or some such.

TV I've been desperate for the BBC to go on the offensive and fight its corner aginst the likes of the Murdoch media and the Daily Mail criticising how the license fee is spent as though they're defending the rights of the viewer/listener as though there isn't a conflict of interests.

This robust defence from Top Gear producer Andy Wilman, in which he explains why its not a waste of money to stop the identity of The Stig and "the wonderment created about what he might think" being revealed, will do nicely:
"The fact is, the “waste of licence payer’s money” argument gets trotted out many times as a way of attacking the BBC, but the reality is this: the BBC is a massive organisation. It’s na├»ve to think it can only ever spend money on cameras, tape for the cameras, Daleks or anything else that contributes directly to what ends up on screen. The BBC also has the right to spend money on protecting the intellectual property it created, because the truth is that all that stuff – the Stig, the Tardis, the Blue Peter dog – does belong to the licence payer, and not to some opportunists who think they can come along and take a slice when they feel like it."
More please. Expect article in the Mail along the lines of "Top Gear chief wastes tax payer's money attacking The Mail" or some such. Either way, they'll be after him. Now can we have injunction against the tabloids spoiling the next series of Doctor Who?

No comments:

Post a comment