BBC1

[comloulou]

does anyone else get mighty fed up with the Beebs constant self promotion? The ads for their shows are repeated ad nauseum until I cant bare the thought of watching the programme! Then theres the fact they must spend millions of the tv license fee on ridiculous 'women falling off cliffs' ads and then give us the 79th repeat of only fools and horses at peak time rather than new drama/comedy. Or am I being uncharitable?

[andy hughes]

As a licence payer, you - and I abd anyone else - is entitled to question the BBC's use of our money. I for one find the new promotion utterly abhorent - tasteless, meaningless, and obviously seriously expensive. You can complain, and if enough people do, maybe the Tristrams will be told to wind in their egos, and put the money to better use,

[treaclefight]

it's not just me then! due to the unique way in which i am funded, i cannot afford the newfangled sky tv etc, in fact i dont even but a tv guide, i rely on the tell me if it wants watching and i find that the bbc is indeed a bit insecure and demands alot of attention, as you've noticed this too i think i will give thee bbc a bit of tough love, perhaps if i only watch big brother channel then the bbc will calm down a bit.

[woodpam]

I absolutely hate the woman falling off a cliff advert, it seems to be insinuating that the viewers are uninvolved morons. That's probably reading too much in to it, but I can tell you that everyone I've spoken to on the subject hates it too. It's a contemptuous waste of the licence fee. One other moan, why is everything worth watching (24, State of Play, 6 feet under, Forsyte Saga) on on a Sunday evening at times which involve a difficult decision even with a VCR? If the BBC can't afford to make too many quality programmes, at least they could make sure their one decent offering for the season doesn't clash with everything else worth watching.

[smorodina]

My personal beef is the way we're being asked to fund an ever increasing number of channels from the license fee most of which should be funded commercially. While I do think there is a case for funding a small number of minority or public service channels, if the BBC wants to be involved in areas that are, for the most part, already well catered for by the commercial sector, then they too should carry commercials. The license fee is already a very unfair system carrying an onerous burden on those who do not watch much TV, or watch mainly non BBC channels (or even no off-air TV at all, as you still have to pay if your equipment is CAPABLE of receiving broadcasts). There is no case for the public funding of the dire Radio 1, Radio 2 or Radio Five. Even less so for the network of mostly unlistenable local BBC stations. And the new channels are just duplicating services already on offer. It's difficult enough to drag the kids away from the hours of programming already aimed their way without yet another. If the BBC wants to compete, let it do so with advertising sponsorship, and we can choose which stations to support and not be forced to fund stations many of us don't even want. Limit the license fee money to the channels that genuinely may not fair well under competition and can be argued as supplying a public service ' at most BBC2 (even that's not what it used to be), Radio 4 and perhaps Radio 3. The license fee can then be reduced to a sensible level or, preferably, abolished altogether.

[comloulou]

I second all those points! And ditto the sunday evening clash, how annoying to have to miss the last half hour of Forsyte Saga to catch the first half of 24 and miss 6ft under altogether!

[darth vader]

ditto all other repsonses and in addition: considering the BBC's ethos is that we pay for the service so they don't have to resort to advertising, it really pi$$es me off that they are ignoring their own ideal and advertising their channel.

On another note - anyone else agree with me that ITV (1) has really gone downhill? - if you're not a soap-junky then there's no point looking at the guide pre 9pm as all you will see is Emmerdale, Coro and the bloody Bill

[comloulou]

Im not overly impressed by this digital thing either. It might only cost a hundred squid for the adapter but I simply dont have �100 and I certainly couldnt afford to replace the areial if it needed updating. So I imaging my tv licence is paying for all those channels that I cant watch. And Darth yes ITV is lame. Maybe Im just growing out of TV?

[Headtime]

According to the BBC in-house magazine, Christine Madden head of marketing for BBC One states, "With 'Cliffhanger' we aim to engage our viewers with this spectacular film in a way that is as involving as our programmes".>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Marketing speak aside, it could be argued that in an increasingly crowded multi-channel world it's more important than ever for the BBC to keep it's services in the front of peoples minds. If we were to abolish the licence-fee, and allowed television to be run purely by market forces, you would quickly see quality teleivision runied by ad-breaks every 7 minutes (as in the States). For every one of their quality programmes we get to see (24, Six feet under, Frasier etc), there are thousands upon thousands of mind-numbingly awful shows that sap the very will to live through your own eye sockets. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For a taste of what has come, check out Friendly TV on Sky. I rest my valise.

[Jetwriter]

Entirely unrelated and irreverant but, when a snooker ref's finished the match, does he case his rest? I'll get me coat.