GO
How it's funded is irrelevant. It's a publicly owned company and should be run efficiently.
It is being run efficiently. It's making huge profits and is generating many millions for the British economy. This is merely a political move made by people with zero knowledge of how television actually works to try and impress saps and secure their vote. It's change for change's sake with a lot of unnecessary risk attached.
It's like someone's looked at BBC North and thought the same can be applied to C4 because it's also a TV station, completely ignoring the fact that BBC North is primarily a production hub while C4 is exclusively a publisher-broadcaster.
Why? C4 is completely funded by advertising. Them being in London isn't costing you anything.
How it's funded is irrelevant. It's a publicly owned company and should be run efficiently.
It is being run efficiently. It's making huge profits and is generating many millions for the British economy. This is merely a political move made by people with zero knowledge of how television actually works to try and impress saps and secure their vote. It's change for change's sake with a lot of unnecessary risk attached.
It's like someone's looked at BBC North and thought the same can be applied to C4 because it's also a TV station, completely ignoring the fact that BBC North is primarily a production hub while C4 is exclusively a publisher-broadcaster.
CN
The Tories and their tabloid mouthpieces have been quietly trying to fool people into believing that Channel 4 is funded by taxpayers' money, or receives part of the licence fee, for years. It makes it easier to turn people against it, driving down its popularity and allowing the right person at the right time to step in and say "Hmm, don't you think we should sell this publicly-owned company to the private sector?"
A lot of people (well, ones outside Wales) conflate it with S4C, which is publicly-funded and takes a portion of the licence fee.
A lot of people (well, ones outside Wales) conflate it with S4C, which is publicly-funded and takes a portion of the licence fee.
WH
How it's funded is irrelevant. It's a publicly owned company and should be run efficiently.
It is being run efficiently. It's making huge profits and is generating many millions for the British economy.
It doesn't make huge profits - it has been bouncing along the break even line over the last few years - and even if it did, that wouldn't mean money should be peed up the wall when less expensive premises outside of London would suffice.
Whataday
Founding member
Why? C4 is completely funded by advertising. Them being in London isn't costing you anything.
How it's funded is irrelevant. It's a publicly owned company and should be run efficiently.
It is being run efficiently. It's making huge profits and is generating many millions for the British economy.
It doesn't make huge profits - it has been bouncing along the break even line over the last few years - and even if it did, that wouldn't mean money should be peed up the wall when less expensive premises outside of London would suffice.
TR
The BBC 's Salford move proved that you don't get different telly, better telly or unique telly produced, its just the same telly from different studios. Its more expensive for the BBC as the money isn't going back into the corporation by using its own facilities its going to Peel/Pinewood.
I doubt that it will make any difference to C4's output. Its still the case that most productions are commissioned around north London dining tables.
I doubt that it will make any difference to C4's output. Its still the case that most productions are commissioned around north London dining tables.
JO
But then is it right that all those jobs should be in London?
The BBC 's Salford move proved that you don't get different telly, better telly or unique telly produced, its just the same telly from different studios. Its more expensive for the BBC as the money isn't going back into the corporation by using its own facilities its going to Peel/Pinewood.
I doubt that it will make any difference to C4's output.
I doubt that it will make any difference to C4's output.
But then is it right that all those jobs should be in London?
WH
If you think it's more expensive for the BBC to hire studio space as and when it's needed, rather than owning, staffing and maintaining their own studios, you're mistaken.
Channel 4 is a very different kettle of fish anyway. We're talking office space, and at the moment they're in a lavish building in Westminster. The Channel has a substantial remit to provide a substantial amount of programming outside of Greater London, to have a distinctive character and to innovate. If any station should relocate outside London, it's Channel 4.
Whataday
Founding member
The BBC 's Salford move proved that you don't get different telly, better telly or unique telly produced, its just the same telly from different studios. Its more expensive for the BBC as the money isn't going back into the corporation by using its own facilities its going to Peel/Pinewood.
If you think it's more expensive for the BBC to hire studio space as and when it's needed, rather than owning, staffing and maintaining their own studios, you're mistaken.
Channel 4 is a very different kettle of fish anyway. We're talking office space, and at the moment they're in a lavish building in Westminster. The Channel has a substantial remit to provide a substantial amount of programming outside of Greater London, to have a distinctive character and to innovate. If any station should relocate outside London, it's Channel 4.
GL
I'm personally not against it, provided the relocation is managed effectively and efficiently, unlike the BBC's messy Salford move.
It really is quite baffling that in this day and age, when we have the rise of pro-indy movements within the UK and a general consensus that too much power and control is centred in London, we are even debating whether or not this should happen!
Take a look at Germany....
ARD - Headquarters in Berlin, News HQ in Hamburg
ZDF - Headquarters in Mainz (near Frankfurt)
RTL - Headquarters in Cologne
Pro7/Sat1 - Headquarters in Unterfohring (near Munich)
It can be done and quite easily. If the UK is to stand a chance of staying together we really do ALL need to get behind the idea of a federalised structure encapsulating everything from the media to politics to grassroots communities.
And, btw, a previous poster mentioned that Glasgow indies were against this move. This doesn't surprise me at all. We have developed a very peculiar bubble mentality in Scotland now, which is almost a mirror image of London. We have our businesses up here and frequently travel to London on business (to the point where the tax man has a term called WILLIES - Working in London, Living in Edinburgh) but we blank out the rest of the UK and almost insulate ourselves from it.
It's all very bizarre.
It really is quite baffling that in this day and age, when we have the rise of pro-indy movements within the UK and a general consensus that too much power and control is centred in London, we are even debating whether or not this should happen!
Take a look at Germany....
ARD - Headquarters in Berlin, News HQ in Hamburg
ZDF - Headquarters in Mainz (near Frankfurt)
RTL - Headquarters in Cologne
Pro7/Sat1 - Headquarters in Unterfohring (near Munich)
It can be done and quite easily. If the UK is to stand a chance of staying together we really do ALL need to get behind the idea of a federalised structure encapsulating everything from the media to politics to grassroots communities.
And, btw, a previous poster mentioned that Glasgow indies were against this move. This doesn't surprise me at all. We have developed a very peculiar bubble mentality in Scotland now, which is almost a mirror image of London. We have our businesses up here and frequently travel to London on business (to the point where the tax man has a term called WILLIES - Working in London, Living in Edinburgh) but we blank out the rest of the UK and almost insulate ourselves from it.
It's all very bizarre.
TVF
TV Forum Team
Posts from
Conservative Manifesto: Ch4 to be moved out of London
have been merged into this topic.
TR
If you think it's more expensive for the BBC to hire studio space as and when it's needed, rather than owning, staffing and maintaining their own studios, you're mistaken.
Channel 4 is a very different kettle of fish anyway. We're talking office space, and at the moment they're in a lavish building in Westminster. The Channel has a substantial remit to provide a substantial amount of programming outside of Greater London, to have a distinctive character and to innovate. If any station should relocate outside London, it's Channel 4.
Not when you account for the fact that money stays within the corporation.
The BBC 's Salford move proved that you don't get different telly, better telly or unique telly produced, its just the same telly from different studios. Its more expensive for the BBC as the money isn't going back into the corporation by using its own facilities its going to Peel/Pinewood.
If you think it's more expensive for the BBC to hire studio space as and when it's needed, rather than owning, staffing and maintaining their own studios, you're mistaken.
Channel 4 is a very different kettle of fish anyway. We're talking office space, and at the moment they're in a lavish building in Westminster. The Channel has a substantial remit to provide a substantial amount of programming outside of Greater London, to have a distinctive character and to innovate. If any station should relocate outside London, it's Channel 4.
Not when you account for the fact that money stays within the corporation.