Comments on: Either/or choices

By: ray

ray — Wed, 03 Mar 2010 09:16:35 +0000

You say, let’s ditch HYS, but then what would the “Speak You’re Branes” site do with it’s day? http://ifyoulikeitsomuchwhydontyougolivethere.com/

Not so easy is it?

By: Banner

Banner — Tue, 02 Mar 2010 21:41:23 +0000

That’s true enough – I wasn’t suggesting we could just flick Moyles away like a crusty scab and then everything would be lovely. I was just bothered by the notion that all of it – 6Music, Moyles, BBC3, Asian Network, anything you like – is vital, cos I don’t think that’s the case. You can argue about how decisions are made about these things – whether the criteria are financial, or based on popularity, or cultural worth (if that can even be gauged) or how diverse the sum total of the BBC’s output is. But everything ought to be questioned, because everything ought to be there because it’s doing something worthwhile and because its positives outweigh the areas where it might fall short.

I appreciate the idea that enough knives are out for the BBC without it performing some kind of mea culpa and slashing at itself, but actually I think any organisation worth its salt ought to be taking a long hard look at itself on a regular basis (not just during a recession or when people in the press are whinging about it) and asking if all its constituent parts are worthwhile. I don’t think anything should get a bye – nothing should be presumed to be vital.

That way, when some journalist (or politician, or whoever) demands to know why we pay our licence fee or why a presenter is worth keeping or whether a programme justifies its budget, there’ll be an answer, and if they do decide to make a cut, they make it on their terms, rather than being forced to satisfy some kind of knee-jerk belt-tightening impulse and throwing the Asian Network to the wolves in order to demonstrate BBC bean-counting in action.

I don’t see anything wrong with the BBC deciding it might need to cut some stuff. I’m just mad because they seem to be doing it for utterly the wrong reasons.

By: MattRob

MattRob — Tue, 02 Mar 2010 16:56:31 +0000

BBC3 viewers don’t deserve to be entertained: they’re beneath flies in my hierarchy of being.

By: Twitted by jpstacey

Twitted by jpstacey — Tue, 02 Mar 2010 11:58:03 +0000

[...] This post was Twitted by jpstacey [...]

By: Anton Vowl

Anton Vowl — Tue, 02 Mar 2010 09:56:31 +0000

That’s all very well argued. I think I should have made it clearer it’s not so easy just to ‘get rid of Chris Moyles’, for example – you’d have to pay off his contract, which exists and which is paying him several million pounds a year. So like when you’re sacking a football manager, you end up paying an awful lot of money just to make a fresh start. If we think that’s a waste of money, it’s more worthwhile looking at how the decision was arrived at to pay him so much and how it might be avoided in the future, for example.

By: Banner

Banner — Mon, 01 Mar 2010 22:00:29 +0000

But – wait a second. I might be being stupid here and missing the point, but aren’t you in danger of being so balanced that you talk yourself into the position that nothing should be got rid of, ever? I mean, there are very few things that have no merit whatsoever, but sometimes there isn’t money for everything, especially if you want to commission new stuff or create new channels — sometimes, in a pinch, things do have to be cut. And as Kristopher says, some things are just bad, and deserve to be cut – even if there was an endless supply of money to pay for fountains of crap like Moyles, I would still think he had no business being on the radio.

I accept the broader point that the either/or choice is frequently spurious, and you should argue for something based on its merits first and foremost, rather than the fact that something else might be shoddier. But if we only praised the things we like and didn’t call out the things we think are shit, then everything would be given a totally lopsided appraisal.

And there’s nothing that says the BBC has to listen to me when I say they should sack Moyles and give his salary to more deserving people or projects – but why shouldn’t I be able to make the argument and call out the things that I think are terrible, as well as support the things I like? It doesn’t have to be about money – if you think HYS is an abomination and should be got rid of, there’s no reason to feel guilty for saying so is there? Cos the time and energy that’s going into writing and moderating HYS could be going into something else, something that doesn’t bring all the trolls on the site to a screaming, howling frenzy of rage.

So I suppose that it is about either/or – either HYS, or something else, something that might be better. Perhaps it would be great if there was unlimited time and space and money for everything, but even if there was, I’d still think that some of those things were a waste of those resources. And when there isn’t time and space and money for everything, I reckon it’s ok to question it when someone talentless is given a primetime breakfast slot and a big fat salary. For example.

By: Alex

Alex — Mon, 01 Mar 2010 21:06:46 +0000

This is quite some coincidence:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2010/mar/01/information-beautiful-bbc-o-gram-spending

By: Anton Vowl

Anton Vowl — Mon, 01 Mar 2010 16:44:36 +0000

I hope no-one does. This isn’t BBC Have Your Say, you know.

By: Bisyss

Bisyss — Mon, 01 Mar 2010 16:30:25 +0000

I get the feeling someone will yell at me for this but, when you look at the figures, the BBC is good value for money. The license fee stands at £145.50, which works out at just under 40p a day. That’s cheaper than a lot of newspapers, and the BBC offer a wider and better service.

I was going to leap to the defence of BBC3 here, but I realised the only thing I watch on the channel is Being Human. Then again, I am perfectly willing to subject myself to whatever toss gets made on BBC3 if it means Being Human stays on.

By: Kristopher

Kristopher — Mon, 01 Mar 2010 14:26:25 +0000

I agree with you on all but a single point; BBC 3 may be shite in your opinion, but it’s also shite in everyone else’s opinion. I suppose it isn’t beyond saving, but I seem to remember at least three major rehauls of the station in an attempt to increase the quality.

6 Music, however, is in my humble opinion the best radio station in the country. Day time Radio 1 is taken up by air headed tits who couldn’t find good music with a map, with snippets of quality in the sunless hours, while 6 Music doesn’t have a single presenter who doesn’t know their stuff, and provides an incredible range of music every god damn day. Oh, apart from George Lamb.

Er…sorry, I didn’t mean to go on. It just pisses me off that the BBC is bending over to let the commercial sector fuck them yet again.