Is this the beginning of the end of the BBC?

[Rollo]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010...nce-fee-frozen
The BBC licence fee is to be frozen at the current level of £145.50 for the next six years, a 16% cut in real terms, after the corporation today concluded a bruising round of funding negotiations with the coalition government.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2...cence-fee-raid
BBC bosses fear that the coalition government is gearing up for a £500m-plus raid on the licence fee, by forcing the broadcaster to meet the full cost of free television licences for the over 75s.
The benefit – which was introduced by Gordon Brown when he was chancellor – costs £556m, and is currently paid for out of general taxation. But ministers are considering passing the bill on to the BBC as part of this week's comprehensive spending review.

Not content with destroying British industry to the point where it won't function again properly, the last time they were is office, the ****ing Tories have already started on hurting the BBC.

It's a real problem for them. People like Rupert Murdoch have been complaining for years that the BBC's mere existance robs him of his precious profits, and now that he's backed the Tories in the media (and probably with cash behind closed doors), he and people like him will begin to make the institution suffer which will only get worse and probably lead to the government selling it off (that and the NHS if they can ruin that as well).

How many days has this Tory government been in power now? (167 days) Already they've sparked my ire. It's just like being a kid again.
What ever happened to Nick Clegg? Is he a toilet cleaner or personal butt-wiper for Mr Cameron yet?

[Daniel]

The Tories are hoping that by the time it comes to the next election they can bribe people with stuff they've bought with the money they've cut now, that much is obvious......

[Mark]

Although the BBC is to be cherished £145 is too much and they should manage on less. That's not the same as wishing their demise.

[Dave B]

I'm actually surprised that the BBC got away so lightly. Earlier in the week the government were suggesting that they take on the burden on funding licences for the over 75s, which was a policy foisted on them by the previous government and would have effectively made them a benefits provider.

As a bargaining chip the BBC offered to fund the World Service, and this seems to have been accepted. They'll also fund the Welsh language channel S4C. Coupled with the six year freeze on the licence fee they do at least have some degree of certainty over their future funding.

The bigger threat comes not from the neutering of the Beeb; as Mark says maybe it's time they tighened their belts with the rest of us. The problem is the likely rise in the dominance and influence of the Murdoch media empire. He's looking to fully buy out BSkyB, which would give him an unprecidented monopoly in the UK's media that even Silvio Berlusconi would baulk at. It should be noted that on the day he declared his bid, his son James made a "courtesy call" to business secretary Vince Cable. Just saying.

It's sickening to remember that the very first person to meet with David Cameron after he became PM was Rupert Murdoch. The same guy whose newspapers (and, in more subtle ways, his news channel) lobbied for the Conservatives. Lest we forget, the political editor of The Sun is on recordas saying "It's my job to see that Cameron f***ing well gets into Downing Street".

Ofcom won't be any help: they're being merged with Postcomm and are in any case effectively useless at the best of times, behoven to market forces rather than what is best for the public.

My fear is that deregulation will see Sky News become more like Fox News: overtly biased, shouty, and not particularly accurate. The BBC will (hopefully) always exist to counter Sky, but I suspect they'll be increasingly marginalised and starved of the funds to properly make their voice heard.

Yesterday was a sad day: the BBC, social housing and the armed forces all took a shafting. Today, the announcement of the spending review, will be far worse.

[ArrowsFA1]

The BBC has always been a target for any government, but particularly the Tories. It is a 'public' broadcaster and as such seen as independent from political influence, something that those in power are not keen on. They prefer to work with the likes of Murdoch who are far more effective at shaping public opinion on their behalf.

While I fear for the future of the BBC under this government I'm more concerned about the increasing influence of the Murdoch media empire, not just in the UK but worldwide. Increasingly news has become confused with opinion. Murdoch is pushing a particular view via his "news" outlets and with his increasing dominance in broadcasting comes increased influence and ability to shape and direct opinions. When the Murdoch view coincides with political power we should all be concerned.

[Dave B]

On a related note I can well envisage the licence fee as we know it being scrapped at the end of this six year period.

Currently you only need one to watch TV "as broadcast" (ie live, or delayed becuase you recorded it as it was broadcast).

Increasingly TV is being delivered by other means. Services like iPlayer and 4OD register millions of views per day, and it's becoming increasingly simply to watch VOD via other devices such as mobile phones and games consoles.

If it wasn't for the fact that I enjoy live sport and watch a fair bit of news, I reckon I could quite legally escape paying the licence fee by taking advantage of such services.

Think back 6 years: the thought of watching TV on your computer or mobile phone wasn't realistic, now we take it for granted. Who can predict where technology will take us 6 years hence?

I would not be in the least bit surprised if the licence fee was replaced with one or more of th following: a tax on individual devices, a tax on internet connections (fixed and mobile), or general taxation.

Interesting, and not necessarily exciting, times ahead.

[Mark]

Yep. Whoever is in power accuses the BBC of being biased against them just because they are more neutral than most give them credit for.

[veeten]

and it's why he reminds me of another media magnate of olden times, William Randolph Hearst.

[BDunnell]

All complaints of bias against the BBC are purely in the eye of the beholder. It is a fine institution, and I would gladly pay £145 a year just for Radio 4 and now the World Service. I mean that quite genuinely.

[Lousada]

If they need to save money, they could start by dropping kickball, speeding cars and other sports the commercial broadcasters would be more than willing to broadcast themselves. Instead they will probably cut the indepth news coverage and the interesting documentaries they now produce