I haven't really followed this thread recently, but I'm also happy to pay the licence. When you consider the amount each month, and how often people would buy a newspaper, a lunch in a cafe, or a carry out meal without thinking, it doesn't seem much to me. Worth it for LoD alone @punkdoc
And Killing Eve, Harlots, Normal people and anything with David Attenborough. Give me any of above over Game of Thrones or endless sport , celebrity or crappy films
Isn't that a Catch-22? The BBC needs audience figures the same as any other broadcaster. In certain areas, personality drives the figures. So do you pay the going rate for presenters who attract the audiences or do you risk losing the audience? Didn't 'me,me,me' Evans get a pay rise when he left the BBC? Everything is about celebrity isn't it nowadays? Even 'influencers' (what on earth is an influencer when it's at home) earn vast fortunes.
Personally I'd rather have the 'front' of camera/microphone people - the visible face of the BBC - earning the money than a raft of managers.
I think they could save a bit of money by not having journalists and news presenters standing outside parliament or court houses. Surely they could do it in the studio with a relevant photo behind. Or if they must have a live picture of the outside of the building, why not have a remote camera trained on it? OK they might miss live coverage of the odd defenestration but the savings would be worth it.
Chris Evans worth £2m? But I suppose it's down to what you like and just a matter of taste. 9+ million liked Chris Evans even though I kept shouting '...you're just an inflated ego on legs...' at the radio (off button I hear you say...but they're for wimps. He never heard me anyway - or if he did, he put me on ignore).
My mum used to complain about footballers' wages, but was quite happy to ignore how much actors got paid. The entertainment industry (I'm beginning to doubt whether the entertainment in football is on the pitch though - the crowd provided a huge boost to broadcast games - so should football pay the crowd to attend?) 'is' celebrity - celebrity attracts audience - audiences pay lots of money - celebrities get paid to attract audiences.
I think they could save a bit of money by not having journalists and news presenters standing outside parliament or court houses. Surely they could do it in the studio with a relevant photo behind. Or if they must have a live picture of the outside of the building,worth it.
Totally agree. If they'd just rushed from a court session, or parliament I'd understand, but standing on a balcony in the rain at 10.15pm, or outside some random building when it's empty is beyond me. To be fair it's not just the BBC who do it.Â
I think they do it just because they always did. It's the same with having a musical background with video clips, it harks back to the silent movie era and the bwah wah wah canned laughter to the time when comedy shows were recorded live - really one take live.
As the camera crew and presenter are on the BBC pay roll anyway, the cost difference between filming outside the building or in the studio must be minimal. I can’t see this being an option to be seized upon by the accounts team.
As the camera crew and presenter are on the BBC pay roll anyway, the cost difference between filming outside the building or in the studio must be minimal. I can’t see this being an option to be seized upon by the accounts team.
payroll or otherwise, there's the cost in extra fuel to move folk , pointlessly , from A to B and electricity in equipment to send the images back to the studio
Posts
Give me any of above over Game of Thrones or endless sport , celebrity or crappy films
To be fair it's not just the BBC who do it.Â