Gransnet forums

Chat

Should the BBC be defunded?

(167 Posts)
Sago Mon 10-Nov-25 09:20:15

The government is committed to upholding the licence fee until the current Charter period ends on December 31, 2027.

After this should the BBC be defunded?

AGAA4 Wed 12-Nov-25 15:21:22

I only watch iPlayer too. They do drama very well. I don't want to lose iPlayer. That would be a catastrophe! 😅

foxie48 Wed 12-Nov-25 15:46:27

Apologies Allira you are correct, the report I read seemed to say it was the Production company "October films" but having done some more checking it was done by BBC editing staff. Absolutely stupid of them, I hope they were sacked!

foxie48 Wed 12-Nov-25 15:49:23

I've just listened to the Trip episode which covers this issue. Apparently in a very recent survey in the US about what media Americans trust, the BBC came out second after the weather channel! Worth a listen if you haven't already heard it.

FriedGreenTomatoes2 Wed 12-Nov-25 16:01:55

foxie48

Apologies Allira you are correct, the report I read seemed to say it was the Production company "October films" but having done some more checking it was done by BBC editing staff. Absolutely stupid of them, I hope they were sacked!

Indeed.
Thank you foxie for posting this though. Good of you a ‘mea culpa’.
The BBC could learn from you!

Labradora Wed 12-Nov-25 16:36:47

That's a resounding "No' from me.
Better "Under no circumstances".

FriedGreenTomatoes2 Wed 12-Nov-25 19:38:46

I think, if the BBC ever switches to a subscription funding model, it will continue to exist only as a shadow of its current size as only a small minority will choose to pay it.

Allira Wed 12-Nov-25 19:50:25

foxie48

Apologies Allira you are correct, the report I read seemed to say it was the Production company "October films" but having done some more checking it was done by BBC editing staff. Absolutely stupid of them, I hope they were sacked!

Perhaps the report was put out by the BBC Editing team foxie48 🤔

Allira Wed 12-Nov-25 19:54:39

Allira

foxie48

Apologies Allira you are correct, the report I read seemed to say it was the Production company "October films" but having done some more checking it was done by BBC editing staff. Absolutely stupid of them, I hope they were sacked!

Perhaps the report was put out by the BBC Editing team foxie48 🤔

And thank you! 🙂

Grantanow Sun 16-Nov-25 18:34:03

If the licence fee goes that's probably the end unless the government funds it from general taxation via an insulating body. I recall a senior independent broadcast executive said some years ago. 'It's the BBC that keeps us honest.' The Panorama debacle is awful but insignificant when compared with the thousands of BBC broadcast hours every year.

Magenta8 Mon 17-Nov-25 09:22:37

Casdon

This will reveal the politics of every Gransnet member who replies!

I don't agree with your statement. I don't think the BBC should be defunded for many reasons that have nothing to do with politics. I know people who are right wing and left wing and neither lot wants to see the BBC defunded.

I don't think that the BBC is bunch of left wing loonies as most of their output is apolitical. Strictly Come Dancing, Gardeners World, Masterchef, Pointless and The Blue Planet are just few random examples.

Guess who I voted for in the last election (Clue it was not Labour)

Lathyrus3 Mon 17-Nov-25 10:01:45

Hmm. Not sure if it reveals the politics per se.

It certainly reveals who is prepared to put truth and honesty aside for political advantage.

Magenta8 Mon 17-Nov-25 10:32:00

It's a bit of a leap to accuse somebody of condoning fake news for the sake of political advantage because they want to preserve an institution that has pioneered broadcasting, informed and entertained people for over 100 years in wartime and in peacetime.

I am not defending the specific lapses the BBC has made recently and over the years I am just trying to see the bigger picture.

Maremia Mon 17-Nov-25 10:32:25

You mean like Trump?

Maremia Mon 17-Nov-25 10:32:49

Was asking Lathyrus

Maremia Mon 17-Nov-25 10:33:42

Conflation happens a lot on GN, Magenta.

Lathyrus3 Mon 17-Nov-25 10:34:59

Absolutely like Trump🙂

Lathyrus3 Mon 17-Nov-25 10:39:12

To me drlbeate falsifying n order to make a point is just that. False.

I’ve always believed that any point of view or argument should be able to stand on truth and fact.

If it needs faking or distorting in some way then there must be doubts or distrust doubts about its value dirty in the the first place.

That’s his I see it anyway. I’ve never had any respect for manipulation.

Maremia Mon 17-Nov-25 10:39:51

Gosh, are you saying that you absolutely like Trump?

Lathyrus3 Mon 17-Nov-25 10:40:00

deliberate. Goodness knows why autocorrect thinks that is a word😬

Lathyrus3 Mon 17-Nov-25 10:41:32

No🤣🤣🤣

I’m agreeing that’s he’s an absolute example of someone who distorts and fakes.

You couldn’t have chosen better.

Lathyrus3 Mon 17-Nov-25 10:43:30

Better as an example.

Dear me I’m a bit woolly in expression today🙄

Need to go and take the tablets…..

Maremia Mon 17-Nov-25 10:45:12

Thing is though.
He did reject the democratic vote. He did egg on those thugs. Five people died. 170 plus police officers were injured. The Politicians had to hide, in real fear of their lives.
He didn't attempt to call them off when Mike Pence phoned and asked him to.
He watched it unfold on TV and did nothing to stop it.
Trump pardoned the offenders.
But the BBC are the baddies, for editing HIS OWN WORDS.

Lahlah65 Mon 17-Nov-25 10:48:02

fancythat

Is all this true?

I dont know what to believe any more.
Are all their articles, going back I dont know how long, true?

www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-55640437

This is a factual description of the basis for the attempted impeachment of Trump, so based on the legal proceedings at the time. It is probably accurate and reliable information, and it would be possible to find the actual documentation and check it word for word if one wanted to.

It’s different to the Panorama programme in which journalists took excerpts from completely different points in a speech and edited them to make it look as if they were consecutive comments.

We all know that there’s an element of editing in news reporting - of course there is. This particular speech was about 70 minutes long and very few of us want to listen to the whole thing. But personally, I am really irritated and annoyed at the Panorama journalists who have bought the BBC into disrepute completely unnecessarily in the Trump programme.

Lathyrus3 Mon 17-Nov-25 10:53:53

He did do all those the things.

The man is unspeakable.

But if we accept it’s ok to edit and spice to create a sentence that didn’t exist in truth then there is no trust in what we see and hear from those who did that.

And there is no barrier to applying a slice and broadcasting a speech that does not reflect what was truly said in regard to anyone.

I think a broadcaster that does not rely on funding from outside sources is vital. I don’t want the BBC to be defunded or to cease to exist.

But I do want it to have integrity and to be a trusted source of what is happening in the world.

Lahlah65 Mon 17-Nov-25 10:57:44

I had a conversation with a relative recently who won’t watch the BBC anymore because they were so cross about what they called ‘the Huw Edwards thing’. It’s also mentioned above. I obviously I (think) I know what happened with HE, but I don’t know why people are so cross with the BBC over it? What do people think was wrong?