'This is the BBC'........but not what it was!

As time goes by the BBC appears more and more as an absurd anachronism.

 

It got the appellation ‘Auntie Beeb’ because in times past it seemed like an elderly maiden aunt; respectable, a bit old fashioned, prudish, an old maid who thought that sex was ‘dirty’. Now she resembles more a greedy old tart.

 

It has money-raising powers greater than the Government, which depends on Parliament passing an annual Finance Bill in order to raise taxes. Once the licence fee is settled, the BBC can go on squeezing the licence fee out of us for years without hindrance, and prosecute us if we don’t pay. It is not a licence to watch its programmes. It is a levy allowing us to own a TV set. It has a reputation for harassing over-75s for not paying their licence fee (from which they are exempt). It is not allowed to carry advertising, but at the same time it is a massive international business.

 

It is supervised by a Trust of 13 members supposedly to look after the licence payers’ interests, although its behaviour during the recent scandals seemed more concerned with damage-limitation.

 

The BBC sets its own salaries, and we know from recent revelations that at the top they are not only breath-taking but the reward for failure is equally generous. It has at least 121 executives earning more than £150,000.

 

The top brass was clearly an accessory before, during and after the fact of the Savile affair; many of his predations are alleged to have taken place on BBC premises, and one would have to be particularly naïve to believe that this was all unknown during  more than 40 years of rape and sexual assault of minors.

 

Much could be forgiven if it had kept its reputation for quality. That has long gone. There was a time when BBC News was almost gospel, and the world respected it. Now it has a reputation for left-wing bias and partiality, for being pro-Palestine and anti-Israel, for supporting the EU come what may, and for suppressing whatever does not suit its world-view, of which the suppression of the Savile expose was merely the most egregious.

 

As for TV, the great days of quality entertainment are long gone. Almost all its dismal programing is bought-in. This means that it does not have the expense of paying actors, writers, producers, make-up artists and the many others who actually create shows. There is almost no quality drama. All channels rely heavily on outsourced documentaries and sport – 13 hours of Wimbledon on a single day, endless coverage of golf, and football fixtures featuring foreign clubs.

 

It is fair to assume that Friday between 8 p.m. and 10 p.m. is a peak viewing time.  Here is a typical programme schedule:

 

BBC1: documentaries;

BBC2: documentaries;

BBC3: repeat documentaries;

BBC4: documentaries.

 

There is heavy emphasis on low-rent stuff such as quizzes, cookery programmes and game shows, plus juvenile trash like ‘Top Gear’ which the producer himself said was aimed at people ‘with a mental age of 12’, and pond-life like Russell Brand.

 

Will it change? Not a chance. It’s an Institution, like the Monarchy, the Church of England and the House of Lords. What must change is the means of financing it. The most touted is to make it a subscription-only service. The competition is Sky which carries more trash than a landfill plus 33 hard-core porno channels, and is much more expensive than the BBC licence fee, especially when the extras are included, such as pay-sport and films.

 

A possible compromise would be a choice between the licence fee and subscription, but this will only raise its head when the next fee review comes up.

 

Meanwhile it will be ‘plus ca change…..’.