Re: [Swprograms] FW: World Service Feedback

[jfiglio1@xxxxxxxxxxxx]

Responding to both you and Scott here...

FWIW, my personal assessment is that the BBC is primarily just trying to reduce its distribution costs without much (or enough) regard to the effect on its listeners.  This is why it spins the research numbers the way it does. 

In fact, I think one could make an excellent case arguing that what the BBC really wants to do is get out of the distribution side altogether or as much as possible ASAP-- perhaps with the exception of the internet.  (At some point, they might even try and spin that off too.  I think I remember a few recent rumors to that effect.)  There are examples in other parts of the media industry of concerted efforts on the part of companies to split production from distribution and be one but not the other.  

Not necessarily a bad decision (although it may be a risky one)...  with all the distribution technologies out there already and more apparently coming, it is a nightmare to figure out how to leverage all of them.

In that regard, the question of "what is or what are the responsibilities of a public broadcaster" gets turned a little.  If there are so many ways to get it and so many others wishing to serve as distribution agents, it can be argued that such a responsiblity *can* be shed.

Speaking theoretically here, of course...  :-))

jaf

----- Original Message -----
From: Richard Cuff <rdcuff@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Monday, April 11, 2005 3:37 pm
Subject: Re: [Swprograms] FW: World Service Feedback

> This is one of the reasons I wanted to get that discussion going
> regarding "what it means to be a public broadcaster".
> 
> Inevitably broadcasters of all sorts have to wrestle with the
> "bang/buck" dilemma.
> 
> The challenge for a public broadcaster -- because it has more latitude
> in its metrics -- is what does "bang" mean?  Number of listeners? 
> Average listener IQ?  Number of "opinion formers" who listen at 2 AM?
> 
> Richard Cuff / Allentown, PA  USA
> 
> On Apr 11, 2005 3:22 PM, Scott Royall <royall@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > I must concur with you on this. I found the email to be quite 
> eloquent in
> > its description of the BBC's reasoning. I've actually resisted 
> using the
> > "bang/buck" cliché, but I'm glad you did because that's what 
> this all comes
> > down to. The BBC is just trying to the most people it can on a 
> finite> budget. Understanding that doesn't infer agreement, of 
> course. It just
> > acknowledged a feality.
> 


_______________________________________________
Swprograms mailing list
Swprograms@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://dallas.hard-core-dx.com/mailman/listinfo/swprograms

To unsubscribe:  Send an E-mail to  swprograms-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe, or visit the URL shown above.