As a relatively new Netflix subscriber I have to say its offering is hardly overwhelming. The Crown, Queens Gambit, we enjoyed The Dig too, but beyond that... it's all a bit meh really. Certainly not enough to fill a schedule.
The BBC has an enormous back-catalogue (quite a few of Netflix's offerings are ex-BBC). I am not sure of the licensing issues in offering that back-catalogue but I hope it is not hampered by 'unfair competition' issues foisted on it by private media interests.
The BBC has been a truly massive cultural influence around the world on behalf of the UK; it would be senseless for us now to allow it to be trashed on ideological grounds.
The problem with the BBC is they seem unable / unwilling to adapt and seem lost about what they should be doing.
We have done the whole bit about how theu haven't adapted to modern tv series structures. But they also seem lost about how to use YouTube. The seem to think uploading the odd clip will do, but their upload get very few views compared to loads of total randoms who do news and current affairs round ups.
Victoria Derbyshire used to make a huge thing about despite hardly anybody watching her show live, some of her clips got lots of retweets...but that doesn't generate any revenue and it is the same niche group of twatterati. As we saw with all the nonsense about how many people viewed a Boris clip it means nothing.
The youth don't watch them as their offerings aren't seen as cool.
And we are seeing it already, all the noises from the BBC are defensive don't toucb the licence fee, no reformz we are better than Netflix.
I don't disagree with a lot of that. One issue the BCC has is the expectation on them is vastly different to that on Netflix. How many hours of new TV does Netflix produce per week? Sure they have had some good series in recent months but so have the BBC.
The government has repeatedly hampered the BBC for 'competition' reasons when it should instead have been promoting and supporting the BBC as a global influencer.
Very short-sighted.
Oh do fuck off what the bbc shows is mainly repeats of things made years ago
Maybe but I'd still like to see the hours of new material the main players produce each month.
Well name the new stuff the bbc has produced thats exclusive to the bbc and they havent just bought of a company whereas for example as I use amazon I have had over the last few years...the expanse 5 series another to go...vikings 6 series...black sails 3 series....preacher.....now on series 4.....amercian gods now on series 3....good omens....greenland...man in the high castle...I could name more but will stop there.
What have the bbc done? Downton abbey? More eastenders? The great british bakeoff?
The new Adam Curtis is very thought provoking. Perhaps needed tighter editing, but fascinating.
Kermodes Secrets of Cinema too.
Shrugs stuff that interests you no doubt, my point was a lot of bbc output though doesnt. When bbc output interests me I buy it on prime. I think over the last 5 years I have spent maybe 60£ on it. Which was the red dwarf series 1 to 6....apart from that they havent done a thing I want to pay for. In the same time I would have had to pay 750£ on licences....and not red dwarf series I bought were made well before I quit the license
Yes, though that can land you in a self reflecting bubble. One of the great things about Radio and TV is that you get exposed to new things that you wouldn't have encountered otherwise. That happenstance can expand horizons.
Much like going to a festival to see a band, and encountering some great new bands while waiting.
As a relatively new Netflix subscriber I have to say its offering is hardly overwhelming. The Crown, Queens Gambit, we enjoyed The Dig too, but beyond that... it's all a bit meh really. Certainly not enough to fill a schedule.
The BBC has an enormous back-catalogue (quite a few of Netflix's offerings are ex-BBC). I am not sure of the licensing issues in offering that back-catalogue but I hope it is not hampered by 'unfair competition' issues foisted on it by private media interests.
The BBC has been a truly massive cultural influence around the world on behalf of the UK; it would be senseless for us now to allow it to be trashed on ideological grounds.
The problem with the BBC is they seem unable / unwilling to adapt and seem lost about what they should be doing.
We have done the whole bit about how theu haven't adapted to modern tv series structures. But they also seem lost about how to use YouTube. The seem to think uploading the odd clip will do, but their upload get very few views compared to loads of total randoms who do news and current affairs round ups.
Victoria Derbyshire used to make a huge thing about despite hardly anybody watching her show live, some of her clips got lots of retweets...but that doesn't generate any revenue and it is the same niche group of twatterati. As we saw with all the nonsense about how many people viewed a Boris clip it means nothing.
The youth don't watch them as their offerings aren't seen as cool.
And we are seeing it already, all the noises from the BBC are defensive don't toucb the licence fee, no reformz we are better than Netflix.
I don't disagree with a lot of that. One issue the BCC has is the expectation on them is vastly different to that on Netflix. How many hours of new TV does Netflix produce per week? Sure they have had some good series in recent months but so have the BBC.
The government has repeatedly hampered the BBC for 'competition' reasons when it should instead have been promoting and supporting the BBC as a global influencer.
Very short-sighted.
The one way the BBC might survive is if it became a rare outpost of anti-Wokery. Instead, it is piling on the bandwagon, spending tens of millions recruiting new BAME staff who are ALREADY over-represented on the screen, compared to the population at large.
BBC drama suffers from the same left-liberal PC bias, it is unwatchably Woke.
I stopped paying for this bien pensant pap several months ago. Yet, it saddens me as a Brit. The BBC is a great British institution - but so were rum, sodomy and the lash, in the Navy, and they have gone the way of all flesh. So will the Corp, unless it transforms, super quick
It's the BBC website that's the worst.
Check out the news homepage any day of the week. Pick one at random. And count the Wokey stories - lots of Twitter amplified bollocks about trans, BLM, gender fluidity, history shaming etc etc.
The irony is da kidz (for that is who they are trying to appeal to with this) never go on there.
I don't think they go a day without a trans article.....even the Guardian manage to have a day off that subject occasionally.
Really? Where's today's?
Also tell me which news site is better then the BBC or the Guardian?
Here you go...Front page, with big picture...
BBC News - Disability and dating: 'I didn’t know what bisexual was'
Ray Everall is a 21-year-old trans man from Brighton. He struggles with communication, audio and visual processing and has learning difficulties, including ADHD, dyslexia and dyspraxia. For him the main challenges are around accessing trans health services.
There are 65 stories on that 'front page'; the one you have highlghted is 35th out of 65 and more about disablility than trans. I can't see why it offends you so much.
And your suggestion for a better news site is... ?
ANY OTHER WEBSITE
Have you not looked at the BBC News Website recently? It is a Woke version of the Daily Express. It is cheap, vulgar, moronic and embarrassing
Perhaps the website is popular with the youngens? Not everything is aimed at you, you know.
It's not, tho. My older, teenage British daughter does not use the BBC website at all. She watches the odd reality TV show, the rest is Netflix, Youtube, etc
This is a massive problem for the Beeb. The kids have lost the BBC habit - as discussed on here ad infinitum, so I shall shut up - and go watch something on Netflix.
Later....
I’m not talking about people watching the Beeb. I’m talking about the website, which is factually and objectively popular.
They wouldn’t write these “woke” articles if people didn’t read them.
Here’s a tip: if you don’t like the articles, don’t read them?
How do you know? The BBC isn't driven by market forces. Victoria Derbyshire had a show for how many years that nobody watched? BBC Three is still going and nobody ever watched that.
They write arts reviews for niche theatre performances, I highly doubt they get many clicks at all.
Now so.might say that great, but how often the BBC write cover something != now engaged the public are about it.
It is however the most popular news website in the country and one of the most popular in the world.
IT. IS. FREE
HEAD. DESK
SO. ARE. MANY. OTHERS.
Sky ITV Sun Express The Independent Channel 4 etc. etc. etc.
I was unaware that the Sun, Express, ITV, etc, were devoid of advertising. Thanks.
Haha, your hatred of the BBC is only made funnier by its undeniable popularity. 😂
You are completely wrong. I am a patriotic Brit and I used to be proud of the BBC as a world-renowned emblem of British principles: free speech, fair play, just the facts, please. It is also - or it was - a positive voice for the Union (and I am clearly a passionate Unionist)
It pains me greatly to see this institution in steep decline, diseased by transient Wokeism, and with no clear model for its future, in the face of the US streaming giants.
I would be delighted if it adapted, survived and thrived, and once again became an institution nearly all Brits could take pride in. Sadly, that doesn’t seem likely (tho i will still mention the Beeb in my daily prayers). In which case it should be privatized, and let it sink or swim in the real world.
Just keep Masterchef, Springwatch and Call The Midwife. Ta
Killing Eve Fleabag Normal People The Serpent Peaky Blinders His Dark Materials Dr Foster The Fall A Suitable Boy Cormoran Strike Line of Duty
I genuinely find it puzzling that you see 'wokism' all over the BBC. One story out of 65 on the front news page that could you might describe as 'woke'.
The UK is missing a massive opportunity for global cultural influence by emasculating the BBC.
But people in britain don't want to watch their output, why do you think anyone else does?
As a relatively new Netflix subscriber I have to say its offering is hardly overwhelming. The Crown, Queens Gambit, we enjoyed The Dig too, but beyond that... it's all a bit meh really. Certainly not enough to fill a schedule.
The BBC has an enormous back-catalogue (quite a few of Netflix's offerings are ex-BBC). I am not sure of the licensing issues in offering that back-catalogue but I hope it is not hampered by 'unfair competition' issues foisted on it by private media interests.
The BBC has been a truly massive cultural influence around the world on behalf of the UK; it would be senseless for us now to allow it to be trashed on ideological grounds.
The problem with the BBC is they seem unable / unwilling to adapt and seem lost about what they should be doing.
We have done the whole bit about how theu haven't adapted to modern tv series structures. But they also seem lost about how to use YouTube. The seem to think uploading the odd clip will do, but their upload get very few views compared to loads of total randoms who do news and current affairs round ups.
Victoria Derbyshire used to make a huge thing about despite hardly anybody watching her show live, some of her clips got lots of retweets...but that doesn't generate any revenue and it is the same niche group of twatterati. As we saw with all the nonsense about how many people viewed a Boris clip it means nothing.
The youth don't watch them as their offerings aren't seen as cool.
And we are seeing it already, all the noises from the BBC are defensive don't toucb the licence fee, no reformz we are better than Netflix.
I don't disagree with a lot of that. One issue the BCC has is the expectation on them is vastly different to that on Netflix. How many hours of new TV does Netflix produce per week? Sure they have had some good series in recent months but so have the BBC.
The government has repeatedly hampered the BBC for 'competition' reasons when it should instead have been promoting and supporting the BBC as a global influencer.
Very short-sighted.
Oh do fuck off what the bbc shows is mainly repeats of things made years ago
Maybe but I'd still like to see the hours of new material the main players produce each month.
Well name the new stuff the bbc has produced thats exclusive to the bbc and they havent just bought of a company whereas for example as I use amazon I have had over the last few years...the expanse 5 series another to go...vikings 6 series...black sails 3 series....preacher.....now on series 4.....amercian gods now on series 3....good omens....greenland...man in the high castle...I could name more but will stop there.
What have the bbc done? Downton abbey? More eastenders? The great british bakeoff?
Lol. Downton was ITV; Bake-off, although made popular on the BBC, was poached by C4.
To answer your question with a few suggestions:
Killing Eve Fleabag Normal People The Serpent Peaky Blinders His Dark Materials Dr Foster The Fall A Suitable Boy Cormoran Strike Line of Duty
And how many hours of viewing per annum is on that list?
Most of those would be no more than six hours in a year on average, if that. Probably much less since they tend to go years between seasons.
I think that's a fair criticsm. I don't pretend to know the answer.
All I can say is comparing Netflix with BBC, I like both but we're still finding more to watch on the BBC.
Can I just give a shout for Elizabeth R, being repeated on the BBC after 50 years. Excellent drama, of its time to a degree but very watchable.
@Benpointer the only one of those you quoted I have even heard anyone mention is peaky blinders, apart from that watercooler chat is all did you see the latest game of thrones/vikings etc....bbc output these days rarely gets a look in
The Shield - 88 episodes, 7 seasons, 7 years Boardwalk Empire - 56 episodes, 5 seasons, 5 years Game of Thrones - 73 episodes, 8 seasons, 8 years Better Call Saul - 50 episodes, 5 seasons, 5 years Soparanos - 86 episodes, 6 seasons, 8 years.
How about slightly less "top end", something like...
The Good Wife - 156 episodes, 7 seasons, 7 years
And the BBC offer me 13 Sherlock episodes in 8 years.
The game has changed, people consume this stuff at home, on their commute, in the gym, on the bog....offering 5-6 episodes for a season and often 2 years between seasons, is just not commercially viable in the real world.
Its like BBC not understanding how they put an odd video on YouTube and it does bugger all views, when those that play the YouTube game know it is about day in, day out, putting stuff up, as people hover up this content e.g. Linus Tech Tips puts I think 4 videos a day out, 7 days a week.
As a relatively new Netflix subscriber I have to say its offering is hardly overwhelming. The Crown, Queens Gambit, we enjoyed The Dig too, but beyond that... it's all a bit meh really. Certainly not enough to fill a schedule.
The BBC has an enormous back-catalogue (quite a few of Netflix's offerings are ex-BBC). I am not sure of the licensing issues in offering that back-catalogue but I hope it is not hampered by 'unfair competition' issues foisted on it by private media interests.
The BBC has been a truly massive cultural influence around the world on behalf of the UK; it would be senseless for us now to allow it to be trashed on ideological grounds.
The problem with the BBC is they seem unable / unwilling to adapt and seem lost about what they should be doing.
We have done the whole bit about how theu haven't adapted to modern tv series structures. But they also seem lost about how to use YouTube. The seem to think uploading the odd clip will do, but their upload get very few views compared to loads of total randoms who do news and current affairs round ups.
Victoria Derbyshire used to make a huge thing about despite hardly anybody watching her show live, some of her clips got lots of retweets...but that doesn't generate any revenue and it is the same niche group of twatterati. As we saw with all the nonsense about how many people viewed a Boris clip it means nothing.
The youth don't watch them as their offerings aren't seen as cool.
And we are seeing it already, all the noises from the BBC are defensive don't toucb the licence fee, no reformz we are better than Netflix.
I don't disagree with a lot of that. One issue the BCC has is the expectation on them is vastly different to that on Netflix. How many hours of new TV does Netflix produce per week? Sure they have had some good series in recent months but so have the BBC.
The government has repeatedly hampered the BBC for 'competition' reasons when it should instead have been promoting and supporting the BBC as a global influencer.
Very short-sighted.
Oh do fuck off what the bbc shows is mainly repeats of things made years ago
Maybe but I'd still like to see the hours of new material the main players produce each month.
Well name the new stuff the bbc has produced thats exclusive to the bbc and they havent just bought of a company whereas for example as I use amazon I have had over the last few years...the expanse 5 series another to go...vikings 6 series...black sails 3 series....preacher.....now on series 4.....amercian gods now on series 3....good omens....greenland...man in the high castle...I could name more but will stop there.
What have the bbc done? Downton abbey? More eastenders? The great british bakeoff?
The new Adam Curtis is very thought provoking. Perhaps needed tighter editing, but fascinating.
Kermodes Secrets of Cinema too.
Shrugs stuff that interests you no doubt, my point was a lot of bbc output though doesnt. When bbc output interests me I buy it on prime. I think over the last 5 years I have spent maybe 60£ on it. Which was the red dwarf series 1 to 6....apart from that they havent done a thing I want to pay for. In the same time I would have had to pay 750£ on licences....and not red dwarf series I bought were made well before I quit the license
Yes, though that can land you in a self reflecting bubble. One of the great things about Radio and TV is that you get exposed to new things that you wouldn't have encountered otherwise. That happenstance can expand horizons.
Much like going to a festival to see a band, and encountering some great new bands while waiting.
Ah so if we don't watch bbc we are well rounded? Sorry not true I have often watched things on amazon that I didnt expect to like by following the "People who watched this also liked this links" Same as youtube where I have discovered a lot more new music I actually liked than radio 1 ever led me too
@Benpointer the only one of those you quoted I have even heard anyone mention is peaky blinders, apart from that watercooler chat is all did you see the latest game of thrones/vikings etc....bbc output these days rarely gets a look in
Really? Normal People was one of the great TV shows of last year, and heavily discussed. Perhaps you need to get out more.
@Benpointer the only one of those you quoted I have even heard anyone mention is peaky blinders, apart from that watercooler chat is all did you see the latest game of thrones/vikings etc....bbc output these days rarely gets a look in
@Benpointer the only one of those you quoted I have even heard anyone mention is peaky blinders, apart from that watercooler chat is all did you see the latest game of thrones/vikings etc....bbc output these days rarely gets a look in
Really? Normal People was one of the great TV shows of last year, and heavily discussed. Perhaps you need to get out more.
To be fair Normal People was absolutely fantastic.
@Benpointer the only one of those you quoted I have even heard anyone mention is peaky blinders, apart from that watercooler chat is all did you see the latest game of thrones/vikings etc....bbc output these days rarely gets a look in
Well, of those you listed I have heard of Man in the High Castle (read the book) and would watch that but I was not going to subscribe for it. I have tried Black Sails (DVD box set) but honestly it was ridiculous trash with a bit of soft porn thrown in (imo).
Each to their own, I guess.
PS Tried GoT (or Death and Bonking as our friends call it - from the theme tune). Meh.
As a relatively new Netflix subscriber I have to say its offering is hardly overwhelming. The Crown, Queens Gambit, we enjoyed The Dig too, but beyond that... it's all a bit meh really. Certainly not enough to fill a schedule.
The BBC has an enormous back-catalogue (quite a few of Netflix's offerings are ex-BBC). I am not sure of the licensing issues in offering that back-catalogue but I hope it is not hampered by 'unfair competition' issues foisted on it by private media interests.
The BBC has been a truly massive cultural influence around the world on behalf of the UK; it would be senseless for us now to allow it to be trashed on ideological grounds.
The problem with the BBC is they seem unable / unwilling to adapt and seem lost about what they should be doing.
We have done the whole bit about how theu haven't adapted to modern tv series structures. But they also seem lost about how to use YouTube. The seem to think uploading the odd clip will do, but their upload get very few views compared to loads of total randoms who do news and current affairs round ups.
Victoria Derbyshire used to make a huge thing about despite hardly anybody watching her show live, some of her clips got lots of retweets...but that doesn't generate any revenue and it is the same niche group of twatterati. As we saw with all the nonsense about how many people viewed a Boris clip it means nothing.
The youth don't watch them as their offerings aren't seen as cool.
And we are seeing it already, all the noises from the BBC are defensive don't toucb the licence fee, no reformz we are better than Netflix.
I don't disagree with a lot of that. One issue the BCC has is the expectation on them is vastly different to that on Netflix. How many hours of new TV does Netflix produce per week? Sure they have had some good series in recent months but so have the BBC.
The government has repeatedly hampered the BBC for 'competition' reasons when it should instead have been promoting and supporting the BBC as a global influencer.
Very short-sighted.
Oh do fuck off what the bbc shows is mainly repeats of things made years ago
Maybe but I'd still like to see the hours of new material the main players produce each month.
Well name the new stuff the bbc has produced thats exclusive to the bbc and they havent just bought of a company whereas for example as I use amazon I have had over the last few years...the expanse 5 series another to go...vikings 6 series...black sails 3 series....preacher.....now on series 4.....amercian gods now on series 3....good omens....greenland...man in the high castle...I could name more but will stop there.
What have the bbc done? Downton abbey? More eastenders? The great british bakeoff?
Lol. Downton was ITV; Bake-off, although made popular on the BBC, was poached by C4.
To answer your question with a few suggestions:
Killing Eve Fleabag Normal People The Serpent Peaky Blinders His Dark Materials Dr Foster The Fall A Suitable Boy Cormoran Strike Line of Duty
Your list is a classic example of how the BBC hasn't adjusted to the modern landscape.
Killing Eve - 3 seasons of 8 episodes (over 3 years) Fleabag - 2 seasons of 6 episodes (over 4 years) Normal People - 12 episodes Peaky Blinders - 30 episodes over 5 seasons (over 7 years) His Dark Materials - 15 episodes over 2 seasons Dr Foster - 10 episodes over 2 seasons (over 3 years) Line of Duty - 29 episodes over 5 seasons (over 8 years).
Example of a Netflix big show
House of Cards - 73 episodes over 6 seasons (over 6 years).
Yes. Aside from the fact many of those shows are dreadful, or decline dreadfully (looking at you, Peaky Blinders) the BBC seems unable to master the obviously-successful American model, of quick but quality production of series after series of a popular drama, by the ton
My go-to example is two hospital drama series, a staple for any TV channel. Grey’s Anatomy versus Casualty. Both are a bit woke, apart from that, they live in parallel universes.
The American series Grey’s Anatomy has consistently moving stories, believeable scenarios, clever melodrama, fine acting, and is globally popular. And they make 26 episodes a year. And they are still doing it, 17 years later. Incredible. And its had 38 Emmy nominations
No one watches Casualty outside the UK, even tho it plods on, year after year. It is laughably wooden, silly, awkward and cheap. And they make about a dozen episodes a season, all of them bad.
As a relatively new Netflix subscriber I have to say its offering is hardly overwhelming. The Crown, Queens Gambit, we enjoyed The Dig too, but beyond that... it's all a bit meh really. Certainly not enough to fill a schedule.
The BBC has an enormous back-catalogue (quite a few of Netflix's offerings are ex-BBC). I am not sure of the licensing issues in offering that back-catalogue but I hope it is not hampered by 'unfair competition' issues foisted on it by private media interests.
The BBC has been a truly massive cultural influence around the world on behalf of the UK; it would be senseless for us now to allow it to be trashed on ideological grounds.
The problem with the BBC is they seem unable / unwilling to adapt and seem lost about what they should be doing.
We have done the whole bit about how theu haven't adapted to modern tv series structures. But they also seem lost about how to use YouTube. The seem to think uploading the odd clip will do, but their upload get very few views compared to loads of total randoms who do news and current affairs round ups.
Victoria Derbyshire used to make a huge thing about despite hardly anybody watching her show live, some of her clips got lots of retweets...but that doesn't generate any revenue and it is the same niche group of twatterati. As we saw with all the nonsense about how many people viewed a Boris clip it means nothing.
The youth don't watch them as their offerings aren't seen as cool.
And we are seeing it already, all the noises from the BBC are defensive don't toucb the licence fee, no reformz we are better than Netflix.
I don't disagree with a lot of that. One issue the BCC has is the expectation on them is vastly different to that on Netflix. How many hours of new TV does Netflix produce per week? Sure they have had some good series in recent months but so have the BBC.
The government has repeatedly hampered the BBC for 'competition' reasons when it should instead have been promoting and supporting the BBC as a global influencer.
Very short-sighted.
Oh do fuck off what the bbc shows is mainly repeats of things made years ago
Maybe but I'd still like to see the hours of new material the main players produce each month.
Well name the new stuff the bbc has produced thats exclusive to the bbc and they havent just bought of a company whereas for example as I use amazon I have had over the last few years...the expanse 5 series another to go...vikings 6 series...black sails 3 series....preacher.....now on series 4.....amercian gods now on series 3....good omens....greenland...man in the high castle...I could name more but will stop there.
What have the bbc done? Downton abbey? More eastenders? The great british bakeoff?
Lol. Downton was ITV; Bake-off, although made popular on the BBC, was poached by C4.
To answer your question with a few suggestions:
Killing Eve Fleabag Normal People The Serpent Peaky Blinders His Dark Materials Dr Foster The Fall A Suitable Boy Cormoran Strike Line of Duty
Your list is a classic example of how the BBC hasn't adjusted to the modern landscape.
Killing Eve - 3 seasons of 8 episodes (over 3 years) Fleabag - 2 seasons of 6 episodes (over 4 years) Normal People - 12 episodes Peaky Blinders - 30 episodes over 5 seasons (over 7 years) His Dark Materials - 15 episodes over 2 seasons Dr Foster - 10 episodes over 2 seasons (over 3 years) Line of Duty - 29 episodes over 5 seasons (over 8 years).
Example of a Netflix big show
House of Cards - 73 episodes over 6 seasons (over 6 years).
A real BBC "classic" example...Sherlock....13 episodes over 8 years. They literally produced what a "normal" show would now expect minimum for a single season over the course of 8, yes 8, years.
This is nothing to do with Netflix. Long series, and many of them, has been standard American broadcast fare from at least the 1960s.
As a relatively new Netflix subscriber I have to say its offering is hardly overwhelming. The Crown, Queens Gambit, we enjoyed The Dig too, but beyond that... it's all a bit meh really. Certainly not enough to fill a schedule.
The BBC has an enormous back-catalogue (quite a few of Netflix's offerings are ex-BBC). I am not sure of the licensing issues in offering that back-catalogue but I hope it is not hampered by 'unfair competition' issues foisted on it by private media interests.
The BBC has been a truly massive cultural influence around the world on behalf of the UK; it would be senseless for us now to allow it to be trashed on ideological grounds.
The problem with the BBC is they seem unable / unwilling to adapt and seem lost about what they should be doing.
We have done the whole bit about how theu haven't adapted to modern tv series structures. But they also seem lost about how to use YouTube. The seem to think uploading the odd clip will do, but their upload get very few views compared to loads of total randoms who do news and current affairs round ups.
Victoria Derbyshire used to make a huge thing about despite hardly anybody watching her show live, some of her clips got lots of retweets...but that doesn't generate any revenue and it is the same niche group of twatterati. As we saw with all the nonsense about how many people viewed a Boris clip it means nothing.
The youth don't watch them as their offerings aren't seen as cool.
And we are seeing it already, all the noises from the BBC are defensive don't toucb the licence fee, no reformz we are better than Netflix.
I don't disagree with a lot of that. One issue the BCC has is the expectation on them is vastly different to that on Netflix. How many hours of new TV does Netflix produce per week? Sure they have had some good series in recent months but so have the BBC.
The government has repeatedly hampered the BBC for 'competition' reasons when it should instead have been promoting and supporting the BBC as a global influencer.
Very short-sighted.
Oh do fuck off what the bbc shows is mainly repeats of things made years ago
Maybe but I'd still like to see the hours of new material the main players produce each month.
Well name the new stuff the bbc has produced thats exclusive to the bbc and they havent just bought of a company whereas for example as I use amazon I have had over the last few years...the expanse 5 series another to go...vikings 6 series...black sails 3 series....preacher.....now on series 4.....amercian gods now on series 3....good omens....greenland...man in the high castle...I could name more but will stop there.
What have the bbc done? Downton abbey? More eastenders? The great british bakeoff?
Lol. Downton was ITV; Bake-off, although made popular on the BBC, was poached by C4.
To answer your question with a few suggestions:
Killing Eve Fleabag Normal People The Serpent Peaky Blinders His Dark Materials Dr Foster The Fall A Suitable Boy Cormoran Strike Line of Duty
Your list is a classic example of how the BBC hasn't adjusted to the modern landscape.
Killing Eve - 3 seasons of 8 episodes (over 3 years) Fleabag - 2 seasons of 6 episodes (over 4 years) Normal People - 12 episodes Peaky Blinders - 30 episodes over 5 seasons (over 7 years) His Dark Materials - 15 episodes over 2 seasons Dr Foster - 10 episodes over 2 seasons (over 3 years) Line of Duty - 29 episodes over 5 seasons (over 8 years).
Example of a Netflix big show
House of Cards - 73 episodes over 6 seasons (over 6 years).
A real BBC "classic" example...Sherlock....13 episodes over 8 years. They literally produced what a "normal" show would now expect minimum for a single season over the course of 8, yes 8, years.
While I take your point, that isn't modern. It's simply the American tradition. 13 or 26 shows a year. Often with a vast army of script writers. Most of those named above are written by a single person. They are someone's baby. That is the British tradition. Sometimes less is more. Edit: I see the point has been made.
Do we think all children going back on 8 March is a good idea?
Won't it lead to R central??
God alone knows. We hear different stories about the schools every day - first that primary school children are now the single biggest source of Covid transmission, and then that there's little evidence from anywhere in Europe that schools are a major driver of infection.
I mean, my instinct would be that it would be more sensible to do it in phases, as is being done in Scotland and Wales and as the teaching unions are demanding, but that's just a guess. Who knows for certain?
All I would add is that it seems to be a considerable gamble. If it does lead to a spike in transmission and the kids end up being shoved back into lockdown again (and, by extension, the whole population has to rot in captivity for even longer,) then the additional socio-economic and psychological damage inflicted upon the population will be enormous. The Government will have spaffed its vaccine advantage up the wall and I would imagine that its popularity would collapse as a result.
If they're going to let all the kids back at once then they'd better have compelling evidence to suggest that it won't precipitate a fresh disaster.
Compelling evidence ?
Well over 17m will have been vaccinated more than two weeks prior to Monday 8th March with hundreds of thousands more joining them every day from then on.
@Benpointer the only one of those you quoted I have even heard anyone mention is peaky blinders, apart from that watercooler chat is all did you see the latest game of thrones/vikings etc....bbc output these days rarely gets a look in
As a relatively new Netflix subscriber I have to say its offering is hardly overwhelming. The Crown, Queens Gambit, we enjoyed The Dig too, but beyond that... it's all a bit meh really. Certainly not enough to fill a schedule.
The BBC has an enormous back-catalogue (quite a few of Netflix's offerings are ex-BBC). I am not sure of the licensing issues in offering that back-catalogue but I hope it is not hampered by 'unfair competition' issues foisted on it by private media interests.
The BBC has been a truly massive cultural influence around the world on behalf of the UK; it would be senseless for us now to allow it to be trashed on ideological grounds.
The problem with the BBC is they seem unable / unwilling to adapt and seem lost about what they should be doing.
We have done the whole bit about how theu haven't adapted to modern tv series structures. But they also seem lost about how to use YouTube. The seem to think uploading the odd clip will do, but their upload get very few views compared to loads of total randoms who do news and current affairs round ups.
Victoria Derbyshire used to make a huge thing about despite hardly anybody watching her show live, some of her clips got lots of retweets...but that doesn't generate any revenue and it is the same niche group of twatterati. As we saw with all the nonsense about how many people viewed a Boris clip it means nothing.
The youth don't watch them as their offerings aren't seen as cool.
And we are seeing it already, all the noises from the BBC are defensive don't toucb the licence fee, no reformz we are better than Netflix.
I don't disagree with a lot of that. One issue the BCC has is the expectation on them is vastly different to that on Netflix. How many hours of new TV does Netflix produce per week? Sure they have had some good series in recent months but so have the BBC.
The government has repeatedly hampered the BBC for 'competition' reasons when it should instead have been promoting and supporting the BBC as a global influencer.
Very short-sighted.
The one way the BBC might survive is if it became a rare outpost of anti-Wokery. Instead, it is piling on the bandwagon, spending tens of millions recruiting new BAME staff who are ALREADY over-represented on the screen, compared to the population at large.
BBC drama suffers from the same left-liberal PC bias, it is unwatchably Woke.
I stopped paying for this bien pensant pap several months ago. Yet, it saddens me as a Brit. The BBC is a great British institution - but so were rum, sodomy and the lash, in the Navy, and they have gone the way of all flesh. So will the Corp, unless it transforms, super quick
It's the BBC website that's the worst.
Check out the news homepage any day of the week. Pick one at random. And count the Wokey stories - lots of Twitter amplified bollocks about trans, BLM, gender fluidity, history shaming etc etc.
The irony is da kidz (for that is who they are trying to appeal to with this) never go on there.
I don't think they go a day without a trans article.....even the Guardian manage to have a day off that subject occasionally.
Really? Where's today's?
Also tell me which news site is better then the BBC or the Guardian?
Here you go...Front page, with big picture...
BBC News - Disability and dating: 'I didn’t know what bisexual was'
Ray Everall is a 21-year-old trans man from Brighton. He struggles with communication, audio and visual processing and has learning difficulties, including ADHD, dyslexia and dyspraxia. For him the main challenges are around accessing trans health services.
There are 65 stories on that 'front page'; the one you have highlghted is 35th out of 65 and more about disablility than trans. I can't see why it offends you so much.
And your suggestion for a better news site is... ?
ANY OTHER WEBSITE
Have you not looked at the BBC News Website recently? It is a Woke version of the Daily Express. It is cheap, vulgar, moronic and embarrassing
Perhaps the website is popular with the youngens? Not everything is aimed at you, you know.
It's not, tho. My older, teenage British daughter does not use the BBC website at all. She watches the odd reality TV show, the rest is Netflix, Youtube, etc
This is a massive problem for the Beeb. The kids have lost the BBC habit - as discussed on here ad infinitum, so I shall shut up - and go watch something on Netflix.
Later....
I’m not talking about people watching the Beeb. I’m talking about the website, which is factually and objectively popular.
They wouldn’t write these “woke” articles if people didn’t read them.
Here’s a tip: if you don’t like the articles, don’t read them?
How do you know? The BBC isn't driven by market forces. Victoria Derbyshire had a show for how many years that nobody watched? BBC Three is still going and nobody ever watched that.
They write arts reviews for niche theatre performances, I highly doubt they get many clicks at all.
Now so.might say that great, but how often the BBC write cover something != now engaged the public are about it.
It is however the most popular news website in the country and one of the most popular in the world.
IT. IS. FREE
HEAD. DESK
SO. ARE. MANY. OTHERS.
Sky ITV Sun Express The Independent Channel 4 etc. etc. etc.
I was unaware that the Sun, Express, ITV, etc, were devoid of advertising. Thanks.
Haha, your hatred of the BBC is only made funnier by its undeniable popularity. 😂
You are completely wrong. I am a patriotic Brit and I used to be proud of the BBC as a world-renowned emblem of British principles: free speech, fair play, just the facts, please. It is also - or it was - a positive voice for the Union (and I am clearly a passionate Unionist)
It pains me greatly to see this institution in steep decline, diseased by transient Wokeism, and with no clear model for its future, in the face of the US streaming giants.
I would be delighted if it adapted, survived and thrived, and once again became an institution nearly all Brits could take pride in. Sadly, that doesn’t seem likely (tho i will still mention the Beeb in my daily prayers). In which case it should be privatized, and let it sink or swim in the real world.
Just keep Masterchef, Springwatch and Call The Midwife. Ta
Killing Eve Fleabag Normal People The Serpent Peaky Blinders His Dark Materials Dr Foster The Fall A Suitable Boy Cormoran Strike Line of Duty
I genuinely find it puzzling that you see 'wokism' all over the BBC. One story out of 65 on the front news page that could you might describe as 'woke'.
The UK is missing a massive opportunity for global cultural influence by emasculating the BBC.
But people in britain don't want to watch their output, why do you think anyone else does?
Any idea why this story can be classed as "woke"? As far as I can see it's just highlighting injustices in society, specifically disability and dating.
What have those idiots done? Any jab is better than no jab. AZ is a pretty darn good jab (against all variants except the SA bug, and even there it probably protects against a severe outcome). You can always get Pfizer, later
Those twats on Handelsblatt, along with Macron, have successfully evangelized anti-vaxxery against the cheapest, easiest-to-use vaccine available in the EU right now. The scale of their fuck-up is monumental. AND they tried to impose a border in Ireland to prevent export of this same vaccine?
Indescribable
Pfizer showed reduced efficacy against the Saffer variant too. The one which might have least reduced efficacy vs Saffer could be sinopharm as it's based off dead virus rather than just blueprint for the spike protein.
You know you’re getting old when you get passionately and irrationally angry about things younger people like because you don’t like it.
When you were 20, I bet people your age currently hated what 20 year olds liked.
“Woke” just means “stuff I don’t like”
It really doesnt mean that.
It’s used in that way. An article talking about transgender-ism has nothing to do with being “woke”. It’s just a human interest story. However people who don’t like transgender-ism will complain simply because they don’t like transgender-ism.
It is just like people making complaints to OFCOM after seeing two men kiss on terrestrial TV god forbid.
As a relatively new Netflix subscriber I have to say its offering is hardly overwhelming. The Crown, Queens Gambit, we enjoyed The Dig too, but beyond that... it's all a bit meh really. Certainly not enough to fill a schedule.
The BBC has an enormous back-catalogue (quite a few of Netflix's offerings are ex-BBC). I am not sure of the licensing issues in offering that back-catalogue but I hope it is not hampered by 'unfair competition' issues foisted on it by private media interests.
The BBC has been a truly massive cultural influence around the world on behalf of the UK; it would be senseless for us now to allow it to be trashed on ideological grounds.
The problem with the BBC is they seem unable / unwilling to adapt and seem lost about what they should be doing.
We have done the whole bit about how theu haven't adapted to modern tv series structures. But they also seem lost about how to use YouTube. The seem to think uploading the odd clip will do, but their upload get very few views compared to loads of total randoms who do news and current affairs round ups.
Victoria Derbyshire used to make a huge thing about despite hardly anybody watching her show live, some of her clips got lots of retweets...but that doesn't generate any revenue and it is the same niche group of twatterati. As we saw with all the nonsense about how many people viewed a Boris clip it means nothing.
The youth don't watch them as their offerings aren't seen as cool.
And we are seeing it already, all the noises from the BBC are defensive don't toucb the licence fee, no reformz we are better than Netflix.
I don't disagree with a lot of that. One issue the BCC has is the expectation on them is vastly different to that on Netflix. How many hours of new TV does Netflix produce per week? Sure they have had some good series in recent months but so have the BBC.
The government has repeatedly hampered the BBC for 'competition' reasons when it should instead have been promoting and supporting the BBC as a global influencer.
Very short-sighted.
Oh do fuck off what the bbc shows is mainly repeats of things made years ago
Maybe but I'd still like to see the hours of new material the main players produce each month.
Well name the new stuff the bbc has produced thats exclusive to the bbc and they havent just bought of a company whereas for example as I use amazon I have had over the last few years...the expanse 5 series another to go...vikings 6 series...black sails 3 series....preacher.....now on series 4.....amercian gods now on series 3....good omens....greenland...man in the high castle...I could name more but will stop there.
What have the bbc done? Downton abbey? More eastenders? The great british bakeoff?
Lol. Downton was ITV; Bake-off, although made popular on the BBC, was poached by C4.
To answer your question with a few suggestions:
Killing Eve Fleabag Normal People The Serpent Peaky Blinders His Dark Materials Dr Foster The Fall A Suitable Boy Cormoran Strike Line of Duty
Your list is a classic example of how the BBC hasn't adjusted to the modern landscape.
Killing Eve - 3 seasons of 8 episodes (over 3 years) Fleabag - 2 seasons of 6 episodes (over 4 years) Normal People - 12 episodes Peaky Blinders - 30 episodes over 5 seasons (over 7 years) His Dark Materials - 15 episodes over 2 seasons Dr Foster - 10 episodes over 2 seasons (over 3 years) Line of Duty - 29 episodes over 5 seasons (over 8 years).
Example of a Netflix big show
House of Cards - 73 episodes over 6 seasons (over 6 years).
A real BBC "classic" example...Sherlock....13 episodes over 8 years. They literally produced what a "normal" show would now expect minimum for a single season over the course of 8, yes 8, years.
While I take your point, that isn't modern. It's simply the American tradition. 13 or 26 shows a year. Often with a vast army of script writers. Most of those named above are written by a single person. They are someone's baby. That is the British tradition. Sometimes less is more.
My point is Netflix have continued this "tradition", while changed the game further, where the likes of House of Cards and the Crown spends ungodly amounts of money on each episode.
And we in the UK weren't "exposed" so much to this US model, so the BBC could get away with saying well here is your 6 "excellent hand crafted episodes".
Instead it is now here is your non-4k piss poor VFX 6 episodes every two years from the BBC vs say The Crown give you 4k HDR $20 million per episode 10 episode season every year.
As a relatively new Netflix subscriber I have to say its offering is hardly overwhelming. The Crown, Queens Gambit, we enjoyed The Dig too, but beyond that... it's all a bit meh really. Certainly not enough to fill a schedule.
The BBC has an enormous back-catalogue (quite a few of Netflix's offerings are ex-BBC). I am not sure of the licensing issues in offering that back-catalogue but I hope it is not hampered by 'unfair competition' issues foisted on it by private media interests.
The BBC has been a truly massive cultural influence around the world on behalf of the UK; it would be senseless for us now to allow it to be trashed on ideological grounds.
The problem with the BBC is they seem unable / unwilling to adapt and seem lost about what they should be doing.
We have done the whole bit about how theu haven't adapted to modern tv series structures. But they also seem lost about how to use YouTube. The seem to think uploading the odd clip will do, but their upload get very few views compared to loads of total randoms who do news and current affairs round ups.
Victoria Derbyshire used to make a huge thing about despite hardly anybody watching her show live, some of her clips got lots of retweets...but that doesn't generate any revenue and it is the same niche group of twatterati. As we saw with all the nonsense about how many people viewed a Boris clip it means nothing.
The youth don't watch them as their offerings aren't seen as cool.
And we are seeing it already, all the noises from the BBC are defensive don't toucb the licence fee, no reformz we are better than Netflix.
I don't disagree with a lot of that. One issue the BCC has is the expectation on them is vastly different to that on Netflix. How many hours of new TV does Netflix produce per week? Sure they have had some good series in recent months but so have the BBC.
The government has repeatedly hampered the BBC for 'competition' reasons when it should instead have been promoting and supporting the BBC as a global influencer.
Very short-sighted.
Oh do fuck off what the bbc shows is mainly repeats of things made years ago
Maybe but I'd still like to see the hours of new material the main players produce each month.
Well name the new stuff the bbc has produced thats exclusive to the bbc and they havent just bought of a company whereas for example as I use amazon I have had over the last few years...the expanse 5 series another to go...vikings 6 series...black sails 3 series....preacher.....now on series 4.....amercian gods now on series 3....good omens....greenland...man in the high castle...I could name more but will stop there.
What have the bbc done? Downton abbey? More eastenders? The great british bakeoff?
Lol. Downton was ITV; Bake-off, although made popular on the BBC, was poached by C4.
To answer your question with a few suggestions:
Killing Eve Fleabag Normal People The Serpent Peaky Blinders His Dark Materials Dr Foster The Fall A Suitable Boy Cormoran Strike Line of Duty
Your list is a classic example of how the BBC hasn't adjusted to the modern landscape.
Killing Eve - 3 seasons of 8 episodes (over 3 years) Fleabag - 2 seasons of 6 episodes (over 4 years) Normal People - 12 episodes Peaky Blinders - 30 episodes over 5 seasons (over 7 years) His Dark Materials - 15 episodes over 2 seasons Dr Foster - 10 episodes over 2 seasons (over 3 years) Line of Duty - 29 episodes over 5 seasons (over 8 years).
Example of a Netflix big show
House of Cards - 73 episodes over 6 seasons (over 6 years).
A real BBC "classic" example...Sherlock....13 episodes over 8 years. They literally produced what a "normal" show would now expect minimum for a single season over the course of 8, yes 8, years.
While I take your point, that isn't modern. It's simply the American tradition. 13 or 26 shows a year. Often with a vast army of script writers. Most of those named above are written by a single person. They are someone's baby. That is the British tradition. Sometimes less is more. Edit: I see the point has been made.
Agreed, American tend to flog an idea to death. Look at how Mad Men dragged on for example.
As a relatively new Netflix subscriber I have to say its offering is hardly overwhelming. The Crown, Queens Gambit, we enjoyed The Dig too, but beyond that... it's all a bit meh really. Certainly not enough to fill a schedule.
The BBC has an enormous back-catalogue (quite a few of Netflix's offerings are ex-BBC). I am not sure of the licensing issues in offering that back-catalogue but I hope it is not hampered by 'unfair competition' issues foisted on it by private media interests.
The BBC has been a truly massive cultural influence around the world on behalf of the UK; it would be senseless for us now to allow it to be trashed on ideological grounds.
The problem with the BBC is they seem unable / unwilling to adapt and seem lost about what they should be doing.
We have done the whole bit about how theu haven't adapted to modern tv series structures. But they also seem lost about how to use YouTube. The seem to think uploading the odd clip will do, but their upload get very few views compared to loads of total randoms who do news and current affairs round ups.
Victoria Derbyshire used to make a huge thing about despite hardly anybody watching her show live, some of her clips got lots of retweets...but that doesn't generate any revenue and it is the same niche group of twatterati. As we saw with all the nonsense about how many people viewed a Boris clip it means nothing.
The youth don't watch them as their offerings aren't seen as cool.
And we are seeing it already, all the noises from the BBC are defensive don't toucb the licence fee, no reformz we are better than Netflix.
I don't disagree with a lot of that. One issue the BCC has is the expectation on them is vastly different to that on Netflix. How many hours of new TV does Netflix produce per week? Sure they have had some good series in recent months but so have the BBC.
The government has repeatedly hampered the BBC for 'competition' reasons when it should instead have been promoting and supporting the BBC as a global influencer.
Very short-sighted.
The one way the BBC might survive is if it became a rare outpost of anti-Wokery. Instead, it is piling on the bandwagon, spending tens of millions recruiting new BAME staff who are ALREADY over-represented on the screen, compared to the population at large.
BBC drama suffers from the same left-liberal PC bias, it is unwatchably Woke.
I stopped paying for this bien pensant pap several months ago. Yet, it saddens me as a Brit. The BBC is a great British institution - but so were rum, sodomy and the lash, in the Navy, and they have gone the way of all flesh. So will the Corp, unless it transforms, super quick
It's the BBC website that's the worst.
Check out the news homepage any day of the week. Pick one at random. And count the Wokey stories - lots of Twitter amplified bollocks about trans, BLM, gender fluidity, history shaming etc etc.
The irony is da kidz (for that is who they are trying to appeal to with this) never go on there.
I don't think they go a day without a trans article.....even the Guardian manage to have a day off that subject occasionally.
Really? Where's today's?
Also tell me which news site is better then the BBC or the Guardian?
Here you go...Front page, with big picture...
BBC News - Disability and dating: 'I didn’t know what bisexual was'
Ray Everall is a 21-year-old trans man from Brighton. He struggles with communication, audio and visual processing and has learning difficulties, including ADHD, dyslexia and dyspraxia. For him the main challenges are around accessing trans health services.
There are 65 stories on that 'front page'; the one you have highlghted is 35th out of 65 and more about disablility than trans. I can't see why it offends you so much.
And your suggestion for a better news site is... ?
ANY OTHER WEBSITE
Have you not looked at the BBC News Website recently? It is a Woke version of the Daily Express. It is cheap, vulgar, moronic and embarrassing
Perhaps the website is popular with the youngens? Not everything is aimed at you, you know.
It's not, tho. My older, teenage British daughter does not use the BBC website at all. She watches the odd reality TV show, the rest is Netflix, Youtube, etc
This is a massive problem for the Beeb. The kids have lost the BBC habit - as discussed on here ad infinitum, so I shall shut up - and go watch something on Netflix.
Later....
I’m not talking about people watching the Beeb. I’m talking about the website, which is factually and objectively popular.
They wouldn’t write these “woke” articles if people didn’t read them.
Here’s a tip: if you don’t like the articles, don’t read them?
How do you know? The BBC isn't driven by market forces. Victoria Derbyshire had a show for how many years that nobody watched? BBC Three is still going and nobody ever watched that.
They write arts reviews for niche theatre performances, I highly doubt they get many clicks at all.
Now so.might say that great, but how often the BBC write cover something != now engaged the public are about it.
It is however the most popular news website in the country and one of the most popular in the world.
IT. IS. FREE
HEAD. DESK
SO. ARE. MANY. OTHERS.
Sky ITV Sun Express The Independent Channel 4 etc. etc. etc.
I was unaware that the Sun, Express, ITV, etc, were devoid of advertising. Thanks.
Haha, your hatred of the BBC is only made funnier by its undeniable popularity. 😂
You are completely wrong. I am a patriotic Brit and I used to be proud of the BBC as a world-renowned emblem of British principles: free speech, fair play, just the facts, please. It is also - or it was - a positive voice for the Union (and I am clearly a passionate Unionist)
It pains me greatly to see this institution in steep decline, diseased by transient Wokeism, and with no clear model for its future, in the face of the US streaming giants.
I would be delighted if it adapted, survived and thrived, and once again became an institution nearly all Brits could take pride in. Sadly, that doesn’t seem likely (tho i will still mention the Beeb in my daily prayers). In which case it should be privatized, and let it sink or swim in the real world.
Just keep Masterchef, Springwatch and Call The Midwife. Ta
Killing Eve Fleabag Normal People The Serpent Peaky Blinders His Dark Materials Dr Foster The Fall A Suitable Boy Cormoran Strike Line of Duty
I genuinely find it puzzling that you see 'wokism' all over the BBC. One story out of 65 on the front news page that could you might describe as 'woke'.
The UK is missing a massive opportunity for global cultural influence by emasculating the BBC.
But people in britain don't want to watch their output, why do you think anyone else does?
Any idea why this story can be classed as "woke"? As far as I can see it's just highlighting injustices in society, specifically disability and dating.
blinks I was talking about woke? did you @ the wrong person?
As a relatively new Netflix subscriber I have to say its offering is hardly overwhelming. The Crown, Queens Gambit, we enjoyed The Dig too, but beyond that... it's all a bit meh really. Certainly not enough to fill a schedule.
The BBC has an enormous back-catalogue (quite a few of Netflix's offerings are ex-BBC). I am not sure of the licensing issues in offering that back-catalogue but I hope it is not hampered by 'unfair competition' issues foisted on it by private media interests.
The BBC has been a truly massive cultural influence around the world on behalf of the UK; it would be senseless for us now to allow it to be trashed on ideological grounds.
The problem with the BBC is they seem unable / unwilling to adapt and seem lost about what they should be doing.
We have done the whole bit about how theu haven't adapted to modern tv series structures. But they also seem lost about how to use YouTube. The seem to think uploading the odd clip will do, but their upload get very few views compared to loads of total randoms who do news and current affairs round ups.
Victoria Derbyshire used to make a huge thing about despite hardly anybody watching her show live, some of her clips got lots of retweets...but that doesn't generate any revenue and it is the same niche group of twatterati. As we saw with all the nonsense about how many people viewed a Boris clip it means nothing.
The youth don't watch them as their offerings aren't seen as cool.
And we are seeing it already, all the noises from the BBC are defensive don't toucb the licence fee, no reformz we are better than Netflix.
I don't disagree with a lot of that. One issue the BCC has is the expectation on them is vastly different to that on Netflix. How many hours of new TV does Netflix produce per week? Sure they have had some good series in recent months but so have the BBC.
The government has repeatedly hampered the BBC for 'competition' reasons when it should instead have been promoting and supporting the BBC as a global influencer.
Very short-sighted.
Oh do fuck off what the bbc shows is mainly repeats of things made years ago
Maybe but I'd still like to see the hours of new material the main players produce each month.
Well name the new stuff the bbc has produced thats exclusive to the bbc and they havent just bought of a company whereas for example as I use amazon I have had over the last few years...the expanse 5 series another to go...vikings 6 series...black sails 3 series....preacher.....now on series 4.....amercian gods now on series 3....good omens....greenland...man in the high castle...I could name more but will stop there.
What have the bbc done? Downton abbey? More eastenders? The great british bakeoff?
Lol. Downton was ITV; Bake-off, although made popular on the BBC, was poached by C4.
To answer your question with a few suggestions:
Killing Eve Fleabag Normal People The Serpent Peaky Blinders His Dark Materials Dr Foster The Fall A Suitable Boy Cormoran Strike Line of Duty
Your list is a classic example of how the BBC hasn't adjusted to the modern landscape.
Killing Eve - 3 seasons of 8 episodes (over 3 years) Fleabag - 2 seasons of 6 episodes (over 4 years) Normal People - 12 episodes Peaky Blinders - 30 episodes over 5 seasons (over 7 years) His Dark Materials - 15 episodes over 2 seasons Dr Foster - 10 episodes over 2 seasons (over 3 years) Line of Duty - 29 episodes over 5 seasons (over 8 years).
Example of a Netflix big show
House of Cards - 73 episodes over 6 seasons (over 6 years).
A real BBC "classic" example...Sherlock....13 episodes over 8 years. They literally produced what a "normal" show would now expect minimum for a single season over the course of 8, yes 8, years.
While I take your point, that isn't modern. It's simply the American tradition. 13 or 26 shows a year. Often with a vast army of script writers. Most of those named above are written by a single person. They are someone's baby. That is the British tradition. Sometimes less is more. Edit: I see the point has been made.
Agreed, American tend to flog an idea to death. Look at how Mad Men dragged on for example.
Less can sometimes be more. But less can also sometimes just be less.
As a relatively new Netflix subscriber I have to say its offering is hardly overwhelming. The Crown, Queens Gambit, we enjoyed The Dig too, but beyond that... it's all a bit meh really. Certainly not enough to fill a schedule.
The BBC has an enormous back-catalogue (quite a few of Netflix's offerings are ex-BBC). I am not sure of the licensing issues in offering that back-catalogue but I hope it is not hampered by 'unfair competition' issues foisted on it by private media interests.
The BBC has been a truly massive cultural influence around the world on behalf of the UK; it would be senseless for us now to allow it to be trashed on ideological grounds.
The problem with the BBC is they seem unable / unwilling to adapt and seem lost about what they should be doing.
We have done the whole bit about how theu haven't adapted to modern tv series structures. But they also seem lost about how to use YouTube. The seem to think uploading the odd clip will do, but their upload get very few views compared to loads of total randoms who do news and current affairs round ups.
Victoria Derbyshire used to make a huge thing about despite hardly anybody watching her show live, some of her clips got lots of retweets...but that doesn't generate any revenue and it is the same niche group of twatterati. As we saw with all the nonsense about how many people viewed a Boris clip it means nothing.
The youth don't watch them as their offerings aren't seen as cool.
And we are seeing it already, all the noises from the BBC are defensive don't toucb the licence fee, no reformz we are better than Netflix.
I don't disagree with a lot of that. One issue the BCC has is the expectation on them is vastly different to that on Netflix. How many hours of new TV does Netflix produce per week? Sure they have had some good series in recent months but so have the BBC.
The government has repeatedly hampered the BBC for 'competition' reasons when it should instead have been promoting and supporting the BBC as a global influencer.
Very short-sighted.
Oh do fuck off what the bbc shows is mainly repeats of things made years ago
Maybe but I'd still like to see the hours of new material the main players produce each month.
Well name the new stuff the bbc has produced thats exclusive to the bbc and they havent just bought of a company whereas for example as I use amazon I have had over the last few years...the expanse 5 series another to go...vikings 6 series...black sails 3 series....preacher.....now on series 4.....amercian gods now on series 3....good omens....greenland...man in the high castle...I could name more but will stop there.
What have the bbc done? Downton abbey? More eastenders? The great british bakeoff?
The new Adam Curtis is very thought provoking. Perhaps needed tighter editing, but fascinating.
Kermodes Secrets of Cinema too.
Shrugs stuff that interests you no doubt, my point was a lot of bbc output though doesnt. When bbc output interests me I buy it on prime. I think over the last 5 years I have spent maybe 60£ on it. Which was the red dwarf series 1 to 6....apart from that they havent done a thing I want to pay for. In the same time I would have had to pay 750£ on licences....and not red dwarf series I bought were made well before I quit the license
Yes, though that can land you in a self reflecting bubble. One of the great things about Radio and TV is that you get exposed to new things that you wouldn't have encountered otherwise. That happenstance can expand horizons.
Much like going to a festival to see a band, and encountering some great new bands while waiting.
Ah so if we don't watch bbc we are well rounded? Sorry not true I have often watched things on amazon that I didnt expect to like by following the "People who watched this also liked this links" Same as youtube where I have discovered a lot more new music I actually liked than radio 1 ever led me too
Yes, that is my point, the "people who watched this, also like..." is how alogarithims create self reflecting bubbles. It is how the companies banalise our interests, away from minority and quirky viewing and towards popular pap. Away from programmes that challenge and stimulate, and towards lowest common denominator stuff.
As a relatively new Netflix subscriber I have to say its offering is hardly overwhelming. The Crown, Queens Gambit, we enjoyed The Dig too, but beyond that... it's all a bit meh really. Certainly not enough to fill a schedule.
The BBC has an enormous back-catalogue (quite a few of Netflix's offerings are ex-BBC). I am not sure of the licensing issues in offering that back-catalogue but I hope it is not hampered by 'unfair competition' issues foisted on it by private media interests.
The BBC has been a truly massive cultural influence around the world on behalf of the UK; it would be senseless for us now to allow it to be trashed on ideological grounds.
The problem with the BBC is they seem unable / unwilling to adapt and seem lost about what they should be doing.
We have done the whole bit about how theu haven't adapted to modern tv series structures. But they also seem lost about how to use YouTube. The seem to think uploading the odd clip will do, but their upload get very few views compared to loads of total randoms who do news and current affairs round ups.
Victoria Derbyshire used to make a huge thing about despite hardly anybody watching her show live, some of her clips got lots of retweets...but that doesn't generate any revenue and it is the same niche group of twatterati. As we saw with all the nonsense about how many people viewed a Boris clip it means nothing.
The youth don't watch them as their offerings aren't seen as cool.
And we are seeing it already, all the noises from the BBC are defensive don't toucb the licence fee, no reformz we are better than Netflix.
I don't disagree with a lot of that. One issue the BCC has is the expectation on them is vastly different to that on Netflix. How many hours of new TV does Netflix produce per week? Sure they have had some good series in recent months but so have the BBC.
The government has repeatedly hampered the BBC for 'competition' reasons when it should instead have been promoting and supporting the BBC as a global influencer.
Very short-sighted.
Oh do fuck off what the bbc shows is mainly repeats of things made years ago
Maybe but I'd still like to see the hours of new material the main players produce each month.
Well name the new stuff the bbc has produced thats exclusive to the bbc and they havent just bought of a company whereas for example as I use amazon I have had over the last few years...the expanse 5 series another to go...vikings 6 series...black sails 3 series....preacher.....now on series 4.....amercian gods now on series 3....good omens....greenland...man in the high castle...I could name more but will stop there.
What have the bbc done? Downton abbey? More eastenders? The great british bakeoff?
Lol. Downton was ITV; Bake-off, although made popular on the BBC, was poached by C4.
To answer your question with a few suggestions:
Killing Eve Fleabag Normal People The Serpent Peaky Blinders His Dark Materials Dr Foster The Fall A Suitable Boy Cormoran Strike Line of Duty
Your list is a classic example of how the BBC hasn't adjusted to the modern landscape.
Killing Eve - 3 seasons of 8 episodes (over 3 years) Fleabag - 2 seasons of 6 episodes (over 4 years) Normal People - 12 episodes Peaky Blinders - 30 episodes over 5 seasons (over 7 years) His Dark Materials - 15 episodes over 2 seasons Dr Foster - 10 episodes over 2 seasons (over 3 years) Line of Duty - 29 episodes over 5 seasons (over 8 years).
Example of a Netflix big show
House of Cards - 73 episodes over 6 seasons (over 6 years).
Yes. Aside from the fact many of those shows are dreadful, or decline dreadfully (looking at you, Peaky Blinders) the BBC seems unable to master the obviously-successful American model, of quick but quality production of series after series of a popular drama, by the ton
My go-to example is two hospital drama series, a staple for any TV channel. Grey’s Anatomy versus Casualty. Both are a bit woke, apart from that, they live in parallel universes.
The American series Grey’s Anatomy has consistently moving stories, believeable scenarios, clever melodrama, fine acting, and is globally popular. And they make 26 episodes a year. And they are still doing it, 17 years later. Incredible. And its had 38 Emmy nominations
No one watches Casualty outside the UK, even tho it plods on, year after year. It is laughably wooden, silly, awkward and cheap. And they make about a dozen episodes a season, all of them bad.
This is a very good point. But it seems to talk to a difference in structure or economics between the US television industry at large versus the British one.
I’m not sure this is a BBC specific problem.
Edit: I see others have made the same point already.
"Two years in the making, Adam Curtis’s latest wonder, Can’t Get You Out of My Head, is hard to precis. It would take my sparrow brain about 12 seconds to precis the average episode of Death in Paradise. It would take that same brain until about 2054 to encapsulate the scope of what Curtis is attempting to achieve: nothing less than a vaulting, all-embracing historical exploration of how we find ourselves in our current angry anxiety.
‘He has quietly explained the world’: a still from Adam Curtis’s Can’t Get You Out of My Head. Photograph: BBC The rather terrific news is that it works. Adam Curtis has quietly explained the world. He has focused – it’s an eight-hour watch over six instalments, yet themes come together – on class and race in Britain, on power struggles in China, on the perpetual suburban paranoia of post-50s America. He doesn’t have any pat conclusions – Curtis tends to take steps to distance himself from tribal politics – but the overall message is of mismanaged power. Since the birth of modernity, he seems to be saying, there have been revolutions, resulting in some bliss, some misery; but, after the torches flicker out, same old, same old.
After the arguments over individualism and collectivism were almost over, there descended, in the 1990s, a new politics, a “caring technocracy”. Nothing changed. Can’t Get You Out of My Head is a powerful catalyst to new thought. It helps that it has the trademark Adam Curtis monochrome 50s montages – he has access to all BBC film libraries, and they tend to leave him alone – and wonderful, just-so soundtracks, ranging from the Raveonettes and the Mekons to Marlene Dietrich. The most challenging, complex watch I’ve had this year: thought-provoking and perhaps, when you’ve thought about it, a little redemptive."
As a relatively new Netflix subscriber I have to say its offering is hardly overwhelming. The Crown, Queens Gambit, we enjoyed The Dig too, but beyond that... it's all a bit meh really. Certainly not enough to fill a schedule.
The BBC has an enormous back-catalogue (quite a few of Netflix's offerings are ex-BBC). I am not sure of the licensing issues in offering that back-catalogue but I hope it is not hampered by 'unfair competition' issues foisted on it by private media interests.
The BBC has been a truly massive cultural influence around the world on behalf of the UK; it would be senseless for us now to allow it to be trashed on ideological grounds.
The problem with the BBC is they seem unable / unwilling to adapt and seem lost about what they should be doing.
We have done the whole bit about how theu haven't adapted to modern tv series structures. But they also seem lost about how to use YouTube. The seem to think uploading the odd clip will do, but their upload get very few views compared to loads of total randoms who do news and current affairs round ups.
Victoria Derbyshire used to make a huge thing about despite hardly anybody watching her show live, some of her clips got lots of retweets...but that doesn't generate any revenue and it is the same niche group of twatterati. As we saw with all the nonsense about how many people viewed a Boris clip it means nothing.
The youth don't watch them as their offerings aren't seen as cool.
And we are seeing it already, all the noises from the BBC are defensive don't toucb the licence fee, no reformz we are better than Netflix.
I don't disagree with a lot of that. One issue the BCC has is the expectation on them is vastly different to that on Netflix. How many hours of new TV does Netflix produce per week? Sure they have had some good series in recent months but so have the BBC.
The government has repeatedly hampered the BBC for 'competition' reasons when it should instead have been promoting and supporting the BBC as a global influencer.
Very short-sighted.
Oh do fuck off what the bbc shows is mainly repeats of things made years ago
Maybe but I'd still like to see the hours of new material the main players produce each month.
Well name the new stuff the bbc has produced thats exclusive to the bbc and they havent just bought of a company whereas for example as I use amazon I have had over the last few years...the expanse 5 series another to go...vikings 6 series...black sails 3 series....preacher.....now on series 4.....amercian gods now on series 3....good omens....greenland...man in the high castle...I could name more but will stop there.
What have the bbc done? Downton abbey? More eastenders? The great british bakeoff?
Lol. Downton was ITV; Bake-off, although made popular on the BBC, was poached by C4.
To answer your question with a few suggestions:
Killing Eve Fleabag Normal People The Serpent Peaky Blinders His Dark Materials Dr Foster The Fall A Suitable Boy Cormoran Strike Line of Duty
Your list is a classic example of how the BBC hasn't adjusted to the modern landscape.
Killing Eve - 3 seasons of 8 episodes (over 3 years) Fleabag - 2 seasons of 6 episodes (over 4 years) Normal People - 12 episodes Peaky Blinders - 30 episodes over 5 seasons (over 7 years) His Dark Materials - 15 episodes over 2 seasons Dr Foster - 10 episodes over 2 seasons (over 3 years) Line of Duty - 29 episodes over 5 seasons (over 8 years).
Example of a Netflix big show
House of Cards - 73 episodes over 6 seasons (over 6 years).
A real BBC "classic" example...Sherlock....13 episodes over 8 years. They literally produced what a "normal" show would now expect minimum for a single season over the course of 8, yes 8, years.
This is nothing to do with Netflix. Long series, and many of them, has been standard American broadcast fare from at least the 1960s.
The point is Netflix now has made all this available to the British consumer, on demand anywhere, anytime, and their own originals are even bigger budget and higher production quality than what the BBC are doing.
The BBC saying we have this handful of great shows, people seemed to really like, they are each a total of 6hrs and you will have to wait another 2 years before you get another 6.....that just isn't the game now.
The Shield - 88 episodes, 7 seasons, 7 years Boardwalk Empire - 56 episodes, 5 seasons, 5 years Game of Thrones - 73 episodes, 8 seasons, 8 years Better Call Saul - 50 episodes, 5 seasons, 5 years Soparanos - 86 episodes, 6 seasons, 8 years.
How about slightly less "top end", something like...
The Good Wife - 156 episodes, 7 seasons, 7 years
And the BBC offer me 13 Sherlock episodes in 8 years.
And while it is true that quantity does not necessarily equal quality - *shifts nervously and glances at post count* - does anyone really believe that the quality offered by Sherlock is so much higher that it provides equivalent content and quality within its episode count? Certainly there is more filler in shows with 20 episodes a season, and even ones with 13 episodes can drag (the Marvel netflix shows spring to mind, and how Lost got better once it reduced its episode count per season), but there's just overall more quality provided more consistently, and 10-13 seems the norm for online stuff anyway.
As a relatively new Netflix subscriber I have to say its offering is hardly overwhelming. The Crown, Queens Gambit, we enjoyed The Dig too, but beyond that... it's all a bit meh really. Certainly not enough to fill a schedule.
The BBC has an enormous back-catalogue (quite a few of Netflix's offerings are ex-BBC). I am not sure of the licensing issues in offering that back-catalogue but I hope it is not hampered by 'unfair competition' issues foisted on it by private media interests.
The BBC has been a truly massive cultural influence around the world on behalf of the UK; it would be senseless for us now to allow it to be trashed on ideological grounds.
The problem with the BBC is they seem unable / unwilling to adapt and seem lost about what they should be doing.
We have done the whole bit about how theu haven't adapted to modern tv series structures. But they also seem lost about how to use YouTube. The seem to think uploading the odd clip will do, but their upload get very few views compared to loads of total randoms who do news and current affairs round ups.
Victoria Derbyshire used to make a huge thing about despite hardly anybody watching her show live, some of her clips got lots of retweets...but that doesn't generate any revenue and it is the same niche group of twatterati. As we saw with all the nonsense about how many people viewed a Boris clip it means nothing.
The youth don't watch them as their offerings aren't seen as cool.
And we are seeing it already, all the noises from the BBC are defensive don't toucb the licence fee, no reformz we are better than Netflix.
I don't disagree with a lot of that. One issue the BCC has is the expectation on them is vastly different to that on Netflix. How many hours of new TV does Netflix produce per week? Sure they have had some good series in recent months but so have the BBC.
The government has repeatedly hampered the BBC for 'competition' reasons when it should instead have been promoting and supporting the BBC as a global influencer.
Very short-sighted.
Oh do fuck off what the bbc shows is mainly repeats of things made years ago
Maybe but I'd still like to see the hours of new material the main players produce each month.
Well name the new stuff the bbc has produced thats exclusive to the bbc and they havent just bought of a company whereas for example as I use amazon I have had over the last few years...the expanse 5 series another to go...vikings 6 series...black sails 3 series....preacher.....now on series 4.....amercian gods now on series 3....good omens....greenland...man in the high castle...I could name more but will stop there.
What have the bbc done? Downton abbey? More eastenders? The great british bakeoff?
Lol. Downton was ITV; Bake-off, although made popular on the BBC, was poached by C4.
To answer your question with a few suggestions:
Killing Eve Fleabag Normal People The Serpent Peaky Blinders His Dark Materials Dr Foster The Fall A Suitable Boy Cormoran Strike Line of Duty
Your list is a classic example of how the BBC hasn't adjusted to the modern landscape.
Killing Eve - 3 seasons of 8 episodes (over 3 years) Fleabag - 2 seasons of 6 episodes (over 4 years) Normal People - 12 episodes Peaky Blinders - 30 episodes over 5 seasons (over 7 years) His Dark Materials - 15 episodes over 2 seasons Dr Foster - 10 episodes over 2 seasons (over 3 years) Line of Duty - 29 episodes over 5 seasons (over 8 years).
Example of a Netflix big show
House of Cards - 73 episodes over 6 seasons (over 6 years).
A real BBC "classic" example...Sherlock....13 episodes over 8 years. They literally produced what a "normal" show would now expect minimum for a single season over the course of 8, yes 8, years.
While I take your point, that isn't modern. It's simply the American tradition. 13 or 26 shows a year. Often with a vast army of script writers. Most of those named above are written by a single person. They are someone's baby. That is the British tradition. Sometimes less is more. Edit: I see the point has been made.
Also, much more importantly for the discussion HBO/Netflix/Prime have actually enabled American TV producers to break free of the TV Syndication death grip.
The reason American TV was produced in 13/26 blocks was for syndication on cable. No cable syndication, no TV show made. And as a result often horrendous padding.
Streaming has allowed American TV producers to produce much shorter, punchier seasons of TV.
The Modern landscape of stream g results in more British style shows with short seasons, not more 26 episode monsters.
As a relatively new Netflix subscriber I have to say its offering is hardly overwhelming. The Crown, Queens Gambit, we enjoyed The Dig too, but beyond that... it's all a bit meh really. Certainly not enough to fill a schedule.
The BBC has an enormous back-catalogue (quite a few of Netflix's offerings are ex-BBC). I am not sure of the licensing issues in offering that back-catalogue but I hope it is not hampered by 'unfair competition' issues foisted on it by private media interests.
The BBC has been a truly massive cultural influence around the world on behalf of the UK; it would be senseless for us now to allow it to be trashed on ideological grounds.
The problem with the BBC is they seem unable / unwilling to adapt and seem lost about what they should be doing.
We have done the whole bit about how theu haven't adapted to modern tv series structures. But they also seem lost about how to use YouTube. The seem to think uploading the odd clip will do, but their upload get very few views compared to loads of total randoms who do news and current affairs round ups.
Victoria Derbyshire used to make a huge thing about despite hardly anybody watching her show live, some of her clips got lots of retweets...but that doesn't generate any revenue and it is the same niche group of twatterati. As we saw with all the nonsense about how many people viewed a Boris clip it means nothing.
The youth don't watch them as their offerings aren't seen as cool.
And we are seeing it already, all the noises from the BBC are defensive don't toucb the licence fee, no reformz we are better than Netflix.
I don't disagree with a lot of that. One issue the BCC has is the expectation on them is vastly different to that on Netflix. How many hours of new TV does Netflix produce per week? Sure they have had some good series in recent months but so have the BBC.
The government has repeatedly hampered the BBC for 'competition' reasons when it should instead have been promoting and supporting the BBC as a global influencer.
Very short-sighted.
The one way the BBC might survive is if it became a rare outpost of anti-Wokery. Instead, it is piling on the bandwagon, spending tens of millions recruiting new BAME staff who are ALREADY over-represented on the screen, compared to the population at large.
BBC drama suffers from the same left-liberal PC bias, it is unwatchably Woke.
I stopped paying for this bien pensant pap several months ago. Yet, it saddens me as a Brit. The BBC is a great British institution - but so were rum, sodomy and the lash, in the Navy, and they have gone the way of all flesh. So will the Corp, unless it transforms, super quick
It's the BBC website that's the worst.
Check out the news homepage any day of the week. Pick one at random. And count the Wokey stories - lots of Twitter amplified bollocks about trans, BLM, gender fluidity, history shaming etc etc.
The irony is da kidz (for that is who they are trying to appeal to with this) never go on there.
I don't think they go a day without a trans article.....even the Guardian manage to have a day off that subject occasionally.
Really? Where's today's?
Also tell me which news site is better then the BBC or the Guardian?
Here you go...Front page, with big picture...
BBC News - Disability and dating: 'I didn’t know what bisexual was'
Ray Everall is a 21-year-old trans man from Brighton. He struggles with communication, audio and visual processing and has learning difficulties, including ADHD, dyslexia and dyspraxia. For him the main challenges are around accessing trans health services.
There are 65 stories on that 'front page'; the one you have highlghted is 35th out of 65 and more about disablility than trans. I can't see why it offends you so much.
And your suggestion for a better news site is... ?
ANY OTHER WEBSITE
Have you not looked at the BBC News Website recently? It is a Woke version of the Daily Express. It is cheap, vulgar, moronic and embarrassing
Perhaps the website is popular with the youngens? Not everything is aimed at you, you know.
It's not, tho. My older, teenage British daughter does not use the BBC website at all. She watches the odd reality TV show, the rest is Netflix, Youtube, etc
This is a massive problem for the Beeb. The kids have lost the BBC habit - as discussed on here ad infinitum, so I shall shut up - and go watch something on Netflix.
Later....
I’m not talking about people watching the Beeb. I’m talking about the website, which is factually and objectively popular.
They wouldn’t write these “woke” articles if people didn’t read them.
Here’s a tip: if you don’t like the articles, don’t read them?
How do you know? The BBC isn't driven by market forces. Victoria Derbyshire had a show for how many years that nobody watched? BBC Three is still going and nobody ever watched that.
They write arts reviews for niche theatre performances, I highly doubt they get many clicks at all.
Now so.might say that great, but how often the BBC write cover something != now engaged the public are about it.
It is however the most popular news website in the country and one of the most popular in the world.
IT. IS. FREE
HEAD. DESK
SO. ARE. MANY. OTHERS.
Sky ITV Sun Express The Independent Channel 4 etc. etc. etc.
I was unaware that the Sun, Express, ITV, etc, were devoid of advertising. Thanks.
Haha, your hatred of the BBC is only made funnier by its undeniable popularity. 😂
You are completely wrong. I am a patriotic Brit and I used to be proud of the BBC as a world-renowned emblem of British principles: free speech, fair play, just the facts, please. It is also - or it was - a positive voice for the Union (and I am clearly a passionate Unionist)
It pains me greatly to see this institution in steep decline, diseased by transient Wokeism, and with no clear model for its future, in the face of the US streaming giants.
I would be delighted if it adapted, survived and thrived, and once again became an institution nearly all Brits could take pride in. Sadly, that doesn’t seem likely (tho i will still mention the Beeb in my daily prayers). In which case it should be privatized, and let it sink or swim in the real world.
Just keep Masterchef, Springwatch and Call The Midwife. Ta
Killing Eve Fleabag Normal People The Serpent Peaky Blinders His Dark Materials Dr Foster The Fall A Suitable Boy Cormoran Strike Line of Duty
I genuinely find it puzzling that you see 'wokism' all over the BBC. One story out of 65 on the front news page that could you might describe as 'woke'.
The UK is missing a massive opportunity for global cultural influence by emasculating the BBC.
But people in britain don't want to watch their output, why do you think anyone else does?
Any idea why this story can be classed as "woke"? As far as I can see it's just highlighting injustices in society, specifically disability and dating.
Isn't "highlighting of injustices in society" the definition of "Woke"?
As a relatively new Netflix subscriber I have to say its offering is hardly overwhelming. The Crown, Queens Gambit, we enjoyed The Dig too, but beyond that... it's all a bit meh really. Certainly not enough to fill a schedule.
The BBC has an enormous back-catalogue (quite a few of Netflix's offerings are ex-BBC). I am not sure of the licensing issues in offering that back-catalogue but I hope it is not hampered by 'unfair competition' issues foisted on it by private media interests.
The BBC has been a truly massive cultural influence around the world on behalf of the UK; it would be senseless for us now to allow it to be trashed on ideological grounds.
The problem with the BBC is they seem unable / unwilling to adapt and seem lost about what they should be doing.
We have done the whole bit about how theu haven't adapted to modern tv series structures. But they also seem lost about how to use YouTube. The seem to think uploading the odd clip will do, but their upload get very few views compared to loads of total randoms who do news and current affairs round ups.
Victoria Derbyshire used to make a huge thing about despite hardly anybody watching her show live, some of her clips got lots of retweets...but that doesn't generate any revenue and it is the same niche group of twatterati. As we saw with all the nonsense about how many people viewed a Boris clip it means nothing.
The youth don't watch them as their offerings aren't seen as cool.
And we are seeing it already, all the noises from the BBC are defensive don't toucb the licence fee, no reformz we are better than Netflix.
I don't disagree with a lot of that. One issue the BCC has is the expectation on them is vastly different to that on Netflix. How many hours of new TV does Netflix produce per week? Sure they have had some good series in recent months but so have the BBC.
The government has repeatedly hampered the BBC for 'competition' reasons when it should instead have been promoting and supporting the BBC as a global influencer.
Very short-sighted.
Oh do fuck off what the bbc shows is mainly repeats of things made years ago
Maybe but I'd still like to see the hours of new material the main players produce each month.
Well name the new stuff the bbc has produced thats exclusive to the bbc and they havent just bought of a company whereas for example as I use amazon I have had over the last few years...the expanse 5 series another to go...vikings 6 series...black sails 3 series....preacher.....now on series 4.....amercian gods now on series 3....good omens....greenland...man in the high castle...I could name more but will stop there.
What have the bbc done? Downton abbey? More eastenders? The great british bakeoff?
The new Adam Curtis is very thought provoking. Perhaps needed tighter editing, but fascinating.
Kermodes Secrets of Cinema too.
Shrugs stuff that interests you no doubt, my point was a lot of bbc output though doesnt. When bbc output interests me I buy it on prime. I think over the last 5 years I have spent maybe 60£ on it. Which was the red dwarf series 1 to 6....apart from that they havent done a thing I want to pay for. In the same time I would have had to pay 750£ on licences....and not red dwarf series I bought were made well before I quit the license
Yes, though that can land you in a self reflecting bubble. One of the great things about Radio and TV is that you get exposed to new things that you wouldn't have encountered otherwise. That happenstance can expand horizons.
Much like going to a festival to see a band, and encountering some great new bands while waiting.
Ah so if we don't watch bbc we are well rounded? Sorry not true I have often watched things on amazon that I didnt expect to like by following the "People who watched this also liked this links" Same as youtube where I have discovered a lot more new music I actually liked than radio 1 ever led me too
Yes, that is my point, the "people who watched this, also like..." is how alogarithims create self reflecting bubbles. It is how the companies banalise our interests, away from minority and quirky viewing and towards popular pap. Away from programmes that challenge and stimulate, and towards lowest common denominator stuff.
Wake up sheeple!
I have seen a broader range of music and tv sinces I gave up the crap that is broadcast including finding music and films I enjoy well outside genres I normally listen to so sorry you arent correct
As a relatively new Netflix subscriber I have to say its offering is hardly overwhelming. The Crown, Queens Gambit, we enjoyed The Dig too, but beyond that... it's all a bit meh really. Certainly not enough to fill a schedule.
The BBC has an enormous back-catalogue (quite a few of Netflix's offerings are ex-BBC). I am not sure of the licensing issues in offering that back-catalogue but I hope it is not hampered by 'unfair competition' issues foisted on it by private media interests.
The BBC has been a truly massive cultural influence around the world on behalf of the UK; it would be senseless for us now to allow it to be trashed on ideological grounds.
The problem with the BBC is they seem unable / unwilling to adapt and seem lost about what they should be doing.
We have done the whole bit about how theu haven't adapted to modern tv series structures. But they also seem lost about how to use YouTube. The seem to think uploading the odd clip will do, but their upload get very few views compared to loads of total randoms who do news and current affairs round ups.
Victoria Derbyshire used to make a huge thing about despite hardly anybody watching her show live, some of her clips got lots of retweets...but that doesn't generate any revenue and it is the same niche group of twatterati. As we saw with all the nonsense about how many people viewed a Boris clip it means nothing.
The youth don't watch them as their offerings aren't seen as cool.
And we are seeing it already, all the noises from the BBC are defensive don't toucb the licence fee, no reformz we are better than Netflix.
I don't disagree with a lot of that. One issue the BCC has is the expectation on them is vastly different to that on Netflix. How many hours of new TV does Netflix produce per week? Sure they have had some good series in recent months but so have the BBC.
The government has repeatedly hampered the BBC for 'competition' reasons when it should instead have been promoting and supporting the BBC as a global influencer.
Very short-sighted.
Oh do fuck off what the bbc shows is mainly repeats of things made years ago
Maybe but I'd still like to see the hours of new material the main players produce each month.
Well name the new stuff the bbc has produced thats exclusive to the bbc and they havent just bought of a company whereas for example as I use amazon I have had over the last few years...the expanse 5 series another to go...vikings 6 series...black sails 3 series....preacher.....now on series 4.....amercian gods now on series 3....good omens....greenland...man in the high castle...I could name more but will stop there.
What have the bbc done? Downton abbey? More eastenders? The great british bakeoff?
Lol. Downton was ITV; Bake-off, although made popular on the BBC, was poached by C4.
To answer your question with a few suggestions:
Killing Eve Fleabag Normal People The Serpent Peaky Blinders His Dark Materials Dr Foster The Fall A Suitable Boy Cormoran Strike Line of Duty
Your list is a classic example of how the BBC hasn't adjusted to the modern landscape.
Killing Eve - 3 seasons of 8 episodes (over 3 years) Fleabag - 2 seasons of 6 episodes (over 4 years) Normal People - 12 episodes Peaky Blinders - 30 episodes over 5 seasons (over 7 years) His Dark Materials - 15 episodes over 2 seasons Dr Foster - 10 episodes over 2 seasons (over 3 years) Line of Duty - 29 episodes over 5 seasons (over 8 years).
Example of a Netflix big show
House of Cards - 73 episodes over 6 seasons (over 6 years).
A real BBC "classic" example...Sherlock....13 episodes over 8 years. They literally produced what a "normal" show would now expect minimum for a single season over the course of 8, yes 8, years.
While I take your point, that isn't modern. It's simply the American tradition. 13 or 26 shows a year. Often with a vast army of script writers. Most of those named above are written by a single person. They are someone's baby. That is the British tradition. Sometimes less is more.
Exactly. And same in comedy. Formula vs bespoke. Sheen vs authenticity. Consistency vs lumpy brilliance. Neither is better. It's just a different MO.
The Shield - 88 episodes, 7 seasons, 7 years Boardwalk Empire - 56 episodes, 5 seasons, 5 years Game of Thrones - 73 episodes, 8 seasons, 8 years Better Call Saul - 50 episodes, 5 seasons, 5 years Soparanos - 86 episodes, 6 seasons, 8 years.
How about slightly less "top end", something like...
The Good Wife - 156 episodes, 7 seasons, 7 years
And the BBC offer me 13 Sherlock episodes in 8 years.
And while it is true that quantity does not necessarily equal quality - *shifts nervously and glances at post count* - does anyone really believe that the quality offered by Sherlock is so much higher that it provides equivalent content and quality within its episode count? Certainly there is more filler in shows with 20 episodes a season, and even ones with 13 episodes can drag (the Marvel netflix shows spring to mind, and how Lost got better once it reduced its episode count per season), but there's just overall more quality provided more consistently, and 10-13 seems the norm for online stuff anyway.
That list of leading US shows stretches back to the late 90s.
There’s less truly great stuff out there than people think.
As a relatively new Netflix subscriber I have to say its offering is hardly overwhelming. The Crown, Queens Gambit, we enjoyed The Dig too, but beyond that... it's all a bit meh really. Certainly not enough to fill a schedule.
The BBC has an enormous back-catalogue (quite a few of Netflix's offerings are ex-BBC). I am not sure of the licensing issues in offering that back-catalogue but I hope it is not hampered by 'unfair competition' issues foisted on it by private media interests.
The BBC has been a truly massive cultural influence around the world on behalf of the UK; it would be senseless for us now to allow it to be trashed on ideological grounds.
The problem with the BBC is they seem unable / unwilling to adapt and seem lost about what they should be doing.
We have done the whole bit about how theu haven't adapted to modern tv series structures. But they also seem lost about how to use YouTube. The seem to think uploading the odd clip will do, but their upload get very few views compared to loads of total randoms who do news and current affairs round ups.
Victoria Derbyshire used to make a huge thing about despite hardly anybody watching her show live, some of her clips got lots of retweets...but that doesn't generate any revenue and it is the same niche group of twatterati. As we saw with all the nonsense about how many people viewed a Boris clip it means nothing.
The youth don't watch them as their offerings aren't seen as cool.
And we are seeing it already, all the noises from the BBC are defensive don't toucb the licence fee, no reformz we are better than Netflix.
I don't disagree with a lot of that. One issue the BCC has is the expectation on them is vastly different to that on Netflix. How many hours of new TV does Netflix produce per week? Sure they have had some good series in recent months but so have the BBC.
The government has repeatedly hampered the BBC for 'competition' reasons when it should instead have been promoting and supporting the BBC as a global influencer.
Very short-sighted.
The one way the BBC might survive is if it became a rare outpost of anti-Wokery. Instead, it is piling on the bandwagon, spending tens of millions recruiting new BAME staff who are ALREADY over-represented on the screen, compared to the population at large.
BBC drama suffers from the same left-liberal PC bias, it is unwatchably Woke.
I stopped paying for this bien pensant pap several months ago. Yet, it saddens me as a Brit. The BBC is a great British institution - but so were rum, sodomy and the lash, in the Navy, and they have gone the way of all flesh. So will the Corp, unless it transforms, super quick
It's the BBC website that's the worst.
Check out the news homepage any day of the week. Pick one at random. And count the Wokey stories - lots of Twitter amplified bollocks about trans, BLM, gender fluidity, history shaming etc etc.
The irony is da kidz (for that is who they are trying to appeal to with this) never go on there.
I don't think they go a day without a trans article.....even the Guardian manage to have a day off that subject occasionally.
Really? Where's today's?
Also tell me which news site is better then the BBC or the Guardian?
Here you go...Front page, with big picture...
BBC News - Disability and dating: 'I didn’t know what bisexual was'
Ray Everall is a 21-year-old trans man from Brighton. He struggles with communication, audio and visual processing and has learning difficulties, including ADHD, dyslexia and dyspraxia. For him the main challenges are around accessing trans health services.
There are 65 stories on that 'front page'; the one you have highlghted is 35th out of 65 and more about disablility than trans. I can't see why it offends you so much.
And your suggestion for a better news site is... ?
ANY OTHER WEBSITE
Have you not looked at the BBC News Website recently? It is a Woke version of the Daily Express. It is cheap, vulgar, moronic and embarrassing
Perhaps the website is popular with the youngens? Not everything is aimed at you, you know.
It's not, tho. My older, teenage British daughter does not use the BBC website at all. She watches the odd reality TV show, the rest is Netflix, Youtube, etc
This is a massive problem for the Beeb. The kids have lost the BBC habit - as discussed on here ad infinitum, so I shall shut up - and go watch something on Netflix.
Later....
I’m not talking about people watching the Beeb. I’m talking about the website, which is factually and objectively popular.
They wouldn’t write these “woke” articles if people didn’t read them.
Here’s a tip: if you don’t like the articles, don’t read them?
How do you know? The BBC isn't driven by market forces. Victoria Derbyshire had a show for how many years that nobody watched? BBC Three is still going and nobody ever watched that.
They write arts reviews for niche theatre performances, I highly doubt they get many clicks at all.
Now so.might say that great, but how often the BBC write cover something != now engaged the public are about it.
It is however the most popular news website in the country and one of the most popular in the world.
IT. IS. FREE
HEAD. DESK
SO. ARE. MANY. OTHERS.
Sky ITV Sun Express The Independent Channel 4 etc. etc. etc.
I was unaware that the Sun, Express, ITV, etc, were devoid of advertising. Thanks.
Haha, your hatred of the BBC is only made funnier by its undeniable popularity. 😂
You are completely wrong. I am a patriotic Brit and I used to be proud of the BBC as a world-renowned emblem of British principles: free speech, fair play, just the facts, please. It is also - or it was - a positive voice for the Union (and I am clearly a passionate Unionist)
It pains me greatly to see this institution in steep decline, diseased by transient Wokeism, and with no clear model for its future, in the face of the US streaming giants.
I would be delighted if it adapted, survived and thrived, and once again became an institution nearly all Brits could take pride in. Sadly, that doesn’t seem likely (tho i will still mention the Beeb in my daily prayers). In which case it should be privatized, and let it sink or swim in the real world.
Just keep Masterchef, Springwatch and Call The Midwife. Ta
Killing Eve Fleabag Normal People The Serpent Peaky Blinders His Dark Materials Dr Foster The Fall A Suitable Boy Cormoran Strike Line of Duty
I genuinely find it puzzling that you see 'wokism' all over the BBC. One story out of 65 on the front news page that could you might describe as 'woke'.
The UK is missing a massive opportunity for global cultural influence by emasculating the BBC.
But people in britain don't want to watch their output, why do you think anyone else does?
Any idea why this story can be classed as "woke"? As far as I can see it's just highlighting injustices in society, specifically disability and dating.
blinks I was talking about woke? did you @ the wrong person?
Sorry, somebody was. The nesting on the quotes gets impossible to read on a laptop.
As a relatively new Netflix subscriber I have to say its offering is hardly overwhelming. The Crown, Queens Gambit, we enjoyed The Dig too, but beyond that... it's all a bit meh really. Certainly not enough to fill a schedule.
The BBC has an enormous back-catalogue (quite a few of Netflix's offerings are ex-BBC). I am not sure of the licensing issues in offering that back-catalogue but I hope it is not hampered by 'unfair competition' issues foisted on it by private media interests.
The BBC has been a truly massive cultural influence around the world on behalf of the UK; it would be senseless for us now to allow it to be trashed on ideological grounds.
The problem with the BBC is they seem unable / unwilling to adapt and seem lost about what they should be doing.
We have done the whole bit about how theu haven't adapted to modern tv series structures. But they also seem lost about how to use YouTube. The seem to think uploading the odd clip will do, but their upload get very few views compared to loads of total randoms who do news and current affairs round ups.
Victoria Derbyshire used to make a huge thing about despite hardly anybody watching her show live, some of her clips got lots of retweets...but that doesn't generate any revenue and it is the same niche group of twatterati. As we saw with all the nonsense about how many people viewed a Boris clip it means nothing.
The youth don't watch them as their offerings aren't seen as cool.
And we are seeing it already, all the noises from the BBC are defensive don't toucb the licence fee, no reformz we are better than Netflix.
I don't disagree with a lot of that. One issue the BCC has is the expectation on them is vastly different to that on Netflix. How many hours of new TV does Netflix produce per week? Sure they have had some good series in recent months but so have the BBC.
The government has repeatedly hampered the BBC for 'competition' reasons when it should instead have been promoting and supporting the BBC as a global influencer.
Very short-sighted.
Oh do fuck off what the bbc shows is mainly repeats of things made years ago
Maybe but I'd still like to see the hours of new material the main players produce each month.
Well name the new stuff the bbc has produced thats exclusive to the bbc and they havent just bought of a company whereas for example as I use amazon I have had over the last few years...the expanse 5 series another to go...vikings 6 series...black sails 3 series....preacher.....now on series 4.....amercian gods now on series 3....good omens....greenland...man in the high castle...I could name more but will stop there.
What have the bbc done? Downton abbey? More eastenders? The great british bakeoff?
Lol. Downton was ITV; Bake-off, although made popular on the BBC, was poached by C4.
To answer your question with a few suggestions:
Killing Eve Fleabag Normal People The Serpent Peaky Blinders His Dark Materials Dr Foster The Fall A Suitable Boy Cormoran Strike Line of Duty
Your list is a classic example of how the BBC hasn't adjusted to the modern landscape.
Killing Eve - 3 seasons of 8 episodes (over 3 years) Fleabag - 2 seasons of 6 episodes (over 4 years) Normal People - 12 episodes Peaky Blinders - 30 episodes over 5 seasons (over 7 years) His Dark Materials - 15 episodes over 2 seasons Dr Foster - 10 episodes over 2 seasons (over 3 years) Line of Duty - 29 episodes over 5 seasons (over 8 years).
Example of a Netflix big show
House of Cards - 73 episodes over 6 seasons (over 6 years).
A real BBC "classic" example...Sherlock....13 episodes over 8 years. They literally produced what a "normal" show would now expect minimum for a single season over the course of 8, yes 8, years.
This is nothing to do with Netflix. Long series, and many of them, has been standard American broadcast fare from at least the 1960s.
The point is Netflix now has made all this available to the British consumer, on demand anywhere, anytime, and their own originals are even bigger budget and higher production quality than what the BBC are doing.
The BBC saying we have this handful of great shows, people seemed to really like, they are each a total of 6hrs and you will have to wait another 2 years before you get another 6.....that just isn't the game now.
It might work if it was also definitely higher quality in production, acting etc, but it isn't. It's like any other TV service, some of it is good, a few bits are great, most of it is mediocre or crap.
If the quality is going to be similar to worse, why the heck wouldn't I prefer offerings which are more numerous, more varied and more accessible?
Do we think all children going back on 8 March is a good idea?
Won't it lead to R central??
God alone knows. We hear different stories about the schools every day - first that primary school children are now the single biggest source of Covid transmission, and then that there's little evidence from anywhere in Europe that schools are a major driver of infection.
I mean, my instinct would be that it would be more sensible to do it in phases, as is being done in Scotland and Wales and as the teaching unions are demanding, but that's just a guess. Who knows for certain?
All I would add is that it seems to be a considerable gamble. If it does lead to a spike in transmission and the kids end up being shoved back into lockdown again (and, by extension, the whole population has to rot in captivity for even longer,) then the additional socio-economic and psychological damage inflicted upon the population will be enormous. The Government will have spaffed its vaccine advantage up the wall and I would imagine that its popularity would collapse as a result.
If they're going to let all the kids back at once then they'd better have compelling evidence to suggest that it won't precipitate a fresh disaster.
Compelling evidence ?
Well over 17m will have been vaccinated more than two weeks prior to Monday 8th March with hundreds of thousands more joining them every day from then on.
One is well aware of the significance of the two key dates so far - 15th Feb for completing cohorts 1-4, and 8th Mar for the schools. They are exactly three weeks apart.
So, in rough terms that means that the large bulk of the four most vulnerable groups should have protection by the time the schools start opening. But that still leaves the whole of the rest of the population defenceless in the event of a resurgence. Even if the consequences in terms of eventual death are greatly ameliorated, another big surge in hospital admissions would be more than enough to see us back to where we are now until the situation calms back down and a lot more people have had their jabs.
I'm as eager to be rid of all these bloody rules as anyone (and nor do I wish us to be locked up for another six months because the authorities have grown excessively cautious,) but if we go charging forwards too quickly we simply risk yet further setbacks, and that would be horrendous.
As a relatively new Netflix subscriber I have to say its offering is hardly overwhelming. The Crown, Queens Gambit, we enjoyed The Dig too, but beyond that... it's all a bit meh really. Certainly not enough to fill a schedule.
The BBC has an enormous back-catalogue (quite a few of Netflix's offerings are ex-BBC). I am not sure of the licensing issues in offering that back-catalogue but I hope it is not hampered by 'unfair competition' issues foisted on it by private media interests.
The BBC has been a truly massive cultural influence around the world on behalf of the UK; it would be senseless for us now to allow it to be trashed on ideological grounds.
The problem with the BBC is they seem unable / unwilling to adapt and seem lost about what they should be doing.
We have done the whole bit about how theu haven't adapted to modern tv series structures. But they also seem lost about how to use YouTube. The seem to think uploading the odd clip will do, but their upload get very few views compared to loads of total randoms who do news and current affairs round ups.
Victoria Derbyshire used to make a huge thing about despite hardly anybody watching her show live, some of her clips got lots of retweets...but that doesn't generate any revenue and it is the same niche group of twatterati. As we saw with all the nonsense about how many people viewed a Boris clip it means nothing.
The youth don't watch them as their offerings aren't seen as cool.
And we are seeing it already, all the noises from the BBC are defensive don't toucb the licence fee, no reformz we are better than Netflix.
I don't disagree with a lot of that. One issue the BCC has is the expectation on them is vastly different to that on Netflix. How many hours of new TV does Netflix produce per week? Sure they have had some good series in recent months but so have the BBC.
The government has repeatedly hampered the BBC for 'competition' reasons when it should instead have been promoting and supporting the BBC as a global influencer.
Very short-sighted.
Oh do fuck off what the bbc shows is mainly repeats of things made years ago
Maybe but I'd still like to see the hours of new material the main players produce each month.
Well name the new stuff the bbc has produced thats exclusive to the bbc and they havent just bought of a company whereas for example as I use amazon I have had over the last few years...the expanse 5 series another to go...vikings 6 series...black sails 3 series....preacher.....now on series 4.....amercian gods now on series 3....good omens....greenland...man in the high castle...I could name more but will stop there.
What have the bbc done? Downton abbey? More eastenders? The great british bakeoff?
Lol. Downton was ITV; Bake-off, although made popular on the BBC, was poached by C4.
To answer your question with a few suggestions:
Killing Eve Fleabag Normal People The Serpent Peaky Blinders His Dark Materials Dr Foster The Fall A Suitable Boy Cormoran Strike Line of Duty
Your list is a classic example of how the BBC hasn't adjusted to the modern landscape.
Killing Eve - 3 seasons of 8 episodes (over 3 years) Fleabag - 2 seasons of 6 episodes (over 4 years) Normal People - 12 episodes Peaky Blinders - 30 episodes over 5 seasons (over 7 years) His Dark Materials - 15 episodes over 2 seasons Dr Foster - 10 episodes over 2 seasons (over 3 years) Line of Duty - 29 episodes over 5 seasons (over 8 years).
Example of a Netflix big show
House of Cards - 73 episodes over 6 seasons (over 6 years).
A real BBC "classic" example...Sherlock....13 episodes over 8 years. They literally produced what a "normal" show would now expect minimum for a single season over the course of 8, yes 8, years.
While I take your point, that isn't modern. It's simply the American tradition. 13 or 26 shows a year. Often with a vast army of script writers. Most of those named above are written by a single person. They are someone's baby. That is the British tradition. Sometimes less is more. Edit: I see the point has been made.
Agreed, American tend to flog an idea to death. Look at how Mad Men dragged on for example.
Less can sometimes be more. But less can also sometimes just be less.
5 seasons is the industry standard for an upmarket drama series. Very few go longer than that while maintaining the quality. Mad Men, House, others, all decline after season 5. But getting to season 5 is a real achievement. A success
Notable exceptions are The Sopranos (kept improving to the final end of season 6), and, as menshed, Grey’s Anatomy, which is just a phenomenon
As a relatively new Netflix subscriber I have to say its offering is hardly overwhelming. The Crown, Queens Gambit, we enjoyed The Dig too, but beyond that... it's all a bit meh really. Certainly not enough to fill a schedule.
The BBC has an enormous back-catalogue (quite a few of Netflix's offerings are ex-BBC). I am not sure of the licensing issues in offering that back-catalogue but I hope it is not hampered by 'unfair competition' issues foisted on it by private media interests.
The BBC has been a truly massive cultural influence around the world on behalf of the UK; it would be senseless for us now to allow it to be trashed on ideological grounds.
The problem with the BBC is they seem unable / unwilling to adapt and seem lost about what they should be doing.
We have done the whole bit about how theu haven't adapted to modern tv series structures. But they also seem lost about how to use YouTube. The seem to think uploading the odd clip will do, but their upload get very few views compared to loads of total randoms who do news and current affairs round ups.
Victoria Derbyshire used to make a huge thing about despite hardly anybody watching her show live, some of her clips got lots of retweets...but that doesn't generate any revenue and it is the same niche group of twatterati. As we saw with all the nonsense about how many people viewed a Boris clip it means nothing.
The youth don't watch them as their offerings aren't seen as cool.
And we are seeing it already, all the noises from the BBC are defensive don't toucb the licence fee, no reformz we are better than Netflix.
I don't disagree with a lot of that. One issue the BCC has is the expectation on them is vastly different to that on Netflix. How many hours of new TV does Netflix produce per week? Sure they have had some good series in recent months but so have the BBC.
The government has repeatedly hampered the BBC for 'competition' reasons when it should instead have been promoting and supporting the BBC as a global influencer.
Very short-sighted.
Oh do fuck off what the bbc shows is mainly repeats of things made years ago
Maybe but I'd still like to see the hours of new material the main players produce each month.
Well name the new stuff the bbc has produced thats exclusive to the bbc and they havent just bought of a company whereas for example as I use amazon I have had over the last few years...the expanse 5 series another to go...vikings 6 series...black sails 3 series....preacher.....now on series 4.....amercian gods now on series 3....good omens....greenland...man in the high castle...I could name more but will stop there.
What have the bbc done? Downton abbey? More eastenders? The great british bakeoff?
Lol. Downton was ITV; Bake-off, although made popular on the BBC, was poached by C4.
To answer your question with a few suggestions:
Killing Eve Fleabag Normal People The Serpent Peaky Blinders His Dark Materials Dr Foster The Fall A Suitable Boy Cormoran Strike Line of Duty
Your list is a classic example of how the BBC hasn't adjusted to the modern landscape.
Killing Eve - 3 seasons of 8 episodes (over 3 years) Fleabag - 2 seasons of 6 episodes (over 4 years) Normal People - 12 episodes Peaky Blinders - 30 episodes over 5 seasons (over 7 years) His Dark Materials - 15 episodes over 2 seasons Dr Foster - 10 episodes over 2 seasons (over 3 years) Line of Duty - 29 episodes over 5 seasons (over 8 years).
Example of a Netflix big show
House of Cards - 73 episodes over 6 seasons (over 6 years).
A real BBC "classic" example...Sherlock....13 episodes over 8 years. They literally produced what a "normal" show would now expect minimum for a single season over the course of 8, yes 8, years.
While I take your point, that isn't modern. It's simply the American tradition. 13 or 26 shows a year. Often with a vast army of script writers. Most of those named above are written by a single person. They are someone's baby. That is the British tradition. Sometimes less is more. Edit: I see the point has been made.
Agreed, American tend to flog an idea to death. Look at how Mad Men dragged on for example.
Less can sometimes be more. But less can also sometimes just be less.
Actually Ireland were really cautious with pub reopening last time. And Ireland is further behind on vaccinations than UK. But certainly something for NI to note. Arlene doesn't strike me as a pub fan in any case. Bit like Sturgeon.
Possibly. I am hoping the pubs will be open by May but I have no insight into that whatsoever.
I have pubs pencilled in for 10th May when hospital admissions should be sub 100.
As a relatively new Netflix subscriber I have to say its offering is hardly overwhelming. The Crown, Queens Gambit, we enjoyed The Dig too, but beyond that... it's all a bit meh really. Certainly not enough to fill a schedule.
The BBC has an enormous back-catalogue (quite a few of Netflix's offerings are ex-BBC). I am not sure of the licensing issues in offering that back-catalogue but I hope it is not hampered by 'unfair competition' issues foisted on it by private media interests.
The BBC has been a truly massive cultural influence around the world on behalf of the UK; it would be senseless for us now to allow it to be trashed on ideological grounds.
The problem with the BBC is they seem unable / unwilling to adapt and seem lost about what they should be doing.
We have done the whole bit about how theu haven't adapted to modern tv series structures. But they also seem lost about how to use YouTube. The seem to think uploading the odd clip will do, but their upload get very few views compared to loads of total randoms who do news and current affairs round ups.
Victoria Derbyshire used to make a huge thing about despite hardly anybody watching her show live, some of her clips got lots of retweets...but that doesn't generate any revenue and it is the same niche group of twatterati. As we saw with all the nonsense about how many people viewed a Boris clip it means nothing.
The youth don't watch them as their offerings aren't seen as cool.
And we are seeing it already, all the noises from the BBC are defensive don't toucb the licence fee, no reformz we are better than Netflix.
I don't disagree with a lot of that. One issue the BCC has is the expectation on them is vastly different to that on Netflix. How many hours of new TV does Netflix produce per week? Sure they have had some good series in recent months but so have the BBC.
The government has repeatedly hampered the BBC for 'competition' reasons when it should instead have been promoting and supporting the BBC as a global influencer.
Very short-sighted.
The one way the BBC might survive is if it became a rare outpost of anti-Wokery. Instead, it is piling on the bandwagon, spending tens of millions recruiting new BAME staff who are ALREADY over-represented on the screen, compared to the population at large.
BBC drama suffers from the same left-liberal PC bias, it is unwatchably Woke.
I stopped paying for this bien pensant pap several months ago. Yet, it saddens me as a Brit. The BBC is a great British institution - but so were rum, sodomy and the lash, in the Navy, and they have gone the way of all flesh. So will the Corp, unless it transforms, super quick
It's the BBC website that's the worst.
Check out the news homepage any day of the week. Pick one at random. And count the Wokey stories - lots of Twitter amplified bollocks about trans, BLM, gender fluidity, history shaming etc etc.
The irony is da kidz (for that is who they are trying to appeal to with this) never go on there.
I don't think they go a day without a trans article.....even the Guardian manage to have a day off that subject occasionally.
Really? Where's today's?
Also tell me which news site is better then the BBC or the Guardian?
Here you go...Front page, with big picture...
BBC News - Disability and dating: 'I didn’t know what bisexual was'
Ray Everall is a 21-year-old trans man from Brighton. He struggles with communication, audio and visual processing and has learning difficulties, including ADHD, dyslexia and dyspraxia. For him the main challenges are around accessing trans health services.
There are 65 stories on that 'front page'; the one you have highlghted is 35th out of 65 and more about disablility than trans. I can't see why it offends you so much.
And your suggestion for a better news site is... ?
ANY OTHER WEBSITE
Have you not looked at the BBC News Website recently? It is a Woke version of the Daily Express. It is cheap, vulgar, moronic and embarrassing
Perhaps the website is popular with the youngens? Not everything is aimed at you, you know.
It's not, tho. My older, teenage British daughter does not use the BBC website at all. She watches the odd reality TV show, the rest is Netflix, Youtube, etc
This is a massive problem for the Beeb. The kids have lost the BBC habit - as discussed on here ad infinitum, so I shall shut up - and go watch something on Netflix.
Later....
I’m not talking about people watching the Beeb. I’m talking about the website, which is factually and objectively popular.
They wouldn’t write these “woke” articles if people didn’t read them.
Here’s a tip: if you don’t like the articles, don’t read them?
How do you know? The BBC isn't driven by market forces. Victoria Derbyshire had a show for how many years that nobody watched? BBC Three is still going and nobody ever watched that.
They write arts reviews for niche theatre performances, I highly doubt they get many clicks at all.
Now so.might say that great, but how often the BBC write cover something != now engaged the public are about it.
It is however the most popular news website in the country and one of the most popular in the world.
IT. IS. FREE
HEAD. DESK
SO. ARE. MANY. OTHERS.
Sky ITV Sun Express The Independent Channel 4 etc. etc. etc.
I was unaware that the Sun, Express, ITV, etc, were devoid of advertising. Thanks.
Haha, your hatred of the BBC is only made funnier by its undeniable popularity. 😂
You are completely wrong. I am a patriotic Brit and I used to be proud of the BBC as a world-renowned emblem of British principles: free speech, fair play, just the facts, please. It is also - or it was - a positive voice for the Union (and I am clearly a passionate Unionist)
It pains me greatly to see this institution in steep decline, diseased by transient Wokeism, and with no clear model for its future, in the face of the US streaming giants.
I would be delighted if it adapted, survived and thrived, and once again became an institution nearly all Brits could take pride in. Sadly, that doesn’t seem likely (tho i will still mention the Beeb in my daily prayers). In which case it should be privatized, and let it sink or swim in the real world.
Just keep Masterchef, Springwatch and Call The Midwife. Ta
Killing Eve Fleabag Normal People The Serpent Peaky Blinders His Dark Materials Dr Foster The Fall A Suitable Boy Cormoran Strike Line of Duty
I genuinely find it puzzling that you see 'wokism' all over the BBC. One story out of 65 on the front news page that could you might describe as 'woke'.
The UK is missing a massive opportunity for global cultural influence by emasculating the BBC.
But people in britain don't want to watch their output, why do you think anyone else does?
Any idea why this story can be classed as "woke"? As far as I can see it's just highlighting injustices in society, specifically disability and dating.
Isn't "highlighting of injustices in society" the definition of "Woke"?
As a relatively new Netflix subscriber I have to say its offering is hardly overwhelming. The Crown, Queens Gambit, we enjoyed The Dig too, but beyond that... it's all a bit meh really. Certainly not enough to fill a schedule.
The BBC has an enormous back-catalogue (quite a few of Netflix's offerings are ex-BBC). I am not sure of the licensing issues in offering that back-catalogue but I hope it is not hampered by 'unfair competition' issues foisted on it by private media interests.
The BBC has been a truly massive cultural influence around the world on behalf of the UK; it would be senseless for us now to allow it to be trashed on ideological grounds.
The problem with the BBC is they seem unable / unwilling to adapt and seem lost about what they should be doing.
We have done the whole bit about how theu haven't adapted to modern tv series structures. But they also seem lost about how to use YouTube. The seem to think uploading the odd clip will do, but their upload get very few views compared to loads of total randoms who do news and current affairs round ups.
Victoria Derbyshire used to make a huge thing about despite hardly anybody watching her show live, some of her clips got lots of retweets...but that doesn't generate any revenue and it is the same niche group of twatterati. As we saw with all the nonsense about how many people viewed a Boris clip it means nothing.
The youth don't watch them as their offerings aren't seen as cool.
And we are seeing it already, all the noises from the BBC are defensive don't toucb the licence fee, no reformz we are better than Netflix.
I don't disagree with a lot of that. One issue the BCC has is the expectation on them is vastly different to that on Netflix. How many hours of new TV does Netflix produce per week? Sure they have had some good series in recent months but so have the BBC.
The government has repeatedly hampered the BBC for 'competition' reasons when it should instead have been promoting and supporting the BBC as a global influencer.
Very short-sighted.
Oh do fuck off what the bbc shows is mainly repeats of things made years ago
Maybe but I'd still like to see the hours of new material the main players produce each month.
Well name the new stuff the bbc has produced thats exclusive to the bbc and they havent just bought of a company whereas for example as I use amazon I have had over the last few years...the expanse 5 series another to go...vikings 6 series...black sails 3 series....preacher.....now on series 4.....amercian gods now on series 3....good omens....greenland...man in the high castle...I could name more but will stop there.
What have the bbc done? Downton abbey? More eastenders? The great british bakeoff?
Lol. Downton was ITV; Bake-off, although made popular on the BBC, was poached by C4.
To answer your question with a few suggestions:
Killing Eve Fleabag Normal People The Serpent Peaky Blinders His Dark Materials Dr Foster The Fall A Suitable Boy Cormoran Strike Line of Duty
Your list is a classic example of how the BBC hasn't adjusted to the modern landscape.
Killing Eve - 3 seasons of 8 episodes (over 3 years) Fleabag - 2 seasons of 6 episodes (over 4 years) Normal People - 12 episodes Peaky Blinders - 30 episodes over 5 seasons (over 7 years) His Dark Materials - 15 episodes over 2 seasons Dr Foster - 10 episodes over 2 seasons (over 3 years) Line of Duty - 29 episodes over 5 seasons (over 8 years).
Example of a Netflix big show
House of Cards - 73 episodes over 6 seasons (over 6 years).
A real BBC "classic" example...Sherlock....13 episodes over 8 years. They literally produced what a "normal" show would now expect minimum for a single season over the course of 8, yes 8, years.
This is nothing to do with Netflix. Long series, and many of them, has been standard American broadcast fare from at least the 1960s.
The point is Netflix now has made all this available to the British consumer, on demand anywhere, anytime, and their own originals are even bigger budget and higher production quality than what the BBC are doing.
The BBC saying we have this handful of great shows, people seemed to really like, they are each a total of 6hrs and you will have to wait another 2 years before you get another 6.....that just isn't the game now.
It might work if it was also definitely higher quality in production, acting etc, but it isn't. It's like any other TV service, some of it is good, a few bits are great, most of it is mediocre or crap.
If the quality is going to be similar to worse, why the heck wouldn't I prefer offerings which are more numerous, more varied and more accessible?
Production is now undeniably higher outside of the BBC. No 4k, no HDR, piss poor VFX....The BBC are just miles behind.
They couldn't make say a Boardwalk Empire type show even if they wanted, they don't have the tech to do all the VFX work. Doctor Who is a joke compared to say the Mandalorian production values.
What Disney getting into the game will show is the idea of you have this for tv and that for movies again is now dead, you are expected to make just excellent produced stuff for tv.
As a relatively new Netflix subscriber I have to say its offering is hardly overwhelming. The Crown, Queens Gambit, we enjoyed The Dig too, but beyond that... it's all a bit meh really. Certainly not enough to fill a schedule.
The BBC has an enormous back-catalogue (quite a few of Netflix's offerings are ex-BBC). I am not sure of the licensing issues in offering that back-catalogue but I hope it is not hampered by 'unfair competition' issues foisted on it by private media interests.
The BBC has been a truly massive cultural influence around the world on behalf of the UK; it would be senseless for us now to allow it to be trashed on ideological grounds.
The problem with the BBC is they seem unable / unwilling to adapt and seem lost about what they should be doing.
We have done the whole bit about how theu haven't adapted to modern tv series structures. But they also seem lost about how to use YouTube. The seem to think uploading the odd clip will do, but their upload get very few views compared to loads of total randoms who do news and current affairs round ups.
Victoria Derbyshire used to make a huge thing about despite hardly anybody watching her show live, some of her clips got lots of retweets...but that doesn't generate any revenue and it is the same niche group of twatterati. As we saw with all the nonsense about how many people viewed a Boris clip it means nothing.
The youth don't watch them as their offerings aren't seen as cool.
And we are seeing it already, all the noises from the BBC are defensive don't toucb the licence fee, no reformz we are better than Netflix.
I don't disagree with a lot of that. One issue the BCC has is the expectation on them is vastly different to that on Netflix. How many hours of new TV does Netflix produce per week? Sure they have had some good series in recent months but so have the BBC.
The government has repeatedly hampered the BBC for 'competition' reasons when it should instead have been promoting and supporting the BBC as a global influencer.
Very short-sighted.
Oh do fuck off what the bbc shows is mainly repeats of things made years ago
Maybe but I'd still like to see the hours of new material the main players produce each month.
Well name the new stuff the bbc has produced thats exclusive to the bbc and they havent just bought of a company whereas for example as I use amazon I have had over the last few years...the expanse 5 series another to go...vikings 6 series...black sails 3 series....preacher.....now on series 4.....amercian gods now on series 3....good omens....greenland...man in the high castle...I could name more but will stop there.
What have the bbc done? Downton abbey? More eastenders? The great british bakeoff?
Lol. Downton was ITV; Bake-off, although made popular on the BBC, was poached by C4.
To answer your question with a few suggestions:
Killing Eve Fleabag Normal People The Serpent Peaky Blinders His Dark Materials Dr Foster The Fall A Suitable Boy Cormoran Strike Line of Duty
Your list is a classic example of how the BBC hasn't adjusted to the modern landscape.
Killing Eve - 3 seasons of 8 episodes (over 3 years) Fleabag - 2 seasons of 6 episodes (over 4 years) Normal People - 12 episodes Peaky Blinders - 30 episodes over 5 seasons (over 7 years) His Dark Materials - 15 episodes over 2 seasons Dr Foster - 10 episodes over 2 seasons (over 3 years) Line of Duty - 29 episodes over 5 seasons (over 8 years).
Example of a Netflix big show
House of Cards - 73 episodes over 6 seasons (over 6 years).
Yes. Aside from the fact many of those shows are dreadful, or decline dreadfully (looking at you, Peaky Blinders) the BBC seems unable to master the obviously-successful American model, of quick but quality production of series after series of a popular drama, by the ton
My go-to example is two hospital drama series, a staple for any TV channel. Grey’s Anatomy versus Casualty. Both are a bit woke, apart from that, they live in parallel universes.
The American series Grey’s Anatomy has consistently moving stories, believeable scenarios, clever melodrama, fine acting, and is globally popular. And they make 26 episodes a year. And they are still doing it, 17 years later. Incredible. And its had 38 Emmy nominations
No one watches Casualty outside the UK, even tho it plods on, year after year. It is laughably wooden, silly, awkward and cheap. And they make about a dozen episodes a season, all of them bad.
Is there anything that doesn't strike you as a bit woke?
PS I'm not going to defend Casualty - it's just a soap.
You know you’re getting old when you get passionately and irrationally angry about things younger people like because you don’t like it.
When you were 20, I bet people your age currently hated what 20 year olds liked.
“Woke” just means “stuff I don’t like”
It really doesnt mean that.
It’s used in that way. An article talking about transgender-ism has nothing to do with being “woke”. It’s just a human interest story. However people who don’t like transgender-ism will complain simply because they don’t like transgender-ism.
It is just like people making complaints to OFCOM after seeing two men kiss on terrestrial TV god forbid.
“Down with this sort of thing”
You're right that some use it that way. But not everyone uses it that way, whether positively or negatively. It's easy to distinguish between people simply railing at something they don't like, and those with an actual point to argue about a specific agenda as they see it, just as it is easy to distinguish between the higlighting of legitimate grievances or injustices, and wallowing in such things to push an agenda beyond addressing such things.
As a relatively new Netflix subscriber I have to say its offering is hardly overwhelming. The Crown, Queens Gambit, we enjoyed The Dig too, but beyond that... it's all a bit meh really. Certainly not enough to fill a schedule.
The BBC has an enormous back-catalogue (quite a few of Netflix's offerings are ex-BBC). I am not sure of the licensing issues in offering that back-catalogue but I hope it is not hampered by 'unfair competition' issues foisted on it by private media interests.
The BBC has been a truly massive cultural influence around the world on behalf of the UK; it would be senseless for us now to allow it to be trashed on ideological grounds.
The problem with the BBC is they seem unable / unwilling to adapt and seem lost about what they should be doing.
We have done the whole bit about how theu haven't adapted to modern tv series structures. But they also seem lost about how to use YouTube. The seem to think uploading the odd clip will do, but their upload get very few views compared to loads of total randoms who do news and current affairs round ups.
Victoria Derbyshire used to make a huge thing about despite hardly anybody watching her show live, some of her clips got lots of retweets...but that doesn't generate any revenue and it is the same niche group of twatterati. As we saw with all the nonsense about how many people viewed a Boris clip it means nothing.
The youth don't watch them as their offerings aren't seen as cool.
And we are seeing it already, all the noises from the BBC are defensive don't toucb the licence fee, no reformz we are better than Netflix.
I don't disagree with a lot of that. One issue the BCC has is the expectation on them is vastly different to that on Netflix. How many hours of new TV does Netflix produce per week? Sure they have had some good series in recent months but so have the BBC.
The government has repeatedly hampered the BBC for 'competition' reasons when it should instead have been promoting and supporting the BBC as a global influencer.
Very short-sighted.
Oh do fuck off what the bbc shows is mainly repeats of things made years ago
Maybe but I'd still like to see the hours of new material the main players produce each month.
Well name the new stuff the bbc has produced thats exclusive to the bbc and they havent just bought of a company whereas for example as I use amazon I have had over the last few years...the expanse 5 series another to go...vikings 6 series...black sails 3 series....preacher.....now on series 4.....amercian gods now on series 3....good omens....greenland...man in the high castle...I could name more but will stop there.
What have the bbc done? Downton abbey? More eastenders? The great british bakeoff?
Lol. Downton was ITV; Bake-off, although made popular on the BBC, was poached by C4.
To answer your question with a few suggestions:
Killing Eve Fleabag Normal People The Serpent Peaky Blinders His Dark Materials Dr Foster The Fall A Suitable Boy Cormoran Strike Line of Duty
Your list is a classic example of how the BBC hasn't adjusted to the modern landscape.
Killing Eve - 3 seasons of 8 episodes (over 3 years) Fleabag - 2 seasons of 6 episodes (over 4 years) Normal People - 12 episodes Peaky Blinders - 30 episodes over 5 seasons (over 7 years) His Dark Materials - 15 episodes over 2 seasons Dr Foster - 10 episodes over 2 seasons (over 3 years) Line of Duty - 29 episodes over 5 seasons (over 8 years).
Example of a Netflix big show
House of Cards - 73 episodes over 6 seasons (over 6 years).
A real BBC "classic" example...Sherlock....13 episodes over 8 years. They literally produced what a "normal" show would now expect minimum for a single season over the course of 8, yes 8, years.
While I take your point, that isn't modern. It's simply the American tradition. 13 or 26 shows a year. Often with a vast army of script writers. Most of those named above are written by a single person. They are someone's baby. That is the British tradition. Sometimes less is more. Edit: I see the point has been made.
Agreed, American tend to flog an idea to death. Look at how Mad Men dragged on for example.
Less can sometimes be more. But less can also sometimes just be less.
5 seasons is the industry standard for an upmarket drama series. Very few go longer than that while maintaining the quality. Mad Men, House, others, all decline after season 5. But getting to season 5 is a real achievement. A success
Notable exceptions are The Sopranos (kept improving to the final end of season 6), and, as menshed, Grey’s Anatomy, which is just a phenomenon
One thing I notice with streaming and maybe only me so anecdotal. With broadcast tv I would start watching something and if it wasnt any good I would generally continue watching as there wasnt anything else worth watching.....with streaming if I get 30 minutes into something and it isnt any good I just go find something else to watch
As a relatively new Netflix subscriber I have to say its offering is hardly overwhelming. The Crown, Queens Gambit, we enjoyed The Dig too, but beyond that... it's all a bit meh really. Certainly not enough to fill a schedule.
The BBC has an enormous back-catalogue (quite a few of Netflix's offerings are ex-BBC). I am not sure of the licensing issues in offering that back-catalogue but I hope it is not hampered by 'unfair competition' issues foisted on it by private media interests.
The BBC has been a truly massive cultural influence around the world on behalf of the UK; it would be senseless for us now to allow it to be trashed on ideological grounds.
The problem with the BBC is they seem unable / unwilling to adapt and seem lost about what they should be doing.
We have done the whole bit about how theu haven't adapted to modern tv series structures. But they also seem lost about how to use YouTube. The seem to think uploading the odd clip will do, but their upload get very few views compared to loads of total randoms who do news and current affairs round ups.
Victoria Derbyshire used to make a huge thing about despite hardly anybody watching her show live, some of her clips got lots of retweets...but that doesn't generate any revenue and it is the same niche group of twatterati. As we saw with all the nonsense about how many people viewed a Boris clip it means nothing.
The youth don't watch them as their offerings aren't seen as cool.
And we are seeing it already, all the noises from the BBC are defensive don't toucb the licence fee, no reformz we are better than Netflix.
I don't disagree with a lot of that. One issue the BCC has is the expectation on them is vastly different to that on Netflix. How many hours of new TV does Netflix produce per week? Sure they have had some good series in recent months but so have the BBC.
The government has repeatedly hampered the BBC for 'competition' reasons when it should instead have been promoting and supporting the BBC as a global influencer.
Very short-sighted.
Oh do fuck off what the bbc shows is mainly repeats of things made years ago
Maybe but I'd still like to see the hours of new material the main players produce each month.
Well name the new stuff the bbc has produced thats exclusive to the bbc and they havent just bought of a company whereas for example as I use amazon I have had over the last few years...the expanse 5 series another to go...vikings 6 series...black sails 3 series....preacher.....now on series 4.....amercian gods now on series 3....good omens....greenland...man in the high castle...I could name more but will stop there.
What have the bbc done? Downton abbey? More eastenders? The great british bakeoff?
Lol. Downton was ITV; Bake-off, although made popular on the BBC, was poached by C4.
To answer your question with a few suggestions:
Killing Eve Fleabag Normal People The Serpent Peaky Blinders His Dark Materials Dr Foster The Fall A Suitable Boy Cormoran Strike Line of Duty
Your list is a classic example of how the BBC hasn't adjusted to the modern landscape.
Killing Eve - 3 seasons of 8 episodes (over 3 years) Fleabag - 2 seasons of 6 episodes (over 4 years) Normal People - 12 episodes Peaky Blinders - 30 episodes over 5 seasons (over 7 years) His Dark Materials - 15 episodes over 2 seasons Dr Foster - 10 episodes over 2 seasons (over 3 years) Line of Duty - 29 episodes over 5 seasons (over 8 years).
Example of a Netflix big show
House of Cards - 73 episodes over 6 seasons (over 6 years).
A real BBC "classic" example...Sherlock....13 episodes over 8 years. They literally produced what a "normal" show would now expect minimum for a single season over the course of 8, yes 8, years.
While I take your point, that isn't modern. It's simply the American tradition. 13 or 26 shows a year. Often with a vast army of script writers. Most of those named above are written by a single person. They are someone's baby. That is the British tradition. Sometimes less is more. Edit: I see the point has been made.
Agreed, American tend to flog an idea to death. Look at how Mad Men dragged on for example.
Less can sometimes be more. But less can also sometimes just be less.
5 seasons is the industry standard for an upmarket drama series. Very few go longer than that while maintaining the quality. Mad Men, House, others, all decline after season 5. But getting to season 5 is a real achievement. A success
Notable exceptions are The Sopranos (kept improving to the final end of season 6), and, as menshed, Grey’s Anatomy, which is just a phenomenon
Yup. We got 5 seasons of the greatest TV drama of all time: Breaking Bad.
If anywhere near true, definitely bye bye to sunshine hols this year. Though if the lockdown rules go in the dustbin around the same time then the UK industry should be able to make good quite a lot of its losses as a result. It'll have a captive market.
As a relatively new Netflix subscriber I have to say its offering is hardly overwhelming. The Crown, Queens Gambit, we enjoyed The Dig too, but beyond that... it's all a bit meh really. Certainly not enough to fill a schedule.
The BBC has an enormous back-catalogue (quite a few of Netflix's offerings are ex-BBC). I am not sure of the licensing issues in offering that back-catalogue but I hope it is not hampered by 'unfair competition' issues foisted on it by private media interests.
The BBC has been a truly massive cultural influence around the world on behalf of the UK; it would be senseless for us now to allow it to be trashed on ideological grounds.
The problem with the BBC is they seem unable / unwilling to adapt and seem lost about what they should be doing.
We have done the whole bit about how theu haven't adapted to modern tv series structures. But they also seem lost about how to use YouTube. The seem to think uploading the odd clip will do, but their upload get very few views compared to loads of total randoms who do news and current affairs round ups.
Victoria Derbyshire used to make a huge thing about despite hardly anybody watching her show live, some of her clips got lots of retweets...but that doesn't generate any revenue and it is the same niche group of twatterati. As we saw with all the nonsense about how many people viewed a Boris clip it means nothing.
The youth don't watch them as their offerings aren't seen as cool.
And we are seeing it already, all the noises from the BBC are defensive don't toucb the licence fee, no reformz we are better than Netflix.
I don't disagree with a lot of that. One issue the BCC has is the expectation on them is vastly different to that on Netflix. How many hours of new TV does Netflix produce per week? Sure they have had some good series in recent months but so have the BBC.
The government has repeatedly hampered the BBC for 'competition' reasons when it should instead have been promoting and supporting the BBC as a global influencer.
Very short-sighted.
The one way the BBC might survive is if it became a rare outpost of anti-Wokery. Instead, it is piling on the bandwagon, spending tens of millions recruiting new BAME staff who are ALREADY over-represented on the screen, compared to the population at large.
BBC drama suffers from the same left-liberal PC bias, it is unwatchably Woke.
I stopped paying for this bien pensant pap several months ago. Yet, it saddens me as a Brit. The BBC is a great British institution - but so were rum, sodomy and the lash, in the Navy, and they have gone the way of all flesh. So will the Corp, unless it transforms, super quick
It's the BBC website that's the worst.
Check out the news homepage any day of the week. Pick one at random. And count the Wokey stories - lots of Twitter amplified bollocks about trans, BLM, gender fluidity, history shaming etc etc.
The irony is da kidz (for that is who they are trying to appeal to with this) never go on there.
I don't think they go a day without a trans article.....even the Guardian manage to have a day off that subject occasionally.
Really? Where's today's?
Also tell me which news site is better then the BBC or the Guardian?
Here you go...Front page, with big picture...
BBC News - Disability and dating: 'I didn’t know what bisexual was'
Ray Everall is a 21-year-old trans man from Brighton. He struggles with communication, audio and visual processing and has learning difficulties, including ADHD, dyslexia and dyspraxia. For him the main challenges are around accessing trans health services.
There are 65 stories on that 'front page'; the one you have highlghted is 35th out of 65 and more about disablility than trans. I can't see why it offends you so much.
And your suggestion for a better news site is... ?
ANY OTHER WEBSITE
Have you not looked at the BBC News Website recently? It is a Woke version of the Daily Express. It is cheap, vulgar, moronic and embarrassing
Perhaps the website is popular with the youngens? Not everything is aimed at you, you know.
It's not, tho. My older, teenage British daughter does not use the BBC website at all. She watches the odd reality TV show, the rest is Netflix, Youtube, etc
This is a massive problem for the Beeb. The kids have lost the BBC habit - as discussed on here ad infinitum, so I shall shut up - and go watch something on Netflix.
Later....
I’m not talking about people watching the Beeb. I’m talking about the website, which is factually and objectively popular.
They wouldn’t write these “woke” articles if people didn’t read them.
Here’s a tip: if you don’t like the articles, don’t read them?
How do you know? The BBC isn't driven by market forces. Victoria Derbyshire had a show for how many years that nobody watched? BBC Three is still going and nobody ever watched that.
They write arts reviews for niche theatre performances, I highly doubt they get many clicks at all.
Now so.might say that great, but how often the BBC write cover something != now engaged the public are about it.
It is however the most popular news website in the country and one of the most popular in the world.
IT. IS. FREE
HEAD. DESK
SO. ARE. MANY. OTHERS.
Sky ITV Sun Express The Independent Channel 4 etc. etc. etc.
I was unaware that the Sun, Express, ITV, etc, were devoid of advertising. Thanks.
Haha, your hatred of the BBC is only made funnier by its undeniable popularity. 😂
You are completely wrong. I am a patriotic Brit and I used to be proud of the BBC as a world-renowned emblem of British principles: free speech, fair play, just the facts, please. It is also - or it was - a positive voice for the Union (and I am clearly a passionate Unionist)
It pains me greatly to see this institution in steep decline, diseased by transient Wokeism, and with no clear model for its future, in the face of the US streaming giants.
I would be delighted if it adapted, survived and thrived, and once again became an institution nearly all Brits could take pride in. Sadly, that doesn’t seem likely (tho i will still mention the Beeb in my daily prayers). In which case it should be privatized, and let it sink or swim in the real world.
Just keep Masterchef, Springwatch and Call The Midwife. Ta
Killing Eve Fleabag Normal People The Serpent Peaky Blinders His Dark Materials Dr Foster The Fall A Suitable Boy Cormoran Strike Line of Duty
I genuinely find it puzzling that you see 'wokism' all over the BBC. One story out of 65 on the front news page that could you might describe as 'woke'.
The UK is missing a massive opportunity for global cultural influence by emasculating the BBC.
But people in britain don't want to watch their output, why do you think anyone else does?
Any idea why this story can be classed as "woke"? As far as I can see it's just highlighting injustices in society, specifically disability and dating.
Isn't "highlighting of injustices in society" the definition of "Woke"?
As a relatively new Netflix subscriber I have to say its offering is hardly overwhelming. The Crown, Queens Gambit, we enjoyed The Dig too, but beyond that... it's all a bit meh really. Certainly not enough to fill a schedule.
The BBC has an enormous back-catalogue (quite a few of Netflix's offerings are ex-BBC). I am not sure of the licensing issues in offering that back-catalogue but I hope it is not hampered by 'unfair competition' issues foisted on it by private media interests.
The BBC has been a truly massive cultural influence around the world on behalf of the UK; it would be senseless for us now to allow it to be trashed on ideological grounds.
The problem with the BBC is they seem unable / unwilling to adapt and seem lost about what they should be doing.
We have done the whole bit about how theu haven't adapted to modern tv series structures. But they also seem lost about how to use YouTube. The seem to think uploading the odd clip will do, but their upload get very few views compared to loads of total randoms who do news and current affairs round ups.
Victoria Derbyshire used to make a huge thing about despite hardly anybody watching her show live, some of her clips got lots of retweets...but that doesn't generate any revenue and it is the same niche group of twatterati. As we saw with all the nonsense about how many people viewed a Boris clip it means nothing.
The youth don't watch them as their offerings aren't seen as cool.
And we are seeing it already, all the noises from the BBC are defensive don't toucb the licence fee, no reformz we are better than Netflix.
I don't disagree with a lot of that. One issue the BCC has is the expectation on them is vastly different to that on Netflix. How many hours of new TV does Netflix produce per week? Sure they have had some good series in recent months but so have the BBC.
The government has repeatedly hampered the BBC for 'competition' reasons when it should instead have been promoting and supporting the BBC as a global influencer.
Very short-sighted.
Oh do fuck off what the bbc shows is mainly repeats of things made years ago
Maybe but I'd still like to see the hours of new material the main players produce each month.
Well name the new stuff the bbc has produced thats exclusive to the bbc and they havent just bought of a company whereas for example as I use amazon I have had over the last few years...the expanse 5 series another to go...vikings 6 series...black sails 3 series....preacher.....now on series 4.....amercian gods now on series 3....good omens....greenland...man in the high castle...I could name more but will stop there.
What have the bbc done? Downton abbey? More eastenders? The great british bakeoff?
Lol. Downton was ITV; Bake-off, although made popular on the BBC, was poached by C4.
To answer your question with a few suggestions:
Killing Eve Fleabag Normal People The Serpent Peaky Blinders His Dark Materials Dr Foster The Fall A Suitable Boy Cormoran Strike Line of Duty
Your list is a classic example of how the BBC hasn't adjusted to the modern landscape.
Killing Eve - 3 seasons of 8 episodes (over 3 years) Fleabag - 2 seasons of 6 episodes (over 4 years) Normal People - 12 episodes Peaky Blinders - 30 episodes over 5 seasons (over 7 years) His Dark Materials - 15 episodes over 2 seasons Dr Foster - 10 episodes over 2 seasons (over 3 years) Line of Duty - 29 episodes over 5 seasons (over 8 years).
Example of a Netflix big show
House of Cards - 73 episodes over 6 seasons (over 6 years).
Yes. Aside from the fact many of those shows are dreadful, or decline dreadfully (looking at you, Peaky Blinders) the BBC seems unable to master the obviously-successful American model, of quick but quality production of series after series of a popular drama, by the ton
My go-to example is two hospital drama series, a staple for any TV channel. Grey’s Anatomy versus Casualty. Both are a bit woke, apart from that, they live in parallel universes.
The American series Grey’s Anatomy has consistently moving stories, believeable scenarios, clever melodrama, fine acting, and is globally popular. And they make 26 episodes a year. And they are still doing it, 17 years later. Incredible. And its had 38 Emmy nominations
No one watches Casualty outside the UK, even tho it plods on, year after year. It is laughably wooden, silly, awkward and cheap. And they make about a dozen episodes a season, all of them bad.
Is there anything that doesn't strike you as a bit woke?
PS I'm not going to defend Casualty - it's just a soap.
I like Triumph of the Will, and I would (albeit hesitantly) defend that as non-Woke, if challenged.
As a relatively new Netflix subscriber I have to say its offering is hardly overwhelming. The Crown, Queens Gambit, we enjoyed The Dig too, but beyond that... it's all a bit meh really. Certainly not enough to fill a schedule.
The BBC has an enormous back-catalogue (quite a few of Netflix's offerings are ex-BBC). I am not sure of the licensing issues in offering that back-catalogue but I hope it is not hampered by 'unfair competition' issues foisted on it by private media interests.
The BBC has been a truly massive cultural influence around the world on behalf of the UK; it would be senseless for us now to allow it to be trashed on ideological grounds.
The problem with the BBC is they seem unable / unwilling to adapt and seem lost about what they should be doing.
We have done the whole bit about how theu haven't adapted to modern tv series structures. But they also seem lost about how to use YouTube. The seem to think uploading the odd clip will do, but their upload get very few views compared to loads of total randoms who do news and current affairs round ups.
Victoria Derbyshire used to make a huge thing about despite hardly anybody watching her show live, some of her clips got lots of retweets...but that doesn't generate any revenue and it is the same niche group of twatterati. As we saw with all the nonsense about how many people viewed a Boris clip it means nothing.
The youth don't watch them as their offerings aren't seen as cool.
And we are seeing it already, all the noises from the BBC are defensive don't toucb the licence fee, no reformz we are better than Netflix.
I don't disagree with a lot of that. One issue the BCC has is the expectation on them is vastly different to that on Netflix. How many hours of new TV does Netflix produce per week? Sure they have had some good series in recent months but so have the BBC.
The government has repeatedly hampered the BBC for 'competition' reasons when it should instead have been promoting and supporting the BBC as a global influencer.
Very short-sighted.
The one way the BBC might survive is if it became a rare outpost of anti-Wokery. Instead, it is piling on the bandwagon, spending tens of millions recruiting new BAME staff who are ALREADY over-represented on the screen, compared to the population at large.
BBC drama suffers from the same left-liberal PC bias, it is unwatchably Woke.
I stopped paying for this bien pensant pap several months ago. Yet, it saddens me as a Brit. The BBC is a great British institution - but so were rum, sodomy and the lash, in the Navy, and they have gone the way of all flesh. So will the Corp, unless it transforms, super quick
It's the BBC website that's the worst.
Check out the news homepage any day of the week. Pick one at random. And count the Wokey stories - lots of Twitter amplified bollocks about trans, BLM, gender fluidity, history shaming etc etc.
The irony is da kidz (for that is who they are trying to appeal to with this) never go on there.
I don't think they go a day without a trans article.....even the Guardian manage to have a day off that subject occasionally.
Really? Where's today's?
Also tell me which news site is better then the BBC or the Guardian?
Here you go...Front page, with big picture...
BBC News - Disability and dating: 'I didn’t know what bisexual was'
Ray Everall is a 21-year-old trans man from Brighton. He struggles with communication, audio and visual processing and has learning difficulties, including ADHD, dyslexia and dyspraxia. For him the main challenges are around accessing trans health services.
There are 65 stories on that 'front page'; the one you have highlghted is 35th out of 65 and more about disablility than trans. I can't see why it offends you so much.
And your suggestion for a better news site is... ?
ANY OTHER WEBSITE
Have you not looked at the BBC News Website recently? It is a Woke version of the Daily Express. It is cheap, vulgar, moronic and embarrassing
Perhaps the website is popular with the youngens? Not everything is aimed at you, you know.
It's not, tho. My older, teenage British daughter does not use the BBC website at all. She watches the odd reality TV show, the rest is Netflix, Youtube, etc
This is a massive problem for the Beeb. The kids have lost the BBC habit - as discussed on here ad infinitum, so I shall shut up - and go watch something on Netflix.
Later....
I’m not talking about people watching the Beeb. I’m talking about the website, which is factually and objectively popular.
They wouldn’t write these “woke” articles if people didn’t read them.
Here’s a tip: if you don’t like the articles, don’t read them?
How do you know? The BBC isn't driven by market forces. Victoria Derbyshire had a show for how many years that nobody watched? BBC Three is still going and nobody ever watched that.
They write arts reviews for niche theatre performances, I highly doubt they get many clicks at all.
Now so.might say that great, but how often the BBC write cover something != now engaged the public are about it.
It is however the most popular news website in the country and one of the most popular in the world.
IT. IS. FREE
HEAD. DESK
SO. ARE. MANY. OTHERS.
Sky ITV Sun Express The Independent Channel 4 etc. etc. etc.
I was unaware that the Sun, Express, ITV, etc, were devoid of advertising. Thanks.
Haha, your hatred of the BBC is only made funnier by its undeniable popularity. 😂
You are completely wrong. I am a patriotic Brit and I used to be proud of the BBC as a world-renowned emblem of British principles: free speech, fair play, just the facts, please. It is also - or it was - a positive voice for the Union (and I am clearly a passionate Unionist)
It pains me greatly to see this institution in steep decline, diseased by transient Wokeism, and with no clear model for its future, in the face of the US streaming giants.
I would be delighted if it adapted, survived and thrived, and once again became an institution nearly all Brits could take pride in. Sadly, that doesn’t seem likely (tho i will still mention the Beeb in my daily prayers). In which case it should be privatized, and let it sink or swim in the real world.
Just keep Masterchef, Springwatch and Call The Midwife. Ta
Killing Eve Fleabag Normal People The Serpent Peaky Blinders His Dark Materials Dr Foster The Fall A Suitable Boy Cormoran Strike Line of Duty
I genuinely find it puzzling that you see 'wokism' all over the BBC. One story out of 65 on the front news page that could you might describe as 'woke'.
The UK is missing a massive opportunity for global cultural influence by emasculating the BBC.
But people in britain don't want to watch their output, why do you think anyone else does?
Any idea why this story can be classed as "woke"? As far as I can see it's just highlighting injustices in society, specifically disability and dating.
Isn't "highlighting of injustices in society" the definition of "Woke"?
The Shield - 88 episodes, 7 seasons, 7 years Boardwalk Empire - 56 episodes, 5 seasons, 5 years Game of Thrones - 73 episodes, 8 seasons, 8 years Better Call Saul - 50 episodes, 5 seasons, 5 years Soparanos - 86 episodes, 6 seasons, 8 years.
How about slightly less "top end", something like...
The Good Wife - 156 episodes, 7 seasons, 7 years
And the BBC offer me 13 Sherlock episodes in 8 years.
And while it is true that quantity does not necessarily equal quality - *shifts nervously and glances at post count* - does anyone really believe that the quality offered by Sherlock is so much higher that it provides equivalent content and quality within its episode count? Certainly there is more filler in shows with 20 episodes a season, and even ones with 13 episodes can drag (the Marvel netflix shows spring to mind, and how Lost got better once it reduced its episode count per season), but there's just overall more quality provided more consistently, and 10-13 seems the norm for online stuff anyway.
That list of leading US shows stretches back to the late 90s.
There’s less truly great stuff out there than people think.
Naturally. We remember the good stuff and barely remember the legion of dreck that came out as well. I dare say with so many platforms now there is an excess of content, as there's only so many good writers and actors to go around.
But I don't see anything special about British television in the ratio of good content to bad it produces. Accordingly, as there is more american content in any case, there will be more really good ones by sheer weight of numbers. And when they do have a good one, you'll have more of it and more often to boot. I also think the British stuff accordingly gets way overhyped as they have to make really sure the limited stuff produced is a hit, at least momentarily.
I don't see why that would be so hard for British TV. I don't watch it anymore, but the revival of Doctor Who used to do something like 13-14 episodes per year and it was good (inasmuch as Doctor Who is capable of being at least).
Actually Ireland were really cautious with pub reopening last time. And Ireland is further behind on vaccinations than UK. But certainly something for NI to note. Arlene doesn't strike me as a pub fan in any case. Bit like Sturgeon.
Possibly. I am hoping the pubs will be open by May but I have no insight into that whatsoever.
I have pubs pencilled in for 10th May when hospital admissions should be sub 100.
It's at the later end of my probability scenario for pubs reopening.
Daily hospital admissions by then - 11 weeks from now - of sub 100 is plausible. Probably 70 to 100.
If anywhere near true, definitely bye bye to sunshine hols this year. Though if the lockdown rules go in the dustbin around the same time then the UK industry should be able to make good quite a lot of its losses as a result. It'll have a captive market.
He is also expected to say that everyone over 50 will be offered at least a first dose by April 15, rather than by May, as previously suggested.
They must be expecting massive expansion in supply.
The Shield - 88 episodes, 7 seasons, 7 years Boardwalk Empire - 56 episodes, 5 seasons, 5 years Game of Thrones - 73 episodes, 8 seasons, 8 years Better Call Saul - 50 episodes, 5 seasons, 5 years Soparanos - 86 episodes, 6 seasons, 8 years.
How about slightly less "top end", something like...
The Good Wife - 156 episodes, 7 seasons, 7 years
And the BBC offer me 13 Sherlock episodes in 8 years.
And while it is true that quantity does not necessarily equal quality - *shifts nervously and glances at post count* - does anyone really believe that the quality offered by Sherlock is so much higher that it provides equivalent content and quality within its episode count? Certainly there is more filler in shows with 20 episodes a season, and even ones with 13 episodes can drag (the Marvel netflix shows spring to mind, and how Lost got better once it reduced its episode count per season), but there's just overall more quality provided more consistently, and 10-13 seems the norm for online stuff anyway.
That list of leading US shows stretches back to the late 90s.
There’s less truly great stuff out there than people think.
Naturally. We remember the good stuff and barely remember the legion of dreck that came out as well. I dare say with so many platforms now there is an excess of content, as there's only so many good writers and actors to go around.
But I don't see anything special about British television in the ratio of good content to bad it produces. Accordingly, as there is more american content in any case, there will be more really good ones by sheer weight of numbers. And when they do have a good one, you'll have more of it and more often to boot. I also think the British stuff accordingly gets way overhyped as they have to make really sure the limited stuff produced is a hit, at least momentarily.
I don't see why that would be so hard for British TV. I don't watch it anymore, but the revival of Doctor Who used to do something like 13-14 episodes per year and it was good (inasmuch as Doctor Who is capable of being at least).
Dr who hasnt been good since tom baker though I admit torchwood wasnt so bad
What is the future of cinema - will it survive Covid?
For the moment, I think it is safe, because the vested interests don't really want to go to a model of just streaming the movies. Think about how reluctant they were to do this during COVID. Tenet was put off and off and off, and then they tried to do it via cinema release.
Do we think all children going back on 8 March is a good idea?
Won't it lead to R central??
God alone knows. We hear different stories about the schools every day - first that primary school children are now the single biggest source of Covid transmission, and then that there's little evidence from anywhere in Europe that schools are a major driver of infection.
I mean, my instinct would be that it would be more sensible to do it in phases, as is being done in Scotland and Wales and as the teaching unions are demanding, but that's just a guess. Who knows for certain?
All I would add is that it seems to be a considerable gamble. If it does lead to a spike in transmission and the kids end up being shoved back into lockdown again (and, by extension, the whole population has to rot in captivity for even longer,) then the additional socio-economic and psychological damage inflicted upon the population will be enormous. The Government will have spaffed its vaccine advantage up the wall and I would imagine that its popularity would collapse as a result.
If they're going to let all the kids back at once then they'd better have compelling evidence to suggest that it won't precipitate a fresh disaster.
Compelling evidence ?
Well over 17m will have been vaccinated more than two weeks prior to Monday 8th March with hundreds of thousands more joining them every day from then on.
One is well aware of the significance of the two key dates so far - 15th Feb for completing cohorts 1-4, and 8th Mar for the schools. They are exactly three weeks apart.
So, in rough terms that means that the large bulk of the four most vulnerable groups should have protection by the time the schools start opening. But that still leaves the whole of the rest of the population defenceless in the event of a resurgence. Even if the consequences in terms of eventual death are greatly ameliorated, another big surge in hospital admissions would be more than enough to see us back to where we are now until the situation calms back down and a lot more people have had their jabs.
I'm as eager to be rid of all these bloody rules as anyone (and nor do I wish us to be locked up for another six months because the authorities have grown excessively cautious,) but if we go charging forwards too quickly we simply risk yet further setbacks, and that would be horrendous.
Those previously infected also have protection.
Nor is the 'rest of the population' going to be getting an overpowering urge to hug every teenager they see.
You're going to struggle to get R>1 with those numbers.
The government seems to have become massively more confident on this in just the last few days. There must be some very promising data coming into no.10.
If anywhere near true, definitely bye bye to sunshine hols this year. Though if the lockdown rules go in the dustbin around the same time then the UK industry should be able to make good quite a lot of its losses as a result. It'll have a captive market.
He is also expected to say that everyone over 50 will be offered at least a first dose by April 15, rather than by May, as previously suggested.
They must be expecting massive expansion in supply.
Well let's hope so. Clearly the sooner we all get them the better.
As a relatively new Netflix subscriber I have to say its offering is hardly overwhelming. The Crown, Queens Gambit, we enjoyed The Dig too, but beyond that... it's all a bit meh really. Certainly not enough to fill a schedule.
The BBC has an enormous back-catalogue (quite a few of Netflix's offerings are ex-BBC). I am not sure of the licensing issues in offering that back-catalogue but I hope it is not hampered by 'unfair competition' issues foisted on it by private media interests.
The BBC has been a truly massive cultural influence around the world on behalf of the UK; it would be senseless for us now to allow it to be trashed on ideological grounds.
The problem with the BBC is they seem unable / unwilling to adapt and seem lost about what they should be doing.
We have done the whole bit about how theu haven't adapted to modern tv series structures. But they also seem lost about how to use YouTube. The seem to think uploading the odd clip will do, but their upload get very few views compared to loads of total randoms who do news and current affairs round ups.
Victoria Derbyshire used to make a huge thing about despite hardly anybody watching her show live, some of her clips got lots of retweets...but that doesn't generate any revenue and it is the same niche group of twatterati. As we saw with all the nonsense about how many people viewed a Boris clip it means nothing.
The youth don't watch them as their offerings aren't seen as cool.
And we are seeing it already, all the noises from the BBC are defensive don't toucb the licence fee, no reformz we are better than Netflix.
I don't disagree with a lot of that. One issue the BCC has is the expectation on them is vastly different to that on Netflix. How many hours of new TV does Netflix produce per week? Sure they have had some good series in recent months but so have the BBC.
The government has repeatedly hampered the BBC for 'competition' reasons when it should instead have been promoting and supporting the BBC as a global influencer.
Very short-sighted.
Oh do fuck off what the bbc shows is mainly repeats of things made years ago
Maybe but I'd still like to see the hours of new material the main players produce each month.
Well name the new stuff the bbc has produced thats exclusive to the bbc and they havent just bought of a company whereas for example as I use amazon I have had over the last few years...the expanse 5 series another to go...vikings 6 series...black sails 3 series....preacher.....now on series 4.....amercian gods now on series 3....good omens....greenland...man in the high castle...I could name more but will stop there.
What have the bbc done? Downton abbey? More eastenders? The great british bakeoff?
Lol. Downton was ITV; Bake-off, although made popular on the BBC, was poached by C4.
To answer your question with a few suggestions:
Killing Eve Fleabag Normal People The Serpent Peaky Blinders His Dark Materials Dr Foster The Fall A Suitable Boy Cormoran Strike Line of Duty
Your list is a classic example of how the BBC hasn't adjusted to the modern landscape.
Killing Eve - 3 seasons of 8 episodes (over 3 years) Fleabag - 2 seasons of 6 episodes (over 4 years) Normal People - 12 episodes Peaky Blinders - 30 episodes over 5 seasons (over 7 years) His Dark Materials - 15 episodes over 2 seasons Dr Foster - 10 episodes over 2 seasons (over 3 years) Line of Duty - 29 episodes over 5 seasons (over 8 years).
Example of a Netflix big show
House of Cards - 73 episodes over 6 seasons (over 6 years).
A real BBC "classic" example...Sherlock....13 episodes over 8 years. They literally produced what a "normal" show would now expect minimum for a single season over the course of 8, yes 8, years.
While I take your point, that isn't modern. It's simply the American tradition. 13 or 26 shows a year. Often with a vast army of script writers. Most of those named above are written by a single person. They are someone's baby. That is the British tradition. Sometimes less is more. Edit: I see the point has been made.
And sometimes less is less.
It wouldn't be too bad if instead of 13/26 episodes per season it was 6 episodes per season but 2-4x as many quality seasons to make up the difference. But there's not many times as many quality series there's just a few potentially decent shows that have a couple of decent episodes every few years.
People literally name Sherlock again and again despite it being 1 proper season if you combine it all together.
If anywhere near true, definitely bye bye to sunshine hols this year. Though if the lockdown rules go in the dustbin around the same time then the UK industry should be able to make good quite a lot of its losses as a result. It'll have a captive market.
He is also expected to say that everyone over 50 will be offered at least a first dose by April 15, rather than by May, as previously suggested.
They must be expecting massive expansion in supply.
Well let's hope so. Clearly the sooner we all get them the better.
If only they could sort of the supply of Nvidia 3080 graphics cards in the same way.....
As a relatively new Netflix subscriber I have to say its offering is hardly overwhelming. The Crown, Queens Gambit, we enjoyed The Dig too, but beyond that... it's all a bit meh really. Certainly not enough to fill a schedule.
The BBC has an enormous back-catalogue (quite a few of Netflix's offerings are ex-BBC). I am not sure of the licensing issues in offering that back-catalogue but I hope it is not hampered by 'unfair competition' issues foisted on it by private media interests.
The BBC has been a truly massive cultural influence around the world on behalf of the UK; it would be senseless for us now to allow it to be trashed on ideological grounds.
The problem with the BBC is they seem unable / unwilling to adapt and seem lost about what they should be doing.
We have done the whole bit about how theu haven't adapted to modern tv series structures. But they also seem lost about how to use YouTube. The seem to think uploading the odd clip will do, but their upload get very few views compared to loads of total randoms who do news and current affairs round ups.
Victoria Derbyshire used to make a huge thing about despite hardly anybody watching her show live, some of her clips got lots of retweets...but that doesn't generate any revenue and it is the same niche group of twatterati. As we saw with all the nonsense about how many people viewed a Boris clip it means nothing.
The youth don't watch them as their offerings aren't seen as cool.
And we are seeing it already, all the noises from the BBC are defensive don't toucb the licence fee, no reformz we are better than Netflix.
I don't disagree with a lot of that. One issue the BCC has is the expectation on them is vastly different to that on Netflix. How many hours of new TV does Netflix produce per week? Sure they have had some good series in recent months but so have the BBC.
The government has repeatedly hampered the BBC for 'competition' reasons when it should instead have been promoting and supporting the BBC as a global influencer.
Very short-sighted.
Oh do fuck off what the bbc shows is mainly repeats of things made years ago
Maybe but I'd still like to see the hours of new material the main players produce each month.
Well name the new stuff the bbc has produced thats exclusive to the bbc and they havent just bought of a company whereas for example as I use amazon I have had over the last few years...the expanse 5 series another to go...vikings 6 series...black sails 3 series....preacher.....now on series 4.....amercian gods now on series 3....good omens....greenland...man in the high castle...I could name more but will stop there.
What have the bbc done? Downton abbey? More eastenders? The great british bakeoff?
Lol. Downton was ITV; Bake-off, although made popular on the BBC, was poached by C4.
To answer your question with a few suggestions:
Killing Eve Fleabag Normal People The Serpent Peaky Blinders His Dark Materials Dr Foster The Fall A Suitable Boy Cormoran Strike Line of Duty
Your list is a classic example of how the BBC hasn't adjusted to the modern landscape.
Killing Eve - 3 seasons of 8 episodes (over 3 years) Fleabag - 2 seasons of 6 episodes (over 4 years) Normal People - 12 episodes Peaky Blinders - 30 episodes over 5 seasons (over 7 years) His Dark Materials - 15 episodes over 2 seasons Dr Foster - 10 episodes over 2 seasons (over 3 years) Line of Duty - 29 episodes over 5 seasons (over 8 years).
Example of a Netflix big show
House of Cards - 73 episodes over 6 seasons (over 6 years).
A real BBC "classic" example...Sherlock....13 episodes over 8 years. They literally produced what a "normal" show would now expect minimum for a single season over the course of 8, yes 8, years.
While I take your point, that isn't modern. It's simply the American tradition. 13 or 26 shows a year. Often with a vast army of script writers. Most of those named above are written by a single person. They are someone's baby. That is the British tradition. Sometimes less is more. Edit: I see the point has been made.
Agreed, American tend to flog an idea to death. Look at how Mad Men dragged on for example.
Less can sometimes be more. But less can also sometimes just be less.
5 seasons is the industry standard for an upmarket drama series. Very few go longer than that while maintaining the quality. Mad Men, House, others, all decline after season 5. But getting to season 5 is a real achievement. A success
Notable exceptions are The Sopranos (kept improving to the final end of season 6), and, as menshed, Grey’s Anatomy, which is just a phenomenon
One thing I notice with streaming and maybe only me so anecdotal. With broadcast tv I would start watching something and if it wasnt any good I would generally continue watching as there wasnt anything else worth watching.....with streaming if I get 30 minutes into something and it isnt any good I just go find something else to watch
No. Me too. 4 and 5 episodes on TV are worse for that. Episode 1 great intruiging idea, 2 OK plot moves on a bit, 3 a bit meh. Now you're invested and have to watch episode 4 and 5 cos that's what you do at that time and day. And you feel like you've wasted 3 weeks otherwise.
A third of the adult population have been vaccinated in 10 weeks. Very impressive. A stunning success for the NHS.
I don't agree entirely.
Back to some figures, there are 25.2 million people over the age of 50 and 16.1 million over the age of 60.
If around 17 million have been vaccinated, that should mean everyone over 60 has been vaccinated.
This over 60 year old has heard nothing about a vaccination at this time.
Clearly, there are areas where over 50s have largely been vaccinated and it may even be younger people are starting to be vaccinated but in other areas such as mine, there are people over 60 who haven't yet been contacted let alone vaccinated.
As I've repeatedly claimed, the rollout programme is uneven - some areas have done really well, others haven't. Priority should now be given to the latter in terms of vaccine supplies and resources.
Organisations which have failed - like your local GP/vaccine delivery unit - should be rewarded?
As a relatively new Netflix subscriber I have to say its offering is hardly overwhelming. The Crown, Queens Gambit, we enjoyed The Dig too, but beyond that... it's all a bit meh really. Certainly not enough to fill a schedule.
The BBC has an enormous back-catalogue (quite a few of Netflix's offerings are ex-BBC). I am not sure of the licensing issues in offering that back-catalogue but I hope it is not hampered by 'unfair competition' issues foisted on it by private media interests.
The BBC has been a truly massive cultural influence around the world on behalf of the UK; it would be senseless for us now to allow it to be trashed on ideological grounds.
The problem with the BBC is they seem unable / unwilling to adapt and seem lost about what they should be doing.
We have done the whole bit about how theu haven't adapted to modern tv series structures. But they also seem lost about how to use YouTube. The seem to think uploading the odd clip will do, but their upload get very few views compared to loads of total randoms who do news and current affairs round ups.
Victoria Derbyshire used to make a huge thing about despite hardly anybody watching her show live, some of her clips got lots of retweets...but that doesn't generate any revenue and it is the same niche group of twatterati. As we saw with all the nonsense about how many people viewed a Boris clip it means nothing.
The youth don't watch them as their offerings aren't seen as cool.
And we are seeing it already, all the noises from the BBC are defensive don't toucb the licence fee, no reformz we are better than Netflix.
I don't disagree with a lot of that. One issue the BCC has is the expectation on them is vastly different to that on Netflix. How many hours of new TV does Netflix produce per week? Sure they have had some good series in recent months but so have the BBC.
The government has repeatedly hampered the BBC for 'competition' reasons when it should instead have been promoting and supporting the BBC as a global influencer.
Very short-sighted.
Oh do fuck off what the bbc shows is mainly repeats of things made years ago
Maybe but I'd still like to see the hours of new material the main players produce each month.
Well name the new stuff the bbc has produced thats exclusive to the bbc and they havent just bought of a company whereas for example as I use amazon I have had over the last few years...the expanse 5 series another to go...vikings 6 series...black sails 3 series....preacher.....now on series 4.....amercian gods now on series 3....good omens....greenland...man in the high castle...I could name more but will stop there.
What have the bbc done? Downton abbey? More eastenders? The great british bakeoff?
Lol. Downton was ITV; Bake-off, although made popular on the BBC, was poached by C4.
To answer your question with a few suggestions:
Killing Eve Fleabag Normal People The Serpent Peaky Blinders His Dark Materials Dr Foster The Fall A Suitable Boy Cormoran Strike Line of Duty
Your list is a classic example of how the BBC hasn't adjusted to the modern landscape.
Killing Eve - 3 seasons of 8 episodes (over 3 years) Fleabag - 2 seasons of 6 episodes (over 4 years) Normal People - 12 episodes Peaky Blinders - 30 episodes over 5 seasons (over 7 years) His Dark Materials - 15 episodes over 2 seasons Dr Foster - 10 episodes over 2 seasons (over 3 years) Line of Duty - 29 episodes over 5 seasons (over 8 years).
Example of a Netflix big show
House of Cards - 73 episodes over 6 seasons (over 6 years).
A real BBC "classic" example...Sherlock....13 episodes over 8 years. They literally produced what a "normal" show would now expect minimum for a single season over the course of 8, yes 8, years.
While I take your point, that isn't modern. It's simply the American tradition. 13 or 26 shows a year. Often with a vast army of script writers. Most of those named above are written by a single person. They are someone's baby. That is the British tradition. Sometimes less is more. Edit: I see the point has been made.
And sometimes less is less.
It wouldn't be too bad if instead of 13/26 episodes per season it was 6 episodes per season but 2-4x as many quality seasons to make up the difference. But there's not many times as many quality series there's just a few potentially decent shows that have a couple of decent episodes every few years.
People literally name Sherlock again and again despite it being 1 proper season if you combine it all together.
What is the future of cinema - will it survive Covid?
Without a doubt. They tried PPV releases of feature films during COVID and it was a disaster.
No, there really is a doubt. I know people in Hollywood. They are mightily afeared that the straight-to-streaming model is the future. It has already laid waste to tv scheduling.
Sure, blockbuster movies will survive as cinematic experiences in big cities. But that’s the problem: cinema could become like theatre. A relatively rare, big city experience. Small town cinemas will all shut.
A third of the adult population have been vaccinated in 10 weeks. Very impressive. A stunning success for the NHS.
I don't agree entirely.
Back to some figures, there are 25.2 million people over the age of 50 and 16.1 million over the age of 60.
If around 17 million have been vaccinated, that should mean everyone over 60 has been vaccinated.
This over 60 year old has heard nothing about a vaccination at this time.
Clearly, there are areas where over 50s have largely been vaccinated and it may even be younger people are starting to be vaccinated but in other areas such as mine, there are people over 60 who haven't yet been contacted let alone vaccinated.
As I've repeatedly claimed, the rollout programme is uneven - some areas have done really well, others haven't. Priority should now be given to the latter in terms of vaccine supplies and resources.
Organisations which have failed - like your local GP/vaccine delivery unit - should be rewarded?
Diverting skills and vaccines to areas struggling to keep up is a "reward"? Eh?
As a relatively new Netflix subscriber I have to say its offering is hardly overwhelming. The Crown, Queens Gambit, we enjoyed The Dig too, but beyond that... it's all a bit meh really. Certainly not enough to fill a schedule.
The BBC has an enormous back-catalogue (quite a few of Netflix's offerings are ex-BBC). I am not sure of the licensing issues in offering that back-catalogue but I hope it is not hampered by 'unfair competition' issues foisted on it by private media interests.
The BBC has been a truly massive cultural influence around the world on behalf of the UK; it would be senseless for us now to allow it to be trashed on ideological grounds.
The problem with the BBC is they seem unable / unwilling to adapt and seem lost about what they should be doing.
We have done the whole bit about how theu haven't adapted to modern tv series structures. But they also seem lost about how to use YouTube. The seem to think uploading the odd clip will do, but their upload get very few views compared to loads of total randoms who do news and current affairs round ups.
Victoria Derbyshire used to make a huge thing about despite hardly anybody watching her show live, some of her clips got lots of retweets...but that doesn't generate any revenue and it is the same niche group of twatterati. As we saw with all the nonsense about how many people viewed a Boris clip it means nothing.
The youth don't watch them as their offerings aren't seen as cool.
And we are seeing it already, all the noises from the BBC are defensive don't toucb the licence fee, no reformz we are better than Netflix.
I don't disagree with a lot of that. One issue the BCC has is the expectation on them is vastly different to that on Netflix. How many hours of new TV does Netflix produce per week? Sure they have had some good series in recent months but so have the BBC.
The government has repeatedly hampered the BBC for 'competition' reasons when it should instead have been promoting and supporting the BBC as a global influencer.
Very short-sighted.
Oh do fuck off what the bbc shows is mainly repeats of things made years ago
Maybe but I'd still like to see the hours of new material the main players produce each month.
Well name the new stuff the bbc has produced thats exclusive to the bbc and they havent just bought of a company whereas for example as I use amazon I have had over the last few years...the expanse 5 series another to go...vikings 6 series...black sails 3 series....preacher.....now on series 4.....amercian gods now on series 3....good omens....greenland...man in the high castle...I could name more but will stop there.
What have the bbc done? Downton abbey? More eastenders? The great british bakeoff?
Lol. Downton was ITV; Bake-off, although made popular on the BBC, was poached by C4.
To answer your question with a few suggestions:
Killing Eve Fleabag Normal People The Serpent Peaky Blinders His Dark Materials Dr Foster The Fall A Suitable Boy Cormoran Strike Line of Duty
Your list is a classic example of how the BBC hasn't adjusted to the modern landscape.
Killing Eve - 3 seasons of 8 episodes (over 3 years) Fleabag - 2 seasons of 6 episodes (over 4 years) Normal People - 12 episodes Peaky Blinders - 30 episodes over 5 seasons (over 7 years) His Dark Materials - 15 episodes over 2 seasons Dr Foster - 10 episodes over 2 seasons (over 3 years) Line of Duty - 29 episodes over 5 seasons (over 8 years).
Example of a Netflix big show
House of Cards - 73 episodes over 6 seasons (over 6 years).
A real BBC "classic" example...Sherlock....13 episodes over 8 years. They literally produced what a "normal" show would now expect minimum for a single season over the course of 8, yes 8, years.
While I take your point, that isn't modern. It's simply the American tradition. 13 or 26 shows a year. Often with a vast army of script writers. Most of those named above are written by a single person. They are someone's baby. That is the British tradition. Sometimes less is more. Edit: I see the point has been made.
Agreed, American tend to flog an idea to death. Look at how Mad Men dragged on for example.
Less can sometimes be more. But less can also sometimes just be less.
5 seasons is the industry standard for an upmarket drama series. Very few go longer than that while maintaining the quality. Mad Men, House, others, all decline after season 5. But getting to season 5 is a real achievement. A success
Notable exceptions are The Sopranos (kept improving to the final end of season 6), and, as menshed, Grey’s Anatomy, which is just a phenomenon
One thing I notice with streaming and maybe only me so anecdotal. With broadcast tv I would start watching something and if it wasnt any good I would generally continue watching as there wasnt anything else worth watching.....with streaming if I get 30 minutes into something and it isnt any good I just go find something else to watch
No. Me too. 4 and 5 episodes on TV are worse for that. Episode 1 great intruiging idea, 2 OK plot moves on a bit, 3 a bit meh. Now you're invested and have to watch episode 4 and 5 cos that's what you do at that time and day. And you feel like you've wasted 3 weeks otherwise.
One of the pluses about streaming I think is you never think, oh well there is nothing else on so may as well watch this
As a relatively new Netflix subscriber I have to say its offering is hardly overwhelming. The Crown, Queens Gambit, we enjoyed The Dig too, but beyond that... it's all a bit meh really. Certainly not enough to fill a schedule.
The BBC has an enormous back-catalogue (quite a few of Netflix's offerings are ex-BBC). I am not sure of the licensing issues in offering that back-catalogue but I hope it is not hampered by 'unfair competition' issues foisted on it by private media interests.
The BBC has been a truly massive cultural influence around the world on behalf of the UK; it would be senseless for us now to allow it to be trashed on ideological grounds.
The problem with the BBC is they seem unable / unwilling to adapt and seem lost about what they should be doing.
We have done the whole bit about how theu haven't adapted to modern tv series structures. But they also seem lost about how to use YouTube. The seem to think uploading the odd clip will do, but their upload get very few views compared to loads of total randoms who do news and current affairs round ups.
Victoria Derbyshire used to make a huge thing about despite hardly anybody watching her show live, some of her clips got lots of retweets...but that doesn't generate any revenue and it is the same niche group of twatterati. As we saw with all the nonsense about how many people viewed a Boris clip it means nothing.
The youth don't watch them as their offerings aren't seen as cool.
And we are seeing it already, all the noises from the BBC are defensive don't toucb the licence fee, no reformz we are better than Netflix.
I don't disagree with a lot of that. One issue the BCC has is the expectation on them is vastly different to that on Netflix. How many hours of new TV does Netflix produce per week? Sure they have had some good series in recent months but so have the BBC.
The government has repeatedly hampered the BBC for 'competition' reasons when it should instead have been promoting and supporting the BBC as a global influencer.
Very short-sighted.
Oh do fuck off what the bbc shows is mainly repeats of things made years ago
Maybe but I'd still like to see the hours of new material the main players produce each month.
Well name the new stuff the bbc has produced thats exclusive to the bbc and they havent just bought of a company whereas for example as I use amazon I have had over the last few years...the expanse 5 series another to go...vikings 6 series...black sails 3 series....preacher.....now on series 4.....amercian gods now on series 3....good omens....greenland...man in the high castle...I could name more but will stop there.
What have the bbc done? Downton abbey? More eastenders? The great british bakeoff?
Lol. Downton was ITV; Bake-off, although made popular on the BBC, was poached by C4.
To answer your question with a few suggestions:
Killing Eve Fleabag Normal People The Serpent Peaky Blinders His Dark Materials Dr Foster The Fall A Suitable Boy Cormoran Strike Line of Duty
Your list is a classic example of how the BBC hasn't adjusted to the modern landscape.
Killing Eve - 3 seasons of 8 episodes (over 3 years) Fleabag - 2 seasons of 6 episodes (over 4 years) Normal People - 12 episodes Peaky Blinders - 30 episodes over 5 seasons (over 7 years) His Dark Materials - 15 episodes over 2 seasons Dr Foster - 10 episodes over 2 seasons (over 3 years) Line of Duty - 29 episodes over 5 seasons (over 8 years).
Example of a Netflix big show
House of Cards - 73 episodes over 6 seasons (over 6 years).
A real BBC "classic" example...Sherlock....13 episodes over 8 years. They literally produced what a "normal" show would now expect minimum for a single season over the course of 8, yes 8, years.
While I take your point, that isn't modern. It's simply the American tradition. 13 or 26 shows a year. Often with a vast army of script writers. Most of those named above are written by a single person. They are someone's baby. That is the British tradition. Sometimes less is more. Edit: I see the point has been made.
And sometimes less is less.
It wouldn't be too bad if instead of 13/26 episodes per season it was 6 episodes per season but 2-4x as many quality seasons to make up the difference. But there's not many times as many quality series there's just a few potentially decent shows that have a couple of decent episodes every few years.
People literally name Sherlock again and again despite it being 1 proper season if you combine it all together.
I agree. Sometimes less is less. One of the problems with Sherlock was getting Cumberbatch and Freeman together at the same time. Neither is short of work often.
What is the future of cinema - will it survive Covid?
Without a doubt. They tried PPV releases of feature films during COVID and it was a disaster.
No, there really is a doubt. I know people in Hollywood. They are mightily afeared that the straight-to-streaming model is the future. It has already laid waste to tv scheduling.
Sure, blockbuster movies will survive as cinematic experiences in big cities. But that’s the problem: cinema could become like theatre. A relatively rare, big city experience. Small town cinemas will all shut.
Well the one big blockbuster covid release was essentially a flop: WonderWoman
And they've held back Black Widow and Bond, I guess for this reason.
I assume more money may go into big-budget "TV" programming rather than feature films?
Amazing if true. I mean, even if there are only partial crowds. I was assuming that music festivals would be an absolute non-starter, and it might take until the new football season for sports crowds to start coming back.
The government seems to have become massively more confident on this in just the last few days. There must be some very promising data coming into no.10.
Maybe. Then again, a lot of cautious noises have continued to be made, and many of the scientists also still seem to be advising glacially-paced unlocking. It's far too early to get in any way excited.
As a relatively new Netflix subscriber I have to say its offering is hardly overwhelming. The Crown, Queens Gambit, we enjoyed The Dig too, but beyond that... it's all a bit meh really. Certainly not enough to fill a schedule.
The BBC has an enormous back-catalogue (quite a few of Netflix's offerings are ex-BBC). I am not sure of the licensing issues in offering that back-catalogue but I hope it is not hampered by 'unfair competition' issues foisted on it by private media interests.
The BBC has been a truly massive cultural influence around the world on behalf of the UK; it would be senseless for us now to allow it to be trashed on ideological grounds.
The problem with the BBC is they seem unable / unwilling to adapt and seem lost about what they should be doing.
We have done the whole bit about how theu haven't adapted to modern tv series structures. But they also seem lost about how to use YouTube. The seem to think uploading the odd clip will do, but their upload get very few views compared to loads of total randoms who do news and current affairs round ups.
Victoria Derbyshire used to make a huge thing about despite hardly anybody watching her show live, some of her clips got lots of retweets...but that doesn't generate any revenue and it is the same niche group of twatterati. As we saw with all the nonsense about how many people viewed a Boris clip it means nothing.
The youth don't watch them as their offerings aren't seen as cool.
And we are seeing it already, all the noises from the BBC are defensive don't toucb the licence fee, no reformz we are better than Netflix.
I don't disagree with a lot of that. One issue the BCC has is the expectation on them is vastly different to that on Netflix. How many hours of new TV does Netflix produce per week? Sure they have had some good series in recent months but so have the BBC.
The government has repeatedly hampered the BBC for 'competition' reasons when it should instead have been promoting and supporting the BBC as a global influencer.
Very short-sighted.
Oh do fuck off what the bbc shows is mainly repeats of things made years ago
Maybe but I'd still like to see the hours of new material the main players produce each month.
Well name the new stuff the bbc has produced thats exclusive to the bbc and they havent just bought of a company whereas for example as I use amazon I have had over the last few years...the expanse 5 series another to go...vikings 6 series...black sails 3 series....preacher.....now on series 4.....amercian gods now on series 3....good omens....greenland...man in the high castle...I could name more but will stop there.
What have the bbc done? Downton abbey? More eastenders? The great british bakeoff?
Lol. Downton was ITV; Bake-off, although made popular on the BBC, was poached by C4.
To answer your question with a few suggestions:
Killing Eve Fleabag Normal People The Serpent Peaky Blinders His Dark Materials Dr Foster The Fall A Suitable Boy Cormoran Strike Line of Duty
Your list is a classic example of how the BBC hasn't adjusted to the modern landscape.
Killing Eve - 3 seasons of 8 episodes (over 3 years) Fleabag - 2 seasons of 6 episodes (over 4 years) Normal People - 12 episodes Peaky Blinders - 30 episodes over 5 seasons (over 7 years) His Dark Materials - 15 episodes over 2 seasons Dr Foster - 10 episodes over 2 seasons (over 3 years) Line of Duty - 29 episodes over 5 seasons (over 8 years).
Example of a Netflix big show
House of Cards - 73 episodes over 6 seasons (over 6 years).
A real BBC "classic" example...Sherlock....13 episodes over 8 years. They literally produced what a "normal" show would now expect minimum for a single season over the course of 8, yes 8, years.
While I take your point, that isn't modern. It's simply the American tradition. 13 or 26 shows a year. Often with a vast army of script writers. Most of those named above are written by a single person. They are someone's baby. That is the British tradition. Sometimes less is more. Edit: I see the point has been made.
Agreed, American tend to flog an idea to death. Look at how Mad Men dragged on for example.
Less can sometimes be more. But less can also sometimes just be less.
5 seasons is the industry standard for an upmarket drama series. Very few go longer than that while maintaining the quality. Mad Men, House, others, all decline after season 5. But getting to season 5 is a real achievement. A success
Notable exceptions are The Sopranos (kept improving to the final end of season 6), and, as menshed, Grey’s Anatomy, which is just a phenomenon
Yup. We got 5 seasons of the greatest TV drama of all time: Breaking Bad.
I loved Breaking Bad from the off. Hated the ending tho. It should have concluded with the death of Hank. After that it was superfluity.
Come to think of it, most of my favourite TV drama series end disappointingly. Endings are really hard to do. The only series i love that have ALSO ended excellently are Spartacus and Hell on Wheels (a neglected minor masterpiece)
As a relatively new Netflix subscriber I have to say its offering is hardly overwhelming. The Crown, Queens Gambit, we enjoyed The Dig too, but beyond that... it's all a bit meh really. Certainly not enough to fill a schedule.
The BBC has an enormous back-catalogue (quite a few of Netflix's offerings are ex-BBC). I am not sure of the licensing issues in offering that back-catalogue but I hope it is not hampered by 'unfair competition' issues foisted on it by private media interests.
The BBC has been a truly massive cultural influence around the world on behalf of the UK; it would be senseless for us now to allow it to be trashed on ideological grounds.
The problem with the BBC is they seem unable / unwilling to adapt and seem lost about what they should be doing.
We have done the whole bit about how theu haven't adapted to modern tv series structures. But they also seem lost about how to use YouTube. The seem to think uploading the odd clip will do, but their upload get very few views compared to loads of total randoms who do news and current affairs round ups.
Victoria Derbyshire used to make a huge thing about despite hardly anybody watching her show live, some of her clips got lots of retweets...but that doesn't generate any revenue and it is the same niche group of twatterati. As we saw with all the nonsense about how many people viewed a Boris clip it means nothing.
The youth don't watch them as their offerings aren't seen as cool.
And we are seeing it already, all the noises from the BBC are defensive don't toucb the licence fee, no reformz we are better than Netflix.
I don't disagree with a lot of that. One issue the BCC has is the expectation on them is vastly different to that on Netflix. How many hours of new TV does Netflix produce per week? Sure they have had some good series in recent months but so have the BBC.
The government has repeatedly hampered the BBC for 'competition' reasons when it should instead have been promoting and supporting the BBC as a global influencer.
Very short-sighted.
The one way the BBC might survive is if it became a rare outpost of anti-Wokery. Instead, it is piling on the bandwagon, spending tens of millions recruiting new BAME staff who are ALREADY over-represented on the screen, compared to the population at large.
BBC drama suffers from the same left-liberal PC bias, it is unwatchably Woke.
I stopped paying for this bien pensant pap several months ago. Yet, it saddens me as a Brit. The BBC is a great British institution - but so were rum, sodomy and the lash, in the Navy, and they have gone the way of all flesh. So will the Corp, unless it transforms, super quick
It's the BBC website that's the worst.
Check out the news homepage any day of the week. Pick one at random. And count the Wokey stories - lots of Twitter amplified bollocks about trans, BLM, gender fluidity, history shaming etc etc.
The irony is da kidz (for that is who they are trying to appeal to with this) never go on there.
I don't think they go a day without a trans article.....even the Guardian manage to have a day off that subject occasionally.
Really? Where's today's?
Also tell me which news site is better then the BBC or the Guardian?
Here you go...Front page, with big picture...
BBC News - Disability and dating: 'I didn’t know what bisexual was'
Ray Everall is a 21-year-old trans man from Brighton. He struggles with communication, audio and visual processing and has learning difficulties, including ADHD, dyslexia and dyspraxia. For him the main challenges are around accessing trans health services.
There are 65 stories on that 'front page'; the one you have highlghted is 35th out of 65 and more about disablility than trans. I can't see why it offends you so much.
And your suggestion for a better news site is... ?
ANY OTHER WEBSITE
Have you not looked at the BBC News Website recently? It is a Woke version of the Daily Express. It is cheap, vulgar, moronic and embarrassing
Perhaps the website is popular with the youngens? Not everything is aimed at you, you know.
It's not, tho. My older, teenage British daughter does not use the BBC website at all. She watches the odd reality TV show, the rest is Netflix, Youtube, etc
This is a massive problem for the Beeb. The kids have lost the BBC habit - as discussed on here ad infinitum, so I shall shut up - and go watch something on Netflix.
Later....
I’m not talking about people watching the Beeb. I’m talking about the website, which is factually and objectively popular.
They wouldn’t write these “woke” articles if people didn’t read them.
Here’s a tip: if you don’t like the articles, don’t read them?
How do you know? The BBC isn't driven by market forces. Victoria Derbyshire had a show for how many years that nobody watched? BBC Three is still going and nobody ever watched that.
They write arts reviews for niche theatre performances, I highly doubt they get many clicks at all.
Now so.might say that great, but how often the BBC write cover something != now engaged the public are about it.
It is however the most popular news website in the country and one of the most popular in the world.
IT. IS. FREE
HEAD. DESK
SO. ARE. MANY. OTHERS.
Sky ITV Sun Express The Independent Channel 4 etc. etc. etc.
I was unaware that the Sun, Express, ITV, etc, were devoid of advertising. Thanks.
Haha, your hatred of the BBC is only made funnier by its undeniable popularity. 😂
You are completely wrong. I am a patriotic Brit and I used to be proud of the BBC as a world-renowned emblem of British principles: free speech, fair play, just the facts, please. It is also - or it was - a positive voice for the Union (and I am clearly a passionate Unionist)
It pains me greatly to see this institution in steep decline, diseased by transient Wokeism, and with no clear model for its future, in the face of the US streaming giants.
I would be delighted if it adapted, survived and thrived, and once again became an institution nearly all Brits could take pride in. Sadly, that doesn’t seem likely (tho i will still mention the Beeb in my daily prayers). In which case it should be privatized, and let it sink or swim in the real world.
Just keep Masterchef, Springwatch and Call The Midwife. Ta
Killing Eve Fleabag Normal People The Serpent Peaky Blinders His Dark Materials Dr Foster The Fall A Suitable Boy Cormoran Strike Line of Duty
I genuinely find it puzzling that you see 'wokism' all over the BBC. One story out of 65 on the front news page that could you might describe as 'woke'.
The UK is missing a massive opportunity for global cultural influence by emasculating the BBC.
But people in britain don't want to watch their output, why do you think anyone else does?
Any idea why this story can be classed as "woke"? As far as I can see it's just highlighting injustices in society, specifically disability and dating.
Isn't "highlighting of injustices in society" the definition of "Woke"?
oic...
So what's wrong with woke?
How people define themselves and what they see as their mission does not mean that everyone who uses it does so in the same way with the same aims. People can disagree on how to highlight and address injustices in society, not wishing to take some of the actions espoused by others who wish to do the same, nor agree with various other views which others highlighting injustices may hold at the same time, regard as essential to the cause, but which others do not think are a necessary part of that fight.
It's definitely not as simply as the lazy refrain some try to push about 'why are some people against achieving equality?' or what have you. Some people are just reacting against new ideas in a, well, reactive way. But that doesn't mean anyone people who are 'woke', by their own designation or that of others, have a monopoly on caring about such issues or are the only ones with the correct way of thinking about it.
Indeed, people might well be very woke in deed and thought without liking the label at all, and others might claim such a label yet act in ways quite contrary to its stated aims.
We only have to look how streaming has shaken up the music biz. Even a "busy" artist / band would basically do something like 1 year to make an album, 1 year touring it, then bugger off and have a year or two off, maybe do a few big paying gigs.
Now if you aren't a very small select number of artists, you have to do a 100+ gigs a year, every year to stay relevant and make a living.
A third of the adult population have been vaccinated in 10 weeks. Very impressive. A stunning success for the NHS.
I don't agree entirely.
Back to some figures, there are 25.2 million people over the age of 50 and 16.1 million over the age of 60.
If around 17 million have been vaccinated, that should mean everyone over 60 has been vaccinated.
This over 60 year old has heard nothing about a vaccination at this time.
Clearly, there are areas where over 50s have largely been vaccinated and it may even be younger people are starting to be vaccinated but in other areas such as mine, there are people over 60 who haven't yet been contacted let alone vaccinated.
As I've repeatedly claimed, the rollout programme is uneven - some areas have done really well, others haven't. Priority should now be given to the latter in terms of vaccine supplies and resources.
Organisations which have failed - like your local GP/vaccine delivery unit - should be rewarded?
Its the populace that's being 'rewarded' (or rather supported) surely?
As a relatively new Netflix subscriber I have to say its offering is hardly overwhelming. The Crown, Queens Gambit, we enjoyed The Dig too, but beyond that... it's all a bit meh really. Certainly not enough to fill a schedule.
The BBC has an enormous back-catalogue (quite a few of Netflix's offerings are ex-BBC). I am not sure of the licensing issues in offering that back-catalogue but I hope it is not hampered by 'unfair competition' issues foisted on it by private media interests.
The BBC has been a truly massive cultural influence around the world on behalf of the UK; it would be senseless for us now to allow it to be trashed on ideological grounds.
The problem with the BBC is they seem unable / unwilling to adapt and seem lost about what they should be doing.
We have done the whole bit about how theu haven't adapted to modern tv series structures. But they also seem lost about how to use YouTube. The seem to think uploading the odd clip will do, but their upload get very few views compared to loads of total randoms who do news and current affairs round ups.
Victoria Derbyshire used to make a huge thing about despite hardly anybody watching her show live, some of her clips got lots of retweets...but that doesn't generate any revenue and it is the same niche group of twatterati. As we saw with all the nonsense about how many people viewed a Boris clip it means nothing.
The youth don't watch them as their offerings aren't seen as cool.
And we are seeing it already, all the noises from the BBC are defensive don't toucb the licence fee, no reformz we are better than Netflix.
I don't disagree with a lot of that. One issue the BCC has is the expectation on them is vastly different to that on Netflix. How many hours of new TV does Netflix produce per week? Sure they have had some good series in recent months but so have the BBC.
The government has repeatedly hampered the BBC for 'competition' reasons when it should instead have been promoting and supporting the BBC as a global influencer.
Very short-sighted.
Oh do fuck off what the bbc shows is mainly repeats of things made years ago
Maybe but I'd still like to see the hours of new material the main players produce each month.
Well name the new stuff the bbc has produced thats exclusive to the bbc and they havent just bought of a company whereas for example as I use amazon I have had over the last few years...the expanse 5 series another to go...vikings 6 series...black sails 3 series....preacher.....now on series 4.....amercian gods now on series 3....good omens....greenland...man in the high castle...I could name more but will stop there.
What have the bbc done? Downton abbey? More eastenders? The great british bakeoff?
Lol. Downton was ITV; Bake-off, although made popular on the BBC, was poached by C4.
To answer your question with a few suggestions:
Killing Eve Fleabag Normal People The Serpent Peaky Blinders His Dark Materials Dr Foster The Fall A Suitable Boy Cormoran Strike Line of Duty
Your list is a classic example of how the BBC hasn't adjusted to the modern landscape.
Killing Eve - 3 seasons of 8 episodes (over 3 years) Fleabag - 2 seasons of 6 episodes (over 4 years) Normal People - 12 episodes Peaky Blinders - 30 episodes over 5 seasons (over 7 years) His Dark Materials - 15 episodes over 2 seasons Dr Foster - 10 episodes over 2 seasons (over 3 years) Line of Duty - 29 episodes over 5 seasons (over 8 years).
Example of a Netflix big show
House of Cards - 73 episodes over 6 seasons (over 6 years).
A real BBC "classic" example...Sherlock....13 episodes over 8 years. They literally produced what a "normal" show would now expect minimum for a single season over the course of 8, yes 8, years.
While I take your point, that isn't modern. It's simply the American tradition. 13 or 26 shows a year. Often with a vast army of script writers. Most of those named above are written by a single person. They are someone's baby. That is the British tradition. Sometimes less is more. Edit: I see the point has been made.
Agreed, American tend to flog an idea to death. Look at how Mad Men dragged on for example.
Less can sometimes be more. But less can also sometimes just be less.
5 seasons is the industry standard for an upmarket drama series. Very few go longer than that while maintaining the quality. Mad Men, House, others, all decline after season 5. But getting to season 5 is a real achievement. A success
Notable exceptions are The Sopranos (kept improving to the final end of season 6), and, as menshed, Grey’s Anatomy, which is just a phenomenon
Yup. We got 5 seasons of the greatest TV drama of all time: Breaking Bad.
I loved Breaking Bad from the off. Hated the ending tho. It should have concluded with the death of Hank. After that it was superfluity.
Come to think of it, most of my favourite TV drama series end disappointingly. Endings are really hard to do. The only series i love that have ALSO ended excellently are Spartacus and Hell on Wheels (a neglected minor masterpiece)
I feel like Spartacus surely had the advantage that it could really only end one way? Probably made planning for it easier.
There is an element wherein people are just upset that the thing they like is ending, and I think even in most of the 'worst endings evarr' examples even when they are not great - as you say endings are hard - they are rarely as bad as people remember them as being (and you know what, the Star Wars Prequels aren't as bad as people remember either). Not that I haven't raved about the terrible endings of some of my favourite shows!
We only have to look how streaming has shaken up the music biz. Even a "busy" artist / band would basically do something like 1 year to make an album, 1 year touring it, then bugger off and have a year or two off, maybe do a few big paying gigs.
Now if you aren't a very small select number of artists, you have to do a 100+ gigs a year, every year.
Not quite true though is it, before streaming the people making the most money out of cd sales was the record companies, after streaming the people making the most money out of streaming deals is the record companies....do artists get a raw deal absolutely.....sort out the middlemen first
Comments
Much like going to a festival to see a band, and encountering some great new bands while waiting.
https://launchandscalefaster.org/COVID-19
Now I am old I find the younger generation is rebelling in a way I don't like.
All I can say is comparing Netflix with BBC, I like both but we're still finding more to watch on the BBC.
Can I just give a shout for Elizabeth R, being repeated on the BBC after 50 years. Excellent drama, of its time to a degree but very watchable.
The Shield - 88 episodes, 7 seasons, 7 years
Boardwalk Empire - 56 episodes, 5 seasons, 5 years
Game of Thrones - 73 episodes, 8 seasons, 8 years
Better Call Saul - 50 episodes, 5 seasons, 5 years
Soparanos - 86 episodes, 6 seasons, 8 years.
How about slightly less "top end", something like...
The Good Wife - 156 episodes, 7 seasons, 7 years
And the BBC offer me 13 Sherlock episodes in 8 years.
The game has changed, people consume this stuff at home, on their commute, in the gym, on the bog....offering 5-6 episodes for a season and often 2 years between seasons, is just not commercially viable in the real world.
Its like BBC not understanding how they put an odd video on YouTube and it does bugger all views, when those that play the YouTube game know it is about day in, day out, putting stuff up, as people hover up this content e.g. Linus Tech Tips puts I think 4 videos a day out, 7 days a week.
https://twitter.com/KieranCain/status/1363224271372320770
Each to their own, I guess.
PS Tried GoT (or Death and Bonking as our friends call it - from the theme tune). Meh.
My go-to example is two hospital drama series, a staple for any TV channel. Grey’s Anatomy versus Casualty. Both are a bit woke, apart from that, they live in parallel universes.
The American series Grey’s Anatomy has consistently moving stories, believeable scenarios, clever melodrama, fine acting, and is globally popular. And they make 26 episodes a year. And they are still doing it, 17 years later. Incredible. And its had 38 Emmy nominations
No one watches Casualty outside the UK, even tho it plods on, year after year. It is laughably wooden, silly, awkward and cheap. And they make about a dozen episodes a season, all of them bad.
Most of those named above are written by a single person. They are someone's baby. That is the British tradition.
Sometimes less is more.
Edit: I see the point has been made.
All on BBC iplayer.
Well over 17m will have been vaccinated more than two weeks prior to Monday 8th March with hundreds of thousands more joining them every day from then on.
https://twitter.com/SundayTimesSco/status/1363245494621925378?s=20
It is just like people making complaints to OFCOM after seeing two men kiss on terrestrial TV god forbid.
“Down with this sort of thing”
And we in the UK weren't "exposed" so much to this US model, so the BBC could get away with saying well here is your 6 "excellent hand crafted episodes".
Instead it is now here is your non-4k piss poor VFX 6 episodes every two years from the BBC vs say The Crown give you 4k HDR $20 million per episode 10 episode season every year.
https://twitter.com/MacaesBruno/status/1363254240504864770?s=20
Wake up sheeple!
But it seems to talk to a difference in structure or economics between the US television industry at large versus the British one.
I’m not sure this is a BBC specific problem.
Edit: I see others have made the same point already.
"Two years in the making, Adam Curtis’s latest wonder, Can’t Get You Out of My Head, is hard to precis. It would take my sparrow brain about 12 seconds to precis the average episode of Death in Paradise. It would take that same brain until about 2054 to encapsulate the scope of what Curtis is attempting to achieve: nothing less than a vaulting, all-embracing historical exploration of how we find ourselves in our current angry anxiety.
‘He has quietly explained the world’: a still from Adam Curtis’s Can’t Get You Out of My Head. Photograph: BBC
The rather terrific news is that it works. Adam Curtis has quietly explained the world. He has focused – it’s an eight-hour watch over six instalments, yet themes come together – on class and race in Britain, on power struggles in China, on the perpetual suburban paranoia of post-50s America. He doesn’t have any pat conclusions – Curtis tends to take steps to distance himself from tribal politics – but the overall message is of mismanaged power. Since the birth of modernity, he seems to be saying, there have been revolutions, resulting in some bliss, some misery; but, after the torches flicker out, same old, same old.
After the arguments over individualism and collectivism were almost over, there descended, in the 1990s, a new politics, a “caring technocracy”. Nothing changed. Can’t Get You Out of My Head is a powerful catalyst to new thought. It helps that it has the trademark Adam Curtis monochrome 50s montages – he has access to all BBC film libraries, and they tend to leave him alone – and wonderful, just-so soundtracks, ranging from the Raveonettes and the Mekons to Marlene Dietrich. The most challenging, complex watch I’ve had this year: thought-provoking and perhaps, when you’ve thought about it, a little redemptive."
https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2021/feb/14/forensics-the-real-csi-review-soulmates-trump-takes-on-the-world-cant-get-you-out-of-my-head-adam-curtis
The BBC saying we have this handful of great shows, people seemed to really like, they are each a total of 6hrs and you will have to wait another 2 years before you get another 6.....that just isn't the game now.
The reason American TV was produced in 13/26 blocks was for syndication on cable. No cable syndication, no TV show made. And as a result often horrendous padding.
Streaming has allowed American TV producers to produce much shorter, punchier seasons of TV.
The Modern landscape of stream g results in more British style shows with short seasons, not more 26 episode monsters.
There’s less truly great stuff out there than people think.
If the quality is going to be similar to worse, why the heck wouldn't I prefer offerings which are more numerous, more varied and more accessible?
So, in rough terms that means that the large bulk of the four most vulnerable groups should have protection by the time the schools start opening. But that still leaves the whole of the rest of the population defenceless in the event of a resurgence. Even if the consequences in terms of eventual death are greatly ameliorated, another big surge in hospital admissions would be more than enough to see us back to where we are now until the situation calms back down and a lot more people have had their jabs.
I'm as eager to be rid of all these bloody rules as anyone (and nor do I wish us to be locked up for another six months because the authorities have grown excessively cautious,) but if we go charging forwards too quickly we simply risk yet further setbacks, and that would be horrendous.
Notable exceptions are The Sopranos (kept improving to the final end of season 6), and, as menshed, Grey’s Anatomy, which is just a phenomenon
They couldn't make say a Boardwalk Empire type show even if they wanted, they don't have the tech to do all the VFX work. Doctor Who is a joke compared to say the Mandalorian production values.
What Disney getting into the game will show is the idea of you have this for tv and that for movies again is now dead, you are expected to make just excellent produced stuff for tv.
PS I'm not going to defend Casualty - it's just a soap.
But I don't see anything special about British television in the ratio of good content to bad it produces. Accordingly, as there is more american content in any case, there will be more really good ones by sheer weight of numbers. And when they do have a good one, you'll have more of it and more often to boot. I also think the British stuff accordingly gets way overhyped as they have to make really sure the limited stuff produced is a hit, at least momentarily.
I don't see why that would be so hard for British TV. I don't watch it anymore, but the revival of Doctor Who used to do something like 13-14 episodes per year and it was good (inasmuch as Doctor Who is capable of being at least).
Daily hospital admissions by then - 11 weeks from now - of sub 100 is plausible. Probably 70 to 100.
They must be expecting massive expansion in supply.
Nor is the 'rest of the population' going to be getting an overpowering urge to hug every teenager they see.
You're going to struggle to get R>1 with those numbers.
Mods please delete!
It wouldn't be too bad if instead of 13/26 episodes per season it was 6 episodes per season but 2-4x as many quality seasons to make up the difference. But there's not many times as many quality series there's just a few potentially decent shows that have a couple of decent episodes every few years.
People literally name Sherlock again and again despite it being 1 proper season if you combine it all together.
Now you're invested and have to watch episode 4 and 5 cos that's what you do at that time and day. And you feel like you've wasted 3 weeks otherwise.
Sure, blockbuster movies will survive as cinematic experiences in big cities. But that’s the problem: cinema could become like theatre. A relatively rare, big city experience. Small town cinemas will all shut.
One of the problems with Sherlock was getting Cumberbatch and Freeman together at the same time.
Neither is short of work often.
And they've held back Black Widow and Bond, I guess for this reason.
I assume more money may go into big-budget "TV" programming rather than feature films?
Come to think of it, most of my favourite TV drama series end disappointingly. Endings are really hard to do. The only series i love that have ALSO ended excellently are Spartacus and Hell on Wheels (a neglected minor masterpiece)
It's definitely not as simply as the lazy refrain some try to push about 'why are some people against achieving equality?' or what have you. Some people are just reacting against new ideas in a, well, reactive way. But that doesn't mean anyone people who are 'woke', by their own designation or that of others, have a monopoly on caring about such issues or are the only ones with the correct way of thinking about it.
Indeed, people might well be very woke in deed and thought without liking the label at all, and others might claim such a label yet act in ways quite contrary to its stated aims.
Now if you aren't a very small select number of artists, you have to do a 100+ gigs a year, every year to stay relevant and make a living.
There is an element wherein people are just upset that the thing they like is ending, and I think even in most of the 'worst endings evarr' examples even when they are not great - as you say endings are hard - they are rarely as bad as people remember them as being (and you know what, the Star Wars Prequels aren't as bad as people remember either). Not that I haven't raved about the terrible endings of some of my favourite shows!