Wednesday, 14 January 2009

Media Matters


The new Breakfast Show on Radio Kent is now 'Co-Presented' by Julia George and John Warnett, Is it better or is it worse?
( I suppose our licence fee has to pay for the extra presenter, is that value for money?)

16 comments:

Anonymous said...

Why do you not ask your reading public whether things that are done by TDC represent value for money?

You are always pointing at others, and I would suggest you should come closer to home. Perhaps you could ask if people think you are value for money, for example?

Also, it would be nice if you could resolve the unanswered questions and unresolved issues from your recent posts. Having started a couple of "strands" you have left them hanging, rather. I know that service failures by a Tory local authority (possibly) leading to a driver's death are not convenient for you, or Chris Wells, but they have attracted a deal of interest.

And, after all, look at how much mileage your political allies have sought to make out of the Haringey social work fiasco.

Anonymous said...

Local radio is provided by more than one private company; therefore the BBC TAX, known as the licence fee is is nothing more than a tax that is unfairly put on one industry.

Example: if Johnathan Ross would have been working for a private Radio sation instead of the BBC, I could have just swtiched and saved money, but with BBC TAX I still have to pay his wages. However, the quality of Radio Kent is not bad, but does it need another presenter? Well: are the private Radio stations hiring more presenters at the moment?

Ken Gregory said...

Anon 11 11, The fact you bother to comment means you read this blog. The idea of a blog is to interact with users of the web, not just people who have an interest in the council. Although a member of a political party and a councillor, I do have interests outside of thanet and also britain. With regard to your question, 'are you value for money?' I hope I am, for Thanet as a whole, and also the people whom I represent. I can say that I do try.

Anonymous said...

The road death that may have been caused by a failure to grit on the part of your Tory Party's County Council was outside Thanet. There you go...

Anonymous said...

Ken, you are right in what you say, just because you are Councillor, it does not mean that you need to talk about council related issue all the time.


KEN,

If Radio Kent was an independently owned Radio station, it would only hire an extra presenter if this increased the number of listeners, and by doing so, attracting more sponsors for the station.

I find myself agreeing with post11:41 regarding the so-called licence fee, being nothing more than an unfair BBC TAX left over from the last century.

For example: say there is a young single woman on a low wage, who only watches ITV free view and prefers to listen to Independent RADIO; this lady is paying a Tax to the BBC for a service that she does not use and gets from others in the same industry for free.

She can't even CHOOSE to subcribe to Sky instead of paying BBC TAX because she can't afford both.

This situation is rather like going to the Movies to watch a James Bond film and being forced to pay for another film that you don't want to see, but if you don't pay up you loose your right to watch anything and get fined. Legal protection money???

The BBC is getting too big and should not be empire building, with poor people paying Mr Ross and Mr Brands wages.

I know the BBC is good quality, but so is Ford; however I don't want to buy Ford, I want a Nissan and should not be forced to pay for the Ford as well.

We need a fair free market approach to Radio and TV like most other countries have, The 20th Centry is over...

The BBC is not acting like a public service broadcaster - We only need 1 public sevice Radio station and 1 TV channel paid for by central govenment. The BBC seem to think they are FOX or CBS.

ascu75 aka Don said...

I love the BBC, most of the programmes I watch are on BBC most of the radio I listen to are on the BBC. I personly dislike adverts. I like the adverts but having a programme interrupted by them no. Glad to see you can look out from planet Thanet Ken shame others cant do the same

Anonymous said...

ascu75 aka Don

I think that you might be missing may point,I agree with what you say - but if want to watch it, you pay for it. I don't question the quality of the BBC; any organisation that is funded by people by FORCE should be able to make good programmes.

Its a moral thing; if ROSS and BRAND would have been on SKY, I could have cancelled Sky in protest; However, due to the socialist way that the BBC is funded,I don't have that choice.

Its rather like saying that people that own a plate must pay a fee to Tesco, even if you only shop at Asda. And if they don't pay the fee, your plate will be taken away and you will get fined.

Anonymous said...

Un-Fair TAX

It is unfair to tax every household within the UK to fund an organisation such as the BBC, simply because in todays world of technology there are better ways.

It is un-fair because…

a) The people who dont wish to watch the BBC have to pay for it.

b)if a person already subscibes to cable or satalite then they pay twice for the service.

c) in many countries outside the UK they receive the same or some of the services of the BBC free of charge.

d) No other service in the UK is allowed to get away with blanket charges to every household whether or not consumers use their sevice!


You could say that the NHS is the exception to the rule, but its not quite the same due to the fact that it costs more to go private. But to use independent TV & Radio is mostly free.

Anonymous said...

sorry about spelling mistake - I never went to a private school :)

ascu75 aka Don said...

Am I the only one who recons the BBC is good value? I never went to private school either but it was approved.

Anonymous said...

ascu75 aka Don

Its not a question of whether the BBC is good vaule or not, its about having the choice to choose what you want to watch, without paying for a service that you don't want.

Food from Marks & Spencer is vaule for money to many people - but would you force someone to make payments to Marks, when they only shop at Asda or Tesco?

BBC TAX or the so-called licence free is an outdated and unfair system left over from the cold war days of the last century.

Please answer this question:

How would you feel about being forced to pay a computer licence fee to BT-Broadband, in order to be allowed to access the internet with AOL or Virgin?

Or pay a search engine licence fee to Yahoo, when you only use google.

Vaule for money or not, we are meant to be living in a democratic, free market where we have the choice. TV and Radio does not deserve the same status as the NHS - I can choose to watch Meridan TV instead of East Enders without getting ill.

ascu75 aka Don said...

And as I said it still represents good value for money regardless of how many analogies you use. It is the way it was set up and has worked well for nearly 100 years. I and most of the people I have spoken to feel the same. You have a choice pay the licence fee or dont get TV you may not like the choice but thats the way it is untill it changes you and I pay up or get fined .

Anonymous said...

Most people do not agree with you.
If you really believe that is fair. You are a communist.

ascu75 aka Don said...

hardly communist a dictator at the very least

Anonymous said...

Look up the word Communist; its the correct word.

ascu75 aka Don said...

In a study done by channel four most people said the BBC represented good value for money. A communist as defined by answer.com 1.
1. A member of a Marxist-Leninist party.
2. A supporter of such a party or movement.
2. A Communard.
3. often communist A radical viewed as a subversive or revolutionary.

as I said dictator at very least