Just A Minute

 

Interesting idea Julian.  I'm sure it's been suggested many times before.

Let me propose a counter argument.

Leaving aside the single right that paying the license fee gives one, I and millions of other license fee payers could have the view that we have "invested" our money over the years to finance the productions of BBC programmes.  In line with investors who put their money into other businesses, we might also have the view that we should get a "return" on our investment.

That "return" could take the form of:

1. A lower license fee (no, I'm not complaining about the fee!)
2. More money in the BBC's coffers to help pay for new productions
3. More money in the BBC's coffers putting it in a stronger position to bid for certain programmes such as Live Test Cricket, Mad Men etc.

Of course the BBC does get a return of many millions from the selling or licensing programmes to other broadcasters, but let's enter the realm of fantasy for a moment.

Apart from the cost of the electricity powering my laptop, watching that video clip of Kenneth Williams on Parkinson cost me nothing. The clip lasts ca 14.5 minutes, so based on a fee of £1 per hour, watching that clip could have cost me 25p. Why £1 per hour? Well, the average price of a cinema ticket in the UK is at least £5, the same goes for the US, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand. For that minimum of £5, the individual gets ca 2 hours of entertainment. Therefore sitting in my lounge, I can enjoy that youtube entertainment at the cost of less than 40% of what it would cost me to watch a film in the cinema. There have been more than 15,000 views of the KW clip, hence the income generated could have been close to £4000, if all viewers had paid the 25p. For one clip!

I wonder how of us here and beyond will listen to at least one episode of JAM today, without specifically paying any money to do so? I will, but I always have a niggling doubt as to whether it is right or not.

 You compare the old programmes to historical documents, but they're more than that surely. They're still products just as all of the output from companies such as Coca-Cola, Rolls Royce, Samsung e.t.c are products.

Just because they're old doesn't mean they have no value.

The best place to see many items of no or very little value is the car boot sale.  It would be interesting to go to one of these sales and try to persuade a stall holder that what is on offer has no absolutely no value and should be free.

---

To: just-a-minute@...
From: don@...
Date: Sat, 1 Sep 2012 22:02:01 +0100
Subject: Re: [just-a-minute] BBC recordings

 

I agree 100% Julian

Thank you for the link - great stuff!

--

Cheers

Don   __o
      \<,
.....O/ O

---

From: Julian Bishop <julianxbishop@...>
To: "just-a-minute@..." <just-a-minute@...>
Sent: Saturday, 1 September 2012, 13:42
Subject: [just-a-minute] BBC recordings

I watched today a recent re-run of Parkinson Shows concentrating on multiple appearances from key celebrities from the 1970s.  The focus was Kenneth Williams.

It struck me that you would never have a prime time show today where the focus of discussion was on architecture, unions and poetry.  The tastes of the audience have changed.  I then wondered what the commercial value of this old programme was.  Presumably this would be fairly low.

Surely, this is an argument for why this type of old content be provided free in the same way that other historical documents are also free.

For those that are interested, the first part is below:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JkUyDr97NU4

Julian