Assuming they're not going to bring Adam and Katya back to London every week, I'm interested to see how they handle the different locations. Part of the charm of the podcast is (as paroied by Jake Yapp) the four being in different locations, sometimes in the middle of events and sometimes in bed after it's all happened.
The Today programme wins awards - should they throw some cameras up and replace Breakfast?
I just want to stress again that I like Brexitcast but I also love well-produced television.
It wouldn't be the first country where they simulcast a radio breakfast show instead. La Une in Belgium simulcast with Vitacité Radio, RMC Découverte does with Bourdin Direct from RMC Radio in France. Both have much better tv production standards than Brexitcast.
The BBC needs to sort out its development departments if it can’t come up with a new, innovative, late-night political show.
With constant budget cuts, I'm not sure a new late night political show is a top priorty or should it be tbh. A dose of reality wouldn't go amiss here.
That wasn’t my point. The question was asked “what would replace This Week?”, not “what would replace This Week that is much, much cheaper?”
Of course there are budget cuts; that’s why this has happened. It’s a separate point but I do find it odd that the BBC spin cuts to services so it looks like they aren’t reducing content, yet at the same time are fighting paying the over-75s’ licence fee. Seems like they’re at cross-purposes.
The odd thing is the BBC spinning one way that they’re giving Brexitcast a new audience, when actually they’re reducing original content, whilst also trying to win the over-75s argument. Cross-purposes.
Nothing odd about that at all - the reality is budgets don't stretch far enough for the BBC to be propping up the welfare budget.
Yes I know they can’t afford it. So why do they try and spin existing cuts when they could use them as an example of an already-stretched BBC? That’s my point.
Nothing odd about that at all - the reality is budgets don't stretch far enough for the BBC to be propping up the welfare budget.
Yes I know they can’t afford it. So why do they try and spin existing cuts when they could use them as an example of an already-stretched BBC? That’s my point.
I think they must be terrified that if the British public suddenly realises the extent of the cuts and reduction in content, they may start to question as to why we actually pay a licence fee at all. Are we really getting value for money? So, if they spin it that the cuts aren't affecting anyone's enjoyment of the BBC, they are keeping the wolves from the door so to speak. Personally, I think they should be upfront about it. If you're making cuts that affect content, be honest. I'm absolutely sick of this culture of lies, lies and more lies to keep people in the dark. It's pervading all of society.
You don't need a masters degree to see how bad the BBC are affected by budget cuts, just take a look at a typical BBC Two weekday schedule and you can see how bad it has come to in 2019. Endless repeats blended with simulcasts with BBC News Channel, to try and create a schedule.
Just for an example - Monday 16th September 2019 on BBC Two. 6.00am - 8.30am are repeats. 8.30am a simulcast with BBC Parliament. 9.00am a simulcast with BBC News Channel until 12.15pm - so for the first 6 hours 15 minutes it is simulcasts and repeats - need we say anymore about cuts?
45 minutes of Politics Live at 12.15pm, followed by 5 hours of more repeats until Eggheads at 6.00pm.
