with the greatest of respect Albs, you don't have a rather clue what you're talking about.
nor it would appear do the rest of you.
(i might add, my father was BBC, one of my brothers was BBC, a great number of life long friends and work colleagues were BBC..... and yes, I worked for the BBC... i might have a little insight.... )
instructed by successive governments and license fee bitchers.... the accountants on high, systematically dismantled the BBC's technical service abilities, using the short term bottom line on both payroll and asset register to justify it.... without being gifted with foresight... (HD, surround, treaty based obligations to supply relevant training and infrastructure support to other countries, and so on... all add significant investment and running costs , and the money has to come from somewhere.... )
NOW...
the BBC cannot fulfill it's contractual obligations (many of which are dumped on them BY the government.... ) without hiring back said technical services, at vastly increased cost... outsourcing what used to be in house and relatively cheap.....
they are required to service ever more output streams.... and at higher data rates, surround sound, HD , etc.... and yet are not given the room to fund that properly...
and are still required to maintain the government's equipment and properties as well as their own, and provide much of the infrastructure also use by other broadcasters.... (anything further on that is covered by OSA ..... so no.... no more details , just remember, in the event of a global catastrophe.... the reason you can hear any news and information from the government, is the BBC.... and part of your license fee... )
technically they do an impossible job, with inadequate staff and equipment....
thanks to the short sighted sell offs, and redundancies, they no longer HAVE the facilities to make all the programming in house, so no longer have full control over the details of how a programme is made and funded....
this was an outsourced programme....
go bitch at the production company responsible....
who will probably tell you that such activities are the only way to be able to make such material available to the BBC, at a price the BBC can afford....
the BBC has gone from being THE world leading broadcaster, to being the pauper in the rat pack, frankly some third world national broadcasters are better supported ....
so break off with your preachy ill informed griping about a subject you know next to break all about....
example.....
someone recently did 3 mixes for a BBC radio live session show .... 3 songs..... back in the Beeb, on a salary, would have cost them about £650 in wages (mix engineer and the assorted support crew) and 3 days use of one room in one of their facilities....
what did it cost them now....
£3500 +VAT
another example....
a colleague recently spent several weeks in Kuala Lumpur, providing training for surround mixing and HD vision processing...
he USED to be in house, a senior trainer at the now Defunct wood norton BBC training facility.... on around a 35K salary
at which point, he would have either, A) been able to provide such training in house at a BBC facility in the UK, at minimal cost to the BBC, or B) been accommodated in the cheapest nastiest hotel in Kuala Lumpur, and still been on basic salary.
NOW? 5* hotel, posh suite.... and about £1000 a day./ about 10 times what it WOULD have cost "back in the day"
this situation is repeated throughout the system, and this position was FORCED on the BBC by external pressure....
i could rant for bloody weeks about the total twunts that put the beeb in that position....
they've not just thrown the baby out with the bath water, they threw the sodding bath out as well.
\\
Author
Topic: Biased BBC? Never! (Read 1948 times)