Ofcom should be the BBC's ultimate overlord, UK.gov told

I'm torn with the BBC. On one hand, it is a venerable institution with lots of decent programming that it has made and continues to make. On the other hand, you've got this (subjectively) biased organisation that lacks accountability and fights tooth and nail against any attempt at transparency. With a private outfit (Sky, for example) if they feck you off, you just stop buying. No such luck with the BBC. So, I cautiously welcome an external regulator, but am concerned over how much government meddling this could entail.

Tough one to figure out where I stand on this...

"Goodbye fat-cat make-work schemes, hello to proper accountability"

Dear El Reg,

Are you high?

Regards,

Everyone

But I thought....

I'm sure commentators keep telling me Ofcom is useless.

And so handing oversight of the BBC to Ofcom helps keep it under control, how?

Ha ha

Offcom are a useless, toothless QUANGO and the BBC are above the law. I'd love to see someone hold the BBC to account for their blatant political correct and left wing agenda but I can't see that happening any time soon. Some of their PC must have someone from every background and gender in every programme is embarrassing to watch.

Best thing that could happen is that the BBC go self funded (subscription) and we'd see how long they'd last then. They are the only company (but still called a corporation) that gets paid by everyone irrespective of their performance and unless that changes it will be business as usual.

P.S. Their Pro America Donald Trump coverage can take a hike too.

Clementi

From wikipedia (as good as anything for a quick look)

former Deputy Governor of the Bank of England

Chairman of International Payments business World First

Vice Chairman of Investment Manager Ruffer Group.

former Chairman of Prudential

(former) non-executive director Rio Tinto Group

former Chairman of Virgin Money

I'm not seeing a lot of experience in telecoms, media, provision of information....etc

Now whether that's a good thing or not, I leave to others.

Ah

So they want to flog it to BT when they privatise it then...

Fuck that!

I find that Ofcom are just a bunch of government arse lickers.

It is downhill all the way with this one.

Trouble ahead

Speaking as an ex customer who has not had a TV set this century and blocked “bbc.co.uk” by firewall for years its hard to care what happens to his sanctimonious cancer of democracy. I see it occasionally when visiting folk and it seems ever more like a piss take of itself. Will this change get them back to the golden days of the BBC and its core values, pre war Lord Reith blocking rabble rousing anti appeasement politicians from accessing the media (Churchill), Peston using live coverage to undermine RBS negotiations using an intriguing stream of apparently market leading inside information to bring the company down etc, Peston Fixed It as surely as the great Jimmy, true BBC men at heart.

When I hear radio news now I repeatedly hear sketches presented by actors written by anonymous parties, what agency is paying for this mendacious fiction that the BBC laughingly presents as fact.

The only answer is to shatter the monolith that is slowly poisoning the UK, its becoming clear that the BBC like the idea of the License Fee becoming a government imposed tax. It will make the poll tax seem like a stroll in the park.

The BBC...

... is just a James Martin and property porn vehicle.

When they are not busy covering their posteriors protecting the likes of Mr Saville that is...

Their worst crime is not showing Pingu on Cbeebies any more. Bastards!

When I worked for the Commercial Media rivals of the BBC everything that could be blamed on the BBC was blamed on the BBC. Audience figures for a show slightly down? Specific demographic missing from the audience? Unable to do that on a commercial station (Ofcom would scream murder) only the BBC can get away with it. It's always the fault of the BBC. So I played devils advocate in one meeting by suggested that what we wanted therefore was for the BBC to be put on equal terms with ourselves namely be regulated by Ofcom and take advertising rather than the License Fee.

The faces round the room were not smiling and someone said we didn't want to change the status quo (and certainly didn't want then taking advertising) because who would we have to blame for our woes - we certainly won't be blaming our excellent programmes.

Ofcom can and do ban services from broadcasting in the UK, fine you for serious breaches of the broadcasting code and for the Media services 'can' be quite tough. Telecoms on the otherhand.......

DOUBLE STANDARDS Mr OFFCOM!

You allow dogs fucking women on Family Guy but heaven forbid if a real woman flashes her flaps on Babestation!.....hope you all choke on your ballgags at your swingers parties this weekend!

Good grief

Ofcom and its previous organisations have allowed the UK TV and radio broadcasters to ride roughshod over their listeners for years to the extent that their programming is dreadful. God forbid that the BBC is allowed to follow suit.

Do any of the official "regulators" actually do anything for consumers? Ofcom seems to exist to protect BT and their openworld monopoly. Ofgem have done nothing about pushing prices lower, or dealing with dodgy selling tactics or t&c's etc - so again the actually appear to exist to protect the energy companies. Ofwat seem to be doing nothing to force the water companies to replace ancient leaking pipes.

They're all a complete waste of tax payers money.

Someone may have missed a point or two...

Passing the Board of Trustees "regulatory" function over to Ofcom may or may not be a good idea, but the Trust has other functions about which Ofcom frankly won't give a sh1t.

The Trustees should have blown the whistle on the DMI and doubtless other follies, but one thing that I think we can be absolutely certain about is that unless Ofcom's remit is radically changed it won't pay the slightest attention to a future DMI debacle. Corporate stupidity will be of no interest to Ofcom unless it impacts on some (existing?) regulatory standard. OK; the Trustees failed in that specific responsibility but that was a failure of their duty, not the non - existence of that duty, and there will have to be some body to oversee the non - regulatory matters that do not fall within Ofcom's brief.

IMHO leaving such responsibilities to the Board fo Management is to invite a repeat of DMI (or similar) and there must remain some "board" (whatever one might choose to call it) to maintain that oversight. I suspect (but do not know) that the problem was that there was nobody in the Trustees with sufficient technical knowledge to be able to mount a proper challenge to management thinking (if there ever was a case where "manglement" might be more appropriate then this was surely it) along the lines of "the Emperor has no clothes".

I can't see Ofcom being able to fulfill that role.

OFCOM regulate the BBC?

So how will this pan out? Will they treat the BBC like BT, a monopoly and hence demand that it should open up it's channels to competition, and go on about splitting the business up along nonsensical lines, simply to "increase competition".

Also won't OFCOM have a conflict of interest, because they are wanting to reduce the spectrum available to broadcast radio and TV (ie. the BBC and friends), so that it can be resold to the 4G operators...

Yes, I get it that the BBC Trust have a conflict of interest, but I doubt that getting OFCOM involved will actually give rise to any benefit whatsoever; unless you happen to be Sky, TalkTalk et al (you can see their complaint: the BBC should be a programme maker not a programme delivery organisation, because that igves it an unfair advantage...).

half the job

The BBC don't need a regulator just to protect themselves from themselves, they need one to protect them from unfair external interference as well. Particularly unwarranted political pressure and the nonstop lies spouted by some media rivals. OFCOM in that role makes no sense at all unless the aim is destroying any independence the BBC still has.

Enough people hate them for usually purely selfish reasons, OFCOM aren't the solution to ensuring honest and strong but fair and balanced independence in the face of so many wanting to cripple and control the BBC.

Must have missed the left wing BBC agenda, from the random selection of BBC stuff I watch they normally seem to be quite right wing in overall tone across content as a whole (obv any 1 particular program, be it TV or radio, chosen at random might have a left wing bias, but overall their "slant" always seem to broadly follow government line in recent years ).

Bias

As far as I can tell, the BBC gets accused of bias from all sides of the political spectrum - which kinda implies they aren't biased (at least not in the way people accuse them of being)

However, they definitely need to more independence from government influence - they should never be a mouthpiece for any political party, they should be providing the facts, and letting people make their own conclusions. Doing any less is a disservice to democracy.