BBC a wonderful British institution?

[R1Geezer]

Are we right to be proud of supplying the world with quality broadcasting? Licence payers the world is in your debt.

[AB Editor]

Yes, it remains one of our finest exports.

All the best,

Spare Ed

[ummmm]

I agree with Ed...

[Garmard]

I'd be lost without the BBC, especially the News at Breakfast time.

[jackthehat]

It is, allegedly, the most trusted worldwide purveyor of news.......essentially unbiased (whatever some may say) and has been instrumental with providing information in some of the 'darkest' corners of the world.

[AB Editor]

Exactly Jack.

I wouldn't mind it if they cut the one show though...I'd probably pay more for the license fee for that to be the case.

Also, the iPlayer is wonderful.

Spare Ed

[ummmm]

Shhhhhh....rebel might be reading..!

[jno]

It provides an extraordinarily wide range of viewing and listening. I don't know why it bought Lonely Planet, though, that doesn't seem to be within its remit at all.

[R1Geezer]

well I think we've all got bits we don't like but I'd accept the warts, even East Enders, for the good

[Prescott]

I agree jno, but then it puts on lots of rubbish which shouldn't be in its remit either.

[Gromit]

Are you a closet leftie R1Geezer.

You right whingers are supposed to anti BBC and pro commercialism.

In answer to you question. Yes we should be proud of the quality of the BBC's work, and that reflects well on our country.

[sp1814]

For making me laugh with the following programmes over the past few years, I thank the BBC:

The Thick Of It
Outnumbered
Absolutely Fabulous
The Armstrong & Miller Show
The Office
The Day Today
That Mitchell & Webb Look
The League Of Gentlemen
Little Britain
Extras
Knowing Me, Knowing You
Nighty Night
Getting On (currently being repeated on BBC2 - strongly recommended)
I'm Alan Partridge

[Davethedog]

Well said R1

It is a national treasure and although I turn my nose up at some of the output I realise exactly what quality is being given to the nation.

We as a nation must resist any attack on it, especialy by errant antipodeans and thier familys with vested interests.

[R1Geezer]

Gromit, yes there are things about the BBC I don't like but overall I'd keep it. For less than £3 a week I think it's value Although they do have a lefty tendency sometimes but I think they mostly try to be impartial.

[R1Geezer]

.....beside's where would Dave get most of their shows?

[jno]

Prescott, 'rubbish' is a matter of opinion. The point is to carry as wide a range of output as possibel so there's something for everyone. Nobody has to like everything and nobody does. I regard Monty Python as one of the BBC's greatest achievements, but they shoved it around the schedules and occasionally dropped it altogether.

Even so, I think they're supposed to be a broadcaster, and that's distinctly different from publishing guide books.

[Goodsoulette]

Absolutely worth every penny when I think about what I get it for it. Radio 6, the mighty boosh, outnumbered and the wilfdlife documentaries and God bless, cbeebies.

[Davethedog]

JNO - I think they still do that with a lot of programes I remember the first time I saw Coast, I thought what a great show but then had to hunt for it all the time.

The BBC publishing arm makes a profit and that money obviously go's back into the Beeb.

[Sooper]

I think the BBC is world class in a lot of the things that it does, you only have to go abroad and watch the television that is shown to realise that. However i do think that its standards for programme making have slipped over the last few years especially with its drama's and it saddens me to say that all the best shows in my opinion are coming from the US. You only have to say HBO or Showtime to reel off hit after hit of top drama's. I dont know if budgets are a factor in this, as a lot of the US shows cost a small fortune to make but i think its money the BBC should be looking at spending and investing. Afterall if the show is a hit they generally sell them around the world and recoup their money that way eg The Office and Top Gear spring to mind.

[Zeuhl]

The BBC certainly fulfils its remit.

Many of its programming would never be commissioned by a commercial broadcaster but delivers excellent content that either goes on to win a large audience e.g. the Nature Watch strand or satisfies a wide array of minority interests e.g. Michael Portillo's series on rail journeys.

We all pay (by income tax or vat) for:

parks (municipal and national) - whether we like them all or ever use them
museums and art galleries - whether we like them all or ever use them

because we believe as a society, having them enriches our nation and us as a people

same with the BBC - excellent value for money
.

[youngmafbog]

R1, to answer your question, where many luvvies seem to have failed here, no it is not right to provide a free service to the world. If it is a true export and it is paid for then fine but often that is not the case.
Personally I find the idea of paying a licence fee on a televiosn outdated It is not the money, I can easily afford it but the principle. Plus you have to remember that the majority of people prosecuted for no licence are poor. How can it be right to effectively deny the poor access to television (commercial) ?
As for the Blairs (then Browns) Braodcasting Corp being impartial, I'm choking on my cornflakes.