All posts by MikeB
Below are all of MikeB's postings, with the most recent are at the bottom of the page.
John Martin: If you bought Jeyes Fluid from a chain store or supermarket, then part of that cash went towards their marketing budget - in the case of a supermarket, that will included a TV ad spend. And Jeyes Fluid did start advertising on TV in 2011 - they spent half a million that year. And since they are part of a group that makes other products, if they are advertised on TV, then your cash possibly went towards that too.
There are certain saloon bar myths - thats anyone can read the news, be a standup comedian or be a teacher. That the weather forcast is never right, and that anyone could sort out government spending, and that they are never ever swayed in any way by advertising. None of these things are true.
| link to this comment |
rob: You havn't actually supplied any evidence that BBC bosses are paid 'over inflated wages' (?) . When you supply the pay rates of the equivalent ITV, C4, C5, and Sky executives, then we are having a discussion. In fact, throw in some advertising positions and newspaper execs as well into the mix. Right now, all you've done is handwaving.
BTW - how exactly does the pay of TV executives impact on the plight of the low paid?
| link to this comment |
Lenny R: All the channels you've mentioned are 'Freeview'. What you've lost is some of the other mux's. You havn't given a postcode, so there is a not a lot anyone can say, part from its likely to be a problem with your aerial system - perhaps a frayed cable, etc. Its kind of working, but its only getting the stronest muxes. Could even just be your aerial lead is loose!
| link to this comment |
Chris Guest: But since the 6pm news has been a fixture since at least 1970, and its second to only the 10pm bulletin in viewers (4m), that might come up against some resistance!
Dave Hagen: Its wider than just that. Not everyone watches News 24, and even if they did, how would it save any money? The reports still have to file their stories, etc. Its local/regional news that costs - all your doing is moving the news half an hour earlier, and finding something else to fill that half hour on BBC1. Its adds costs, not reduces them.
The same goes for all of you who want more local news. The regions dont make sense, everyone knows that. But even Brian's idea for a change doesn't really change the slightly strange logic of my parents in Dorset watching a report about something in Kent - the regions are too large. But to make them smaller and more local means spending more money, not less...
Trevor:: Not all your weather presenters are trained meteorologists, but Kaddy Lee-Preston, Rachel Mackley & Sara Thornton are.
Since my signal comes from Waltham, I get East Midland Today, rather than Anglia. However, that does mean I get to see the freelancer (and trained meteorologist) Kaye Forster. The weather forcast is not very useful for me, but it has its compensations!
| link to this comment |
Brianist: When I look at the latest comments using Safari mobile, all I'm getting is the headings ('Connecting it all up', etc). No comments, and no icons, pics, etc.
| link to this comment |
rob: Whatever Alan Yentob is paid (and I believe his role is something of a special case) is a red herring.
When I asked you about what someone at his level in Sky, ITV, etc is being paid, its because there is a market rate for any job. I'm sure the HR dept where ever you work keeps a close eye on the local rates of pay, and what competitors pay. If they don't, they are not a very good HR dept.
What ITV or Sky pays is relevent in two ways. Firstly, if you are going to claim that the BBC managers are overpaid, what are you comparing them with? If you have no figures, but just quote-mined from Google, thats simply handwaving. I want to see data.
Secondly, if the BBC wants to attarct or retain experienced, quality staff, it needs to pay people a competative salary. The BBC very quickly pointed out in rebuttal to the Sun story that it tends to pay anything from 20% to 80% less than other broadcasters. It can do this becuase its the BBC, and people want to work with it. But they also need to make a living, and in the current TV sector, talant is highly sought after. Its not just all the TV channels that need people, its the increasingly large independent sector, owned by large multinational companies. If your good, you can paid far more outside the BBC. The BBC has to respond to that.
So my question remoains - what exactly should a senior BBC exec be paid, and how does that relate to their counterpart in other organisations? Facts please, not empty opinion.
| link to this comment |
Fred Perkins: I agree - its incrediably polarising. However, the vast majority of people have voted with their feet - they watch BBC programmes, in extremely large numbers. The idea that there are people who 'defend it to the death and dont see any need to change any aspect of it' is a strawman. The BBC is not perfect, and it will get things wrong. I praise it when its doing the right thing, and complain when it does not (and I do actually complain). Mosts of the time, the BBC does a great job. When it does not, hold it to account, and make it better.
However, if your going to do that to the BBC, you have to look at other broadcasters as well. The BBC publishes its accounts, and even the pay of its execs, taxi fares, etc. The others dont. So its much easier for a a tabloid hack to write an attack piece about the BBC. ITV? Not so much.
As a thought experiment, imagine what the reaction would have been in the press if Jimmy Savile had been employed by ITV in the 1970's. Would the current ITV boss be expected to resign, etc? Almost certainly there would have been far less coverage, and the angle would have been very different.
In terms of funding - can you think of a better system than the licence fee? Its not perfect, but its better than all the rest.For less than £3 a week, I get a lot for my money, so I'm pragmatic about the licence fee.
The people who scream 'but..its a tax!' also have to pay to licence their car. Do they refuse to pay and vow only to drive on private roads, and should we give them a 'choice'? Life is imperfect, and all you can do is go for the greatest good of the greatest number.
Rob: I asked you one question. Instead of bringing any actual evidence to the table, you just Googled 'BBC waste' and threw in whatever came up first. Your 'argument' is pure handwaving. So once again, what makes you think that BBC exec's are, relative to the industry they are in, overpaid?
| link to this comment |
Phil White: The clue might be that your just 5 miles away from the transmitter and you've got an amp as well. Your just screaming at your TV with a megaphone. See 'too much of a good thing' on this site.
| link to this comment |
MikeP: Thanks - although I'm not sure I've that much experience in the TV industry...:-)
I dont think I've ever been described as a toff, and I'm certainly not a tory!
| link to this comment |
Sunday 7 December 2014 11:37PM
Briantist: Frankly, its fairly depressing - just 50p per day per household would bring the licence fee back up to around £180 a year, which is still an absolute bargain.
I agree with closing S4C - its having competing stations for the sake of it. Is it possible to get the devolved governments of Scotland and Wales to pony up some cash? If they want expensive programmes, then they have to put their money where their mouth is.
CBBC, Radio 3, Radio 1 Xtra and so on are classic cases of good programming for minorities which the commercial sector really does not cater for. In other words, the BBC at its best. Yet we apparently dont want to pay for them. If the BBC drops them, the people who dont want to pay for them will complain...
What makes me angry is this is a death spiral caused by a mixture of spite, ideological delusion, a sense of vacous self interest and the attacks of media bosses with a fairly naked self interest, even though their own empires are in part, in terminal decline. The BBC is popular, excellent value, and does a good job. Apparently that is a bad thing. Truely, the stupid, it burns.