All posts by MikeB
Below are all of MikeB's postings, with the most recent are at the bottom of the page.
Kevin Farley: You havn't given a postcode, so we have no idea how good your reception is supposed to be. You need to tell us what transmitter your actually tuned to, what the signal strength is, and when the problem occurs. It could well be that your in a marginal spot, but you've got a problem with your system, which means its gone completely.
You can go satellite if you like, but you will still have to pay your licence fee - which of course has no bearing on your quality of signal.
| link to this comment |
Simon: Your paying £145 for an all you can eat service, which works out at £2.79 a week! I dont know what you mean by a 'few programmes', but if you want to buy them individually on Itunes, you'd almost certainly be paying far more than that.
Think about raising funds via taxation, and what that means for the BBC in terms of political control. Say something bad, and your funding gets a 10% cut next year. Or because the paper which backs your party also happens to own a broadcasting network. Or simply because you want to grandstand about public spending. I dont want a politican looking over the shoulder of the person delivering the 6 O'Clock News, never mind his boss being appointed by the PM (which is what happened in Greece).
Brianist: Did you listen to the phone-in on Radio 4's 'You and Yours'. I was vaguely dreading it (they had one on climate change that was so bad it made your ears bleed and I complained to the BBC about it), but actually, a good 70% were very supportive of the BBC and the licence fee.
In fact, what came through was the love and loyality they had for the BBC. There was also the perspective of those who had lived abroad, which emphasised the value and values which the BBC gives.
The negative callers tended to be vaguely ignorant about how broadcasting actually works, repeated meme's, and plucked figures out of the air (apparently one caller was willing to pay £60 per year, 'about the same as National Trust membership'!). They also repeated the normal nonsense about 'subscription', without any idea as to how this would work (and the presenter did not press them).
The most misleading guest was a former executive of LWT, and apparently a former adviser to John Whittingdale, who suggests that a 'voluntary subscription' system would replace the licence fee. How this was supposed to work was never explained, and he tended just to repeat the meme that the licence fee was unworkable.
He was very disingenous when putting forward the idea that Iplayer could not easily use a password system by which anyone who had not paid the licence fee could not gain access to it. He waffled something about all the commercial streams needing to do the same, but this is nonsense - Now TV and Netflix do this already, and without any problems.
It would have been nice to have someone other than the presenter (who only occasionally pushed back against the more stupid claims) refuting the myths and propaganda with actual data. Perhaps they could ring you next time?
Overall, though, what came through, and the BBC executive on the show spoke about this, is the appreciation that the BBC creates amoungst its audience, and that they feel its not only good value, its good in itself. If the BBC could mobilise this, then they would be in a very strong position.
| link to this comment |
J V Gethic: We need a postcode, the transmitter your actually tuned to, and an idea of what the signal strength of the other SD channels are like.
Also worth checking your system - if the signal is degraded, then its your system which is probably at fault - corrosion, frayed cable, or a failing amp might all be the issue.
| link to this comment |
Brianist: I see your alleged Jefferson quote and raise you an alleged Edmund Burke/John Stuart Mill quote - 'The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men should do nothing'.
The problem isn't just what people might have in mind for the BBC, its also getting an effective coalition together to defend it.
The Tories have a very slim majority, and there will be casualities - byelections, scandals, etc. However, the British 'Constitution' (which Peter Henessey and other have argued is essentially uncodified, and therefore open to whatever you think you can get away with) means that you can not only get an majority in parliament on a minority of votes cast during an election, you can do whatever you like, as long as enough MP's follow you through the lobby.
British PM's have the sort of power American Presidents can only dream about when it comes to pushing through legislation.
And, if Letts is any guide, they will push that to its limits. Many in the Tory Party will regard the manifesto as just a taster - and if you look at how Andrew Landsley operated, his actions on the NHS were pretty much the opposite of any promises made during the election or set out in the manifesto.
However, whilst the government might not feel bound by any conventions, promises, etc, their outriders in the media will insist that the Salisbury Convention stays, etc - this is not a fair fight. I'm not sure about Labour any longer either. Listening to pretty much all the contenders is a bit like listening to a 'speak your weight machine'. I suspect that they would sell their own grandmothers for even a ghost of a smile from Rupert Murdoch, so the best we can hope for is that they keep to their manifesto commitment towards the licence fee (although at what level is another matter). The Lords will be interesting - they dont have to get elected, they dont need to get ennobled, and they are the great and the good - exactly the sort of people who normally sit on BBC boards.
The BBC has not helped itself. Tony Hall's announcement about production made no sense. Not only did he basically negotiate with himself, and gave something away for nothing, he misunderstood the natues of his foes. They are like The Terminator, ' It can't be bargained with. It can't be reasoned with. It doesn't feel pity, or remorse, or fear. And it absolutely will not stop, ever, until you are dead. '
And as Alan Rusbridger has pointed out, the BBC has internalised the press's attacks on it Alan Rusbridger: press can't afford to cover corruption and tax avoidance | Media | The Guardian - he's perfect correct that the BBC really has done little about climate change (which I've often complaied about), becuase its too afraid to. The rightwing press has moved the Overton Window, so that their views are portrayed as the centre, and forced the BBC to work to their agenda. Those attacks will continue, and Nick Hyam will continue to report on nonsense about the BBC of the type which Jon Stewart has described in the US as coming from 'bulls*** mountain' (the debate between him and O'Reilly is on YouTube, and reminds us that he's a much better journalist than the majority of journalists).
If you listen to those who want the BBC to go to subscription, a voluntary fee, etc, you come to the conclusion that they are all about the ideology, not the practicality. They will torture the data and twist logic to breaking point - this is about faith, not reason. The BBC is a succcesful non profit governemnt organisation - that simply should not exist, so they will try to shoot the BBC, just to watch it die.
However, that does not mean that its a done deal. BBC polls very high, its programming is generally high quality, and like the NHS, its a fixture. You may be right - kick it down the road, and leave it alone. There is already a Cabinet battle over Teresa May's batty idea about Ofcom and censorship, and thats just the start.
However, I suspect the haters will want red meat. The Barclay brothers (slightly dull Bond villians?), the Mail & the Express will all push hard. The Murdoch press certainly will. Governments like to do radical things, especially if they've just won something. On the other hand, look what happended over the forestry selloff - a disaster, despite the seeming behind the scenes support of the NT, etc.
If the BBC, other parts of broadcast and other media, 38 Degrees, etc can all have a solid front, then there will be a high price to pay for any change. Is Cameron willing to pay that price? Perhaps its a battle he can do without.
| link to this comment |
Tommy Dobson: Check your signal strength. It might be that your SD channels are low but viable, but the HD ones are out. Most likely explaination? Your system has a problem - perhaps a loose connection, etc. Check each bit.
| link to this comment |
Briantist: Thanks for your thoughts - your perfectly right when you point out that people really like the BBC, despite the newspapers. Its just that they are somewhat confused - they love that BBC presenter, but then get really in a tiz about how much money they are supposedly paid.
The Lords can do what they like (within reason), but dont forget the pressure they will be under from the media - it will be intense, if the Letts article is any indication.
As for Tony Blair - perhaps he was always a mixture of both - its just that the Bambi mask slipped.
'If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it' (guess who that quote comes from), as perhaps Ed Miliband has discovered! The papers are blatent, but it seems to work.
Thanks for all your hard work so far - you've really laid out the various options over the last year or two, in a way thats concise but very informative. Its a shame that the media hasn't covered it in anything like the way you have, because we would all be much better off if it did!
| link to this comment |
Jim: Having seen Notts TV (although I'm in Cambridgeshire), I'm not sure that even with a Sky spot, social media and perhaps some help from the gods, there will be much difference to audience figues, unless there is actually something decent to watch on it!
| link to this comment |
Sharon collins: Is your TV plugged into a freeview box, or is there one built in?
If its plugged into a freeview box in one room, and the same in another, then the scart connection/cable might be playing up - all the pins have to connect properly, and if they dont, you can then get everyone being green on the screen or loss of sound.
If its not, then thats weird! If the TV works fine plugged into a normal TV aerial in one room, but not another, it doesn't make sense. If the signal was bad in one room, then it would be just the sound, it would be whole channels being a bit dodgy.
| link to this comment |
m.whitbrook: Actually, Humax is a best selling (and excellently reviewed) brand - the only PVR's we recommend at work are Humax's and Panasonics. Yes, there will be some problems, but since they greatly outsell any other high quality PVR brand, when there is a problem, your more likely to hear about it.
10 seconds on Google found these hints - Humax HDR Green Screen Sorted - Freesat - Digital Spy Forums & Pink screen when in HDMI | YouView Community
Basically, the HDMI's are not handshaking properly. Known as a Humax thing from a couple of years back (although I'll have to ask tech support at work, since its a new one to me), and there are a couple of workarounds, including upgrading the software, swithing on the Humax before the TV, etc.. Easiest thing, swap around the HDMI ports on the TV and see if that cures it. Scart works fine.
| link to this comment |
Monday 18 May 2015 12:00AM
Artemis: Because the commercial channel dont care about you, and dont want to shell out to broadcast to your area.
If you cant get decent reception from a main transmitter, try Freesat.
I think David Lindsay has a nicer version of this on copy and paste - but thats the bottom line!