Who would give a sh!t if -
 

The BBC went on strike?
BBC News - Strike warning over BBC plans 'to cut services'
One of the problems with going on strike, is that people will realise that they don't really miss you when you are not there.
Let's just hope they can't resolve the issues.
£140 tax reduction buys my vote.:thumb:

I will be gutted if the Asian music network goes, I love Citarrh music acompanied by what sounds like someone torturing a cat.

:lol:

Don't think too many people will miss it ... BBC Asian Network, UK - listening figures - Media UK

"... Audience data for September 2009 to December 2009
TSA: This radio station broadcasts to a survey area of 51,280,000,000 adults (aged 15+).
Reach: It is listened to by 360,000 people (1%) each week.
Hours: Each listener tunes in for 5.2 hours per week - a total of 1,879,000.
Share: In its area, it has a 0.2% market share ..."

Not that the BBC will reduce the price of a license though ....

Dave

Might be three noughts too many there.

I don't think John Peel will mind, some how... :wonder:

;)

If the fcuckers want to listen to Asian music, ship them off to Asia and they can listen to it there, and then give any monies saved to Blue Peter and bring back the magic roundabout.

id rather ban bbc from my viewing then wouldnt have to pay the bloomin licence fees, mind you the missis would go ape as avid enders fan

UK gold for you mate - the story lines are rehashed every five years or so anyway.

I couldn't give a toss if the bbc went....

You would be surprised how many programs are aired by other channels that were made by the BBC.

Hear hear.

Let the BBC go on strike, preferably for 52 weeks,followed by another 52, and we wont have to pay them robbing bastards their license fee.

I would be very glad not to have to pay a licence fee for a pretty poor set of programmes which are hardly ever worth watching.

Les

I wouldn't be that fussed.

There is some good stuff done by the BBC - but it is dwarfed by the rest of the utter ****e they broadcast. :)

Another vote for letting them founder.

If ever a company was not in the rteal world, it's the BBC:rolleyes:

The bbc are one of the things that make me proud to be british. The news coverage is better than any other western media company and for those that do not understand how catastrophic things can be without a TV station free of comercial incentive, have a look at fox news. Amercians have news and programming decided by advertising, programs showing positive aspects of Cuba for example are not allowed on American TV.
The bbc is respected the world over for its programming and yet people here fail to appreciate how important the BBC is. Without the BBC to set a standard there would be no independant news left in the UK and many other parts of the world. The BBC website is a source of news for people all over the world , USA included , who cannot get non-propaganda information from anywhere else.

EFA .....

Dave

yeah then we can all get our news from Fox:Whatever_

Its funny how the BBC get accused of bias by both sides when dealing with pretty much any Political or geo political issue. My only gripe has been how massively soft they are on Israel's deliberate murder of young children but seeing as most western news source' hardley mention Israels war crimes, at least the bbcmake a cursery akknowledgement of the fact.

Twenty years ago maybe (or not indeed).
Why anyone in this day and age would think a publicly funded state constituted organisation would provide impartial news coverage is beyond my understanding, well apart from in China, Libya, Cuba, former iron curtain countries and so forth, where it would indeed!
The BBC is a complete anachronism, with little to commend, apart from "unbiased" news for the blinkered. Which is fair enough....
if only I am not obliged by the law to fund it.

Because they do. State funded and state controled are two different things.

They do? Tell us more.

That to you might be a statement.
For me it is no such thing at all.
An oxymoron perhaps?
As I say, I am not really bothered by how cr*p the BBC is, merely that I don't like being forced to fund it.
At least with privately funded rubbish - it isn't me (compelled by decree) who coughs up for it.
The unusual thing is, those on low incomes pay the same as those on high incomes for this service.
Totally unacceptable for the poll tax, but OK for funding an establishment run information service?
A socialist case of four legs good, two legs better?
Please don't take what I am saying as a personal attack - it is just that I am no big fan of the state apparatus.

In all fairness, I must say that Dimblebum's programme last night was extremely good. Fascinating and informatory look into our history presented in a most interesting way.

Les

For what I get from it, I don't think its bad value.

The Archers, the News, Wildlife shows, various sporting events, music on BBC4, Top Gear, the BBC News website, Horizon, HIGNFY, Mock the Week, etc.

:lol:

However if it does get chucked, then why don't you just go down to your local indian restaurant for a fix whilst you eat