The should we scrap BBC3 & BBC4 thread

For me, if BBC3 & BBC4 were axed, we shouldn't look for the best of their programming to find a place on 1&2. It's Channel 4 which should be producing the low brow rubbish and high brow documentaries. That's what it was created for. Instead we've got gameshows and lifestyle programmes in a desperate attempt to bring in revenue, programming which should've been on ITV in the first place.

Maybe if they scrapped the two BBC digital channels and allocated some funding to C4, it would solve some of that channel's problems.

In other words....scrap two publicly-funded channels and turn C4 from a commercial channel into one which is partially funded by public money?

Is this intended to save or just redistribute public money?

I can't see any reason for BBC Three to continue. The genre is more than adequately provided for by commercial alternatives.

BBC Four produces some excellent programmes and has a much broader appeal. It would be a very sad day if the BBC decided to axe it.

I like the way BBC Four digs into the archives and creates special seasons around it. That's what makes it great.

To me, BBC Three tends to consist of Family Guy and investigative documentaries that end on a whimper. That said, it's something to watch if there's nothing else on.

But if I had to choose, then BBC Three should go.

The problem with Channel 4 funding is that they have always been reliant on 1 or 2 big commercial shows to give their revenue a huge boost, but with Brookside being axed to make way for Big Brother, and with Big Brother now ending they have nothing cheap to produce that can provide them with a significant income. Channel 4's biggest mistake was imo Big Brother. Whilst its a show that I have enjoyed over the years, they ruined Brookside for it and in 2006 they cut costs in every place thinkable just to pay for the next few years rights, and in the long run it hasn't worked out.

I disagree with you saying content on BBC Three has alternatives elsewhere. It doesn't. BBC3 is good for making documentaries and factual shows for a younger audience, and as someone else has already said its a good channel for when there is nothing else on. No other channel is like that. The BBC don't utilise BBC3 as Channel 4 do with E4, and ITV do with ITV2. But I do think maybe BBC3 should begin to show more BBC1 & 2 content, whether 'first look' or a repeat. It could give the channel quite a big leg up (Eastenders usually gets more than 1m viewers).

Exactly. If to compensate for axing either content and finances is redistributed to BBC2 what is the benefit to the licence fee payer? Yes, BBC2 might be strengthened, but the viewer is better served by a choice of 4 channels rather than 3.

Now, the budgets themselves can certainly be looked at - though of course even though their budgets are higher than their commercial rivals, so is their quota of original British programming.

How would folk propose content was arranged across the channels? Where does BBC 2 belong? I do think BBC 4 has a place. It's like the Radio 3 of TV. Last night a programme on gothic music. Really low budget specialist affair, and really interesting, but I can't imagine the larger public would look at it. It's still good educational content - but without BBC 4, where would it go?

I'd argue a mixture of Radio 3 and Radio 4 personally.

It could be good to link BBC2 and 4 in the way that BBC1 and 3 are linked. And as I said earlier, both digital channels should use programming from their terrestrial counterpart to give the channel a bit of a boost.