BBC lacks leadership
Sunday, November 23, 2008 Last week I was invited to join what the Guardian calls "a small band of conservative malcontents [who] are refusing to pay the BBC's annual licence fee on the grounds that they object to parts of its output".
I declined, not because I am a great fan of the BBC but because I still think the licence fee represents good value for money - especially if, like me, you prefer watching real-time TV without the commercials.
There are loads of things wrong with the BBC (not least the institutionalised 'liberal' bias) but I would miss it if it didn't exist or it ended up like public service broadcasting in the States.
Also, I have no wish to ally myself with those who are determined to see Jonathan Ross axed from the BBC. Like Jon Gaunt at Talksport, Ross knows he went too far. But I don't like witchhunts and that is what this is turning into. (Ross and Brand made a mistake. Get over it.)
By all means let's discuss the size and future direction of the BBC. And while we're at it, let's look at the idea that the BBC should share the revenue from the licence fee with other broadcasters (not a bad idea at all).
But let's not throw the baby out with the bath water. The concept of a publicly-funded British broadcasting service still has a lot going for it. Unfortunately no-one at the BBC, from the top down, seems to be able to communicate what that is.
The problem, I think, is relatively simple. It has nothing to do with preening presenters, excessive swearing or political bias (though these may be symptoms of the malaise). The real problem is leadership (lack of).
Somehow, somewhere, the BBC has to find a chairman or chief executive who can communicate a clear vision of the BBC in the 21st century. That person has to have a passion for public service broadcasting and the bottle to stand up to government, opposition parties and disaffected viewers when the BBC is under attack. He/she also has to be able to put the fear of god into employees as and when necessary.
It is impossible for the BBC to please all the people all the time. But if they want our money they have to earn our respect, and to do that the BBC needs a big man with a big reputation - the Fabio Capello of broadcasting - in charge.
Any suggestions?
BBC
Reader Comments (4)
Simon you skip over the 'liberal bias' issue as though it's not terribly important but to me it's everything that's wrong with the BBC. They've taken every politically correct mantra and turned it into 'acceptable fact'which we apparently need to 'get over' - everything from the EU to global warming, passive smoking - to anti-Englishness. It's so bad now that everytime I switch on the BBC (nowadays, not that often) I feel as though I'm viewing a strange almost alien culture with which I share no common values. Living as I do in a 'devolved' area of the UK makes the anti-English angle far more apparent than to those living in England itself. We shouldn't have to pay for propaganda but that's precisely what we are getting - we get the BBC's warped view of the world and they don't give any airtime at all to those who view the world from a different perspective. They are a complete and utter disgrace and in need of urgent and thorough reform.
Perhaps, if the BBC were to make their channels optional viewing and use a system like the Sky Card, so that if you decide to pay the licence fee, you will be able to access BBC channels, but if you prefer not to, you are not robbed of money you often do not have to spare, and cannot access the BBC channels.
I guess the problem there for the BBC would be that too many people would opt out and they would not have enough money to to carry on!
The problem with the system as it is, is that no-one has a choice if they want a TV in their home; whether or not they want to watch BBC, they still have to pay the licence fee or risk a huge fine and often bully boy tactics too!
As my mother says, it is all very well for people to say, switch channels if you don't like what the BBC is showing, but she is paying for them to show these programs! Probably not really a good argument, but that is how many people think.
I would'nt like to see the BBC going and those wankers that refused to pay their licence are ridiculous. If they had protested over the way the BBC is going or the content of their programmes I would go along with them.
I agree that whats needed is to get rid of the dick heads who are running it at the moment and appoint someone who is more in touch with what people want.
For instance where has all the great british comedy gone over the past decade. In my opinion no one can do comedy like the british and there were some excellent shows, like Keeping up Appearances, Fawlty, Rising damp, AB FAB and others too numerous to mention. Personally I spend my time scouring the satalites for reruns of the above and so do loads of people I know.
And why dont they do period dramas again, its 13 years since they made the brilliant Pride and Prejudice when they said at the time it would be their last as they couldnt afford it any more. Big deal! and what do we get instead only sickening reality horrors, its like pay for it yourselves by laughing at yourselves.
Just like the govt and the rest of the dick heads running us, they all need a mega dose of reality and they need to put on some decent shows again and bring back and PAY the scriptwriters proper money, that is if there are any still around.
Otherwise they may have a job getting us out of the opium dens in the future!
Sexist pig, why not a big female.