BBC Deputy DG Rhodri Talfan Davies was at the heart of switching resources out of local radio and into 'digital', and continues to laud online hits. Of course, the switch started in BBC Wales/Cymru, when Rhodri was Director there. And the practice of promoting stories that have a marginal relationship with most definitions of 'news' continues.
Take this, from Monday, constructed from one Disney+ clip, an Instagram post, and some repeating of public comments.
The Commons Culture Committee's Charter review has played back many of the BBC's requests for a new Charter; so many, indeed, that we're no closer to a workable way forward.
Dangerously, though, they talk about a leaner BBC, with more people paying, but a lower sum than at present. They suggest any household with a PC, Tablet or Smartphone should be liable to pay for a 'reformed licence', but with no suggestion on means of enforcement - and so, we're just in the same place. Evasion is evasion, whether the licence fee is £200 a year or £100, and evasion, silently encouraged by the BBC's traditional opponents, is still the problem.
The launch of the report provided Justin Webb with a moment he'll want to recall in the golf club.
The BBC's Ben Chu is on the digital frontline churning out gobbets of Verify for social media. But this one, has got the tone wrong, pitting yoof against stereotpyed oldies, according to more than one of my correspondents.
The extraordinary efforts of BBC News online to 'win the weekend' with click-baity tosh continue, but are beginning to be noticed.
This weekend, Sydney-based BBC World journalist Tiffanie Turnbull and London-based Simran Sohal put together 1500 words on "How the bare nails trend became a class issue". It's filed under "Health", subheading "Wellbeing". The Daily Mail spotted the ensuring Twitter pile-on, including this from (Professor) Alexandra Wilson:
The politicisation of absolutely everything is becoming deeply tedious. We used to be a sane country. Women could wear nail varnish or not, according to their preference, and nothing further needed to be said, certainly not by the BBC. https://t.co/7uXdOwt2rJ
— Alexandra Wilson (@amwilson_opera) September 26, 2026
Is this about 'pursuing the truth with no agenda' ?
"A globally renowned media company borne of the BBC" is the latest tagline in job adverts for BBC Studios.
Both 'born' and 'borne' are past tense forms of the verb 'bear'. In the UK, we are pretty clear that 'born' is the past tense of the verb meaning 'to give birth'. 'Borne' is more commonly associated with 'carrying a physical or figurative burden', or, when combined with another word, transmitted. E.g. airborne, water-borne bacteria, wind-borne pollen, mosquito-borne diseases.
I suspect the tagline comes from the US side of studios....
A little bewildered. I have watched the YouTube 33 minute version of Laura Kuenssberg;s interview with BBC Director General Matt Brittin. Cui bono ? Why did Matt accept the request ? Very little pitch-rolling, very little vision, a sort of Ken Barrington innings, largely defensive strokes. And why didn't Laura push a bit harder for some vision of a future BBC, beyond Matt's platitudes ?
Let's walk through last night's pub discussion (mine, not yours) again.
The BBC is currently built on 'universality', something for everyone, and measures success by the size of audiences. In the old linear tv world, this meant plenty of jolly stuff, mass audience entertainment, to keep the viewing figures in a tight line for as long as possible in the evenings. Sitcoms, to drag you through Panorama, panel games to get you past Tomorrow's World, That Was The Week That Was to keep you awake and interested beyond some Previn-conducted Symphony Concert, no hammocks to lead you away to Minder or Sunday Night at the London Palladium.
But the world of the set menu is gone. Programmes matter more than channels and perhaps even more than streamers. Slow Horses gets talked about more than Apple TV. Ted Lasso. Clarkson's Farm. The Crown. Games of Thrones. Which is on where, again ?
So the BBC has to decide, I think, on a long-term vision of its programme portfolio, which ditches low cost, low public value schedule fillers. Can it - should it - really sustain Pointless, House of Games, Wisdom of The Crowd, The Inner Circle, Answer Run, The Finish Line, Bridge of Lies, The Weakest Link in an on-demand world ? How would you defend a household tax that pays for Antiques Roadshow, Bargain Hunt, The Travelling Auctioneers, The Bidding Room, Flog It, Road Trip and more ?
The case for a BBC channel built around a newsy breakfast show and three main bulletins looks to have legs for a couple of Charters; but I would argue it could take more, not less, current affairs in its schedule. Newsnight, Politics Live etc should be continuing BBC products. Turn The One Show into a properly funded Michelmore-era Tonight. Then Tentpole stuff 8pm to 10pm. Satire, jazz, comedy, Brains Trusts, reviews at 11pm. Back to the future, eh ?
And then, an on-demand portfolio of seriously good programmes that reflect and celebrate British culture, arts, drama, music, and yes, comedy. Programmes that encourage family viewing, programmes that educate, gently, programmes that last. Can you do that, Matt ?
An excellent piece of misdirection by BBC DG Matt Brittin in his pre-recorded interview with Laura Kuennsburg.
“We might have some channels and services where maybe 100,000 people are watching the broadcast service, but 500,000 are getting those programmes on iPlayer. When’s the right time to migrate that service fully to being on demand? "
The problem is, Matt, that your managers are now cutting the programmes, and whether they're delivered 'on-demand' or 'broadcast' is a secondary issue. Neither forms of delivery are 'free', and the savings in going down to 'on-demand' only, if chased too early, mean an end to the channels which showcase good material and bring it to the attention of wider audiences.
