3.6.08

Mutually assured gravy

The BBC has one law for the rich, one for the poor

Hard to comprehend.

Whilst undoubtedly talented (mostly), there are plenty more where they came from, and no one is, or should be, indispensable.

The BBC is unique, and that works in a variety of ways. One is giving all sorts of folk the opportunity to get in front of a national audience, which can launch big-money careers opening fetes, providing VOs, signing books, etc. Less profile... less moolah.

Hence a slot on the BBC should be seen for the opportunity and privilege it is.

Along with the lazy, useless, senior management on equally rewarding packages, who defend their atrocious negotiating abilities with their mates on such spurious grounds.

If they were not part of yet another option-free, voter-unaccountable (telling that one who might see fit to intervene, our PM, is protected from paying the licence fee... by us) drain on the taxpayer, along with most other index-salaried, golden pensioned public bodies such as HMG's civil service and countless quangos, one suspects they'd soon find out what their true value in the open market was.

Guardian - BBC talent report: are the stars worth it?

Guardian - Woss it all cost?

As there are no advertisers, the only purpose I can see for ratings to register at the Beeb is as a measure of how the top guys are doing to help with their salaries. Not, surely, what the licence fee is/was intended for.

Whilst undoubtedly talented (mostly), there are plenty more 'stars' where the current crop came from, and no one is, or should be, indispensable.

The BBC is unique, and that works in a variety of ways. One is giving all sorts of folk the opportunity to get in front of a national audience, which can launch big-money careers opening fetes, providing VOs, signing books, etc. Less profile... less moolah.

Hence a slot on the BBC should be seen for the opportunity and privilege it is.

Not a means for an unaccountable cultural elite to enrich themselves at the public trough.

Telegraph - The BBC can never admit it's wrong

No comments: