Saturday, 10 July 2010


Following on from the previous post, Mrs Thatcher - during the height of her cost-cutting frenzy - took a tour of the BBC, and in each studio the visited, she asked how many people were employed by the production teams involved. When given the answer, she merely retorted that the number was far too high, and they should sack as many people as possible, as quickly as possible, in order to save the licence fee payer money, increase efficiency and compete with the private commercial stations, which did not receive money from the public in order to survive. This - it seems - was her one and only constructive comment when shown the inner workings of the wonderfully creative and free National network that is housed in the shrine of Broadcasting House, shown above.

For those of you who cannot listen to anything other than the World Service without resorting to the free, online facility of the BBC iPlayer on the net, the BBC is an independent, national broadcasting company, and has been since it's inception. It receives money from everyone in the UK who watches television, and that money amounts to quite a lot, so it has no reason whatsoever to compete with the commercial stations, which is why the quality of the programmes are so good, compared with others world-wide. I have watched American TV, and - believe me - it is absolute shite compared to the BBC's output. The only thing they have to compete is run by the National Geographic, online channel, but this is mainly a wildlife thing. It is VERY good though, and funded - as far as I know - by the US equivalent of the Royal Society. May they long continue.

The man who did the most to form the BBC as we know it today, was the Director General, Lord Reith. He genuinely did insist that the radio news-readers wore evening suits (inc. black bow-ties), purely to maintain high standards. The BBC has always had a commitment to the Anglican Church, and later, faiths of all denominations. More and more programmes are sourced externally via private companies, such as the ones owned by Melvyn 'Lord' Bragg. Nothing wrong with that.

In the last few months, despicable corporate predators like the Australian Rupert Murdoch and his son, have been causing a fuss in the media (HIS media - SKY TV, plus all the British newspapers and other companies they own), saying that the BBC has an unfair advantage, because they receive money from the public by force, and therefore do not need to compete with the likes of HIS channels which show round-the-clock, appalling rubbish which makes them a great deal of money. Well he can just fuck off. I would be happy to be one of about 90 million Brits who pay about £150 a year, JUST to keep his and his son's sweaty hands off our broadcasting company, and all the fine writers and producers who are commissioned by it. He was a very good friend of Margaret Thatcher's, and -for all I know - still is, if he can get any sense out of her.

As I have mentioned before, I have not owned a TV for about 25 years, but I have - in the last year or so - been occasionally watching repeats on the iPlayer system, for which I am not obliged to pay anything. I would genuinely be happy to pay a percentage of the license fee, if I was asked to, however. I listen to the radio instead, including the online Radio 7, which is an absolute jewel of a station, run - at any given time - by no more than 14 PEOPLE! Try cutting that to within an inch of it's life, and it will be dead.

A little British touch - that figure statue you can see over the door of Broadcasting House in London, was carved - in situ - by the famous sculptor, Eric Gill. When he was up the scaffold over the door, he wore a Scottish kilt, and nothing else - much to the consternation of the ladies beneath. How British is that?


  1. Again, we really hear next to nothing of this in America. We're just so inundated with our own local news and any national catastrophe of the day that this type of information just doesn't filter through. Thatcher is starting to sound very Republican to me: all business and almost cruel with little reason. I agree that most of our television here stinks, but I do like our Public Broadcasting (PBS) which, ironically, shows a lot of BBC productions. The local features are nice though, with pieces on art and music, and eclectic stories of American life. It runs by private funding, grants, and public donation through phone drives. Consequently, what you see is a result of catering to whoever has the money and time. So if a whole bunch of rich people in the community want to see Celtic Women again and again and again, that's what everyone has to endure, haha.

    I can see what the issue is though, that things are run in a selfish manner by the powers that be. Those that wish to be in power are the ones we least want to see in such positions. It's the kind of thing that makes you wonder why someone like Obama would want to be President. Or why any man or woman would want to be in the Senate or any type of position that places you above the rest of society. Because, as we all know, Tom Joad died a long time ago.

  2. And Gill was made (by Reith) to reduce the size of the offending member. Did he base it on his own perhaps?

  3. Yes, I was probably being a bit unfair about US TV, Amy. Whenever I've been there (not a lot) I sort of HAVE to watch the bad stuff, because it is so shockingly bad that it makes good morbid viewing. Some the the US imports to here have been good though - the sitcoms in particular. I suppose I am just ranting about it because - when I was a kid - there was just as much. You are right about Mrs T being a Republican. She aligned herself with them very closely.

    I think you're right about Reith and the willy, Cro. It rings a bell, and wouldn't be out of character. As to the rest, I don't know!