The BBC  permalink

Money Saving Tips for the BBC in times of Osterity, and General comments.

This discussion has been closed.

Messages: 1 - 37 of 37
  • Message 1. 

    Posted by Disgruntled_Licence_Fee_Payer (U15525634) on Sunday, 2nd December 2012

    Hi.

    Bearing in mind we are all license fee payers, and yet we have NO real say in how the BBC is run, or more disturbingly, how Our money is spent. Especially when you consider what we have been seeing lately on the way the BBC exec team seem to run things

    I have a few ideas about this, and wondered what others thought.

    1) Do away with the people in fancy suits presenting the weather, which is usually wrong in any case, and just get the news reader to read out the weather whilst we see a graphical representation on the screen. ( Have you seen how many of them there are ? I know they are usually on a sub-contract, but it's still coming out of the overall budget )

    2) Just have One (1) News reader, you know, like a lot of other news channels seem to manage with.

    3) Stop sending people all over the world at our expense, and start to use the Local people that are closer or even there already.

    General Comments.

    1) We have BBC1, 2, and then we have BBC 3 and 4. So, Why are the latter two not used before 7 pm in the evenings? and the same at the weekends and Bank Holidays? Contrary to what the BBC Programmers may think, the whole planet is NOT interested in Football

    2) Why does the BBC keep messing about with the program times. What has happened to Continuity?. For example. When Doctor Who was running, one week it would be on at 18:30, another week 19:00, then it also went to 19:15? Cant anyone program better than this?

    3) Films. Quite frankly I think the BBC should be ashamed of themselves. Looking through the TV guide is like playing a game of "Spot the film" when it comes to BBC1. this is during the week as well as a Saturday night. Unless of course you want to include the post midnight files they screen from time to time, but this then begs the question are these being shown for the unemployed? seeing as most Working people would be in bed!

    4) Salaries. £6 million-a-year for a presenter? Seriously, what the heck are the senior managers thinking. No-one is worth that kind of money. Were talking Television here, it's not like they are saving peoples lives, good grief.

    As a License fee payer I would like some more input into how our money is spent, and I would also like more representation on the board of directors from the average fee payers too. This would allow for some form of transparency.

    Report message1

  • Message 2

    , in reply to message 1.

    Posted by Bethgem (U14263559) on Sunday, 2nd December 2012

    smiley - biggrin Quite right too!
    I do agree with you about this, and there must be many more ways to save money so - keep thinking!
    And saving!

    Report message2

  • Message 3

    , in reply to message 1.

    Posted by Guv-nor (U7476305) on Sunday, 2nd December 2012

    1) We have BBC1, 2, and then we have BBC 3 and 4. So, Why are the latter two not used before 7 pm in the evenings? 

    Have you noticed that before 7pm we have CBBC and CBeebies?

    I'm sure you have, well guess what they share the same bandwidth.

    If you get that wrong I shall ignore the rest of you post as garbage.

    Report message3

  • Message 4

    , in reply to message 3.

    Posted by BBC auto-messages (U294) on Monday, 3rd December 2012

    Editorial Note: This conversation has been moved from 'BBC Television ' to 'The BBC'.

    General BBC topic not related to a specific programme

  • Message 5

    , in reply to message 1.

    Posted by dayraven (U13717520) on Monday, 3rd December 2012

    2) Why does the BBC keep messing about with the program times. What has happened to Continuity? 
    Looking at a single show, the time changes may not make sense, looking at everything else that's being fitted into the schedule (including live broadcasts, and shows that don't all start and finish in the same week) it may make more sense.

    3) Films. 
    I'd expect that, with dozens of channels, including dedicated, premium-rate film channels, the cost of buying up films for TV is rather higher than back when there were only four channels to sell them to.

    Report message5

  • Message 6

    , in reply to message 1.

    Posted by technologist (U1259929) on Monday, 3rd December 2012

    Some points on the original points

    1) weather - this was competitively tendered and won by the met office despite some strong competition. the weather team provide invision forecasting on BBC TV _ including the 3 international 24/7 news channels BBC Radio and the web .. so it is a very efficient operation. ... www.bbc.co.uk/presso...

    2) i think under DQF you will see more single news presenters - but this is a topic often put to audience surveys - and the repartee between the presenters is seen as making things easier to understand.

    3) with 4 TV news channels going 24/7 and then the best part of 2 UK news channel on Radio - plus all the services of World service ...and the web it is often that the local staff
    do need help when a major incident arrives - so to have someone who is focused on putting over the news to a peak time UK audience is not unexpected. ( note the BBC is the world's largest news gathers outside of China)
    Again DQF will have an effect.

    Read DQF www.bbc.co.uk/aboutt...

    General points

    1) BBC 3 and 4 already covered - and DQF will pair these with BBC one and two.

    2) Programme scheduling is not a simple task - and particularly on a channel which is reactive to events that occur ...

    3) the BBC is the UK largest single film maker for theatrical release.... www.bbc.co.uk/bbcfil...
    as far as films on TV go - there has been persistent audience pressure against films on TV and the reduction in bought in (acquired) programming .... some of which inter alia is bound in UK law.

    4) the £6M was the fee for a production company owned by a leading presenter to provide Programmes and also the services of that person on the radio. Just the TV programs themselves were under Half the price (tariff) allocated for that premiere slot - seems like good value" buying in bulk "to me. see www.bbc.co.uk/commis... ( how many other PSB publish these???)


    As far as input into how the BBC is run - there is the BBC Trust and reporting to that the four Audience Councils www.bbc.co.uk/bbctru... as well as within the executive the team who pass your comments via the complaints system to the BBC Programme makers ... and what used to be the largest weekley audience survey organisation for a single company in the UK......

    Note the BBC executive board has Non execs www.bbc.co.uk/aboutt... - again putting "non media" people into the highest levels of the BBC organisation.

    Actually the BBC Staff do a great job - it is just very unfortunate that some seem to have not maintaining the high standard we all come to expect from the BBC

    Report message6

  • Message 7

    , in reply to message 6.

    Posted by Sue_Aitch (U3336990) on Monday, 3rd December 2012

    I agree with technologist. And thankfully there is always faq.external.bbc.co.... for FAQs.

    Report message7

  • Message 8

    , in reply to message 2.

    Posted by germinator hebdo (U13411914) on Monday, 3rd December 2012

    1/ Sack all the MOTD pundits and replace them with Garth Crooks.
    2/ Reduce the number of OB pieces to camera; we all know what no.10 Downing Street looks like, likewise for airports, law courts, stations and busy streets, some older viewers (like Portly) may even remember what schoolchildren looked like, before they went all fuzzy.
    3/ Replace BBC 3 with BBC 4+ or -1.
    4/ Reduce coverage of USA elections to that of other countries with similar populations.

    Report message8

  • Message 9

    , in reply to message 6.

    Posted by fourthelephant (U15487252) on Monday, 3rd December 2012

    Thanks for the info on Audience Councils. Never heard of them before (your info could be organised much better to present it in a way that enabled the average viewer to find things)..... So the Audience Councils report to the BBC Trust (mustn't give them direct contact with the BBC, that would be much too influential). As for who is on my particular region's council (it's led by an experienced chief exec, and member of this and that committee... etc.)... not exactly your average viewer/citizen (I realise regional heads have to be competent but they don't have to be career committee people). The rest of the members are named but no information is given about them (and it's all very vague about who chooses them and on what criteria). Sorry but it all comes across as arms-length public accountability 'tokenism' by the BBC.

    If you want to have real public accountability (note, I said 'accountability' not 'control') have quarterly on-line surveys of viewers opinions/satisfaction levels (it won't reach everyone but it will be a lot more representative than the current system).

    Report message9

  • Message 10

    , in reply to message 8.

    Posted by Bethgem (U14263559) on Monday, 3rd December 2012

    1/ Sack all the MOTD pundits and replace them with Garth Crooks.
    2/ Reduce the number of OB pieces to camera; we all know what no.10 Downing Street looks like, likewise for airports, law courts, stations and busy streets, some older viewers (like Portly) may even remember what schoolchildren looked like, before they went all fuzzy.
    3/ Replace BBC 3 with BBC 4+ or -1.
    4/ Reduce coverage of USA elections to that of other countries with similar populations.
     
    Ok so far. Keep thinking! Or should that be keep dreaming? smiley - biggrin

    It seems there is a reason for everything that the BBC do, as has been explained above.

    Whether that will stop folks thinking that the BBC waste our money is subject to conjecture.

    Report message10

  • Message 11

    , in reply to message 9.

    Posted by DBOne (U14389107) on Monday, 3rd December 2012

    So the Audience Councils report to the BBC Trust (mustn't give them direct contact with the BBC, that would be much too influential). 
    Sorry but it all comes across as arms-length public accountability 'tokenism' by the BBC. 

    The BBC Trust governs the BBC and is responsible for ensuring the license fee gets spent wisely. Changes to the way the license fee is spent have to be approved by the Trust and it is the Trust who set strategy and direction. It makes sense therefore that the Audience Councils report to the Trust.

    The BBC perform lots of market research (such as audience appreciation numbers take a look here: www.bbc.co.uk/commis... as an example) to understand what its audience thinks of specific programmes.

    Online surveys would be poor from a statistical POV as it is difficult to get a validated sample that can be representative of the whole of the viewing public.

    Report message11

  • Message 12

    , in reply to message 11.

    Posted by Bethgem (U14263559) on Monday, 3rd December 2012

    The BBC perform lots of market research (such as audience appreciation numbers take a look here: www.bbc.co.uk/commis... as an example) to understand what its audience thinks of specific programmes. 
    Been there, but couldn't find what I wanted to read about. Can you find me the bit which covers background musical noises in programmes, please?

    All I could ascertain from looking briefly at all of the headings and scanning the text is that this web page is there to promote the BBC and the aquisition of audiences. Plenty of ways to see how it all works, even down to "Pronunciaton"! Can there ever be a few paragraphs on how their audience finds the watching of tv programmes difficult to follow because of the added excessive musical noises?

    I will not hold my breath, waitng for that one.

    Report message12

  • Message 13

    , in reply to message 12.

    Posted by Peta (U24) on Monday, 3rd December 2012

    There's definitely some out there Bethgem, I remember posting a link to it to the Background music discussion.


    Have a search? I'll try and find it again later, but I'm finished here for the day now.

    Report message13

  • Message 14

    , in reply to message 13.

    Posted by Bethgem (U14263559) on Monday, 3rd December 2012

    Peta, I will hold my breath, just for you. Cheers! smiley - winkeye

    Report message14

  • Message 15

    , in reply to message 9.

    Posted by technologist (U1259929) on Monday, 3rd December 2012

    . Sorry but it all comes across as arms-length public accountability 'tokenism' by the BBC.  

    So what is a better means for the BBC trust to do things?
    it is worth noting that the other PSBs including the Public corporation Ch4 do not have anything as comprehensive as this ... and OFCOM is removing its audience panels ...
    And you can apply to be on an audience council or if you are in England any one of the 12 Regional panels -details are on the website including their email address www.bbc.co.uk/bbctru... - and this tell you what they do and who is unlikely to be selected downloads.bbc.co.uk/...

    If you want to have real public accountability (note, I said 'accountability' not 'control') have quarterly on-line surveys of viewers opinions/satisfaction levels (it won't reach everyone but it will be a lot more representative than the current system). 

    the BBC Does even better than this - Look at the Method section in this wiki article -en.wikipedia.org/wik...
    the BBC is asking from a panel of 20,000 every day or so .... and I am sure that ( As in the past) it is augmented by people with Clipboards on the street (or telephone surveys) ....

    There are also Trust consultations -see www.bbc.co.uk/bbctru... and the top one on "Red button" is a sticky on this board ... but the others are on WOCC, Purpose Remits – documents that explain what the BBC needs to do to fulfil each of its public purposes. (CLOSES 6Dec)

    And there are other bodies like VLV http://www.vlv.org.uk/ and many charities which make frequent representations to the BBC - and the thousands of viewers and listeners who use the BBC complaints site www.bbc.co.uk/compla... every day (and get an answer) .. plus FOI .... www.bbc.co.uk/foi (over 1000 replies a year) ...

    Report message15

  • Message 16

    , in reply to message 12.

    Posted by I Forget (U15411209) on Monday, 3rd December 2012

    This might interest:

    www.bbc.co.uk/academ...

    There are links to other stuff at the bottom of the page.

    And this blog:

    www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/...

    I'll post a link to this on the main thread, but I answer here because the question is here.

    Been there, but couldn't find what I wanted to read about. Can you find me the bit which covers background musical noises in programmes, please? 

    Report message16

  • Message 17

    , in reply to message 13.

    Posted by technologist (U1259929) on Monday, 3rd December 2012

    There's definitely some out there Bethgem, I remember posting a link to it to the Background music discussion.
     
    As I seem to have some interest in this -
    BGM - the overall view and how it is not just BGM www.bbc.co.uk/academ...
    look at some of the instruction linked from that page

    and the Editorial guidelines www.bbc.co.uk/editor...

    here is a key extract
    """ BBC's Audience Services monitors the number of complaints we receive about a programme's audibility. If a substantial number of justifiable complaints are made, production teams will be contacted and asked to remix the programme for future transmission, and to confirm that any subsequent episodes in the series are mixed to achieve the best audibility possible.""

    Report message17

  • Message 18

    , in reply to message 17.

    Posted by Bethgem (U14263559) on Monday, 3rd December 2012

    here is a key extract
    """ BBC's Audience Services monitors the number of complaints we receive about a programme's audibility. If a substantial number of justifiable complaints are made, production teams will be contacted and asked to remix the programme for future transmission, and to confirm that any subsequent episodes in the series are mixed to achieve the best audibility possible."" 


    OMG! Then why oh why is the problem of pointless excessive musical noises still prevalent?

    Don't make me laugh. Well I'll do this just once then smiley - laugh

    Just how many complaints do they require? smiley - doh

    Get the figures from a survey, as soon as possible!

    But then, surveys are not deemed viable on this, as one has been ruled out for some spurious reasons.

    Back to the drawing board.

    There is too much pointless and excessive musical noises in programmes.

    Report message18

  • Message 19

    , in reply to message 18.

    Posted by DBOne (U14389107) on Monday, 3rd December 2012


    There is too much pointless and excessive musical noises in programmes. 


    Two problems:

    You are in the wrong thread and there isn't smiley - winkeye

    Report message19

  • Message 20

    , in reply to message 17.

    Posted by Radioactiveoldduffer (U4768882) on Monday, 3rd December 2012

    How about this quality control. You put a human beings in front of an average TV and get them to press a button every time they can't hear the dialogue. You can't do this for all broadcasts but you can certainly do it for the expensive ones where mumbling and background music ruins what might be an excellent transmission. Next time any technician at the BBC wants to know how to do it right I suggest they look at any studio film from the 30's or 40's where you can hear every sound clearly and effortlessly and that surely is what defines quality.

    Report message20

  • Message 21

    , in reply to message 20.

    Posted by technologist (U1259929) on Monday, 3rd December 2012

    Sounds a good ideas - but isn't this better crowd sourced and then BBC Audience services can coordinate and the commissioning editor decides not to pay the programme maker until it is sorted out.... (!!!!)
    (I was involved in an incident with getting aspect ratios wrong.... and the lack of payment (and the fact that they could not get it right so NO repeat or sales) rather galvanized the industry .. )

    On the other hand the way in which films are /were put together was /is very labour intensive - and actually on set recordings were not that good ( as it was always dubbed) ... But they did take care.
    What the BBC and BBC Academy are trying to do is to get people to speak clearly, get the microphones do they pick up wanted sound and ignore unwanted sounds - and then get any additional sounds such that they do not swamp the words!!!

    Report message21

  • Message 22

    , in reply to message 21.

    Posted by Radioactiveoldduffer (U4768882) on Monday, 3rd December 2012

    Sounds a good ideas - but isn't this better crowd sourced and then BBC Audience services can coordinate and the commissioning editor decides not to pay the programme maker until it is sorted out.... (!!!!)
    (I was involved in an incident with getting aspect ratios wrong.... and the lack of payment (and the fact that they could not get it right so NO repeat or sales) rather galvanized the industry .. )

    On the other hand the way in which films are /were put together was /is very labour intensive - and actually on set recordings were not that good ( as it was always dubbed) ... But they did take care.
    What the BBC and BBC Academy are trying to do is to get people to speak clearly, get the microphones do they pick up wanted sound and ignore unwanted sounds - and then get any additional sounds such that they do not swamp the words!!!
     
    Labour intensive they may have been but they didn't have radio mikes or the sensitivity of modern microphones.

    To quote a modern remake of Spartacus:

    "I am Spa****"

    Somewhat loses the build up when Kirk calls himself a spa doesn't it.

    Report message22

  • Message 23

    , in reply to message 22.

    Posted by technologist (U1259929) on Monday, 3rd December 2012

    Labour intensive they may have been but they didn't have radio mikes or the sensitivity of modern microphones.


    Both of which are a very mixed blessing! particularly in the wrong hands !
    see www.bbc.co.uk/academ...

    But there is often not the time or money to build up the sound as they did in the films ..

    Report message23

  • Message 24

    , in reply to message 18.

    Posted by Lee (U1149673) on Monday, 3rd December 2012

    OMG! Then why oh why is the problem of pointless excessive musical noises still prevalent?

    Don't make me laugh. Well I'll do this just once then

    Just how many complaints do they require?

    Get the figures from a survey, as soon as possible!  

    I can answer this, Bethgem. My team will contact a production office every time we get 10 or more complaints about background sound or music. The producers will then review the programme and often make edits for any repeats or if there are any episodes still to be shown. To be totally open with you, they may not always agree that there's a problem.

    I think you would be amazed how rare it is for a programme to get 10 or more complaints about background music. It probably only happens a couple of times a year on average.

  • Message 25

    , in reply to message 23.

    Posted by Radioactiveoldduffer (U4768882) on Monday, 3rd December 2012

    Labour intensive they may have been but they didn't have radio mikes or the sensitivity of modern microphones.


    Both of which are a very mixed blessing! particularly in the wrong hands !
    see www.bbc.co.uk/academ...

    But there is often not the time or money to build up the sound as they did in the films ..  
    Sorry to be blunt over this but having read the link you provided it seems that an above average technician is good enough for the BBC. I'm sure there are very competent camera technicians who can also record sound but this academy page is more appropriate to school children. If you employ a professional wedding photographer he/she will know that you have to set an exposure mid way between the white dress of the bride and the dark suit of the groom to ensure that both are evenly exposed - that's why you employ a professional. Is it asking too much for the BBC to employ such people or do they have to employ non experts?

    Here's sound recording in an extreme situation and you can hear every word yet the BBC can spend millions on something like Birdsong and still not hear clearly the spoken word.

    www.youtube.com/watc...

    Report message25

  • Message 26

    , in reply to message 25.

    Posted by technologist (U1259929) on Monday, 3rd December 2012

    The issues is that the person is a PD ... Producer Director who self shoots because programme tariff do not allow! the employment of a sound person .... (or a camera person for that matter .... )

    There are lots of folk like that (and a lot worse) .....

    But with a good craft operative things usually go a lot better and you may save yourself a lot of time.... (But PDs do quite like DIY and some are V good.... BUT......)

    if you look at www.bbc.co.uk/academ... this describes how shows with a higher Tariff and sensible and knowledgeable Exec producer do get it right...

    the Alex Crawford piece is typical of news - they do know how to do it right - but she does go off mic sometimes but she is also very good at turning off mic and not saying things... and she did have a cameraman!

    Report message26

  • Message 27

    , in reply to message 19.

    Posted by Bethgem (U14263559) on Monday, 3rd December 2012


    There is too much pointless and excessive musical noises in programmes. 


    Two problems:

    You are in the wrong thread and there isn't smiley - winkeye 

    Phuff! So what? Have you read that other thread then? You will certainly learn a lot on there!

    Oh and I maintain that there is still excessive noise in television programmes. Sorry to upset you, but there it is, loud and clear!

    Report message27

  • Message 28

    , in reply to message 27.

    Posted by henry crun (U14339711) on Wednesday, 5th December 2012

    Back to the OP

    Don't waste money on silly CGI intros to sports programmes, like F1 or the Olympic Games.
    Just show us clips from the archives. Far more interesting and very very cheap.

    Report message28

  • Message 29

    , in reply to message 28.

    Posted by Peta (U24) on Wednesday, 5th December 2012


    What sort of clips are you thinking of henry? If you were thinking of great sporting moments from recent years then it's unlikely that the BBC owns the broadcast rights. They tend to be owned by the sporting bodies or the clubs. smiley - sadface

    The BBC may own rights to some old black and white sports clips from yesteryear, but that might be seen to be rather odd and very outdated to many of this generations sports fans.

    Report message29

  • Message 30

    , in reply to message 28.

    Posted by DBOne (U14389107) on Thursday, 6th December 2012

    Tell you what - how about a photo still with some letraset letters spelling the title of the programme on it, we would even use the same studio for all programmes - a couple of DFS sofas and a second hand teak coffee table. smiley - winkeye

    Report message30

  • Message 31

    , in reply to message 30.

    Posted by Radioactiveoldduffer (U4768882) on Thursday, 6th December 2012

    Tell you what - how about a photo still with some letraset letters spelling the title of the programme on it, we would even use the same studio for all programmes - a couple of DFS sofas and a second hand teak coffee table. smiley - winkeye

     
    Letraset......you're showing your age DB1!

    Report message31

  • Message 32

    , in reply to message 1.

    Posted by henry crun (U14339711) on Thursday, 27th December 2012

    maybe stop getting rid of people -

    www.telegraph.co.uk/...

    Report message32

  • Message 33

    , in reply to message 11.

    Posted by oldmanriver (U14455170) on Thursday, 27th December 2012

    "The BBC Trust governs the BBC and is responsible for ensuring the license fee gets spent wisely." ( 3rd December).

    smiley - biggrin

    Report message33

  • Message 34

    , in reply to message 33.

    Posted by henry crun (U14339711) on Saturday, 29th December 2012

    I know Top Gear is supposed to make money for Uncle Beeb but for how much longer ?

    www.telegraph.co.uk/...

    Report message34

  • Message 35

    , in reply to message 34.

    Posted by fourthelephant (U15487252) on Saturday, 29th December 2012

    Don't think I can come up with any brilliant tips, just realise the money is finite and spend it wisely.

    Report message35

  • Message 36

    , in reply to message 35.

    Posted by megamain (U12800305) on Sunday, 30th December 2012

    According to Mark Radcliffe in a (very enjoyable) programme called The Richest Songs in the World, BBC Radio 1 pays 16 POUNDS PER MINUTE in royalties for every record in plays.

    This is utterly horrific use of our licence fee!

    Every musician on the planet wants their song to be played on Radio 1 for the exposure it gives the artist and the sales it generates. The artists should be paying the BBC!!

    At least renegotiate these terms, no artist would ever not appear on the BBC because they were only getting, say, a fiver a minute? Even that is a stupid amount of money. I'm stunned.

    smiley - yikes

    Report message36

  • Message 37

    , in reply to message 6.

    Posted by oldmanriver (U14455170) on Sunday, 30th December 2012

    " i think under DQF you will see more single news presenters - but this is a topic often put to audience surveys - and the repartee between the presenters is seen as making things easier to understand."

    Sky seem to manage very well with one presenter. That one presenter also doesn't just read the news but is a journalist and they can cope with "emergency" news items, put questions to politicians and others - all the things that journalists do rather than mere "newsreaders" do.

    As to employing local people on items the BBC employs people all over the country and all over the world , - these people are often more competent than those "high profile" people who are shipped in to "front up" situations.

    As to "independent" production companies - the BBC has shares in a large number of these and some of these "independent" production companies have been taken over by the big boys - like Sony and Sky for instance. So the situation is not as transparent as it appears.

    As to audiece surveys - as everyone knows it all depends what questions are asked. In the same vein the construction of "audience reach" statistics depends only on a 15 minute time frame.

    The BBC Trust employs people who move seemlessly between the BBC and the Trust - try complaining to them - get the standard reply - "We have referred your complaint to the BBC" - check out the name on the letter and you can easily find what job they had at the BBC before they moved to the Trust.

    The Complaints system of the BBC itself - replies which don't address the complaint - I often think that they work by a "word recognition system" which when they see a keyword they just send out the standrard reply on that topic.

    The current situation is very sad for the people at the BBC who do want to deliver a "public service".

    Report message37

Back to top

About this Board

The Points of View team invite you to discuss BBC Television programmes.

Add basic Smileys or extra Smileys to your posts.

Questions? Check the BBC FAQ for answers first!

Go to: BBC News Have your say to discuss topics in the news

Make a complaint? Go to the BBC complaints website.

BBC News: Off-topic for this board, so contact them directly with your feedback: Contact BBC News

or register to take part in a discussion.


The message board is currently closed for posting.


Mon-Sat: 0900-2300
Sun: 1000-2300

This messageboard is reactively moderated.

Find out more about this board's House Rules

Search this Board

Recent Discussions

Copyright © 2015 BBC. The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.