The future of the BBC

The recent episode of Ross and Brand has reminded us, even if our yearly tax payment is a distant memory of many months ago, that the BBC is supposed to be our broadcaster. It has a long and illustrious history and many of us owe much to it throughout our lives.

The question we must ask, however, is whether something designed in a very different age and circumstances quite unlike our own needs radical change now.

There are features which are of concern.

The first is that it is a monopoly, or near monopoly in many of its areas, but especially in radio news and the internet. Any monopoly will tend to become inward looking and lack consideration for its customers, with a "take it or leave it" attitude. It has found a unique slot for itself. While other broadcasters are completely subject to the regulation of Ofwatch, the BBC Trust does much of the regulation for the BBC, and the independence of the Trust comes under question. Why should the BBC not have the same regulation as other broadcasters?

The second is connected, that it is financed by a compulsory tax. Even if you never watch or listen to BBC output, you must still pay for those outputs. Indeed you can be found guilty of evading the tax even if you never use your TV or computer to receive TV broadcasts. The justification for this right to tax us regardless, apart from the silly one that we wouldn't want to have our programmes interrupted by advertising, would we?, is that it is public service broadcasting. I have listened to experts arguing what this term means, and there seems little agreement other than than it is a good thing to have public service broadcasting. The tax raises over £3 billion a year with little effort, while commercial competitors must struggle to find advertisers.

The third is that it is biased. At the moment it is public service broadcasting because it spouts government messages, while during the last Conservative administration it served the public by trying to undermine the government. The techniques are so obvious in what it includes and what it excludes in its news programmes, how much time and the order of interview and finally the different level of ferocity and aggression with which it attacks politicians from different parties.

A classic case is the Sunday slot with Andrew Marr, - Gordon's slot, to promote him whenever he feels the need. Marr actually admitted the bias, when he said, "The BBC is not impartial or neutral. It's a publicly funded, urban organisation with an abnormally large number of young people, ethnic minorities and gay people. It has a liberal bias."

How then can it pretend to be a public service if it gives undue prominence to certain groups and their values? Above all, why should it have such a monopoly in the provision of news if it is biased? I am glad that the US election is over - we need no longer listen to hours of description and forecast from the hundreds of staff the BBC had in the US for the occasion.

I have to admit that I now miss parts of the radio news because I am asking "Now why did they put it like that, and why did they not mention ........., or why have they elected to interview only ....?" If there was an alternative news service which I could trust as being objective and impartial, I would certainly not listen to the BBC. This is something that I feel has changed during my lifetime and something which has for me destroyed the reputation of the BBC.

I would be happy if
1) the BBC received less of my licence fee, and as a consequence had to drop certain things it does not need to do, such as publishing travel books.

2) some of my tax went to other broadcasters, preferably radio news broadcasters

3) the BBC attempted in some measure to improve taste, rather than merely following it into the gutter.

4) public service broadcasting meant putting on programmes of merit which other broadcasters could not mount, and pulling out of areas of tawdry, banal or bad taste.

5) the BBC was made to sell off parts which merely duplicate what other commercial broadcasters are doing - radio 1, radio 2, etc., or digital channels BBC3 and BBC4 which show repeats and attract low audiences.