Fisking Donal Blaney on 18 Doughty Street - why the BBC is the best option
Last night on Up Front on 18 Doughty Street (direct media link) Donal Blaney was having a go at the BBC. You need to look about 5 minutes into the programme.
I don’t find the case convincing.
Donal makes the point strongly that the BBC have been “ripping people off” and “defrauding people” in the scandal over faked phone-ins, and makes a comparison with Sky.
And he has a point. But it becomes a much smaller point when you compare the cost of the BBC with those of their main competitor - Sky TV.
Let’s consider the monthly costs and what they give us.
The BBC
BBC Licence Fee (2007/8 prices):
- £135.50 per annum = £11.29 per month.
For which we get:
- 8 TV channels
- 10 radio networks
- more than 50 local TV and radio services
- bbc.co.uk
- BBC on-demand TV service from this month from an archive that - at root - belongs to us
- the thing under our control
Sky
And what you get from the Sky Basic Service (current prices):
- £180 per annum = £15 per month. (Does this include VAT?)
For which we get:
- Two channel mixes from Variety, Music, News/Events, Kids, Knowledge, Style and Culture.
- If you happen to want (for example) news and knowledge and style and culture you will have to pay another £132 per year for the privilege.
- A bundled (bandwidth limited) internet and phone service.
- The basic package gives you 2Gb bandwidth per month - which is roughly equivalent to a mere 3 evenings of streamed TV from 18 Doughty Street. This estimate is based on a 300kbps stream for 5 hours of broadcasts.
- The £26 per month (£312 per year with an extra installation cost higher than 12 months of BBC License Fee) Sky package gives you 40Gb of bandwidth per month online - which would let you use more than one third of your allowance to watch 18 Doughty Street in the evenings. Just expect to be buggered when they go to an all-day programme.
- If you want sports it will cost you another £19 per month (£228 per annum).
- If you want Sky in your den, your kitchen or your children’s bedrooms it will cost you an extra £10 per month per room.
Beyond that - just the £65 Sky Call Out charge to mend a digibox is almost half of the entire BBC Licence Fee.
Conclusion
The question answers itself.
Yes - the BBC should have its place at the heart of British society. Not quite “sacrosanct” certainly, and the degree of regulation needs reviewing from time to time.
The BBC does have has the odd problem - such as the current “phone-in” question (if it was in news I would be seriously worried), and needs taking in hand form time to time. We have new governance structures in the BBC Trust - let’s see how they work.
But the overall cost-benefit analysis for society is still massively in the BBC’s favour.
Any wholesale case against the BBC has fewer legs and makes little more sense than Heather Mills-Macartney.
In my view, Sky TV is a bargepole job, unless you need one of the crown jewels that they purchased (such as football or cricket). Even in these days of 3 and 4 way plays providing television, phone and internet, it is not competitive.
I haven’t (until now) mentioned the Murdoch Manipulation Factor, which (for me at least) is a consideration. He does tend to conduct himself in something of a thuggish manner in business; remember the removal of TV channels from Virgin. To be fair, Richard Branson can be equally vigorous as well sometimes - such as the way he dealt with Randolph Fields when setting up Virgin Atlantic.
So - what would you prefer for your £130 a year? The BBC, or your Digibox mended twice?
And which would you prefer as the elephant you are in bed with - the BBC or Sky?
I think I will also leave another question hanging: have Sky manipulated their phone-ins? If they had, how would we find out?
Tags: BBC, Donal Blaney, 18 Doughty Street, 18DS, Up Front, digital television, sky tv review, satellite tv, sky vs bbc comparison, compare sky and the bbc[tags]BBC, Donal Blaney, 18 Doughty Street, 18DS, Up Front, digital television, sky tv review, satellite tv, sky vs bbc comparison, compare sky and the bbc[/tags]
Categories: Media, News - Current Affairs, Politics
The one thing you fail to mention on your list when comparing Sky to the BBC is that payment for the Sky package isn’t compulsory; and Rupert Murdoch doesn’t threaten to jail people for six months for refusing to subscribe to his service.
Fair point, lee, and thanks for the comment.
However £135 a year is a tiny part of our average tax bill - compare it with the £4000 or so spent on Local Government services for each household, or the far greater sums spent on National Government.
Also far greater sums than the £3bn or so that goes to the BBC are being wasted (in the NHS alone for example) within public expenditure with little outcry.
And - if you would like to opt out - there are all sorts of other compulsory taxes that do not benefit the whole population, such as revenue spent on coastal defence.
Many people would regard the Sky payment as compulsory by the exclusivity on e.g., football now.
PS The link back on your name appears to be dead.
For people on basic benefit in Britain such as myself it’s three weeks’ money.
Again - a very fair point.
However, I’d suggest that the answer there would be a differential price for a TV license, not the abolition of the BBC.
If the BBC went, your television would - in my view, and I think I’ve provided the facts to back it up - eventually cost you more not less, or you would have to accept only the existing “free to air” channels - which means ITV/C4/C5 (assuming that those who cannot afford the license cannot afford a set top box/satellite dish combo).
To be honest; the day the BBC closes down, no-one will celebrate more than me. Being compelled to fund an organisation that denies, belittles and denigrates everything that I am or believe is the worst type of oppression imaginable.
I’d be quite happy with just the remaining UK broadcasters; and why not a network like Fox News with a freshingly honest outlook to news reporting…yes, I know it’s biased, but it doesn’t claim not to be biased, it’s a bias that I generally support…and it doesn’t want to send me to prison.
Thanks for the further comment Lee.
We disagree fundamentally on that one then.
I’d argue that it is the BBC that keeps all the others honest on their News Reporting.
Reforms perhaps. Abolition or privatisation - No.
Thanks again for the debate.
Matt
The BBC has 6 channels because the TWO kids channel slots are shared with BBC 3 & 4. I’d also like to point out its only your opinion that the BBC is better value than Sky and Sky don’t force you to pay a subscription fee just for watching live transmissions my leftie friend. The sooner you lot start paying for the BBC by yourselves instead of expecting millions of people to be forced to subsidise you the better
Totally agree with you John.
Thanks for the comment.
Leftie ?? !! You need to read the blog.
This debate should not be a political football. It should be
casting in left/right rather thanTV quality/value for money terms rather than left/right.Certainly it is my opinion that the Beeb is better quality than Sky - others may differ.
I’d suggest the only bits of Sky that are currently better in quality terms than the BBC are possibly news (which is free to air) and possibly some of the extra “charged for” services - perhaps sport, perhaps movies - which cost £200 extra a year each.
The Sky Radio, Local Radio and Internet Content services are distinctly inferior to those offered by the BBC.
On the value for money costs, I think the numbers speak for themselves - Sky doesn’t remotely stack up.
So which would you prefer for your £130 - the BBC or 2 repairs to your Sky Box each year?
Thanks again for the comment.
On the 6/8 channels point. Sorry - missed this one.
You have a point on the delivery infrastructure - but they still deliver 8 channels of content.
Looks like efficient use of resources to me.
Matt
Matt if you think the BBC is better value that’s all fine and dandy but you should be paying for it by yourselves instead of expecting millions of people to be forced to subsidise it for you.
I’d prefer paying ZERO for my Humax 9200 PVR channels and the FREE cable box included with the phoneline (& free evenings and weekend calls) from Virgin Media which only costs £11……..Yes that’s right only £11 which is a damn site better value than the BBC because I can’t stand them or the biased people who expect everyone to bend over backwards for them.
You see Matt if the BBC is so great why are the pro BBC people so scared of it going subscription? Could it be that you know you’re only a very small minority and the BBC will crash faster than a space shuttle with a broken tile!
Every single opinion poll I’ve seen shows 65%+ in favour of scrapping the BBC TV licence apart from the Government/BBC one which was done by the Work Foundation that just happens to be run by yep you guessed it a former BBC employee
“You have a point on the delivery infrastructure - but they still deliver 8 channels of content.”
You can play with figures if you like but they still only have 6 channel slots two of which are split with different things to make it look like theirs 8
John
Could you clarify before I reply, please:
>I’d prefer paying ZERO for my Humax 9200 PVR channels and the FREE cable box included with the phoneline (& free evenings and weekend calls) from Virgin Media which only costs £11…….
Am I correct that that would be a Freeview box and a paid-for Virgin cable service?
Matt
The DTT 9200 has access to FREEview although it isn’t free when you add the enforced BBC TV Licence to it and the cable set-top-box has paid and fta channels included for the £11 (adding the free weekend and evening calls)
John:
>“You have a point on the delivery infrastructure - but they still deliver 8 channels of content.”
>You can play with figures if you like but they still only have 6 channel slots two of which are split with different things to make it look like theirs 8
I’m not playing with figures - just stating how it is set up. Delivering 8 content streams over 6 slots is an efficient use of resources.
Sky do precisely the same thing, as I’m sure (I haven’t checked) do Virgin.
Matt
No Matt the streams come from 6 slots now unless you wish to change the way math is worked out 6 has always been 6 not 8
“Sky do precisely the same thing”
Please keep Sky/VM out of this because they don’t force anyone to subscribe to them and send people round to my house trying to threaten me.
If trying to slate Sky/VM is the best defence for the BBC then you may as well give up
Some interesting stuff from a 25yr veteran of the BBC Robin Aitken
youtube.com/watch?v=6_WEZloX2fQ
youtube.com/watch?v=OY4umBmJHjg
Oh and just to prove my point the BBC spent £200,000 of public money to without the Balen Report
Some interesting stuff from a 25yr veteran of the BBC Robin Aitken
youtube.com/watch?v=6_WEZloX2fQ
youtube.com/watch?v=OY4umBmJHjg
Oh and just to prove my point the BBC spent £200,000 of public money to withhold the Balen Report
I’m out for the afternoon, but I’ll return to the thread this evening or Saturday AM.
Thanks for the debate.
Matt
[...] John over at the indefatigable TV License Resistance, commenting on an article where I dare to defend the BBC in response to a broadside on Up Front on 18 Doughty Street (direct media link) where Donal Blaney [...]
[...] defences of the corporation come from Simon Jenkins and Matt Wardman. It’s just as diverse a range lining up to defend the Beeb as it is to lay the boot into [...]
[...] as Matt Wardman points out: have Sky manipulated their phone-ins? If they had, how would we find [...]