Ones suspicions are not unsurprisingly raised by lead stories in News International papers on the subject of the BBC.
It might not be the case that directions are being followed but it does not do too much harm to the 'The times' to earn some brownie points from a certain family dynasty leader.
I'm far from a fully paid up cheerleader to the BBC but do regard the News International agenda on the subject of UK broadcasting as questionable.
In truth the BBC is often attacked for being both successful and unsuccessful, drawing too small an audience on BBC 3 and too big an audience on BBC 1, super-serving the middle classes with Radio 3 and pandering to the masses with Radio 2.
The review conducted by/for Mark Thompson (who incidentally if web comments are any sort of indicators of popularity is deeply unpopular) seems to indicate that for PR purposes radio services BBC Asian network and Radio 6 are to be sacrificed the reports also suggest a retreat on Internet ambitions and a cut on BBC TV imports.
Perhaps we shouldn't be too surprised that the reports of potential are meeting with approval by the Conservatives?
Now several questions occur one is why is that males in the 35 year old age bracket (sought after by advertisers) should not have a radio network that serves their musical tastes? (and it costs around the same amount as Mr J Ross)
Another question could be why a praised radio service for Britain's Asian should be closed?
And a third - Isn't the dramatic capital projects overspend more significant? (£110 Million).
Perhaps in fact a Chief Executive on a salary of something like £880,000 a year plus perks who has been in post at such a time should be replaced rather than sacrificing the public services the organisation should have at the heart of its existence?
So perhaps the BBC needs to get closer to its audiences but it could be that this can be achieved by other means than making it smaller which incidentally benefits certain commercial interests?
No comments:
Post a Comment