I didn't word my first statement properly...got interrupted.
I'd not pay a fee for individual programs of series as it would almost be guaranteed to be more expensive.
The Daily Mail article at the link I’m sorry to have to say is a good example also of less than balanced reporting. A sensational headline followed by an impression at the end that one hadn’t had the full story. Just a vague comment from a BBC spokesperson. No explanation as to why they backtracked. Maybe and quite possibly there are sinister reasons for the omission. But without that full “both sides” picture it’s impossible to say.
When I read a BBC report I generally do feel there has been an attempt to get both sides of a story.
@Gromit.18,50...You are correct to say that ITV is paying Jeremy Paxman but my point is that the BBC is purchasing the programme from the production company and is, in effect, continuing to employ the Quizz Master.
Hans,
Arch leftie Steve Coogan stars in a film. The BBC buy the rights to screen the the film in the UK.
The BBC are not paying Coogan they are paying the Studio that made it.
Allenlondon, my son objected to my objections of asylum seekers leaving a safe country, France, to come here.
He only concentrated on the stories they told of fleeing conflict?
I am not racist, and I will call it out, even when it is reverse racism, from BAMEs.
So what is your point?
//So what is more important?
The BBC has money to waste.
Hospices need money.//
If the BEEB donated to hospices, you and your fellow naysayers would complain (with justification) that they were spending your license fee on charities you may not support.
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.