Ideologically-driven Conservatives have seized the economic crisis to knock back the BBC – and it only took 48 hours, writes Left Foot Forward's Joy Johnson.
So the Tory-led coalition government has gone on its rampage and at the last minute demonstrated the shambolic nature of the cuts, or more correctly I should imagine, Tory ideological calculation, the BBC was ambushed. Commercial opponents have long wanted to diminish the BBC and in the pages of the Daily Mail and News International its programming and its people come in for a battering. Even in the last few weeks there were complaints about the number of BBC people in Chile covering one of the truly great global stories.
The warning signs came with James Murdoch’s speech in Edinburgh which took the attacks to a different level. Pursuing News Corporation’s business interests, which sees profit in everything, he railed against the BBC’s brilliant web service and declared that the BBC was embarking on a land grab. This was all too much for the Murdochs; for them, the only empire that should grow is News Corporation.
James Murdoch argued:
“The BBC is dominant… Other organisations might rise and fall but the BBC’s income is guaranteed and growing.”
And so you had it. Clear warning signs that took the BBC hierarchy a whole year to counter-attack with Mark Thompson’s speech in the same venue last August. Thompson didn’t go all out with guns blazing but he did make an important, and with today’s news, prescient point:
“A pound out of the commissioning budget of the BBC is a pound out of [the] UK creative economy. Once gone, it will be gone forever.”
It was a defiance that lasted all of a three months. Faced with government battalions, he waved the white flag. The Corporation will now have to pay for the BBC World Service previously paid for by the Foreign office. And the licence fee is frozen for six years. Osborne also gave Rupert and James what they wanted – a commitment from the BBC to spend less on its website.
And calls for the BBC to go down the subscriptions route have already begun. It must be avoided at all costs. The consequence of the ambush has meant that public service is no longer regarded as a public good. The BBC fat cats with their bloated salaries lived high on the hog and it has weakened them; ideologically-driven Conservatives have seized the economic crisis to knock back the BBC – and it only took 48 hours.
49 Responses to “Payback? Osborne’s raid on BBC gives Murdochs exactly what they wanted”
Stephen P
@ Alan W
So Sky’s revenue is £5.9 billion which people have actively chosen to pay via subscriptions, whilst the BBC receives £4.8 billion through taxation (aka licence fee).
This shows that people are clearly willing to pay for entertainment on TV – in fact, they’re willing to pay this in addition to the licence fee and Sky get more revenue than the BBC off the back of it.
That being the case and if the BBC is so amazing, why don’t they cancel the licence fee and go down the subscription route like Sky? If they provide a service that everyone appreciates so much, they’d surely be able to maintain or even increase their revenue.
Stephen P
As for the blog post itself, there’s a couple of things to point out:
1) With regards to the Chile coverage, the complaints didn’t relate to the BBC covering the news. It was because they sent 26 members of staff to cover this event, which was more than ITV, Channel 4 & Sky News combined. If three channels can cover the news adequately with less staff, why can’t the BBC? This is just another example of the BBC spending more than it needs to, just because it can.
2) Mark Thompson’s comment that “A pound out of the commissioning budget of the BBC is a pound out of [the] UK creative economy. Once gone, it will be gone forever.” How ridiculous is that statement? Does that mean that if the licence fee was abolished and £4.8 billion wasn’t taxed, not a single pound would be spent on creative content? His comment suggests he thinks that the BBC IS the UK creative economy.
simon
Since when was light entertainment an essential public service? The BBC exists for the benefit of its staff, luvvies and propagates leftwing ideology. I have no problem with this but I do not see why I should be taxed to pay for it, this is undemocratic. If, as the BBC keeps telling us, the public loves the BBC then surely it follows they can thrive as a subscription channel.
adrian
Mark Thompson is a thieving, lying twat who is trying to justify his near million pound annual salary. He would make up anything
Mr. Sensible
Joy I fully agree with you.
I think an independent public service broadcaster like the BBC is something that is important for our democracy.
I think we should remind ourselves that the owners of the Daily Mail, Telegraph, Guardian and others wrote last week to Vince Cable expressing their concerns about how much power News International has.
For me, cutting the BBC’s revenues and giving it more responsibilities is like the economics primer written by a 6 year-old.