tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8248707.post1846115671680755034..comments2023-08-14T16:35:49.756+01:00Comments on Cruella-blog: BBC Rethink DueCruellahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03446805038957924958noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8248707.post-67031783267757890902008-11-07T16:51:00.000+00:002008-11-07T16:51:00.000+00:00People like you Jackart justify why Clarkson shoul...People like you Jackart justify why Clarkson should be taken off air, because he justifies and mainstreams offensive views like yours.<BR/><BR/>And yes as I understand it the BBC has been told in the past to act more like a business and I think they should be "untold" that. What is the point of having a special structure so that they're not funded like a business and then using that structure to run them as much like a business as they can?Cruellahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03446805038957924958noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8248707.post-75528945495946567202008-11-06T16:38:00.000+00:002008-11-06T16:38:00.000+00:00Is part of the licensing regs not that they have t...Is part of the licensing regs not that they have to justify themselves in terms of ratings? During the 1980s the BBC was told to act more like a business, paying attention to ratings and seeking alternative funding for joint productions and alternative markets (i.e. overseas) in order to continue to justify its licence fee. As far as I'm aware this is still an aspect on which the BBC's continued receiving of the money from the licence fee is judged. As a result, from a ratings POV, retaining talent that will get them good ratings makes sense.<BR/><BR/>However, given that they also have a cultural remit to fulfil, I do agree that they should consider whether or not producing the same old stuff that can be found elsewhere does enhance their product range. Especially given the price range they are wandering into.NotOverreactinghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04867180513516830392noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8248707.post-81602519113574982002008-11-06T15:03:00.000+00:002008-11-06T15:03:00.000+00:00So you want a publicly funded BBC to look and thin...So you want a publicly funded BBC to look and think like you, a pretty extreme left-wing androphobe.<BR/><BR/>And you think that's democratic?<BR/><BR/>Jeremy Clarkson (for example) represents brilliant value for money. Top Gear is the Best selling programme the BBC make - so his salary is irrelevant. Why? High production values and entertaining content (Mostly lambasting humourless pinko shills like yourself). <BR/><BR/>There's plenty of cultural content on the BBC. If that's all there was, you'd be whining that it was "eliteist" or something.<BR/><BR/>A publically funded BBC produces top gear and organinc yurt weaving for lesbians. There. Everyone's happy.Jackarthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04477130724830922566noreply@blogger.com