We were going to write a long and detailed discussion of what the BBC should do with its reduced funding, above and beyond the obvious (sell the DOG machine, fercryinoutloud). Then we noticed that the BBC Trust had approved the odious proposal to take advertising for international viewers to its websites.
Fecking sellouts.
The Trust was satisfied that approving the proposals would not conflict with its Charter duty to secure that the independence of the BBC was maintained. They bloody well would be. These pillocks are appointed by those odious incompetents at the DCMS, and paid ludicrous amounts of money to sit on their arses and sell the corporation down the river.
Our position is very simple. It is not possible to carry commercials and retain editorial independence, as Martin Belam argued almost a year ago. The Trunts cite CNN and the Economist as organisations that appear to do this, but forget that both are profit-driven enterprises. No comparison is offered with public service broadcasters, for the DCMS appointees know full well that they cannot make a similar claim. ABC, for instance, has recently sold advertising for its website, and been solidly criticised for it.
Some have argued that journalists would be aghast at any attempt to influence their work. This is true, but isn't the point. It's what people think is happening, and the undeniable fact that the many bad apples in the commercial sector have queered the pitch for the few organisations of honesty and probity. The BBC has no commercials: this is an obvious way of asserting its independence. Slap adverts all over the site, and the corporation has to work harder, and can never reap the same rewards.
The official BBC position is that not doing so would be to use license fee money for the benefit of international audiences. This is cowardly bullshit; the amount of cross-subsidy is minimal, and would be more than recouped when the BBC commands higher prices when selling its wares overseas.
Some have argued that this is the thin end of the wedge, a plot hatched by Rupert Murdoch, snivelling lacklustre lackeys in the Labour party such as Tessa Jowell, and augmented by Alistair Campbell's self-righteous desire for revenge. It is alleged that these people would love to see the BBC reduced to a vassel, occupying one or two places well down the EPG. We don't necessarily believe this line of thought, but we don't have enough evidence to disprove it.
The reprobates responsible for killing the BBC's independence are the BBC Trust:
- Chitra Bharucha
- Diane Coyle
- Dermot Gleeson
- Alison Hastings
- Patricia Hodgson
- Rotha Johnston
- Janet Lewis-Jones
- David Liddiment
- Sir Michael Lyons
- Mehmuda Mian Pritchard
- Jeremy Peat
- Richard Tait
These people are charged with keeping the BBC independent. How on earth can they square this with the very real loss of independence that has to come from taking commercials? We have documented, at great length, the decline of other services after they started taking advertisements. We have no guarantees that the BBC will do any better, only warm words by people who claim to represent us, but in whose appointment we have neither say nor confidence.
We must now consider very carefully whether we can continue to support the BBC financially. We hope that the dirty dozen above can sleep soundly in their beds to-night; while the price of their decision may be low, it is clear their values are far, far lower.
