News0 min ago
BBC World Service.
13 Answers
http://tinyurl.com/3j7otme
Should the BBC's 'World Service' be closed down and the British licence payer's money spent on improving our programmes?
Should the BBC's 'World Service' be closed down and the British licence payer's money spent on improving our programmes?
Answers
1 to 13 of 13
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by anotheoldgit. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
The World Service is, and always has been, the jewel in the BBC's crown. Up until very recently (when the Government changed the funding arrangements) it didn't receive a single penny from the licence fee. (It was funded, indirectly, by the Foreign Office).
Despite the distorted picture painted by the dire Daily Wail, the BBC World Service Trust (which is at 'arm's length' from the BBC anyway) does a great deal of good:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/trust/
The £800,000 from the BBC, quoted, by the Wail is misleading. The charity actually received £150,000 from the World Service (which, as indicated above, was actually money from the Foreign Office) plus £594,000 from the BBC Group (which includes, for example, the publishing and programme distribution sectors of the BBC - so it's not from licence fees).
Even if the £800,000 figure had been correct, what do you think that the BBC could do with it? It would only pay for roughly one episode of a costume drama (such as 'Cranford') or for about three quarters of one episode of a major 'buy in' from the USA (such as 'Glee).
Chris
Despite the distorted picture painted by the dire Daily Wail, the BBC World Service Trust (which is at 'arm's length' from the BBC anyway) does a great deal of good:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/trust/
The £800,000 from the BBC, quoted, by the Wail is misleading. The charity actually received £150,000 from the World Service (which, as indicated above, was actually money from the Foreign Office) plus £594,000 from the BBC Group (which includes, for example, the publishing and programme distribution sectors of the BBC - so it's not from licence fees).
Even if the £800,000 figure had been correct, what do you think that the BBC could do with it? It would only pay for roughly one episode of a costume drama (such as 'Cranford') or for about three quarters of one episode of a major 'buy in' from the USA (such as 'Glee).
Chris
Absolutely not, AOG. My OH used to use World Service a lot when he was driving in Europe - now that some parts have been shut down, he has to rely on local foreign radio stations to hear his news. We listen to it at night quite often - it comes on after the Shipping Forecast between 1am and 520am everynight, it's a great way to see the news from other countries.
(On that front, we quite often watch the news channels on TV from the Russian service and Al Jazeera - again it's interesting to see another country's perspective of the world news (and they're on freeview).)
(On that front, we quite often watch the news channels on TV from the Russian service and Al Jazeera - again it's interesting to see another country's perspective of the world news (and they're on freeview).)
The BBC World Service must be the best value for money there is. As a tool for promoting Britain and Britishness it is invaluable. As a means of giving impartial news to half the world, it cause many a cleric, despot or dictator great annoyance.
When the Tories were last in, they closed the BBC Middle East office (like it wasn't a place we wanted to be heard). The result was the sacked journalists opened Al Jazeera instead, and the ability of a British influence was lost for ever.
Anyone who wishes to close the BBC World Service or even part of it is extremely shortsighted.
When the Tories were last in, they closed the BBC Middle East office (like it wasn't a place we wanted to be heard). The result was the sacked journalists opened Al Jazeera instead, and the ability of a British influence was lost for ever.
Anyone who wishes to close the BBC World Service or even part of it is extremely shortsighted.
/// Even if the £800,000 figure had been correct, what do you think that the BBC could do with it? It would only pay for roughly one episode of a costume drama (such as 'Cranford') or for about three quarters of one episode of a major 'buy in' from the USA (such as 'Glee).///
Agree that would also be a waste of taxpayer's money.
Agree that would also be a waste of taxpayer's money.
I will ask this again in 2014 then, shall I?
/// The Government has reduced the World Service's £237 million-a-year budget by 16 per cent and ordered the BBC to fund the service from the licence fee from 2014. ///
Source,
Independent Newspaper, Wednesday, 13 April 2011
Not taking inflation into account, or the yearly rise in the Licence fee, £237 million puts even £800 thousand into insignificance.
/// The Government has reduced the World Service's £237 million-a-year budget by 16 per cent and ordered the BBC to fund the service from the licence fee from 2014. ///
Source,
Independent Newspaper, Wednesday, 13 April 2011
Not taking inflation into account, or the yearly rise in the Licence fee, £237 million puts even £800 thousand into insignificance.
No the World Service provides facilities for servicemen abroad as mentioned above not to mention the ex-pats who like to keep in touch.
What does seem a waste is to have almost two identical channels when during certain times of the day they are broadcasting the same news. I refer to BBC Channel 4 and Channel 5 live. If the latter is for sport then it should be closed down for the period when no sport is available.
What does seem a waste is to have almost two identical channels when during certain times of the day they are broadcasting the same news. I refer to BBC Channel 4 and Channel 5 live. If the latter is for sport then it should be closed down for the period when no sport is available.
1 to 13 of 13
