Should we axe BBC Three and Four?

BBC Four is cutting back on most drama and is going to focus on Factual programming. But even so, does it matter if it's in a post Newsnight slot, when you've got iPlayer?

No BBC Four has cut back on original drama. It's mostly moved to BBC 2. It's still spending the same (modest) money on European drama which is what Bic was talking about.

What is the point of closing down either 3 or 4 if you're just going to move the shows/ money over to the dead hours on BBC ONE/TWO. It makes no sense.
It also wasn't what Mosey suggested either. It is to give more money to ONE and TWO and shut down the other two

This is a ridiculous suggestion, BBC Three and BBC Four produce in some cases brilliant programmes.
BBC Three started off badly but is now in competition with ITV2 - BBC Three has many programmes which are loved and watched by their demographic.
BBC Four has produced some of the best comedies in the last 10 years. QI, The Thick of It, Dirk Gently and Charlie Brooker's Screenwipe (Most of which have unfortunately been stolen by BBC Two) It's also got some brilliant documentaries especially those about Television Centre, and some of the best imports - The Danish Dramas, Curb your Enthusiasm, Mad Men. (Most of those have been snatched by Channel Four and ultimately Sky.)

That is one thing I hate - BBC Four gets a hard time because it crafts all these brilliant programmes, works on them and develops them only for them to be stolen by BBC Two, the same with BBC Two and BBC One. I mean the argument that it gives them more exposure is quite frankly bull in this day and age where basically everyone who can access BBC One and Two can access Three and Four so moving channels is ridiculous. However, take Bake Off, that's being moved from Two to One - It's ridiculous are people so incompetent they think that there's only one channel. The BBC treats BBC Two as a guinea pig for BBC One and BBC Four a guinea pig for BBC Two.

Yes, some people are daft like that. When ITV and BBC One both show the same football match (World Cup final, for example), BBC One always gets far more viewers. In order, people will gravitate to BBC One, ITV, BBC Two and then Channel 4. For some reason, a programme on BBC One always gets higher ratings than it would on another channel, even though it shouldn't matter what channel a programme is on as long as it's on Freeview (programmes on non-Freeview channels of course understandably get lower ratings).

You've completely misunderstood how BBC Television works. BBC One doesn't 'steal' BBC Two's programmes because they'll reach a wider audience. The reason Bake Off is changing channels is that it has outgrown BBC Two's remit and is more suited to BBC One's.

BBC Three/Four is meant to grow more challenging and niche programming. As soon as the programming becomes popular and stops becoming niche, it has no home on those channels.

QI was developed by BBC Two. The fact that The Thick of It transferred so quickly to BBC Two shows that that was its natural home in the first place. As far as imports are concerned, if Sky and Channel 4 are prepared to bid to screen them, well they don't belong on BBC Four either.

My point is, there is nothing decent on BBC Four that wouldn't sit quite nicely on BBC Two. If they want an extra layer of 'guinea pig' programming, they can get a Head of Commissioning for iPlayer and launch programming on that. It will save a LOT of money and the quality will float to the top.

I wouldn't even say that - BBC3 may be in competition for the demographic with ITV2 and E4 but it offers a completely different range of programming. OK, some of it's comedy has been hit and miss over the years but they're throwing more comedy on screen than any other channel, while their factual content just isn't really offered anywhere else. The snobs might not like it but it's a very important channel for the BBC and without it much of their content simple wouldn't find a home.

You obviously don't watch BBC 4 then. 90% of their factual would be too specialist for them. It's like saying Sky Art's shows would work on Sky 1.




Utter nonsense BBC 4's budget is only 49m v 1.2bn for BBC One. It would save nothing especially given your suggestion that the BBC3/4 shows would still be commissioned and just air on late night BBC ONE/TWO . Pointless

If he'd said "There is nothing decent on BBC Four that wouldn't sit quite nicely on BBC One" then I'd agree with you, but Sky1 has no similarities (with the exception of Top Gear perhaps) to the kind of content BBC Two puts out. And frankly BBC Two seems to be the BBC channel that is the most lost brand-wise now that it's programming has been branched out onto BBC Three and Four.

Not for the first time you've missed the point. Nobody is comparing the content of BBC 2 and Sky1 ffs. The point is that BBC 2 is too mainstream for some of BBC4's specialised factual content, even the controller of BBC 2 has said that!

Nail on the head.

Yes but the point is BBC 2 SHOULDN'T be too mainstream for specialised factual content (and yes, I do watch BBC Four). As VMPhil said, BBC 2 has lost its identity as a result of losing too much programming to BBC Four (and Three).