Actor says shows like DW shouldn't be supported by BBC once popular

[Captain Shaw]

Re: Actor says shows like DW shouldn't be supported by BBC once popula

I don't think top gear and doctor who are taking money away from other shows, I think the money they bring in help fund more shows.

 

[DWF]

Re: Actor says shows like DW shouldn't be supported by BBC once popula

Hm. Let me get this straight.

A publicly-funded broadcasting corporation, which operates on the basis of a compulsory license fee paid by all owners of television sets, should not use the license fee to pay for shows that a large percentage of license fee payers enjoy?

In other words... money that people have to pay should not go to things they like?

I understand the rationale behind the license fee -- it ensures that quality programing that might not be commercially viable will get a chance and that commercialism will not utterly control all television. But I would argue that that means the BBC's obligation is to find a balance between using the license fee to fund shows a huge percentage of fee payers enjoy and using the license fee to fund shows that would otherwise not get a chance on commercial TV. It shouldn't all be just one or the other.

That's not how it works the license fee is far too small to pay for the shows on the BBC channels.

 

[Bob The Skutter]

Re: Actor says shows like DW shouldn't be supported by BBC once popula

Hm. Let me get this straight.

A publicly-funded broadcasting corporation, which operates on the basis of a compulsory license fee paid by all owners of television sets, should not use the license fee to pay for shows that a large percentage of license fee payers enjoy?

In other words... money that people have to pay should not go to things they like?

I understand the rationale behind the license fee -- it ensures that quality programing that might not be commercially viable will get a chance and that commercialism will not utterly control all television. But I would argue that that means the BBC's obligation is to find a balance between using the license fee to fund shows a huge percentage of fee payers enjoy and using the license fee to fund shows that would otherwise not get a chance on commercial TV. It shouldn't all be just one or the other.

That's not how it works the license fee is far too small to pay for the shows on the BBC channels.

What do you mean by this? My brain may not be grasping it but it doesn't seem to make much sense.

 

[P0sitr0nic]

Re: Actor says shows like DW shouldn't be supported by BBC once popula

This actor sounds like hes just pissed that his own shows arent as popular.

Besides, WHO isnt a dead horse one can whip... it doesnt die, it regenerates!

 

[VDCNI]

Re: Actor says shows like DW shouldn't be supported by BBC once popula

Hm. Let me get this straight.

A publicly-funded broadcasting corporation, which operates on the basis of a compulsory license fee paid by all owners of television sets, should not use the license fee to pay for shows that a large percentage of license fee payers enjoy?

In other words... money that people have to pay should not go to things they like?

I understand the rationale behind the license fee -- it ensures that quality programing that might not be commercially viable will get a chance and that commercialism will not utterly control all television. But I would argue that that means the BBC's obligation is to find a balance between using the license fee to fund shows a huge percentage of fee payers enjoy and using the license fee to fund shows that would otherwise not get a chance on commercial TV. It shouldn't all be just one or the other.

That's not how it works the license fee is far too small to pay for the shows on the BBC channels.

You what? Sorry I don't get what you're saying there.

 

[Bob The Skutter]

Re: Actor says shows like DW shouldn't be supported by BBC once popula

Hm. Let me get this straight.

A publicly-funded broadcasting corporation, which operates on the basis of a compulsory license fee paid by all owners of television sets, should not use the license fee to pay for shows that a large percentage of license fee payers enjoy?

In other words... money that people have to pay should not go to things they like?

I understand the rationale behind the license fee -- it ensures that quality programing that might not be commercially viable will get a chance and that commercialism will not utterly control all television. But I would argue that that means the BBC's obligation is to find a balance between using the license fee to fund shows a huge percentage of fee payers enjoy and using the license fee to fund shows that would otherwise not get a chance on commercial TV. It shouldn't all be just one or the other.

That's not how it works the license fee is far too small to pay for the shows on the BBC channels.

You what? Sorry I don't get what you're saying there.

Yeah, I didn't get it either. Wasn't sure if he was saying the licence fee is a small amount for a lot of quality shows, or is misunderstanding how the licence fee works.

 

[Sindatur]

Re: Actor says shows like DW shouldn't be supported by BBC once popula

That's not how it works the license fee is far too small to pay for the shows on the BBC channels.

You what? Sorry I don't get what you're saying there.

Yeah, I didn't get it either. Wasn't sure if he was saying the licence fee is a small amount for a lot of quality shows, or is misunderstanding how the licence fee works.

I assume BBC shows in total, cost "$x.00" and the License fee brings in "$y.00" and $y.00 is less than $x.00. Having a show like Dr. Who, allows the BBC to bring in extra dollars by selling the airing rights to other entities, such as BBC America.

 

[Bob The Skutter]

Re: Actor says shows like DW shouldn't be supported by BBC once popula

You what? Sorry I don't get what you're saying there.

Yeah, I didn't get it either. Wasn't sure if he was saying the licence fee is a small amount for a lot of quality shows, or is misunderstanding how the licence fee works.

I assume BBC shows in total, cost "$x.00" and the License fee brings in "$y.00" and $y.00 is less than $x.00. Having a show like Dr. Who, allows the BBC to bring in extra dollars by selling the airing rights to other entities, such as BBC America.

The Licence fee brings in around £3bn a year. BBC run a commercial arm called BBC Worldwide with an operating budget of around £1bn. They buy any rights the BBC have and sell them on or exploit them in their own commercial channels, such as UKTV channels here and BBC America etc. any profits made from these sales go back in to the BBC and add a few hundred million to their budget. So basically it adds money but they're not dependent on it to function.

 

[VDCNI]

Re: Actor says shows like DW shouldn't be supported by BBC once popula

BBC Worldwide made about £145m in the last financial year which I think was a record and was up 35% on the year before.

So yeah it's an extra more than a major source of funding - though it looks like it will become more important in the future.

The license fee basically funds everything.

 

[Silent_Bob]

Re: Actor says shows like DW shouldn't be supported by BBC once popula

If Eve thinks money is being wasted on long running shows, then he should feel free to return his wages from 'Waking the Dead' since 2007 so that it can be spent on more worthy programming.

 

[wamdue]

Re: Actor says shows like DW shouldn't be supported by BBC once popula

out of interest does Waking the Dead make an internation sales?

 

[Bob The Skutter]

Re: Actor says shows like DW shouldn't be supported by BBC once popula

out of interest does Waking the Dead make an internation sales?

looks like the first 5 series have been released in R1 and 7 in R4, so I guess it does.

 

[Deckerd]

Re: Actor says shows like DW shouldn't be supported by BBC once popula

I liked Shoestring.

 

[Starkers]

Re: Actor says shows like DW shouldn't be supported by BBC once popula

I liked Shoestring.

Yeah me too, the theme tune brings back fond memories!

 

[Bob The Skutter]

Re: Actor says shows like DW shouldn't be supported by BBC once popula

I liked Shoestring.

Yeah me too, the theme tune brings back fond memories!

Shoestring was a show? I thought it was just the budget Doctor Who used to have.

 

[Starkers]

Re: Actor says shows like DW shouldn't be supported by BBC once popula

Young people today...

 

[DWF]

Re: Actor says shows like DW shouldn't be supported by BBC once popula

BBC Worldwide made about £145m in the last financial year which I think was a record and was up 35% on the year before.

So yeah it's an extra more than a major source of funding - though it looks like it will become more important in the future.

The license fee basically funds everything.

Then why is the BBC talking about budget cuts?

 

[Bob The Skutter]

Re: Actor says shows like DW shouldn't be supported by BBC once popula

BBC Worldwide made about £145m in the last financial year which I think was a record and was up 35% on the year before.

So yeah it's an extra more than a major source of funding - though it looks like it will become more important in the future.

The license fee basically funds everything.

Then why is the BBC talking about budget cuts?

Because they've just had half a billion in extra costs foisted on them.

 

[VDCNI]

Re: Actor says shows like DW shouldn't be supported by BBC once popula

Yep - the BBC now have to fund the World Service & S4C (Welsh language channel) so that's extra costs for them - I think they were at least partly funding the switch to digital TV as well.

Also in light of the economic situation the license fee has been frozen which when you factor in inflation means a cut in real terms.

Due to all this they are facing a 16% budget cut in the next 6 years.

 

[Temis the Vorta]

Re: Actor says shows like DW shouldn't be supported by BBC once popula

Hm. Let me get this straight.

A publicly-funded broadcasting corporation, which operates on the basis of a compulsory license fee paid by all owners of television sets, should not use the license fee to pay for shows that a large percentage of license fee payers enjoy?

In other words... money that people have to pay should not go to things they like?

I understand the rationale behind the license fee -- it ensures that quality programing that might not be commercially viable will get a chance and that commercialism will not utterly control all television. But I would argue that that means the BBC's obligation is to find a balance between using the license fee to fund shows a huge percentage of fee payers enjoy and using the license fee to fund shows that would otherwise not get a chance on commercial TV. It shouldn't all be just one or the other.

That makes no sense. If a show is genuinely popular, then why can't it survive commercially?

Like it or not, when people are forced to pay for something, then it's because someone has decided they know what's best for them, better than the person does. Left to their own devices, people would be selfish and not pave roads or build schools, hence their money must be taken from them and applied to these things. The PBS philosophy is that the entertainment analogue to roads and schools are ballet and left-wing documentaries about the Middle East. You may not like these things but too bad. The nanny state says you should take your medicine.

I can agree about the roads and the schools, but TV shows is where I draw the line. What gives someone the right to decide for other people what is good for them, in the entertainment realm? Can't people be trusted to know and seek out what they enjoy? I'd love to see PBS take Americans' money and create a kick ass space opera a la DS9 (which incidentally did need seven seasons) but I'd understand if 90% of America screamed their heads off about it. I'd scream my head off if they made another cop show or dumbass comedy instead, so I'm not willing to leave it up to the whims of a government bureaucrat.

In the end, I know the market will create shows that suit my tastes more reliably. I can't even remember the last show I watched on PBS. I just wish more people (specifically, more ad-watching/cable-subscribing people) liked space operas. That's where the real problem lies, the fact that I'm not in charge of all TV production.