Let’s talk about BBC

[First Aspect]

My friend who is a very accomplished dancer loves it too. Went to the live shows. I guess part of the recipe for success is appealing to both good dancers and admiring ones. I find Big Brother even less compelling. I don't think every tv show has to be worthy but isn't it just people sat on sofas chatting? I can't think of a reason to watch it. Seems like a big time investment for tiny moments of drama or humour.

What are your thoughts on MAFSs or Below Decks? Eye candy having arguments? Could be worse.

 

[AuroraSaab]

Never seen either. Nor Chelsea or Geordie Shore. Aren't these shows semi scripted? Isn't the drama manufactured? I don't mind that others enjoy them. There will be people who don't get the appeal of the shows I watch. In an age where there's 100 channels to fill there'll always be a place for cheap TV.

 

[Rusty Nails]

I “watch” it most weeks…usually with headphones on watching something else on my laptop. My wife will often record it and watch it from about an hour in so that she can fast forward through the chat and padding.

 

[C R]

Never seen either. Nor Chelsea or Geordie Shore. Aren't these shows semi scripted? Isn't the drama manufactured? I don't mind that others enjoy them. There will be people who don't get the appeal of the shows I watch. In an age where there's 100 channels to fill there'll always be a place for cheap TV.

We watched half an episode of the Chelsea thing in LA because a distant relative of my wife had a paid part in it as an actress. We couldn't force ourselves to even watch the whole episode.

 

[Psamathe]

I don't mind that others enjoy them. There will be people who don't get the appeal of the shows I watch. In an age where there's 100 channels to fill there'll always be a place for cheap TV.

I agree but they are big budget and I'm being forced to subscrive (and an expensive subscription). Fine if people enjoy them and want to watch them and they pay for them.

And whilst massive budgets for these high profile shows, informative stuff like Newsnight has been turned into a useless airtime filler - used to report and properly analyse events, now it's just a couple of people they can drag in with agendas (often Reform of ex-UKIP) telling us what they think of something.

 

[TailWindHome]

I agree but they are big budget and I'm being forced to subscrive (and an expensive subscription). Fine if people enjoy them and want to watch them and they pay for them.

And whilst massive budgets for these high profile shows, informative stuff like Newsnight has been turned into a useless airtime filler - used to report and properly analyse events, now it's just a couple of people they can drag in with agendas (often Reform of ex-UKIP) telling us what they think of something.

Strictly doesn't cost the licence payer money. It's a monster cash cow

 

[Rusty Nails]

TV is all about viewing numbers.

If Newsnight or other political shows attracted viewers they would be marketed more and not shunted out of peak viewing time.

I am forced to subscribe to stuff I don’t like such as Countryfile or the soaps or Paw Patrol but I realise they do not plan their schedules or content around me so have become very proficient with the Off button or channel changer.

The licence fee is a valid talking point but content is just a matter of taste…good or bad,

 

[Psamathe]

I am forced to subscribe to stuff I don’t like such as Countryfile or the soaps or Paw Patrol but I realise they do not plan their schedules or content around me so have become very proficient with the Off button or channel changer.

The licence fee is a valid talking point but content is just a matter of taste…good or bad,

The issue for me is that the fre Freeview programs I do watch are not on the BBC but I can't watch those programs without subscribing to the BBC. eg only real Freeview program I watch is C4 News and they get nothing from my compulsory subscription but I can't watch it without paying BBC for their twaddle. If others want to watch it, fine, let them pay for it but to me it's morally wrong to charge me for something I don't want and don't use.

 

[Rusty Nails]

The issue for me is that the fre Freeview programs I do watch are not on the BBC but I can't watch those programs without subscribing to the BBC. eg only real Freeview program I watch is C4 News and they get nothing from my compulsory subscription but I can't watch it without paying BBC for their twaddle. If others want to watch it, fine, let them pay for it but to me it's morally wrong to charge me for something I don't want and don't use.

So this is a licence fee argument, not a quality issue. Fair enough.

Your version of twaddle probably differs from some/many others. That is an on/off switch issue.

 

[Ianonabike]

Am I the only person on here who has never seen Strictly?

Just clips from time to time, like the one TWH posted upthread (and which was lovely). I don't have a TV licence, which of course is no real bar, but even if I did, the format of most of those types of shows doesn't appeal.


View: https://youtu.be/14Rla5mA_BE

"Tell a story with your groin."

 

[Pross]

Never seen it either, not even at other people's houses (nobody I know watches it).

I find it disappointing that BBC puts so much of its limited resources into such programs that seem predominantly about giving those self-appointed "celebrities" social media presence. Basically about giving people who have nothing to say a platform to say nothing (beyond inane social media "content").

It feels a bit elitist to get annoyed by the BBC making stuff you don’t like especially when it’s one of their most successful programmes and makes them in a fortune from the franchising around the world. Like it or not, some ‘low brow’ content like this actually makes the BBC money and gives them more cash to make the stuff you seem to desire but which has no commercial value.

I’m not sure you can call the celebrities self-appointed, I quite often haven’t heard of them but they aren’t inviting themselves on and quite often my kids know the ones I don’t so maybe we need to accept that we are behind the times in the same way as when our parents moaned about the stuff we liked.

 

[C R]

It feels a bit elitist to get annoyed by the BBC making stuff you don’t like especially when it’s one of their most successful programmes and makes them in a fortune from the franchising around the world. Like it or not, some ‘low brow’ content like this actually makes the BBC money and gives them more cash to make the stuff you seem to desire but which has no commercial value.

I’m not sure can call the celebrities self-appointed, I quite often haven’t heard of them but they aren’t inviting themselves on and quite often my kids know the ones I don’t so maybe we need to accept that we are behind the times in the same way as when our parents moaned about the stuff we liked.

I can agree with that, but, it doesn't justify the dismantling of programs like Newsnight.

 

[Pross]

Am I the only person on here who has never seen Strictly? Apart from the odd 5 mins caught at other people's houses I've never seen an episode. Like Celebrity Big Brother I've never heard of half the people on it. It seems a national obsession. Am I missing out? What's the appeal?

I’m not sure it’s fair to put it in the same category as something like Big Brother. People are actually having to work hard acquiring a new skill. Whether it needs to be celebrities or not is open to debate, I don’t know if that would get as many viewers although other things like Bake Off and Masterchef do OK with members of the public instead. FWIW I feel it’s past its prime and is going downhill each year but I haven’t seen the viewing figures and revenue income.

 

[Pross]

I can agree with that, but, it doesn't justify the dismantling of programs like Newsnight.

Is it responsible for Newsnight being dismantled? I’d like to see your rationale considering there’s no programming clash and Strictly is a significant revenue raiser.

 

[briantrumpet]

Is it responsible for Newsnight being dismantled? I’d like to see your rationale considering there’s no programming clash and Strictly is a significant revenue raiser.

It was a significant degradation of remit and budget a year or two back. One suspects the hand of Gibb & Davie were involved, as Newsnight had remained outside of the 'bubble' of normal BBC news which avoided 'trouble' on certain topics.