From: kevinh@hslrswi.hasler.ascom.ch (kevinh)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv.uk
Subject: Re: BBC Select - what a total rip-off !!!!!!
Date: 16 Apr 92 07:08:21 GMT
Reply-To: kevinh@hslrswi.hasler.ascom.ch
Organization: Ascom Hasler AG
Originator: kevinh@nath


In article <1992Apr14.222739.4794@cc.uow.edu.au>, jlloyd@cc.uow.edu.au (Jonathan Lloyd) writes:
|> kevinh@hslrswi.hasler.ascom.ch (kevinh) writes:
|> 
|> 
|> >In article <1992Apr13.110212.1413@and.csc.liv.ac.uk>, rkl@and.csc.liv.ac.uk writes:
|> >|> I recorded a one-minute promo for "BBC Select" on Friday (just before Thunder-
|> >|> birds on BBC 2) and I had to play it back several times - I couldn't believe
|> >|> it !!!! Here's the synopsis:
|> >|> 
|> >|> The BBC currently broadcasts between 6.00am and about 1.00am (earlier on
|> >|> weekdays) the next day - leaving several hours inbetween where the station
|> >|> is off the air. From what I can tell (though the promo wasn't explicit about
|> >|> this), the BBC plans to use this spare time to broadcast SCRAMBLED programmes !
|> >|> They want people to buy a decoder (the size of a VHS VCR - huge in other words,
|> >|> unless it was a prototype they'd rigged up) and subscribe on a regular basis
|> >|> to the service.
|> >|> 
|> >|> I FIND THIS UTTERLY OUTRAGEOUS ! We Brits pay a licence fee to ENTIRELY fund
|> >|> the BBC (it has no ads) and why should we be expected to pay even more to watch
|> >|> programmes on the BBC ? Anyone else care to comment ?
|> 
|> >Sounds reasonble to me! Depends on what programmes they're intending to put
|> >out on this service - many people are quite happy subscribing to BSkyB for
|> >the additional services they provide. Do you really think that the Beeb's
|> >licence fee would cover the cost of the film rights for all these films
|> >etc.? Besides, it's not compulsory is it :-)
|> 
|> >kevinh@hasler.ascom.ch
|> 
|> British viewers are used to getting most of their TV for "free".

Free? :-) I pay for ITV every time I buy something in the shops! and the,
of course, there's the TV licence.

|> People are'nt too happy about much of the sport etc going onto subscription
|> only services. The Cricket world cup is good example.

True, my father thought he was dead lucky when cable vision was offered in
his local area. he might have had to buy a dish else :-).

|> On the other hand both BBC and ITV show mostly old movies (>5years)
|> and people use their VCRs heaps.

Apparently video hire use has gone down dramatically since BSkyB become so popular.
I didn't realise how much until I went into the local video shop which was almost 
empty when about a year or so before it was absolutely packed!

|> Most people do not have BSkyB even though it looks quite cheap compared to
|> comparable services elsewhere.

A surprisingly large amount of people so, either by buying a dish or having
a local cable network. (> 1in 5 I seem to remember).

|> Here in Aussie the TV screens quite recent movies on 3 of the 5 channels
|> 4 nights out of 7, (i.e. about 12-15 late movies a week!). And we don't have 
|> to pay a licence fee even.
|> The only thing is that these movies are interrupted by too many ads.

The two movie channels on BSkyB have no adverts, i'm quite happy to pay
17 quid a month for that (and the films of course).

|> The trouble is it is the "thin end of the wedge". First we pay extra for 
|> sports, then movies, then news then all we willbe left with is B movies and
|> crappy soaps.

Yes, i'd give up tv if I only had Sky1 or Super(!) channel. Most tv here
in Switzerland comes from Italy/France/Germany/Austria and basically
it's a load of crap - hope the BBC never becomes like these commercial 
stations!!

By the way, even though ITV and C4 are commercial, their
programs, in general, are so superior to european commercial stations
that I can't believe the Beeb could ever sink to the standards shown
by BSkyB(Sky One, Comedy Channel,) or european tv. 

But I should say that Sky news is very good, as are the movie channels 
and the sport channels. MTV is also quite good. These are all services 
that the BBC could not afford to provide given the current level of
the TV licence. 

I would much prefer that the BBC was able to run a service, such as Select,
that enables them to keep up with BSkyB and also to keep the normal B1, B2
running, rather than lose money and have to reduce the quality of their
normal offerings. 


|> In the end the result will be socially devisive excluding
|> those with low incomes from todays most powerful media.

Well, if you believe this, then you should have a drive around areas
in the UK that perhaps you would class as lower income, many of them
seem to look like a road near where my parents live that's nicknamed 
"Satellite Row"!

kevinh@hasler.ascom.ch