Radio WM

[pauliewalnuts]

It isn't about a Birmingham v Manchester choice, it is about the fact that the BBC spends a minuscule amount of licence fee raised in the midlands in the region, far less as a proportion than anywhere else, not just Manchester.

That means Glasgow, Bristol, Cardiff and all the other places they have substantial operations, and compared not just to Brum but to the midlands as a whole.

That is why tthis region effectively subsidises the media industry elsewhere in the country.

[Stu]

And gets ignored at the same time.

I bought this up on the Graun once btl on a BBC article. I was told, by other posters, that it wasn't the BBC's remit to provide jobs. Think of that.

[E I Adio]

The argument will cease to be relevant when the BBC is privatised.

I see today that they're already planning to start with Channel 4.

[brian green]

My other son is doing his best to recycle BBC money. I think he intends to fly in from Cannes to the Stoke game.

[ciggiesnbeer]

Radio WM and the BBC's in general terrible Football coverage has gone some way to reducing my affection for the organization. Which is a shame because it still is in most areas a truly world class broadcaster, its just a shame that they have thrown away any sense of standards when it comes to football.

[robbo1874]

I've said this before, villa fans should just boycott the local media. Don't listen to or ring in to their shitty phone-ins. Don't buy the rag or go on the crappy mail website.

If you feel that strongly about the quality or bias of either's Villa coverage then write a strongly worded letter of complaint and make a pain in the arse of yourself. I haven't checked but pretty sure the bbc if not the mail would have some kind of provision in their charter for having to respond to complaints, even if it's just the standard, 'we've considered your submission and we disagree' bollocks.

If every Villa fan did this, then they'd soon get their shit together... Maybe.

[brian green]

I agree with you Robbo, especially the part about turning your back on them. That is the only foolproof way of making them behave with fairness and objectivity. On the topic of letters of complaint, over many years of letter writing to the BBC on matters of balance and their failure to uphold standards of broadcasting impartiality, any replies I have every received effectively say the same thing - we are the BBC, we do as we see fit.  You get the same reply whether you have written about Jimmy Savile, the royal family on It's A Knockout or Jimmy Young brown nosing Margaret Thatcher. These days I cut to the chase and write to my MP about what comes out of my radio and TV. I find that way the broadcasters take at least some notice.

[phantom limb]

I haven't clicked on a Birmingham Mail link since halfway through preseason, and haven't listened to WM at all. It's not that either make me particularly angry, it's just boring hearing/reading the same snidey digs all of the time. If they became more even-handed then I'd maybe go back, but with all the other news sources I find I don't actually need either of them.

[oldhill_avfc]

So there's nothing wrong with the tax-payers of the Midlands subsidising Manchester, with the added bonus of appearing a cultural wasteland compared to the veritable oasis we are actually paying for, even though we are culturally, socially, economically and artistically about the same?

It's supposed to be the British Broadcasting Corporation, and should be even-handed in every way to all parts of Britain. In fact, as proven by the first article, it is fairly even-handed to every region - except London where there is an overspend, and Birmingham where there is a huge underspend. If that was Manchester or anywhere else I wouldn't consider that fair enough either BTW.

The article is muddled.  It mixes up money spent in a region, e.g. on production costs (including those for everyone), with money spent on programmes either about or for the people of a given area.

Therefore the people of Birmingham aren't subsidising Manchester, they are paying their share of the costs of producing programmes that happen to be made in Manchester, but are general in nature and don't have a regional focus.

The article is not muddled, you're over-complicating it. Whether the programmes are general or local interest, our money is being taken from our region to subsidise another, economically similar, region, to make TV that could be made just as easily and well here, as it has been in the past. We may consume the 'general' programmes, but we derive no economic benefit from them in terms of jobs, skills or investment.

In addition, production of a general nature bleeds into the cultural argument too. 6 Music is supposed to be a general music station, but doubles as a non-stop advert for Manchester.

Yeah, I get the point you're making, but organisations have to focus their operations in a finite number of locations - and as I pointed out earlier Manchester won the argument (by fair means or foul).  I guess, I just don't see the argument that there should be a correlation between where the fees are raised and where the programmes are made.

In much the same way, when I pay a prescription fee I don't expect the medicines to come from a factory round the corner.   

In terms of the consumer, everyone pays the same licence fee and gets a broadly similar level of service (a mixture of national and regional output).  Everyone on that basis is treated fairly.   In addition, a major part of the BBC's remit is in programme commisioning meaning that where the licence payer's money ends up in geographic terms is far from clear.

I also have to say, that I find argument that the BBC ought to make more programmes in Birmingham on a thread slating one of the stations it actually runs highly ironinc!

[AV82EC]

But you can't compare cultural output to buying medicine, chalk and cheese in my view. If the BBC is part of the sum of the cultural output of our nation then apart from the Archers and Doctors ignoring 12 million mercians, midlanders and assorted others is surely folly?

[aj2k77]

If Midlanders are forking out nearly a billion pound in to the BBC then I'd expect some sort of meaningful investment back in to the area. It's not just about getting some cultural representation on the BBC I want something financial back as well. Whilst all these programs etc are being made in Manchester you can bet your bottom dollar that a lot of licence fee money is being spent in the surrounding areas to support what is being made.

We are getting fuck all from the BBC, I don't even bother buying a licence anymore.

[oldhill_avfc]

But you can't compare cultural output to buying medicine, chalk and cheese in my view. If the BBC is part of the sum of the cultural output of our nation then apart from the Archers and Doctors ignoring 12 million mercians, midlanders and assorted others is surely folly?

Ah!, but that's a different argument and one which I agree with and alluded to when I mentioned the commissioning role.  All of the regions and cultures of this country should be reflected in the programmes and who they are aimed at. 

[oldhill_avfc]

If Midlanders are forking out nearly a billion pound in to the BBC then I'd expect some sort of meaningful investment back in to the area. It's not just about getting some cultural representation on the BBC I want something financial back as well. Whilst all these programs etc are being made in Manchester you can bet your bottom dollar that a lot of licence fee money is being spent in the surrounding areas to support what is being made.

We are getting fuck all from the BBC, I don't even bother buying a licence anymore.

News? World Service? Radio? Fuck all - really?

If you access the BBC you should pay the licence - simple. 

[brian green]

I was hinting at the spread of BBC money widely when I flippantly commented about my son returning from Cannes. In the same way that Damon "works out of Manchester" but appears on locations anywhere between Watford and Wick, his brother "works out of that London" but could be anywhere. He once made the hit "Cake Wars" programmes sitting with us up the Holte with his minions slaving away at the NEC.   From my observations television headquarters are going the same way as banks. They are all headed for big sheds on business parks around Milton Keynes.

[aj2k77]

If Midlanders are forking out nearly a billion pound in to the BBC then I'd expect some sort of meaningful investment back in to the area. It's not just about getting some cultural representation on the BBC I want something financial back as well. Whilst all these programs etc are being made in Manchester you can bet your bottom dollar that a lot of licence fee money is being spent in the surrounding areas to support what is being made.

We are getting fuck all from the BBC, I don't even bother buying a licence anymore.

News? World Service? Radio? Fuck all - really?

If you access the BBC you should pay the licence - simple. 

News, shit, not interested in hearing who's died, been raped or scare stories all the time. Radio, nope, listen to podcasts. The only BBC ''product'' I've accessed for years is the sport on the internet and the odd catch up program.