National News A Question of Sport

tonyw

Well-known member
Joined
6 Dec 2017
Messages
1,661
The argument in favour of the BBC used to be that it was the only way to get niche programming made. If you relied on commercial TV stations, you would just end up with lowest common denominator TV - wall-to-wall Love Island and I'm a Celebrity, and whatever else can draw in the most viewers and therefore advertisers.

But Netflix and the other streaming services have killed that argument. Because they've wanted to diversify content to grab the broadest range of subscribers, we've entered into a real golden age for documentary filmmakers and other niche content. There has never been so much varied and intelligent TV being made. The BBC no longer provides content that you can't find elsewhere other than, probably, the local news.

So what's the justification for forcing everyone to pay that license fee? Why not let people choose streaming/commercial TV packages that fit what they want to watch?
And if the government needs to spend a little money to keep local radio going, that's fine - but it would be minuscule compared to what they currently spend on the Beeb.



p.s. I did used to love Question of Sport, though, back in the day.
Although in my mind, it's always David Coleman in the main chair, Bill Beaumont on one side, and Emlyn Hughes or Ian Botham on the other.......
 

Leysboy

Well-known member
Joined
6 Dec 2017
Messages
2,064
Yeah I always remember it for David Coleman. Emlyn Hughes and Bill Beaumont/Botham.

I think (World In Action) followed this show. God I’m old. In fact it couldnt of done, QOS was BBC. WIA was on ITV, and a very good show.

Old tv shows I would love to see again.

15/1
Krypton Factor
World In Action
QED
You Bet
 
Last edited:

holdsteady

Well-known member
Joined
8 Dec 2017
Messages
2,334
The argument in favour of the BBC used to be that it was the only way to get niche programming made. If you relied on commercial TV stations, you would just end up with lowest common denominator TV - wall-to-wall Love Island and I'm a Celebrity, and whatever else can draw in the most viewers and therefore advertisers.

But Netflix and the other streaming services have killed that argument. Because they've wanted to diversify content to grab the broadest range of subscribers, we've entered into a real golden age for documentary filmmakers and other niche content. There has never been so much varied and intelligent TV being made. The BBC no longer provides content that you can't find elsewhere other than, probably, the local news.

So what's the justification for forcing everyone to pay that license fee? Why not let people choose streaming/commercial TV packages that fit what they want to watch?
And if the government needs to spend a little money to keep local radio going, that's fine - but it would be minuscule compared to what they currently spend on the Beeb.



p.s. I did used to love Question of Sport, though, back in the day.
Although in my mind, it's always David Coleman in the main chair, Bill Beaumont on one side, and Emlyn Hughes or Ian Botham on the other.......

It was all in the Pringle jumpers back then, once they went it was downhill. It actually got out golfing jumpered by ITVs attempt at competing with it, saint and greavsies sporting triangles, think I played board games of both shows.

The new question of sport on BBC will be a woke nightmare watched by only the desperate who can’t find their tv remote, a far cry from the days of Emlyn Hughes in a Lyle and Scott jumper gushing over Princess Anne.
 

tonyw

Well-known member
Joined
6 Dec 2017
Messages
1,661
It was all in the Pringle jumpers back then, once they went it was downhill. It actually got out golfing jumpered by ITVs attempt at competing with it, saint and greavsies sporting triangles, think I played board games of both shows.

The QoS board game was a Christmas staple in our household when I was a kid! Wasn't Christmas unless we were bickering about sporting trivia!

Old tv shows I would love to see again.

Krypton Factor

Man, I had completely forgotten about the Krypton Factor. Used to love that programme!

Also, as a child, loved the Crystal Maze. Although mostly when Richard O'Brien was doing it. It started going downhill when Ed Tudor-Pole took over. I'll forgive him that for 'Swords of 1000 Men' mind.......
 

SteMerritt

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
8 Dec 2017
Messages
4,414
The QoS board game was a Christmas staple in our household when I was a kid! Wasn't Christmas unless we were bickering about sporting trivia!
We had that, but found the 'Sporting Triangles' boardgame from the ITV show (remember that?) to be superior as a game. We used to keep the game behind the bar in the old Manor supporters club and play from 12:30 until kick off before every home game for quite a while, a group of about 15 of us.
 

werthersoriginal

Well-known member
Joined
9 Dec 2017
Messages
2,942
I don’t do any of that, like most people now. Nearly all of that will be replaced by commercial tv etc when the BBC is gone. It’s impossible to support a flat rate tax for something very few people use anymore.
Most people use the BBC in some way. Without it we’d be even more at the mercy of the privileged elite and fake news.
 

Marked Ox

Well-known member
Joined
6 Dec 2017
Messages
16,694
The argument in favour of the BBC used to be that it was the only way to get niche programming made. If you relied on commercial TV stations, you would just end up with lowest common denominator TV - wall-to-wall Love Island and I'm a Celebrity, and whatever else can draw in the most viewers and therefore advertisers.

But Netflix and the other streaming services have killed that argument. Because they've wanted to diversify content to grab the broadest range of subscribers, we've entered into a real golden age for documentary filmmakers and other niche content. There has never been so much varied and intelligent TV being made. The BBC no longer provides content that you can't find elsewhere other than, probably, the local news.

So what's the justification for forcing everyone to pay that license fee? Why not let people choose streaming/commercial TV packages that fit what they want to watch?
And if the government needs to spend a little money to keep local radio going, that's fine - but it would be minuscule compared to what they currently spend on the Beeb.



p.s. I did used to love Question of Sport, though, back in the day.
Although in my mind, it's always David Coleman in the main chair, Bill Beaumont on one side, and Emlyn Hughes or Ian Botham on the other.......

I'd argue the niche programming argument is still there. Take History/Archaeology programmes, the History Channel/National Geographic channels tend to be Americas orientated with some other stuff. If it is a British/European focused programme then it is likely about Royalty, Stonehenge or the Romans.

The BBC programmes cover far more of our history and other European history. Just last week, a programme started following the digs coming from the HS2 development. The annual series, Digging for Britain, about the Archaeological digs going on across Britain (and Europe very occasionally). I can't see the likes of Netflix etc doing this.

And where History, Smithsonian or Nat Geo channels show something different, it tends to be an old BBC programme.

Likewise in terms of art/culture with programmes on UK folk culture etc. I'm sure the likes of Antiques Roadshow would get picked up by ITV/Channel 4 but not somebody visiting the small local festivals such as the football game between villages/Guy Fawkes night in Lewes etc or programmes on Morris Dancing etc.
 

MarkG

Well-known member
Joined
11 Dec 2017
Messages
1,388
The argument in favour of the BBC used to be that it was the only way to get niche programming made. If you relied on commercial TV stations, you would just end up with lowest common denominator TV - wall-to-wall Love Island and I'm a Celebrity, and whatever else can draw in the most viewers and therefore advertisers.

But Netflix and the other streaming services have killed that argument. Because they've wanted to diversify content to grab the broadest range of subscribers, we've entered into a real golden age for documentary filmmakers and other niche content. There has never been so much varied and intelligent TV being made. The BBC no longer provides content that you can't find elsewhere other than, probably, the local news.

So what's the justification for forcing everyone to pay that license fee? Why not let people choose streaming/commercial TV packages that fit what they want to watch?
And if the government needs to spend a little money to keep local radio going, that's fine - but it would be minuscule compared to what they currently spend on the Beeb.



p.s. I did used to love Question of Sport, though, back in the day.
Although in my mind, it's always David Coleman in the main chair, Bill Beaumont on one side, and Emlyn Hughes or Ian Botham on the other.......
"A golden age for documentaries", maybe if you like watching shows about serial killers, nazis, and fishing.

Netflix will just cancel a series if it doesn't get the viewers, so the idea it will support niche shows that don't get the viewers doesn't ring true.

The BBC provides a lot of programming, news and other services that may not be something that I watch, read or listen to, but may be of interest to other people. Mrs Brown's Boys for instance. Or Radio 3.

I haven't watched QOS for decades, it's seems like forced gurning laughter. A bit like those endless "corpsing" clips of quiz show hosts or Philip Schofield and Holly Willoughby.
 

mooro

Well-known member
Joined
13 Dec 2017
Messages
1,887
Time was I would have added Question Time to the list of must-watch BBC programmes, but that has been less the case in recent years, and certainly since Fiona Bruce has taken over, as I think her style does not suit the role of Chairing a Debate..

Anyway, I tuned in last night, as it was the first of the new season, and saw a quite remarkable five minutes which only served to highlight so much that is wrong with politicians today...
Nadhim Zahawi displayed a perfect example of a government minister who had clearly read his brief, remembered all his numbers and mastered the technique of stringing buzz-phrases together interweaving these numbers with plans and aims and targets and praise, yet actually saying nothing and giving a very good impression of actually having understood absolutely none of it.
Then following a clumsy contribution from Sunetra Gupta, an Oxford Epidemiologist, in which she realised she had worded something badly and attempted to correct herself, it was the turn of shadow health secretary Jonathan Ashworth, who proceded to mock her, make sensationalist claims about god knows what in an increasingly high-pitched squeal, and then, when challenged by another guest as to why he thought he knew better than the experts, had a proper tantrum worthy of the three year old, complete with hand-flapping.

The first was a depressing picture of what government is all about nowadays - all bluster, waffle and no substance - while the second was frankly embarrassing performance, typifying the finger-pointing, sensationalistic, substance-free dramatics that opposition has become. And sadly, none of it came as a surprise.
 

Sarge

God like member
Joined
6 Dec 2017
Messages
30,645
Time was I would have added Question Time to the list of must-watch BBC programmes, but that has been less the case in recent years, and certainly since Fiona Bruce has taken over, as I think her style does not suit the role of Chairing a Debate..

Anyway, I tuned in last night, as it was the first of the new season, and saw a quite remarkable five minutes which only served to highlight so much that is wrong with politicians today...
Nadhim Zahawi displayed a perfect example of a government minister who had clearly read his brief, remembered all his numbers and mastered the technique of stringing buzz-phrases together interweaving these numbers with plans and aims and targets and praise, yet actually saying nothing and giving a very good impression of actually having understood absolutely none of it.
Then following a clumsy contribution from Sunetra Gupta, an Oxford Epidemiologist, in which she realised she had worded something badly and attempted to correct herself, it was the turn of shadow health secretary Jonathan Ashworth, who proceded to mock her, make sensationalist claims about god knows what in an increasingly high-pitched squeal, and then, when challenged by another guest as to why he thought he knew better than the experts, had a proper tantrum worthy of the three year old, complete with hand-flapping.

The first was a depressing picture of what government is all about nowadays - all bluster, waffle and no substance - while the second was frankly embarrassing performance, typifying the finger-pointing, sensationalistic, substance-free dramatics that opposition has become. And sadly, none of it came as a surprise.
agree re QT ... its nothing like it once was , sadly
 

pooshooter

Well-known member
Joined
6 Dec 2017
Messages
2,153
I'm sorry but I don't watch it. I like watching live sport not questions about old sport. Sky for me...
 

Sarge

God like member
Joined
6 Dec 2017
Messages
30,645
Unfortunately, that's not really the fault of the programme so much as the reduction in quality of the guests (especially the politicians).
very good point ... though I would add that Fiona Bruce isnt 'respected' much in her capacity of chairing QT - in the main by them politicians you mention
 

Leysboy

Well-known member
Joined
6 Dec 2017
Messages
2,064
Fiona Bruce always interrupts the brexiteers, but the remoaners can have all they air time they want.
 

mooro

Well-known member
Joined
13 Dec 2017
Messages
1,887
Fiona Bruce always interrupts the brexiteers, but the remoaners can have all they air time they want.
I don't think she is that selective, I think she just does it whenever she wants to hear the sound of her own voice
 

Essexyellows

Well-known member
Joined
7 Dec 2017
Messages
6,000
Loads of programmes need a re-run..................
Love thy Neighbour
On The Buses
Till Death us do part
Mind your Language
Curry & Chips (Spike Milligan)
It Ain`t Half Hot Mum

Some round here would drown in the froth created.............. ? ? ?
 

ZeroTheHero

Well-known member
Joined
7 Dec 2017
Messages
5,032
Loads of programmes need a re-run..................
Love thy Neighbour
On The Buses
Till Death us do part
Mind your Language
Curry & Chips (Spike Milligan)
It Ain`t Half Hot Mum

Some round here would drown in the froth created.............. ? ? ?
Sadly I suspect some would actively seek to subscribe to a channel that showed all that rubbish.

(PS you forgot 'The Black & White Minstrel Show' and 'The KKK Happy Hour' ;) )
 

Banbury2018

Active member
Joined
1 Jan 2018
Messages
738
Sadly I suspect some would actively seek to subscribe to a channel that showed all that rubbish.

(PS you forgot 'The Black & White Minstrel Show' and 'The KKK Happy Hour' ;) )
One things for sure though the BBC’s flagship comedy these days Mrs Browns boys is utter s**t. The second series of Extras was like a parody in advance of what was to come but was funny unlike Mrs Browns boys. Even Gavin and Stacey was considered offensive by some at Christmas which nobody complained about 10 years ago.
 

Sarge

God like member
Joined
6 Dec 2017
Messages
30,645
One things for sure though the BBC’s flagship comedy these days Mrs Browns boys is utter s**t. The second series of Extras was like a parody in advance of what was to come but was funny unlike Mrs Browns boys. Even Gavin and Stacey was considered offensive by some at Christmas which nobody complained about 10 years ago.
agree 100% re Mrs Browns boys .... its not funny
 
  • Like
Reactions: ljs
Top Bottom