[onecitizen]

Sadly, over recent years I believe that the BBC has slowly lost the ability to provide wide ranging and good quality TV and Radio programmes which have wide appeal.
Take comedy for example, at one time the corporation could say with justifiable pride that their comedy output was both high in quality and was watched by a large cross section of the British public.
But when was the last time a BBC sitcom was produced which had appeal to a wide section of people across all age groups and backgrounds ?
The comedy programmes which create most affection in the memory were made a long time ago.
Now all the BBC produces in comedy is “topical” comedy quiz shows, with the same half dozen people seemingly doing and endless round of guest appearances. That’s the way is seems.
Have I got news for you was probably the first and best of this type of programme, and now all we get is endless rehashed versions of this format.
Not everyone likes this kind of snide, sneering humour.
But the people at the BBC love it, so that’s all they are interested in commissioning.
The drama output focuses on wife beating alcoholic drug addicts on council estates, want something uplifting or thought provoking ? Best avoid the Beeb at all costs.
Its got to be “gritty” and make people feel bad about themselves, god knows why.
As for news and current affairs the BBC is the place to go to be depressed, take one example, Afghanistan, the BBC will only report the most negative aspect possible of any situation.
Want to hear about the sense of duty, courage and sacrifice of British forces, the BBC aren’t interested in saying anything about that.
It might suggest something is going right, not nearly dreary enough for them.
Even Andrew Marr, the leading BBC political correspondent has admitted that the BBC is biased.
In defence of the BBC people will put forward David Attenborough and the still excellent documentaries he has a major role in producing, but Attenborough isn’t getting any younger and when he is no longer around there will be precious little to defend the BBC with.
Maybe David Attenborough represents the an older generation of BBC types who had a genuine commitment to quality entertainment.
The current lot seem to be smug, self important over-age student types who are more interested in their own agenda than the needs or interests of the people who are forced by law to pay the over-priced licence fee tax to keep them in their very well paid and comfortable lifestyles.
The only positive thing they seem to think of Britain as a country and the British public,is as an endless cash machine.
While whole sections of that same British public have been marginalised and are ignored

[welsh_Gaz]

Originally Posted by onecitizen

Take comedy for example, at one time the corporation could say with justifiable pride that their comedy output was both high in quality and was watched by a large cross section of the British public.
But when was the last time a BBC sitcom was produced which had appeal to a wide section of people across all age groups and backgrounds ?

There's a fair few decent ones on the radio. Not enough of them make the jump for my liking, and I'm not sure if Sitcoms are as popular as they once were. I hate the comedy panel shows, but everyone else seems to like them, and they're pretty cheap to make, so I can see why the BBC uses them often.

Originally Posted by onecitizen

Want to hear about the sense of duty, courage and sacrifice of British forces, the BBC aren’t interested in saying anything about that.
It might suggest something is going right, not nearly dreary enough for them.

Yeah, but you'd have to be careful with things like that, because it can be seen as propaganda, which has no place on our airwaves, in my opinion.

Originally Posted by onecitizen

The current lot seem to be smug, self important over-age student types

Oi! What's wrong with us Mature Students! We aren't all unwashed beardies (although admittedly, I do have a beard). That's a stereotype.

[iain]

Originally Posted by onecitizen

Sadly, over recent years I believe that the BBC has slowly lost the ability to provide wide ranging and good quality TV and Radio programmes which have wide appeal.
Take comedy for example, at one time the corporation could say with justifiable pride that their comedy output was both high in quality and was watched by a large cross section of the British public.
But when was the last time a BBC sitcom was produced which had appeal to a wide section of people across all age groups and backgrounds ?
The comedy programmes which create most affection in the memory were made a long time ago.
Now all the BBC produces in comedy is “topical” comedy quiz shows, with the same half dozen people seemingly doing and endless round of guest appearances. That’s the way is seems.
Have I got news for you was probably the first and best of this type of programme, and now all we get is endless rehashed versions of this format.
Not everyone likes this kind of snide, sneering humour.
But the people at the BBC love it, so that’s all they are interested in commissioning.

that's not the only comedy the BBC does at all.

The drama output focuses on wife beating alcoholic drug addicts on council estates, want something uplifting or thought provoking ? Best avoid the Beeb at all costs.
Its got to be “gritty” and make people feel bad about themselves, god knows why.

you must have missed stuff like the tudors, emma, ashes to ashes, being human, desperate romantics, hope springs, hotel babylon, george gently, dr who, the number 1 detectives agency, new tricks, waterloo road, torchwood, micro men.

there may be others, they were off the top of my head.

As for news and current affairs the BBC is the place to go to be depressed, take one example, Afghanistan, the BBC will only report the most negative aspect possible of any situation.

i think most news focuses primarily on the bad - nature of the beast usually, and certainly nothing new, or particular to the BBC.

Want to hear about the sense of duty, courage and sacrifice of British forces, the BBC aren’t interested in saying anything about that.

It might suggest something is going right, not nearly dreary enough for them.

i guess you also missed the recent documentary wounded.

Even Andrew Marr, the leading BBC political correspondent has admitted that the BBC is biased.

no - he didn't.

In defence of the BBC people will put forward David Attenborough and the still excellent documentaries he has a major role in producing, but Attenborough isn’t getting any younger and when he is no longer around there will be precious little to defend the BBC with.
Maybe David Attenborough represents the an older generation of BBC types who had a genuine commitment to quality entertainment.

you must also have missed recent excellent examples of Attenborough free natural history -

lost land of the volcano and last chance to see.

The current lot seem to be smug, self important over-age student types who are more interested in their own agenda than the needs or interests of the people who are forced by law to pay the over-priced licence fee tax to keep them in their very well paid and comfortable lifestyles.
The only positive thing they seem to think of Britain as a country and the British public,is as an endless cash machine.
While whole sections of that same British public have been marginalised and are ignored

to be honest, given the selective examples in your post, you're starting to sound fairly passionate.

Iain

[Tassium]

The BBC have not tracked society, it's the classic mistake often made by arrogant and smug organisations.

What they provide does appeal to a few, although maybe even they are starting to turn, but for most people it's hard to find something to watch that justifies the licence fee.

If the BBC were a politcal party they would be facing extinction at the ballot box.

[mossy2103]

Originally Posted by Tassium

The BBC have not tracked society, it's the classic mistake often made by arrogant and smug organisations.

What they provide does appeal to a few, although maybe even they are starting to turn, but for most people it's hard to find something to watch that justifies the licence fee.

If the BBC were a politcal party they would be facing extinction at the ballot box.

Can I suggest that you take a step back into reality and stop posting such nonsense?
It's hardly conducive to furthering constructive debate.

The ratings, audience shares and audience reach stats do not even come close to backing up any of your claims.

[iain]

Originally Posted by Tassium

The BBC have not tracked society, it's the classic mistake often made by arrogant and smug organisations.

What they provide does appeal to a few, although maybe even they are starting to turn, but for most people it's hard to find something to watch that justifies the licence fee.

If the BBC were a politcal party they would be facing extinction at the ballot box.

Given that no two non BBC channels are watched as much as BBC1 and BBC2, and 90% + of the tv viewing audience tune in to BBC1 and 2 for an average of around 8 hours a week, I think it might be you who is out if touch.

Iain

[onecitizen]

Originally Posted by welsh_Gaz

There's a fair few decent ones on the radio. Not enough of them make the jump for my liking, and I'm not sure if Sitcoms are as popular as they once were. I hate the comedy panel shows, but everyone else seems to like them, and they're pretty cheap to make, so I can see why the BBC uses them often.



Yeah, but you'd have to be careful with things like that, because it can be seen as propaganda, which has no place on our airwaves, in my opinion.



Oi! What's wrong with us Mature Students! We aren't all unwashed beardies (although admittedly, I do have a beard). That's a stereotype.

I am not asking for propaganda, just balance.
The impression I get is that the reporting isn't balanced.

[iain]

so ignoring the fact that you're clearly unaware of a lot of stuff on the BBC, can you give some examples of this unbalanced reporting?

Iain

[mRebel]

Originally Posted by iain

no - he didn't.

Iain

Yes he did. See,

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/6764779.stm

The BBC itself quotes Mr Marr as saying there is "an innate liberal bias within the BBC."

[iain]

He was referring to people, not editorial content of news.

And that whole thing was totally misreported in a lot of press anyway ;

read more

interesting that you posted a story from the BBC site which said much!

Iain

[hendero]

I agree with the part about there seeming to be a distinct lack of British sitcoms that the average man and woman in the pub watches and talks about, at the moment anyway. I'm waiting for the next Office/Extras/Fast Show. Not just a BBC issue, btw.

[Bundyman]

Originally Posted by welsh_Gaz

There's a fair few decent ones on the radio. Not enough of them make the jump for my liking, and I'm not sure if Sitcoms are as popular as they once were. .

The US still churns out some very very funy sitcoms

How i met your mother, Big Bang Theory, Modern Family & Eastbound & Down just being some current examples.

British TV really does seem to have lost the art of sitcoms & yes i do think the BBC still dines out on Fools & horses, Fawlty Towers etc, which while still very funny at times are also now very old.

[welsh_Gaz]

The Americans are streets ahead of us in Sitcoms, indeed. Eastbound and Down definately needs a terrestrial airing. Best one I've seen in a while.

[onecitizen]

Originally Posted by Bundyman

The US still churns out some very very funy sitcoms

How i met your mother, Big Bang Theory, Modern Family & Eastbound & Down just being some current examples.

British TV really does seem to have lost the art of sitcoms & yes i do think the BBC still dines out on Fools & horses, Fawlty Towers etc, which while still very funny at times are also now very old.

Agreed.
The BBC have failed to continue a tradition of good sitcoms, they simply don't make the effort anymore.
Hence they have disenfranchised many of the licence fee tax payers.

[PeterB]

Originally Posted by onecitizen

Agreed.
The BBC have failed to continue a tradition of good sitcoms, they simply don't make the effort anymore.
Hence they have disenfranchised many of the licence fee tax payers.

What about Outnumbered?

[onecitizen]

Originally Posted by iain

He was referring to people, not editorial content of news.

And that whole thing was totally misreported in a lot of press anyway ;

read more

interesting that you posted a story from the BBC site which said much!

Iain

So the type of people employed by the BBC isn't going to have a strong impact on the news coverage and the type of programmes they make ?
Very naive.
It can and it does.

[welsh_Gaz]

Originally Posted by PeterB

What about Outnumbered?

That's one sitcom. And it's hardly a modern classic, it's watchable but it's not on the level of a "Flight of the Concords" or "Eastbound and Down".

But in saying that, HBO can afford to gamble on programmes like those.

[PeterB]

Originally Posted by onecitizen

So the type of people employed by the BBC isn't going to have a strong impact on the news coverage and the type of programmes they make ?
Very naive.
It can and it does.

How does the mix of people compare with Sky News?

[exlordlucan]

Originally Posted by onecitizen

So the type of people employed by the BBC isn't going to have a strong impact on the news coverage and the type of programmes they make ?
Very naive.
It can and it does.

Some examples would be helpful.

[mossy2103]

Originally Posted by PeterB

What about Outnumbered?

Not forgetting Lead Balloon, and The Thick of It, Gavin & Stacey.

And of course The Worst Week Of My Life (ended before its time I think).


In truth, the age of the sit-com of old has passed, it has transformed.

[mossy2103]

Originally Posted by welsh_Gaz

That's one sitcom. And it's hardly a modern classic,

Not a modern classic? That's not a view that is shared by some

[welsh_Gaz]

Originally Posted by mossy2103

Not a modern classic? That's not a view that is shared by some

You can say that about anything though, to be fair. All just a matter of opinion.

[sn_22]

Originally Posted by onecitizen

So the type of people employed by the BBC isn't going to have a strong impact on the news coverage and the type of programmes they make ?
Very naive.
It can and it does.

Of course it can - and of course it does. People aren't robots. Their personalities, values and beliefs affect what is produced no matter how good their intentions, or the controls and balances in place.

The question is, is the bias intentional and pre-meditated? I would say no.

And do the BBC have better balances and checks than other news organisations? I would say yes.

[sn_22]

Originally Posted by welsh_Gaz

You can say that about anything though, to be fair. All just a matter of opinion.

It is. Which means that this:

Originally Posted by welsh_Gaz

That's one sitcom. And it's hardly a modern classic, it's watchable but it's not on the level of a "Flight of the Concords" or "Eastbound and Down".

is also a matter of opinion.

[welsh_Gaz]

Of course it is. I thought that would go without saying.