Post by Teddy Bear on Aug 16, 2008 19:22:47 GMT
Article from The Telegraph
BBC Four is a betrayal of public service broadcasting
Friday, August 15, 2008, 07:59 AM GMT [General]
I can't be the only person who finds BBC Four utterly frustrating. It launched in 2002 with much fanfare: its head of marketing, James Pestell, claimed it wanted to be "the most intellectually and culturally rewarding channel of television".
The channel's motto, "Everyone needs a place to think", was a promising indication that, when licence fee payers want to learn and expand their intellectual horizons, the BBC would deliver the goods. And yet, here in 2008, it serves up a disappointing menu of repeats and poorly-chosen programming, albeit with some gems thrown in.
Why, for example, does BBC think that the 1960s Batman series, which it gives prime-time slots, fits with BBC Four's "place to think" ethos? Don't get me wrong: I think Batman is a fine series, and enjoyed watching it on ITV as a child in single digits. But Britain's favourite superhero can happily be funded by advertising; it is hardly an example of public service broadcasting.
And, yet, BBC Four does some things well. Tonight's Proms broadcast of Daniel Barenboim conducting his West-Eastern Divan symphony orchestra will highlight one of the world's most notable conductors, and there's something appealing about being able to see an orchestra performing with video, rather than just listen in audio.
But the Proms, as a whole, are full of worthy performances. Therefore, given that the BBC seems to find filling the channel so difficult, why is it not showing the complete Proms programme?
Making the choice between episodes of The Avengers and classical music concerts, surely "the most intellectually and culturally rewarding channel of television" ought to opt for the classical music?
And surely BBC Four is ideal for showing opera. Listening to a light opera like Le nozze di Figaro is fine on Radio 3, but for heavier operas, the BBC would greatly boost its public service remit by putting them on television, where the acting and (most importantly) the English subtitles would make them much more accessible.
It is a pity therefore that BBC Four has shown so little opera, a hugely worthwhile art form for which the channel could do wonders in opening up to a wider audience.
BBC Four ought to be appealing to that great human desire for betterment, providing programming that stretches, and doing so because of the unique way the BBC is funded.
Instead, the BBC has starved the channel of funding, preferring to broadcast cheap repeats on the channel and elsewhere squander its licence fee revenue chasing ratings by competing against private sector channels.
This betrayal of public service broadcasting is a dangerous strategy for the BBC. At a time when the licence fee is under increasing criticism, with the Tories planning to share out the licence fee with other broadcasters, it ought to be showing that it provides something unique that other broadcasters cannot. If the BBC wants to keep the licence fee, it should start by making BBC Four truly "a place to think".
Friday, August 15, 2008, 07:59 AM GMT [General]
I can't be the only person who finds BBC Four utterly frustrating. It launched in 2002 with much fanfare: its head of marketing, James Pestell, claimed it wanted to be "the most intellectually and culturally rewarding channel of television".
The channel's motto, "Everyone needs a place to think", was a promising indication that, when licence fee payers want to learn and expand their intellectual horizons, the BBC would deliver the goods. And yet, here in 2008, it serves up a disappointing menu of repeats and poorly-chosen programming, albeit with some gems thrown in.
Why, for example, does BBC think that the 1960s Batman series, which it gives prime-time slots, fits with BBC Four's "place to think" ethos? Don't get me wrong: I think Batman is a fine series, and enjoyed watching it on ITV as a child in single digits. But Britain's favourite superhero can happily be funded by advertising; it is hardly an example of public service broadcasting.
And, yet, BBC Four does some things well. Tonight's Proms broadcast of Daniel Barenboim conducting his West-Eastern Divan symphony orchestra will highlight one of the world's most notable conductors, and there's something appealing about being able to see an orchestra performing with video, rather than just listen in audio.
But the Proms, as a whole, are full of worthy performances. Therefore, given that the BBC seems to find filling the channel so difficult, why is it not showing the complete Proms programme?
Making the choice between episodes of The Avengers and classical music concerts, surely "the most intellectually and culturally rewarding channel of television" ought to opt for the classical music?
And surely BBC Four is ideal for showing opera. Listening to a light opera like Le nozze di Figaro is fine on Radio 3, but for heavier operas, the BBC would greatly boost its public service remit by putting them on television, where the acting and (most importantly) the English subtitles would make them much more accessible.
It is a pity therefore that BBC Four has shown so little opera, a hugely worthwhile art form for which the channel could do wonders in opening up to a wider audience.
BBC Four ought to be appealing to that great human desire for betterment, providing programming that stretches, and doing so because of the unique way the BBC is funded.
Instead, the BBC has starved the channel of funding, preferring to broadcast cheap repeats on the channel and elsewhere squander its licence fee revenue chasing ratings by competing against private sector channels.
This betrayal of public service broadcasting is a dangerous strategy for the BBC. At a time when the licence fee is under increasing criticism, with the Tories planning to share out the licence fee with other broadcasters, it ought to be showing that it provides something unique that other broadcasters cannot. If the BBC wants to keep the licence fee, it should start by making BBC Four truly "a place to think".