... while the BBC's flagship BBC1 bulletins and News 24 services will soon have to make do with one, despite all the problems that's already causing.
The FCO are paying for BBC Arabic, us Brits get nothing from the Goverment.
Though in effect we're paying for both...
BBC domestic services are funded by us TV owners by the licence fee.
BBC overseas services like BBC World Service, BBC Arabic etc. are funded by us, as a country, through general taxation etc. which provides the treasury with funds to go to the FCO to pay the BBC to produce the service...
... while the BBC's flagship BBC1 bulletins and News 24 services will soon have to make do with one, despite all the problems that's already causing.
The FCO are paying for BBC Arabic, us Brits get nothing from the Goverment.
Though in effect we're paying for both...
BBC domestic services are funded by us TV owners by the licence fee.
BBC overseas services like BBC World Service, BBC Arabic etc. are funded by us, as a country, through general taxation etc. which provides the treasury with funds to go to the FCO to pay the BBC to produce the service...
Yes, but practically no-one questions, if indeed knows, how much the FCO is spending on BBC Arabic, compared to the licence fee which is constantly under the media spotlight.
And that is where my problem with the service is. I wouldn't be comfortable with the US government funding a Middle Eastern news channel, and hence I'm not with the British government either.
And that is where my problem with the service is. I wouldn't be comfortable with the US government funding a Middle Eastern news channel, and hence I'm not with the British government either.
are you comfortable with the rest of the world service?
... while the BBC's flagship BBC1 bulletins and News 24 services will soon have to make do with one, despite all the problems that's already causing.
The FCO are paying for BBC Arabic, us Brits get nothing from the Goverment.
Though in effect we're paying for both...
BBC domestic services are funded by us TV owners by the licence fee.
BBC overseas services like BBC World Service, BBC Arabic etc. are funded by us, as a country, through general taxation etc. which provides the treasury with funds to go to the FCO to pay the BBC to produce the service...
Yes, but practically no-one questions, if indeed knows, how much the FCO is spending on BBC Arabic, compared to the licence fee which is constantly under the media spotlight.
£25million a year isn't it? Or is that just extra funding?
And that is where my problem with the service is. I wouldn't be comfortable with the US government funding a Middle Eastern news channel, and hence I'm not with the British government either.
The difference is that the FCO funds the BBC to specifically provide an impartial news service - NOT a news service favourable to the British government or the West in general. The BBC - through their Royal Charter - are fiercely independent of government (*)
The US situation is slightly different - as they don't have an equivalent of the BBC or the World Service. Voice of America (and Worldnet if it still exists) are not the same at all...
I think the view taken by the FCO and the BBC is that impartial news can only help to serve a nation "doing the right thing". Now that may be a very naive thing to think - but that is basically the ethos.
As for government funding of a broadcast outlet - the UK government was democratically elected by us. I have no problem with it funding unbiased international news broadcasting to regions of the world where this is not in plentiful supply - or where many news outlets are particularly biased. I see it as no different to providing food aid etc. I have a REAL problem with it trying to control broadcasting. Having it fund the BBC World Service (of which BBC Arabic is a part) is probably the best guarantee that it can't control the content.
In many parts of the world the BBC has been broadcasting news and information for over 50 years - and it is widely respected for telling the truth. Certainly in Europe - particularly Scandinavia and Benelux countries - the memories of the BBC accurately reporting the second world war are still particularly relevant.
(*) though the Andrew Gilligan affair has caused some to question how critical the BBC is prepared to be at times, I think that it has just made them more careful to be absolutely sure of their facts.
And, of course, the US Govt - through the same organisation that runs Voice of America and Radio Free Europe - already funda an Arabic News channel for the Middle East called Al-Hurra (which has a very "BBC" on-screen look) - all the more reason that the BBC should have a presence to provide the impartiality that other outlets may lack.
And that is where my problem with the service is. I wouldn't be comfortable with the US government funding a Middle Eastern news channel, and hence I'm not with the British government either.
You can hardly compare the US media with the BBC though. If the USA had a body similar to the BBC which was independent, though funded by the government, the country would be up in arms (possibly literally!). They're so sickeningly overtly patriotic they wouldn't know the truth if it came up and bit them on the ass!
Yes, it could be asked why the BBC should suddenly be interested in starting a channel in a region that the government is also interested, but I think the BBC's motives are clearly different from the those of the government. They may be political, but they are political with a small p - "Nation shall speak peace unto nation" and all that sort of stuff.
I wouldn't have thought there was any doubt these days about the BBC's stance against the UK Government, which in its self could be seen as a bias AGAINST the government. After Greg Dyke and Alistair Campbell, you can't blame them for holding a grudge, anyway, the only threat with the BBC, is all these budget cuts.
And that is where my problem with the service is. I wouldn't be comfortable with the US government funding a Middle Eastern news channel, and hence I'm not with the British government either.
The difference is that the FCO funds the BBC to specifically provide an impartial news service - NOT a news service favourable to the British government or the West in general. The BBC - through their Royal Charter - are fiercely independent of government (*)
The US situation is slightly different - as they don't have an equivalent of the BBC or the World Service. Voice of America (and Worldnet if it still exists) are not the same at all...
I think the view taken by the FCO and the BBC is that impartial news can only help to serve a nation "doing the right thing". Now that may be a very naive thing to think - but that is basically the ethos.
In theory it's all great, but whatever the effort it's absolutely impossible for any broadcaster to be completely impartial. The nature of it's existence means there is always going to be a tendency to present a more Western view than the local channels.
(BTW, just to confirm is BBC Arabic based in London?)
People say it's there to provide an impartial service in area people can't get that, but surely in such countries I'd imagine BBC Arabic has been prevented from broadcasting.
And that is where my problem with the service is. I wouldn't be comfortable with the US government funding a Middle Eastern news channel, and hence I'm not with the British government either.
The difference is that the FCO funds the BBC to specifically provide an impartial news service - NOT a news service favourable to the British government or the West in general. The BBC - through their Royal Charter - are fiercely independent of government (*)
The US situation is slightly different - as they don't have an equivalent of the BBC or the World Service. Voice of America (and Worldnet if it still exists) are not the same at all...
I think the view taken by the FCO and the BBC is that impartial news can only help to serve a nation "doing the right thing". Now that may be a very naive thing to think - but that is basically the ethos.
In theory it's all great, but whatever the effort it's absolutely impossible for any broadcaster to be completely impartial. The nature of it's existence means there is always going to be a tendency to present a more Western view than the local channels.
Yes - but aiming to be impartial is a good start. Yes - there is inevitable partiality in what an editorial team decide is newsworthy and what is not - but the BBC World Service ethos is widely seen as the best model - and through the World Service Trust and similar UN initiatives is often involved in training other broadcast organisations. The one area that the BBC World Service DOES have a very strict rule (more so than domestic outlets and BBC World) is the two-source rule - that means that any news that is reported as fact has to be confirmed by two independent sources (so the BBC has to know which agencies report each other - as they would not be two sources) - if it hasn't been directly witnessed by a BBC employee (I believe)
It may not be perfect - but it is probably "least worst".
Quote:
(BTW, just to confirm is BBC Arabic based in London?)
Yep - two studios and galleries in a new bit of BH - I've stood in both of them. I believe BBC Farsi/Persian will be in the same building, as will BBC London (probably) when they have to vacate Marylebone High Street when it is disposed of by the BBC.
BBC Arabic may have facilities in the region as well - but the two main news studios are in London.
Quote:
People say it's there to provide an impartial service in area people can't get that, but surely in such countries I'd imagine BBC Arabic has been prevented from broadcasting.
It is almost impossible to prevent satellite reception in a country unless you ban all satellite dishes. BBC Arabic is on the same satellites as the other main Arabic news networks - so it is pretty difficult to ban it based on the direction a dish is pointed.
I think that the aim of the BBC Arabic service is to report the world's events in Arabic - not just those of the Middle East - to provide more context and analysis. I don't think they are saying that Al Jazeera and some other networks are terrible (in fact quite a few of the BBC Arabic - journalists have come from existing Middle Eastern broadcasters) just that the BBC has an ability to report the world TO the Middle East, which other broadcasters just don't have.