economics

Have your say on the future of our BBC

Link | | Paul Greer

I am posting this here in case anyone hasn’t seen it.

Last night I filled in my answers to the governments public consultation document for the future of the BBC. It has been sneeked out and the questions are weighted heavily so it is essential that anyone who cares about the BBC and would like to see it’s future secured in a way that benefits everyone, take the time to fill it in. It takes about quarter of an hour. There is just over a day left.

Here’s the link.

Here are my answers. They’re not perfect, but they’re done:

 

How well is the BBC serving its national and international audiences?
Extremely well. With news coverage, drama and especially documentaries. I also use the podcasting feature a lot and the radio iplayer.

Which elements of universality are most important for the BBC?
The BBC is a relied upon national institution, unique in the world. It is trusted universally and is a major driving part of British culture. It is extremely important that ti’s content is advert free as it provides a space for thought and consideration free from sponsorship.

Is the BBC’s content sufficiently high quality and distinctive from that of other broadcasters? What could improve it?
The nature of the BBC allows new talent and ideas to grow organically, many cultural icons with global influence exist today because they were nurtured and allowed to grow on the BBC. The BBC should be allowed to produce the kind of content that other companies cannot due to to market forces being their main drive.

Where does the evidence suggest the BBC has a positive or negative wider impact on the market?
It is extremely important that BBC news comes free from any adverts or sponsorship for obvious reasons. The powerhouse of innovation and creativity which the unique way the BBC is funded produces some of the most important cultural forces we have today. It is a shelter for innovation which produces benefits which far out way the investment.

Is the expansion of the BBC’s services justified in the context of increased choice for audiences? Is the BBC crowding out commercial competition and, if so, is this justified?
It is essential that the BBC provides an alternative to other commercial news and online content, if people choose to use the BBC over it’s competitors because of it’s high quality then surely that proves it’s value. If other commercial companies feel they are being pushed out maybe they should rethink their strategy of connecting with people. Their audience will not increase just because the BBC is not there.

Has the BBC been doing enough to deliver value for money? How could it go further?
The BBC is incredible value for money, if one compares it with any online subscription service. To get the equivalent breadth and range of content using other services one would have to spend considerably more than £12 per month, possibly 5 to 10 times that amount.

How should we pay for the BBC and how should the licence fee be modernised?
I think the existing license fee system is fair. I would like to see the BBC supplement this by providing an fee paying subscription for the iPlayer for non-UK customers.

How should the relationship between Parliament, Government, Ofcom, the National Audit Office and the BBC work? What accountability structures and expectations, including financial transparency and spending controls should apply?
The BBC should be supported by government but this regular interference by successive administration is unhelpful. There is room for improvement in the way the BBC is run, but I do not think many politicians have the breadth of knowledge and experience to be applying their opinions to the corporation. I also believe may politicians are under the influence of corporate lobbyists representing the interests of those who want to see the BBC diminished for their own personal gain. The BBC is for the people of Great Britain, it is for them to decide if the fee is suitable and appropriate and not a few politicians.

(cross posted from Facebook)

This Is Not Reality

Aside | | Paul Greer

reblogged form motleyglue:

“So about those Polar Bears. Let’s be clear; nature does not line itself up, all “raw” and “visceral” and hurl itself into our telly screens for consumption. It’sproduced; from the moment a documentary is concieved, it is contrived and constructed.

Okwonga’s angle typifies our habitual misconception and fetishisation of photo-reality as reality. (But this guy works in media? Don’t they immunise you against that on the first day?).  Reality, went. Ages ago.  And the line between photoreality and ‘CGI’ is pixel-thin, overlayed a few times and with a shed-load of blur to give the impression of depth of field.

(It’s all ‘enhanced’! Everything!! Look!!!)

OK that’s not so bad. What’s terrible is that anyone gives a monkey /polar bear/ whatever. Because in the REAL world, Cameron has left the UK floating up the Atlantic without a paddle, or a friend (except the US, but that’s ok cuz the dollar will never collapse, right?), and the inquiry into the really properly morally destitute media whores is re-opened.

I don’t subscribe to the theory of a singly masterminded conspiracy. But. When the media is so desperate to distract us from both what IS newsworthy, and from the stink of its own backfired distractions – with a well-timed soup of such cute fluff and contrived confrontation as would make Simon Cowell proud – the icky symbiosis of governance and media is horribly, scarily obvious.

The reality or honesty that I want from media is more fundamental than location or editing. If necessary, composite Cameron’s head onto some fuzzy bear cubs, and then lets have discussion and debate of something relevant to our interests.”

The Common Good.

Quote | | Paul Greer

“Take a walk through any big city. Do you see anything that needs improvement? There are huge amounts of work to be done, and lots of idle hands. People would be delighted to do the work, but the economic system is such a catastrophe it can’t put them to work.

The country’s awash in capital. Corporations have so much money they don’t know what to do with it – it’s coming out of their ears. There’s no scarcity in funds – these aren’t “lean and mean” times. That’s just a fraud.”

— Noam Chomsky

Albert Einstein: Why Socialism? 1949

Quote | | Paul Greer

“I have now reached the point where I may indicate briefly what to me constitutes the essence of the crisis of our time.
It concerns the relationship of the individual to society. The individual has become more conscious than ever of his dependence upon society. But he does not experience this dependence as a positive asset, as an organic tie, as a protective force, but rather as a threat to his natural rights, or even to his economic existence. Moreover, his position in society is such that the egotistical drives of his make-up are constantly being accentuated, while his social drives, which are by nature weaker, progressively deteriorate. All human beings, whatever their position in society, are suffering from this process of deterioration. Unknowingly prisoners of their own egotism, they feel insecure, lonely, and deprived of the naive, simple, and unsophisticated enjoyment of life. Man can find meaning in life, short and perilous as it is, only through devoting himself to society.

The economic anarchy of capitalist society as it exists today is, in my opinion, the real source of the evil… This crippling of individuals I consider the worst evil of capitalism. Our whole educational system suffers from this evil. An exaggerated competitive attitude is inculcated into the student, who is trained to worship acquisitive success as a preparation for his future career.”

— Albert Einstein
via

“Osborne’s first Budget? It’s wrong, wrong, wrong!”

Quote | | Paul Greer

“If you have a household that can’t pay its debts, you tell it to cut back on spending to free up the cash to pay the debts. But in a national economy, if you cut back on your spending, then economic activity goes down, nobody invests, the amount of tax you take goes down, the amount you pay out in unemployment benefits goes up and you don’t have enough money to pay your debts.”

— Joseph Stiglitz