How many presenters do they need?

I watched the recent series about the Boleyn family, and there were ten presenters in each hour long episode, professors. doctors and authors, plus the voice over. I did wonder how much it cost as they all appeared to be filmed in different places and at different times.

Had to laugh yesterday 3 different weather presenters within 10mins on BBC yesterday on the same channel.

It seems to me that the millions paid to a relative few "popular" presenters, celebs and talking heads is an insult to the hundreds (thousands) of technical people they need to create their content. They'll be on market rates.

Shelagh6

I absolutely agree about Claudia Winkleman - what else does she do to earn quite so much?

If the BBC was serious about saving £megabucks they could start by firing Claudia Winkleman. I cannot imagine anyone pleading for her return.

Not keen on these so called personalities- just one articulate expert will do for me. The multiple presenter deal is to keep the hard of thinking hooked - they need constant stimulation, concentration is beyond most of ‘em.

I absolutely agree about Claudia Winkleman - what else does she do to earn quite so much?

The BBC is dreadful with its overpaid presenters and the extortionate fee which is driving some of us into poverty.

Not everyone wants to use all the things the BBC provides and feel they shouldn't have to pay for them all. Personally, I would love it if we could use the BBC on a "pay as you go" basis and I don't mean paying the licence fee by direct debit.

I watch 2, 45minute programmes on BBC1 each week (when the series are actually playing) and don't think that's worth £159/year. For me, this equates to a maximum of 78hrs per year, costing over £2/hour.

I use Sky and pay them approx £500 each year, they not only give me far more variety and interesting programmes (that I do watch) than the BBC but my broadband is also included in that figure, hence my TV service equates to around £250/year and I watch at least 40hrs worth of programming each week, equating to approx 12p/hour watched.

In the same way as drivers of cars that produce lower CO2 emissions get to pay lower Road Fund Licences (road tax) and people with water meters and low consumption are charged less, we should be given the option of paying for the full BBC licence (annually or monthly) or to pay for, let's say, a block of hours. I would gladly buy say 30hours for £5, thus reducing my 'licence fee' to around £15/year.

And the BBC pay Gary Lineker £1.36 million

This type of thing is what angers so many. I don't mind Gary Lineker, although I do find him a bit smug, but that is way too much to be paying a presenter, and how many hours a year does he work for that? The licence fee has to be paid whether or not you ever avail yourself of any of the BBC offerings. The BBC doesn't seem to be accountable to the people paying the fees, I don't remember the public ever being given a say in how it should be run, what its aims should be, or even having their criticisms taken seriously. Maybe it's time to make it a subscription service. People seem happy to pay for content from Sky, Netflix, Amazon Prime etc I assume those that enjoy BBC content would also be happy to pay.

So I take it you won't be wanting a Blue Peter badge then Amalegra.

The BBC with its ridiculously highly paid presenters and news readers and its woke, biased agenda horrifies me these days. It has moved far away from its mission statement of ‘inform, educate and entertain’. The leftist points of view expressed by many of its ‘stars’ goes completely against the neutrality an obligatory licence fee should demand and which is stated in its charter. There are far too many presenters and hangers on with their noses in the trough. The BBC is no longer the kindly ‘Auntie’ of yore but an unaccountable institution run by the privileged and paid for by many who struggle to meet the cost. A Relic. Reform or defund!

I like Gary Lineker he is a hero of my era and a good presenter IMO. but I don't have a TV so don't pay the licence.
I think BBC bashing is popular because of the way they have treated many presenters.
I have not listened to Radio2 since Simon Mayo left - even though I missed Jo and Ken and Steve. And I was a lifelong Radio2 listener thanks to my mum.
It has been wrecked and that is one of the reasons BBC bashing is popular.
I watch Gardner's World at work and Britain in Bloom.
I am glad Rachel de Thame is well and back on I like her.
A lot of chaps at our gardening society hate the viewers video part of gardner's world now but I love it. I love Monty too.

I'm glad she brightens your day good old JO

MoorlandMooner

Also, the TV licence fee is £159. For that we get 12 months of TV across many channels, a first class 24 hour news service, access to a website packed with information and, when watching television we don't have to suffer constant interruption from adverts.

I went to lunch with two friends the other day. What amounted to a snack, soft drinks and coffees for three people cost £45 and was gone in an hour. To my mind that makes the licence fee seem a good deal.

It seems a very fashionable pass time to knock the BBC, but if we think about it it's been there for us since we were born providing education, entertainment and news. It's not perfect, but is there anything better?

And the BBC pay Gary Lineker £1.36 million

JaneJudge

we also get the radio as part of the license

why is Jo Whiley presenting though, does she garden now?

I understand the others are gardeners

I think Jo Whiley has become a keen gardener JaneJudge, in an amateur rather than professional way. I'm always pleased to see her on gardening shows for her smile, enthusiasm and lovely dresses (shallow I know).

I'd forgotten the BBC radio channels...yes, of course. Where would I be without Radio 4!?

helgawills

Agree, Granmarderby10
Re your mega-star comment, Ro60, does anybody understand why Claudia Winkleman earns what she does?

I think it might be so she can afford all the anti dandruff shampoo she uses.??
Truthfully, I don’t know. I didn’t mind her on Strictly but for the rest . . .

I resent having to sit through several BBC presenters interviewing-each other!?!? What is that all about? Who cares what a TV presenter thinks about a given situation anyone? Have different reporters for each story If they must but don't then bring their mates in to have what seems like a private conversation that we all have to sit and watch......!? I don't actually CARE what reporters think!

we also get the radio as part of the license

why is Jo Whiley presenting though, does she garden now?

I understand the others are gardeners

What gets me is when a reporter interviews another reporter. Why?

MoorlandMooner

Also, the TV licence fee is £159. For that we get 12 months of TV across many channels, a first class 24 hour news service, access to a website packed with information and, when watching television we don't have to suffer constant interruption from adverts.

I went to lunch with two friends the other day. What amounted to a snack, soft drinks and coffees for three people cost £45 and was gone in an hour. To my mind that makes the licence fee seem a good deal.

It seems a very fashionable pass time to knock the BBC, but if we think about it it's been there for us since we were born providing education, entertainment and news. It's not perfect, but is there anything better?

Well said

I can understand it with sports in that they wheel in former sportspeople who are knowledgeable about tjat particular sport.

But on the news I do wonder sometimes as bringing in someone else doesn't really add to it, and you wonder why they have bothered to send ceramic and presenter to interview someone who basically has nothing to say

Granmarderby10

Nope MoorlandMooner and they should leave Channel 4 alone as well as their evening news programme is quite superior imo of course ?

I agree with you, the 7PM Channel 4 news is the best. The BBC seems to be filled with (cheaper) 20 year old "correspondents" and Sky news is so repetitive, showing 20 second loops of video again and again.

@Annahan, that was @MoorlandMooner’s point! The tv licence only costs as much as 10 trips to the cafe. Not that much.

Agree, Granmarderby10
Re your mega-star comment, Ro60, does anybody understand why Claudia Winkleman earns what she does?

I’m sorry, MoorlandMoonerbut in the south-east of England £45 for three people to have a light lunch, i.e. £15 ahead, is really not expensive. Maybe you are just luckier than I am wherever it is you live