tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1141932539860553199.post5448201988326203800..comments2024-03-05T10:52:24.691+00:00Comments on Mark Wadsworth: Culture and the EUMark Wadsworthhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07733511175178098449noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1141932539860553199.post-2457255170254547812016-05-24T13:17:07.037+01:002016-05-24T13:17:07.037+01:00Bayard,
"If you don't have a TV, you don...Bayard,<br /><br />"If you don't have a TV, you don't pay the tax"<br /><br />But that's not the point of public service broadcasting. It's a general service to the population. In the same way that we treat poor kids with cancer and look after the disabled, there are TV services we should provide to people, regardless of wealth. The prime example is TV for under-5s. Broadcasting for disabled audiences. Broadcasting of parliament. We might even expand that to the sort of things Brian Cox does, or Horrible Histories. We want poor kids on council estates to learn about the cosmos or history in a way that draws them in, maybe?<br /><br />It does mean that the BBC would shrink hugely. Maybe a couple of channels of TV, couple of radio channels. Most of BBC1 would be eradicated - hospital dramas, property porn, antique porn, chat shows. Most of BBC2 too: cookery shows, game shows, historical drama, cop shows, music shows. Depending on where you drew the line, BBC4 might keep a lot of its content.Tim Almondhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13369256383976094670noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1141932539860553199.post-29521421290966256622016-05-24T12:13:08.005+01:002016-05-24T12:13:08.005+01:00TS, it is fairer than general taxation. Not much, ...TS, it is fairer than general taxation. Not much, but it is fairer. If you don't have a TV, you don't pay the tax, like cars and road tax, but unlike education if you have no children or health if you never go to hospital.Bayardhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15211150959757982948noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1141932539860553199.post-76545537955022311342016-05-24T12:10:04.283+01:002016-05-24T12:10:04.283+01:00L, good point: "public libraries" are ac...L, good point: "public libraries" are actually two types of library, a lending library, with space for people to go and read in it and a reference library. Whilst a lot of what's in the latter can be found on the internet, there is likely also to be much that isn't, especially local history and records.<br /><br />The problem with libraries, like many public services, is that, with declining usage, at what point do you stop providing that service and disadvantage the few remaining users?<br /><br />Art galleries are different. There really is no substitute for seeing a work of art "in the flesh". Whether you want to or think that the experience should be available free of charge to the public is another matter.Bayardhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15211150959757982948noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1141932539860553199.post-2866742971866825542016-05-24T10:49:32.384+01:002016-05-24T10:49:32.384+01:00It's about coercion again. I object to that. ...It's about coercion again. I object to that. I really do not see the need for state funded art galleries or libraries (the latter especially now with cheap books on amazon and google.). There in fact a private reading room aka library in my town. Which is a de facto library. It suffers from unfair completion from the County Library.<br /><br />What I do think that there is a public need for is a local records library which is available to all at public expense. That would help with open government.Lolahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04586735342675041312noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1141932539860553199.post-3623206497118698732016-05-24T09:51:08.092+01:002016-05-24T09:51:08.092+01:00Bayard,
"I know it's slightly fairer tha...Bayard,<br /><br />"I know it's slightly fairer than funding it out of general taxation, but people don't see it that way."<br /><br />No, it isn't. It's a regressive tax on the poor, and for something that people overwhelmingly choose to have. It's not like slapping a tax on say, yachts, that few people on, and mostly rich people. Almost everyone has a TV, to the point you can describe it as universal.<br /><br />The thing with the BBC is that it only really made sense in its current form when broadcasting had limited bandwidth and high barriers to entry. You only had a small number of channels - you want to ensure that a wide variety of products, everything from game shows to history and science and arts gets broadcast. This worked better than say, the USA, which took the perspective of commercial TV and had little diversity in its broadcasting.<br /><br />But when there's pretty much unlimited choice on YouTube, why do you need the BBC? I regularly watch the Red Letter Media movie show on YouTube. It's better than Film 2016. Why should I pay for Film 2016? That doesn't mean that you don't need a BBC. I think kids getting CBeebies is a good thing. I'm open to arguments that some aspects of the BBC, particularly the enlightening and educational stuff, is worth having. The Brian Cox stuff was pretty good. But if that's "a good thing", should we force poor people to pay for it? Shouldn't we be wanting to make sure that kids in council estates don't have to choose between that and something else, that we, the richer people subsidise it in the same way that we fund schools?Tim Almondhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13369256383976094670noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1141932539860553199.post-75973836494441196072016-05-24T09:22:33.132+01:002016-05-24T09:22:33.132+01:00Mark,
And there's the problem. Libraries have...Mark,<br /><br />And there's the problem. Libraries have been in decline for decades. Even before the Internet came along. You reduce the price of buying a book, people are more likely to choose to buy than borrow a book. Maybe they don't want to wait for a library copy to come back in.<br /><br />It's reached the point for me where it's generally cheaper to buy a book at £3 a time (which seems to be about my average price) than to either park or take a bus to the library.<br /><br />I do think there's rather a lot of people liking the idea of libraries, museums and galleries than actually liking them. It's a much more socially comfortable existence to say that you think they're awesome and shouldn't be closed down than to suggest that maybe there's too much of it.<br /><br />They reduced the hours of the Swindon Art Gallery. It's rather good and I recommend people pay it a visit. Early 20th century industrial art, mostly. And someone from the parks and museums that I know was outraged. Tory cuts etc. But honestly, I've been in there a dozen times and never seen more than 3 or 4 people at a time. I've only seen more when they bring someone in to teach crafts to kids, when you then have 20 or more kids.Tim Almondhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13369256383976094670noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1141932539860553199.post-34380419594332353232016-05-23T18:28:04.851+01:002016-05-23T18:28:04.851+01:00Broadly agreed, although I do like public museums ...Broadly agreed, although I do like public museums and libraries. It's a question of fact and degree how many you need.Mark Wadsworthhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07733511175178098449noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1141932539860553199.post-32320803274614790752016-05-23T18:11:43.789+01:002016-05-23T18:11:43.789+01:00DBCR, I very much doubt that it is public art gall...DBCR, I very much doubt that it is public art galleries that the luvvies are referring to, they already have an income from central or local government. It is more likely private galleries getting EU money.<br /><br />Anyhow all this is bollocks for another reason: we have no idea to what extent central and local government funding has been scaled back precisely because there is money available from the EU. I am sure that if the Tories thought they could get away with closing public art galleries or public libraries, they would already have done so. I used to live in the right-wing banana republic that was Wandsworth Borough. They kept the libraries open and free, much to my surprise at the time.<br /><br />The problem with the funding of the Beeb is the way the money is collected and the perceived unfairness of that. I know it's slightly fairer than funding it out of general taxation, but people don't see it that way. The licence fee combines the disadvantages of funding by subscription (a high fixed cost to the poor) with the disadvantages of funding by taxation (you pay whether you use it or not). It should be one or the other.Bayardhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15211150959757982948noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1141932539860553199.post-80604091008494571332016-05-23T09:51:39.056+01:002016-05-23T09:51:39.056+01:00Another one must bite the dust: this time its publ...Another one must bite the dust: this time its public art galleries.Lola or somebody had a go at public libraries recently. All as part of a generalised attack on the BBC because it is not saturated with adverts for the things that really matter in life.<br />Be clear: if the State doesn't tax the money the private rent-seekers<br />will. DBC Reedhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17891849727783879145noreply@blogger.com