, 2005 by Woodpigeon (oh, I do like a bit of gorgonzola)
Hi Z - your list of just two types of users might be a bit restrictive. I can think immediately of another group - a very large group - who are actively involved in the community, but not in the Edited Guide.
Just to take up autumnrue's point about classing people - while I think that classing people into categories is against the general ethos of the site, and probably a task the off-vertical ones could do without, the help section could perhaps be beefed up to help direct newcomers to forums that meet their interest. This might help a bit.
|
| | |
| |
Posted Mar 3, 2005 by anhaga
" I've just realised my personal space is the second Google entry for 'yowser'."
I just had a look and I seem to be top of the list for 'anhaga'.
|
| | |
| |
Posted Mar 3, 2005 by Blackberry Cat , if one wishes to remain an individual in the midst of the teeming multitudes, one must make oneself grotesque
I think thats right
there are a lot of clubs and societies and although there are ways of finding out about them these require finding too
a link on the tour to some of the larger and longer lasting groups like the regional researchers groups, the Musicians Guild, the Geographical Society might help
h2g2 can seem a bit cliquey when you join
I think theres a clique for everyone here but finding it can take a bit of doing
|
| | |
| |
Posted Mar 3, 2005 by WanderingAlbatross - Wing-tipping down the rollers of life's ocean.
Here's an interesting question if we want to expand the h2g2 user base. Where would you find h2g2 if you were looking for an online chatroom or community or knowledge base. I linked back from here to the BBC homepage. I tried Science and Lifestyle and then about five or six clicks in came across h2g2 under the alphabetical index. But I knew what I was looking for.
H2g2 can be both cliquee and intimidating and we should be thinking of some way to warn newbies not to take fright. I consider myself to be pretty IT savvie and intellectually robust but one of my first sorties into somebody's persoanl space turned out to be a OI YOU WHAT THE F**K ARE YOU DOING HERE I'M WATCHING YOU. First impression was fine crack on sonny I'll go back to reading the Independent,.
I also got Yikesd early on and despite providing a defence by email did not even get the curtesy of a reply from management. That I considered to be plain bad manners so stayed off h2g2 for ages. If it hadn't have been for the Save the Albatross Voyage I probably wouldn't have returned. I did, so that's water under the bridge. However I don't see many similar campaigns so are we leaking hard won newbies to other sites.
|
| | |
| |
Posted Mar 3, 2005 by Post Team
<aside> As always, we have a little topic drift. Apologies to B for this small incursion. This reply is mainly for autumnrue and Blackberry Cat.
Well, ThePost does try to maintain an up-to-date list of all the clubs, regional groups etc over at A660304. Also pretty active is the Classified Ads page at A630019. Of course, these services rely heavily on input to keep them current.
As far as I know most ACE's provide a link to both these pages in their introduction, although they have been asked to concentrate more on the EG at this time
shazz 
</aside>
|
| | |
| |
Posted Mar 3, 2005 by WanderingAlbatross - Wing-tipping down the rollers of life's ocean.
 for later. Need to do some background reading but it raises an interesting point.
|
| | |
| |
| |
Key |  |  |
A: An older reply to the parent Posting
B: The parent Posting, to which this is a reply
C: A newer reply to the parent posting
D: The first reply to this Posting
| | |
Click on this icon to make a complaint about a specific Posting | |
|
Home
Reply
