Should we axe BBC Three and Four?

Is this one of the reasons why Sky News has continued on Freeview, so that MP's can see themselves?

As I've said before Formula 1 = £50m a year. The BBC could easily dispose of it and ITV or Channel 4 could pick it up or Sky can have it all, viewing figures for F1 have been going down year on year.

Why single out F1 not the FA Cup or The Voice? You need to justify why that should be dropped over other things.


F1 actually has more value on being on the BBC over a commercial rival than most sports for it's fans, as it's doesn't have natural breaks meaning a commercial broadcaster has to interrupt the live coverage. There is no such advantage with the Six Nations or even Wimbledon.

When has the BBC ever done what is in the best interest for fans of a particular sport? The Ashes, Cricket springs to mind they disposed of that pretty quickly.

Formula One on terms of value for money probably offers very little in return financially, not only are the rights expensive but so is production having to fly presentation and technical teams all over the world. Sports Broadcasting is a needlessly expensive business and if the BBC was going to go on a Value for money basis I wouldn't be surprised if they ditched F1, they've talked about it before.

Taking each in term:
* Getting rid of BBC Parliament is political suicide. Apart from the fact it is clear public service broadcasting, politicians - the people who ultimately decide on future licence fee increases - kinda like seeing themselves on telly. Why do you think ITV Border's been forced to produce a Scotland-only political show? In terms of battles to pick, this isn't a good one. You could say Democracy Live covers this, but given we're arguing internet-only isn't good enough for BBC3 it's a dodgy argument to say people could just get this content online - broadband isn't good enough in many areas and BBC Parliament is likely to attract an older audience.
* Baffled by the Xtra stations idea. Are you suggesting they are all put on one channel? That's going to be difficult to build an audience that doesn't know what it's going to get when it tunes in. In addition, as much as it's not of much interest to me, 1Xtra superserves an audience traditionally hugely underserved by the BBC, 4Extra is mainly repeats of PSB programming and 5Extra is an inevitable overspill of 5 Live and the digital home of Test Match Special among other things.
* Parents would kill you if you cut the hours of CBeebies. Beyond that, it's the very definition of PSB. I suspect it also earns the Beeb a bit of cash as well through spin-off magazines and shows. CBBC's a bit trickier, but not being target audience I wouldn't profess to argue whether it's doing its job properly or not. I would defend CBeebies to the hilt though, and don't think diluting it in any way is a good idea.
* F1 is an interesting one. Given that the BBC only gets so many races anyway, you wonder how much it benefits the BBC. But it does have a huge following and I'm not a fan of getting rid of something just because I don't like it.
* Taking a dispassionate view on the Scottish issue, as someone who actually has some sympathy with the idea of independence, I can't imagine the SNP's ideas on what would happen to Scotland's broadcasting after a Yes vote would last for a particularly long time. People on here who know about the break-up of other countries, or indeed the coming together of Germany, could probably advise better though. I imagine in the long-term Scotland would get its own broadcaster and buy programming in the same sort of way as RTE does (whether that's the same rate as other countries would is another matter - I'd argue an SBC would be interested in a lot of BBC programming, so you could argue for a bulk rate). But that's hypothetical, as a Yes vote is very, very unlikely to happen this time round.

A couple of other points. The BBC will be desperate to get BBC1+1 up and running as it essentially costs very little and gives all its programming a leg-up in the ratings. I would not be surprised if the BBC3 closure would then be followed by the space being used for this.

Will be fascinating to see how any campaign to save BBC3 goes. It's not going to have the hard base of Guardian-reading influential opinion formers that 6 Music had, although it does employ quite a few of them. Had you asked the BBC Trust a few years about closing BBC3 it would probably have been delighted, whereas the station has built a bit of a reputation in the last few years. There is also the problem that BBC3 serves an audience which is slightly underserved by the BBC as a whole.

The station has never quite hung together properly, but the concept of a PSB TV channel for young adults the same age as the Radio 1 target audience is surely viable in this day and age. If the BBC is going to give up on trying to serve a younger audience what goes next? Radio 1?

They absolutely do produce documentaries of a similar genre as does BBC 2 on occasion. I've watched several documentaries on Channel 5 in particular and found them engaging and informative.

BBC3 is being cut because it's the easy option. The viewers of the channel have the quietest voices.

To say that the programming could be moved to other channels is rubbish. We all know that won't happen in the channel's online future.

Much like the decision makers are outside of the channel's demographic, it would seem that the few who support the move here on TVF are also outside of the channel's demographic.

I am not only well within BBC Three's demographic, but I actually watch BBC Three programmes. That doesn't mean I can't take an impartial view that when it comes to cuts, BBC Three was the most vulnerable, and in terms of moving online, it was the best fit (demographic-wise) to do so.

Also, I don't see how you can say 16-34 year olds have the 'quietest voices'. They're probably the most Twitter-savvy demographic and are more than equipped to have their say.

My actual opinion is (and always has been in these debates) that cutting Three and Four would be most beneficial not only in saving money but also revitalising BBC Two. So no one can throw the "you're being a snob because you'd rather keep BBC Four as you don't 'get' BBC Three" accusation at me.

I'd be interested to see how many other people in favour of the decision on this forum are within the demographic also.

Perhaps if we all hadn't been so laid back and allowed Thompson to agree the secret deal with the Grant Sh!tts and the Tory government then the cuts would not have to be so deep. As it stands Thomo's legacy is the closing of unique TV station, a world famous TV Centre & the public having to pay for the world service and a load of cr@ppie local TV channels - try watching Estuary for a couple of minutes before you disagree.

F1 was costing less than £40m per year when the BBC had it exclusively. The shared rights were said to cost around £15m per year. Production costs wouldn't add a huge amount to that.

F1 brings in an audience who often don't watch much else on the BBC. And it's not unusual to get similar or better ratings than most other sport on FTA channels.

i agree. bbc 1 and 2 are completely muddled. those of us who grew up in the 1980s will fondly remember the alternative comedy movement of that era and all the sitcoms and programmes born out of that and which ended up on BBC2. BBC2 should go back to its routes of experimental, daring and though provoking and not what it is today which seems to be mostly lifestyle and an extension of daytime tv.

there is about 5 hours of repeats on bbc 2 in the day time. surely some of the original programming which end up on bbc 3 and 4 could go here?