91Èȱ¬

Peter, you are doing a great job in using blogs in this way.

We need the top people to spend more time actually communicating changes, decisions and choices. The 91Èȱ¬ is good at talking about the problems, which to a certain extent is now eloquently covered here by public input.

Reviews often mean that the decisions should have been taken earlier. Please provide some evidence that the top people are actually making decisions and managing the 91Èȱ¬ - not just paraphrasing public input but actually communicating how they are solving the problems!

So in the last month at the 91Èȱ¬ did anyone make a significant decision/change? Why not take the opportunity at the conference to actually suggest ways of solving these problems? Why isn´t the conference more public?

I think you need more than a box - try Canterbury Cathedral :P

(I didn't post the following thoughts to the other thread because they refer to the 91Èȱ¬ directly, whereas the other thread was (I think) intended more for comments addressed to the industry as a whole.)

Let's be honest, the chances of anyone at the conference reading past the first half a dozen "91Èȱ¬ sucks" posts are about as good as my chances of being elected Pope next week.

But on the other hand, it *will* give a small percentage of people the feeling that they have a chance to say what's on their mind to the people they feel make all the decisions.

So from that perspective it does contribute to a sense of openness.

The question will be if the industry actually does something, to winnow through the posts (and whatever information they get from other sources) and isolate the things that are accurate, to resolve the issues.

The biggest real problem I can see is that the 91Èȱ¬ is in the position of being able to avoid having to pander to one side or another from a commercial aspect - but people don't *want* non-commercially-generated content.

All the other outlets have remember who pays their salaries - commercial interests. So they have to resort to the usual tricks to keep the numbers up to bring in more advertisers - and that's why you end up with puerile mindless inane gormless crud like Big Brother.

The 91Èȱ¬ is coercively funded, and as such *should* be able to break away from that cycle - unfortunately, you're just as much a victim of ratings as the commercial networks, because people will demand you show what they want to see, with their relative slant attached, because they as license payers "pay your wages".

Wonderful catch-22 you find yourselves in. Add in the government's desire to have you slant things the way they want, with the sword of damocles *it* can bring to bear oh so subtly, and you're pretty much damned if you do, damned if you don't.

You're getting to the stage where you're being too reactive and trying to bend over backwards to appease too many different groups with different agendas, all because you're being "punished" by the Government for not being entirely in their pockets as they would like.

If it was me, remembering the founding ideas behind the 91Èȱ¬, I'd say screw the lot of them, if you're going to be damned, be damned for having standards and doing the job right, even if it makes you unpopular.

There's an axiom about how many people you can please how often.

Yes, you made some huge cock-ups this year, and probably have done in the past. The self-flagellation and walking on eggshells is worse, guys. if people can't handle the "truth", they're in no condition to be watching TV to begin with.

Stand up, walk tall, remember why the 91Èȱ¬ is/was one of the most respected media outlets in the world since nearly the very beginning *of* broadcasting - remember, if *no-one* is complaining about you, then you're *not* doing your jobs.

Is the box intended to symbolise your catholic tastes, gain you absolution, or let you all play Father Ted?
Have fun, regardless, and may your mantra be Arts and Crafts not Ratings and Suits.

Hey, no knocking Father Ted :P If there had been more Father Ted, we wouldn't need Big Brother!

There's an idea. Why not take all those Media Execs from the conference, stick them all in the BB House, then wire it up to internet-triggered electrical shock machines?

That way you get ratings, you please the widest possible audience - and maybe they'll get the clue too!

Heck, a set-up like that would give you more "click through's" than Google, you could make it an annual event and do away with the license fee :)

Peter, do me a favour and could you put a huge banner in the middle of your confessional asking why no major media outlet is providing a balanced investigation into 911.

Not the 91Èȱ¬ or ITN or The Guardian or The Independant or Private Eye or anyone else.

Yet the new media documentaries and debates are among the most watched on video sharing sites and the most commented on in discussions - check both google video and your own blog pages as examples.

If nothing else it would make for a nice debate about new media agendas and old media ones

Big banner, red letters on a white background would stand out i think.

If you could get a nice pic of it that would be great

Cheers