BBC needs to appeal to 'mass audience' to survive says expert

We use your sign-up to provide content in ways you’ve consented to and to improve our understanding of you. This may include adverts from us and 3rd parties based on our understanding. You can unsubscribe at any time. More info

The corporation’s future was thrust into question after Culture Secretary Nadine Dorries said the latest announcement about the licence fee would be the last. While she suggested that a review would be opened into it, she said that it was time that BBC explored new ways to find and sell “great British content”. Many have since added their voices to a debate that has been going on for decades.

Veteran TV presenter David Dimbleby this weekend suggested the licence fee could be linked to council tax to make it fairer, telling BBC Radio 4’s World at One: “The licence fee is something that I absolutely believe in.

“I don’t think you can have public service broadcasting without paying for it through the public purse in that way.

“But what I do think is the BBC should acknowledge that £159 paid by the poorest as well the richest is just unfair, it’s inequitable.”

Many from within the BBC, like Tim Davie, its Director General, have since spelled disaster following the announcement, saying it “will affect our frontline output,” and that “everything’s on the agenda” when considering what might be cut.

When looking at previous debates regarding huge shifts in the way the BBC operates, it has been accused of “overreacting” when faced with criticism or competition from commercial outlets.

This was seen in 1969 when politicians were considering the future of the radio licence, which would go on to be scrapped and assimilated into the TV licence in 1971.

Paul Bryan, then Conservative MP for Howden, in a speech on July 22 of that year, reasoned that the radio licence was no longer justifiable given the number of other commercial radio channels that had come into existence.

He went on to note how the BBC had been stirred into action by commercial television — something that the Labour Party had wanted to ban — and that radio must now be given the same room to flourish without the BBC holding a monopoly.

Mr Bryan said: “For advertising effectiveness, a station likes to attract a complete age or market group to one programme.

“There is nothing inherently wrong with that, but it is not compatible with public service broadcasting if, as I suggest, one of its requirements is to educate and lead people towards better things.

“Network broadcasting may or not be an inevitable development, but it should not be adopted without a clear realisation of its implications.

“I have considerable respect for the BBC, but I think that one of its faults in the past has been that it has always over-reacted to competition and criticism, be it Mrs Whitehouse or Radio Caroline.”

JUST IN: NHS course branded Bible ‘racist’

He went on to note how the launch of Radio One in 1967 was a direct reaction to the emergence of Radio Caroline in 1964 — a music-based British radio station that was created to circumvent the BBC’s monopoly over popular music.

The MP said this was a clear example of the BBC stopping being solely a public service broadcaster and entering the realms of commercial radio.

He continued: “The new plans are a reaction to the threat of commercial radio.

“The BBC argues that as a national corporation it must have a mass audience, otherwise people will not want to pay the licence fee.

“But it has gone too far. People are now saying, ‘If the BBC production is to be 90 percent neo-commercial, why pay for a licence when we can get this sort of thing from commercial radio?'”

The radio licence was finally scrapped on February 1, 1971.

It was first introduced by the Wireless Telegraphy Act 1923 at the cost of ten shillings (50p) a year.

DON’T MISS

University makes move to ban word ‘maternity’ [REPORT] 
Have your say: Pressure mounts on Boris – has he got your backing? [INSIGHT]
Britain exposes EU split ‘loud and clear’ as it stands up to Putin [ANALYSIS] 

In 1946, it was extended to TVs at the cost of £2, and people could opt to have a TV licence, a radio licence or a combined TV and radio licence.

The arguments about the rise of commercial radio mirror the debate today over the TV licence.

Many people say the BBC should now follow a subscription-based model, similar to that seen with the popular streaming services Netflix and Amazon Prime.

Britbox had a scattered launch (March 2017 in the US; February 2018 in Canada; November 2019 in the UK; November 2020 in Australia; August 2021 in South Africa) across the world, and could be something that the BBC looks to emulate with its main services in the future.

An online digital video subscription service, it is jointly operated by the BBC and ITV, offering a number of British television series and films, mainly featuring content and past series and films supplied by the BBC, ITV, Channel 4 and Channel 5 — as well as original programming.

However, it is not clear how the broadcaster would offer its myriad other services like news, its highly popular BBC website, podcasts and apps.

While many argue that it should follow in the footsteps of popular streaming services, others say it holds a unique and important role in British life as a public service broadcaster, paid for by the people, made for the people, without profit and private vested interests.

Fleur Anderson, a Labour shadow minister, hit-out at Ms Dorries’ decision, describing it as “unpatriotic”.

Speaking in Parliament, she said the BBC World Service was the “envy of the world” and served countries across the globe, stressing it should be protected from cuts.

Ms Anderson said: “Cutting funding to the BBC and the World Service is already leaving the path clear for Russian and Chinese influence in those countries.

“Does she agree with me that only an unpatriotic party would cut the real-terms funding of this national treasure?”

Ms Dorries did not agree, responding that she was “very patriotic”.

Meanwhile, Mr Dimbleby, continuing in his defence of the licence fee, conceded that the price of the licence fee had to be looked at by the broadcaster.

He said: “And there’s a simple way in which the BBC can get on the front foot, which is by suggesting the licence fee figure, the gross figure of £159, should not be paid flat-rate by everybody, but the richest should pay more and the poorest less.

“And the simple way of doing it would be to attach an element of the licence fee to the council tax band.

“Why should the poorest pay the same as I pay? It’s just not fair.”

Source: Read Full Article