Quote from boothy :

Is that really your best shot at a dig at Sly Sports? Chris Kamara is a brilliant laugh - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H8gKmQ6Hrro

No I wasn't even digging, was only imagining a F1 race commentated by Chris Kamara

Why do they call BBC free to air?

There's no such thing as free to air tv in uk.

Also this should be expected, I mean isn't the EPL on subscription tv as well?

A sport like F1 is just too massive for a public broadcaster.

^ But it has been on free to air TV for....let's see....the past 30 or 40 years. Remember the BBC only started full season coverage in 1978 with Murray.

IMO it's a major, major step backwards. I can see Sky....er, Murdoch wanting to shut down video streaming sites even more now.

BBC isn't free to air.

In the UK you HAVE to pay the BBC license fee. All this means now is that you'll still have to pay the licence fee and pay the sky subscription fee.

Watching F1 on a channel you're paying for anyway is one thing, watching F1 on an additional channel you have to pay for...hmmmmm, nah.

F1 is currently free-to-air in the UK, on the basis that there is no additional cost to watching it over not watching it (short of not owning a TV).

I would probably considering paying the BBC an F1 subscription fee. I will not pay Murdoch/Sky knowingly.

What if, let's say, that Virgin Media bought the rights or a rival non-Murdoch broadcaster. Would you subscribe then?

F1 isn't just a bunch of rich people playing with cars, it's a major driver of advanced miniature/high performance technology, and draws a huge number of people towards engineering as a career.

Without exposure to F1, I (and many of my friends) would never have got into engineering. The "cool" side of engineering is never shown on free TV, and F1 is right at the forefront.

Instead of biggering you should mourn the death of watchable F1 programming. The majority of people will not pay to see F1, basically everyone is going to lose interest because it's not 'free' to watch. Then the F1 coverage quality will go down like you wouldn't know and soon you'll have a former floorball referee doing the commentary along with a former high jumper.

That's what happened here anyway

so basically it proves that f1 has been unaturally boosted by Governments, as pretty much expected.

Quote from spookthehamster :

F1 isn't just a bunch of rich people playing with cars, it's a major driver of advanced miniature/high performance technology, and draws a huge number of people towards engineering as a career.

Without exposure to F1, I (and many of my friends) would never have got into engineering. The "cool" side of engineering is never shown on free TV, and F1 is right at the forefront.

Either way its not your ''right'' to watch f1, and if it ends up such a failure a so called 'free to air channel' will naturally take its place, unless they add some more regulation to already near socalist british TV market.

What I find amusing is how people are taking the moral high-ground in regard to the Murdochs. The hypocrisy is hilarious.

Let's take McLaren for example (and this is just ONE of many). It's 30% part owned by the Bahrain Government. McLaren's business model and profitability probably relies heavily on publicly subsidised broadcasting. So via the BBC, public funds are helping profit a regime so many objected too. So this idea that the BBC is a wholly grail of what's right is complete and utter nonsense.

Directly or in-directly they are all the same. Except some you HAVE to pay for, some you don't.

So objecting on moral grounds is hypocrisy of the highest order.

Quote from Intrepid :

What if, let's say, that Virgin Media bought the rights or a rival non-Murdoch broadcaster. Would you subscribe then?

No. It's not just Murdoch.

Although I'd be less cross as my girlfriend has Virgin Media (for broadband and phone line mostly; it's rare that we actually turn on the media box, preferring terrestrial/freeview) so I could still watch it

I see no need for Sky/Virgin/Other paid services. I have a freeview box. I'll probably get an HD freeview box to get the free-to-air HD channels when my local transmitter is upgraded in October.

I'll stick with the one I don't actually have to pay for. I don't consider the licence fee a subscription. Just like I don't worry about the tax on my car every time I drive to the shops. It's a tiny amount of money really. I actually LIKE to pay for the privilege of not having adverts.

Quote from tristancliffe :

I'll stick with the one I don't actually have to pay for. I don't consider the licence fee a subscription. Just like I don't worry about the tax on my car every time I drive to the shops. It's a tiny amount of money really. I actually LIKE to pay for the privilege of not having adverts.

Well good, they should make the BBC a subscription service that doesn't have adverts. Then you can pay for it and enjoy the 'Secret History of Door Knobs' (I made that up, but it wouldn't surprise me if it was commissioned) advert free on BBC4.

Quote from CSF :

To me the simple suggestion to save a fair amount of money would be to close the shocking BBC3 channel, and some of the terrible Radio stations aimed at different things in the UK...the BBC has become over inflated with mediocre television of late, and even its "flagship" Eastenders seems to be on a steady decline. If the BBC wasn't so set in it's ways over certain programming that simply isn't quality or even needed, they could find many ways to make the cut, while retaining things that they are good at. But heyho, tarrah F1.

BBC3? Yea and the rest. Go on iplayer and see how many unnecessary channels and radio stations there is. its horrible.

Quote from Intrepid :

The BBC journalism can often be quite flaky, mis-informed and bias.

biased... learn your own goddamn language

Quote from Intrepid :

I spent all my life in them and learnt nothing apart from how to blag exams.

quite evidently

Thanks Shotglass for highlighting that little error there. I'll really try hard to improve next time.

Seriously though, was it really worth replying my post with that pointlessness? No, of course not! It's a bloody web forum, not an article in the Financial Times.

Quote from Intrepid :

Thanks Shotglass for highlighting that little error there. I'll really try hard to improve next time.

you did it twice so dont try to pass it off as a typo

Quote :

Seriously though, was it really worth replying my post with that pointlessness?

that pretty much applies to every single one of your posts in this thread... and any other thread remotely related to the bbc

There couldn't be a more appropriate thread to talk about BBC. The very debate is about the BBC, it's funding model, and the future of F1 broadcasts. It's the perfect thread to post on about these issue. Unless you want to discuss the inherent pointlessness of life itself that is? But that would be pointless to talk about pointlessness on a pointless thread right?

My opinions about the specific nature of F1 broadcasts on the BBC are actually echoed within the corporation itself. It's not just the anti-BBC lobby that objected to the F1 coverage.

On-topic

Interesting article on Autosport for free http://plus.autosport.com/free ... -sport-why-it-the-future/

Figures ... Something had to screw up a good thing.

I think Murdoch will make the coverage stupendously good. He'll lose money on it I am sure, but anything to annoy the BBC. He doesn't mind keeping open un-profitable businesses like The Times (which you have to give him credit for) so expect him to pump the money in.

Right then.

My ten pence's worth.

The BBC is without doubt the best broadcaster in the world. It is a model both admired and aspired to by many. The BBC is unique in this modern capatalist world and we should consider ourselves very very lucky that it has managed to survive as long as it has. The Beebs output isn't just about F1 or eastenders or Doctor who. The beeb is about the very programmes you guys have been knocking it for, everyone pays, everyone is entitled to watch well informed, and well made programmes about doorknobs of the 15th Centuary on BBC3. I would gladly pay more for my licence, because I use the whole length and breadth of the BBC, Radio, TV, Internet, News, Current Affairs, Enterainment, Comedy, the list is endless. And I very dare you to come up with viable and equivilent Broadcasters who offer as much as and to the same quality as, the BBC.

Bernie never wanted the Beeb to get the F1 because he couldn't get his sharebuying, scheming, company purchasing, money grabbing little hands on any of the coverage. Which is why it's so controlled and there is constant reference to it by Martin and the boys. I think the BBC did a tremendous and respected job against the difficult backdrop that is the politics of modern F1. If F1 drops from the beeb, I wouldn't miss it. It's their coverage I like, no adverts, unbiased (as much as they can be) and UNCONTROLLED from any investors or interested parties. To be honest, if it drops from the beeb, I think it will just serve to highlight just how much the sport has lost followers and will only serve as that final last straw for many UK followers.

And thus, I urge the BBC to not fret it, don't chase it. Get Aussie V8's instead.

Quote from Funnybear :

The BBC is without doubt the best broadcaster in the world. It is a model both admired and aspired to by many. The BBC is unique in this modern capatalist world and we should consider ourselves very very lucky that it has managed to survive as long as it has. The Beebs output isn't just about F1 or eastenders or Doctor who. The beeb is about the very programmes you guys have been knocking it for, everyone pays, everyone is entitled to watch well informed, and well made programmes about doorknobs of the 15th Centuary on BBC3. I would gladly pay more for my licence, because I use the whole length and breadth of the BBC, Radio, TV, Internet, News, Current Affairs, Enterainment, Comedy, the list is endless. And I very dare you to come up with viable and equivilent Broadcasters who offer as much as and to the same quality as, the BBC.

Thank you for posting this, you have articulated exactly how I feel. I wanted to post something like this myself, but I didn't because of all the arguing it will cause.

Quote from Funnybear :

And thus, I urge the BBC to not fret it, don't chase it. Get Aussie V8's instead.

As much as I love F1, if that happened I'd be one happy bunny!

Quote from Funnybear :

And I very dare you to come up with viable and equivilent Broadcasters who offer as much as and to the same quality as, the BBC

I can think of a whole host of broadcasters that match and exceed BBC content. Drama wise the US absolute destroys what the BBC produces (The Wire, Deadwood etc... etc...). Nothing the BBC has ever produced matches that quality output.

Comedy? Let's put up Family Guy and Curb Your Enthusiam up against BBC One's flagship comedy show Miranda

And what was the best and most original documentary/comedy of the last year? An Idiot Abroad... a SKY production (GOSH)

BBC radio? Ever heard of a thing called Spotify?

News? BBC24 is often quite poor and biased. Al Jazeera, RT, Bloomberg, CNN news, the INTERNET etc... providing as good, if not better content.

Overall, like any broadcaster the BBC does some things very well and other things pretty poorly. Documentaries of a non-political nature they do well, and Radio 4 and BBC Parliament are genuinely good services. However, the licence fee? It's a dinosaur, and infringes on people's freedom to choose the news and TV content they want to consume.

It seems many would PAY more for the licence fee. Let's hope they drop the licence fee so you can, and everyone else can choose. It's a fallacy to believe the BBC wouldn't survive without the licence fee. It certainly would reduce in size, but it could concentrate on things it does well and not commission a new series of My Family.

/rant

really

This is a saddening piece of news.

I love F1, but there's no way I'm signing up to sky.