This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.
Register | Edit Profile | Subscriptions | Forum Rules | Log In
Badger11 Beckenham 24 Jan 22 9.31am | |
---|---|
Doctor Who slumps to new low. According to the media the New Year episode only brought in 3.4m viewers for the BBC's flag ship show in a prime time slot. There has been plenty of media speculation as to who will replace Jodie with various candidates suggested from the alphabet soup. Apparently they are now considering putting the show on hiatus for a few years which i think would be the sensible call. The ratings have plummeted since David Tennant the show should have been canned after Matt Smith but for some reason the BBC hates to cancel shows and sees it as some kind of betrayal. Appointing a women was a desperate attempt at reviving the rating and it did for a few episodes before the decline continued. It is an expensive show to make so it has to have good ratings if they have any sense they will rest it. Personally after a gap I would re-launch it from the start with an origins story about the Doctor on Galifry and how he came to start his adventures. I would also ditch the rainbow alliance it's a kids show they just want monsters.
One more point |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 24 Jan 22 9.40am | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Stirlingsays
It's not just about people's ability to pay. No one should be compelled to fund the BBC when they don't support it regardless of method. Like you say reform should be front and centre....root and branch in my view. Edited by Stirlingsays (23 Jan 2022 10.03am) The BBC, alongside the NHS, is the shining light on the hill of Britishness in the modern world. It's what sets us apart, and what is admired by others. Those who fail to recognise that, be proud of them and prepared to support them, don't understand they are our most valuable assets. Throwing either away because they don't suit individual lifestyles, or politics, would be a grave folly and short-sighted in the extreme. Everything evolves. TV no less than anything else. The BBC itself is evolving fast. If something better than the licence can be found, no worries. What is important is that it's core mission and status remains untouched, that it is free of government, or commercial, influence and that we all, barring no-one, pay our share, whether we choose to watch, or not. We are British. It is the British Broadcasting Corporation. We pay for it. The BBC is NOT just another broadcaster. It's the BBC. What it does matters to all of us, whether we approve of it, or not.
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 24 Jan 22 9.46am | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Teddy Eagle
Are ITV or Channel 4 less independent than the BBC? ITV certainly is, as it depends on commercial interests. Channel 4 less so as it is publicly owned but also derives its revenue from commercial interests, so potentially less than the BBC.
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 24 Jan 22 9.51am | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Badger11
Doctor Who slumps to new low. According to the media the New Year episode only brought in 3.4m viewers for the BBC's flag ship show in a prime time slot. There has been plenty of media speculation as to who will replace Jodie with various candidates suggested from the alphabet soup. Apparently they are now considering putting the show on hiatus for a few years which i think would be the sensible call. The ratings have plummeted since David Tennant the show should have been canned after Matt Smith but for some reason the BBC hates to cancel shows and sees it as some kind of betrayal. Appointing a women was a desperate attempt at reviving the rating and it did for a few episodes before the decline continued. It is an expensive show to make so it has to have good ratings if they have any sense they will rest it. Personally after a gap I would re-launch it from the start with an origins story about the Doctor on Galifry and how he came to start his adventures. I would also ditch the rainbow alliance it's a kids show they just want monsters. Strange, isn't it? I don't watch Dr Who and never have. The little bits I have stumbled over I find ridiculous. This for me is not something the BBC ought to be doing at all. It's not it's mandate. So far as I can tell it's just expensive escapism which could be left to those chasing ratings and revenue.
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Pembroke Bristol 24 Jan 22 10.07am | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
Everything evolves. TV no less than anything else. The BBC itself is evolving fast. If something better than the licence can be found, no worries. What is important is that it's core mission and status remains untouched, that it is free of government, or commercial, influence and that we all, barring no-one, pay our share, whether we choose to watch, or not. We are British. It is the British Broadcasting Corporation. We pay for it. The BBC is NOT just another broadcaster. It's the BBC. What it does matters to all of us, whether we approve of it, or not.
Evolution is also allowing people choice. An easier choice of not paying for something they do not use, do not want and logically object to paying for.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
BlueJay UK 24 Jan 22 10.11am | |
---|---|
In some respects the BBC offer a good service, though like any organisation getting money thrown it is, it becomes bloated and drifts from its primary purpose. I'd be all for a more slimmed down BBC with a cheaper fee, but can't see that happening. How people watch TV of changing dramatically and as a service funded by the public it's on borrowed time in my view. I very much doubt we'll actually save any money though. If the license fee disappears expect Netflix, Amazon Prime and co to hike their prices shortly after.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Teddy Eagle 24 Jan 22 10.15am | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Badger11
Doctor Who slumps to new low. According to the media the New Year episode only brought in 3.4m viewers for the BBC's flag ship show in a prime time slot. There has been plenty of media speculation as to who will replace Jodie with various candidates suggested from the alphabet soup. Apparently they are now considering putting the show on hiatus for a few years which i think would be the sensible call. The ratings have plummeted since David Tennant the show should have been canned after Matt Smith but for some reason the BBC hates to cancel shows and sees it as some kind of betrayal. Appointing a women was a desperate attempt at reviving the rating and it did for a few episodes before the decline continued. It is an expensive show to make so it has to have good ratings if they have any sense they will rest it. Personally after a gap I would re-launch it from the start with an origins story about the Doctor on Galifry and how he came to start his adventures. I would also ditch the rainbow alliance it's a kids show they just want monsters. There is a rumour that David Tennant will be returning to replace Jodie Whittaker.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Badger11 Beckenham 24 Jan 22 10.25am | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
The BBC, alongside the NHS, is the shining light on the hill of Britishness in the modern world. It's what sets us apart, and what is admired by others. Those who fail to recognise that, be proud of them and prepared to support them, don't understand they are our most valuable assets. Throwing either away because they don't suit individual lifestyles, or politics, would be a grave folly and short-sighted in the extreme. Everything evolves. TV no less than anything else. The BBC itself is evolving fast. If something better than the licence can be found, no worries. What is important is that it's core mission and status remains untouched, that it is free of government, or commercial, influence and that we all, barring no-one, pay our share, whether we choose to watch, or not. We are British. It is the British Broadcasting Corporation. We pay for it. The BBC is NOT just another broadcaster. It's the BBC. What it does matters to all of us, whether we approve of it, or not. Yeah it's so good you have to force people to pay for it with the threat of a criminal record if they don't. Admired by who? The luvvies in other countries certainly as the BBC is a money pit for them of course they would like their own version. The World service seems to be admired but that is paid for by the government not he licence fee.
One more point |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Badger11 Beckenham 24 Jan 22 10.27am | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Teddy Eagle
There is a rumour that David Tennant will be returning to replace Jodie Whittaker. If he does come back I think that says a lot about his current career, it's a backward step and I doubt even he can rescue it.
One more point |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
The Dolphin 24 Jan 22 10.42am | |
---|---|
Wisbech - we all want the BBC to be that shining light - but sadly you cannot polish a turd!
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Hrolf The Ganger 24 Jan 22 12.17pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Badger11
Doctor Who slumps to new low. According to the media the New Year episode only brought in 3.4m viewers for the BBC's flag ship show in a prime time slot. There has been plenty of media speculation as to who will replace Jodie with various candidates suggested from the alphabet soup. Apparently they are now considering putting the show on hiatus for a few years which i think would be the sensible call. The ratings have plummeted since David Tennant the show should have been canned after Matt Smith but for some reason the BBC hates to cancel shows and sees it as some kind of betrayal. Appointing a women was a desperate attempt at reviving the rating and it did for a few episodes before the decline continued. It is an expensive show to make so it has to have good ratings if they have any sense they will rest it. Personally after a gap I would re-launch it from the start with an origins story about the Doctor on Galifry and how he came to start his adventures. I would also ditch the rainbow alliance it's a kids show they just want monsters. There is a simple reason why it is failing. It has become a vehicle for woke, LGBTQ, feminist propaganda. The stories are almost a side issue. When you make shows that obsess about minorities, why would you expect the majority to watch? It is simply dumb. The quality of the stories gave it no chance.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Hrolf The Ganger 24 Jan 22 12.27pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
Strange, isn't it? I don't watch Dr Who and never have. The little bits I have stumbled over I find ridiculous. This for me is not something the BBC ought to be doing at all. It's not it's mandate. So far as I can tell it's just expensive escapism which could be left to those chasing ratings and revenue. A bit like moving to Cornwall. Escapism is a large part of Television. In fact, it is one of the things that improves the quality of people's lives, especially when most people have dull, uninspiring ones. We all pay for programs on all channels through advertising, so the BBC doing escapism is no different. The BBC needs to exercise its imagination on something different because it's normally focussed on avoiding the truth.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Registration is now on our new message board
To login with your existing username you will need to convert your account over to the new message board.
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2024 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.