Why the BBC is a redundant enterprise

By Pete North - January 20, 2021

Were I born twenty years sooner, I would likely perform an administrative function for a living attached to the manufacturing sector in the north of England. I would spend most of my day poking spreadsheets in a portacabin and unless I bought a newspaper, the only news I would see would be the Sun and the Express in the works canteen.

I would therefore value an evening news programme to bring me up to the minute, and perhaps look to the Telegraph the following day for analysis – back in the days when we mistakenly imagined commentators were serious people who knew about things. There would be no BBC News homepage, no Twitter, and the only next text service would be Ceefax. BBC television news, therefore, served a function.

Fast forward to today and we are bombarded with news every hour of the day and we can barely escape it. Consumption of news has become habitual and often we receive the news around the same time as journalists. By the time they’ve knocked up their first draft of events, their audiences have already seen more sources than they have and the average BBC hack, with one or two honourable exceptions, has no greater insight than the average joe. In fact, the bubble effect very often means a BBC political hack knows even less than those the presume to inform.

It therefore comes as no real surprise that BBC audiences are rapidly collapsing. It cannot add value in the news sector nor can it compete in the entertainment stakes. It is gradually facing its own obsolescence. Eventually we’ll get to the point where receiving equipment in vehicles steps into the twenty first century by which time commuters (presently in lockdown) will have choices other than Radio 4.

Increasingly audiences are wondering why they should pay for this degraded and largely redundant service when they don’t have to. I’ve never had a TV licence and I’m not volunteering to incur that expense. There are alternatives.

BBC Home Affairs correspondent, Daniel Sandford, tweets “At £13.99 a month Netflix is now more than the BBC licence and there is no radio, no live TV, no news online etc etc” but I’m not sure if he’s advertising Netflix or attempting to argue in favour of the BBC. I’m not given to watching celebrity presenters who take to Twitter to inform us what our opinions should be, I’m not interested in the superficial and third rate analysis of its political correspondents, nor particularly am I in the market for political gossip. And I’m not alone.

As it happens, I’m not in the market for a streaming service either. I probably am in the minority on that one but I can choose not to without risking a prison sentence or harassment from Craptia.

There most certainly is an argument for funding the BBC from general taxation were it to fulfil its public service remit, but instead of taking risks to produce higher quality, it has joined commercial stations in a race to the bottom to maximise ratings. Moreover, it doesn’t seem to want to fulfil that remit. Certainly not in a sense that would be appreciated by audiences.

The BBC sees part of its role to correct the views of the great unwashed. Last time I checked in on its children’s output, I was horrified to see a Blue Peter presenter lecturing a ginger kid about his white privilege. It used to be that the BBC was a trusted institution you could leave you kids lone with (notwithstanding Jimmy Saville) but now it’s a corrupting influence.

Further it could have made itself very popular and produced a global export by producing a British version of Band of Brothers, back when there were still enough veterans around. But that in the yes of BBC executives would be pandering to white men obsessed with WW2. A tragically missed opportunity right about the time when it had both the production ability and the money. Instead it was lavishing Gary Lineker with millions to opine on the outcome of foot ball games, and Graham Norton for reasons known only to itself.

Gone are the days when the BBC made pioneering documentaries and instead got lazy, relying on high definition photography with the soothing narration of eco-warrior David Attenborough. It’s great stuff but nothing the private domain could not accomplish. Meanwhile it took a cherished British institution, Doctor Who and turned it into a tedious wokeathon that even its most ardent fans couldn’t stomach. The latest series finale broke the record of being the least-watched episode of the show since 2005.

For a long time the BBC has traded off its legacy prestige from when it was a capable and respected organisation but it’s been hollowed out from the inside while the bureaucrats took over – more interested in in meeting screen time diversity and inclusion quotas than entertaining people. Top Gear fronted by Jeremey Clarkson, its most successful production of modern times, and the only vessel still capable of reaching certain demographics was jettisoned with glee when Clarkson gave them the opportunity. It existed at their sufferance.

For as long as the BBC sees its role as a political re-education ministry, it cannot be surprised if audiences no longer want to part with their own money for it. It cannot entertain, it cannot inform, and it cannot compete – and the function it does serve ceased to be relevant two decades ago. The only thing left to do is strip it for parts and thank it for its service. It has now outstayed its welcome.