Good thing we’re going, eh?

Via Raedwald:

Finally, the EBC’s chances for success will be enormously improved if it can develop within a suitable regulatory environment. We favor an approach where major digital platform providers would have to reserve a certain percentage of their media space, say 5 percent, for EBC content (on a must-carry basis). In addition, such platforms should be levied a general fee of 5 percent on their European turnover to help fund the EBC. The present situation where the click economy thrives while undermining any reasonable business model for quality journalism and engaging in the most aggressive kind of tax avoidance planning is simply no longer sustainable.

EBC is, yes, you’ve guessed it, European Broadcasting Corporation.

At least the BBC has never demanded that ITV must carry its programs, eh?

29 comments on “Good thing we’re going, eh?

  1. Very good thing.

    The British govt needs to set the absolute and total destruction of the EU and the individual and personal punishment of its participants and close supporters as a war aim.

  2. At least the BBC has never demanded that ITV must carry its programs, eh?

    And not just that, also ITV should pay for the “pleasure”.

  3. You know, its funny – looking at the history of the BBC, it didn’t really flourish (as in more than one program in a thousand was considered worth the costs of shipping overseas to the other English-speaking countries) until it had significant competition.

    These guys need to step back and ask themselves what would an EBC bring to the table that current stations *and the internet* don’t already. What sort of programming are you going to have for a meta-nation that speaks, what, a dozen languages? Two? That isn’t already being provided.

    I can guarantee that any private investor would be asking that question.

    And I can guarantee that the people proposing the EBC want it to be a government broadcaster specifically so they never have to.

  4. I recall that the European Union once identified the main problem with the Internet as being “nobody owns it, nobody controls it”.
    That being not a bug, but a feature; it was designed that way.

    This is just another attempt to control (or use free of charge) the system someone else built.

  5. Why don’t these utter cvnts in the EU become completely transparent and instead of the Ode to Joy, use Tomorrow Belongs to Me as their theme music

  6. In the long-term, European democracy will only work if it is underpinned by a European public sphere, rather than a series of fragmented national public spheres.

    “In the long-term, European democracy will only work if we have a single centrally controlled news and broadcasting source.”

  7. EU wants a pro-EU propaganda channel.

    Like Euronews but even more blatently EU.

    I, for one, can’t wait for wall to wall “documentaries” on how EU subsidies are improving the lives of people half a continent away. Like French sugar beet farmers.

  8. Interesting. There was a comment facility on that Der Spiegel article. There were 12 comments. On Firefox, at least, certainly none of them are showing.
    One can’t help wonder if they weren’t supportive.

  9. Oh dear, too long in the ivory tower.

    “We need a communication system.”
    “Well, just steal one”
    “No, I think we steal it and like the Hood Robbing, who played for Nottingham Forest, we make them pay us for the stealing!”

    What can go wrong?

  10. I can’t see the comments on Chromium (Linux) either, even with Ghostery & uBlock turned off. From the short bios the authors certainly look like fully paid up members of the European Statist Organisation, and certainly wouldn’t want adverse comment to pollute the message.

  11. Calling the Ecksterminator….

    I’ve just read the whole article – these people really are bonkers!

    An alternative view might be that if we were staying in, far fewer of the “whacko” proposals would ever see the light of day. My take is – why take the chance. Live and let live and all that…

    (BiS – comments don’t show up in IE or Opera either, looks like a fault)

  12. BiS: Odd. The original version of the article seems to have been published two months earlier and still has a pile of comments both for and against.

    It’s surprising how quickly people forget their immediate history. The GDR had a flagship propaganda slot called the Black Channel presented by Karl-Eduard von Schnitzler who acquired the soubriquet “Karl-Eduard von Sch” because the loyal peasant and worker citizenry turned their sets off before he could even finish announcing his name.

  13. It’s a lovely chevauchee on successful Yankee imperialist companies to feather the nests of shit European ‘artists’ who are unable and unwilling to produce anything people are willing to pay for.

    But hey, no State aid for industry, right?

  14. TMB in Bulgaria and Latvia every flat had a state radio in it that could not be switched off. Everybody suspected it was there for the authorities to listen to rather than for raising the consciousness of the proles with speeches and music. When I visited the Baltics in 2003, one hotel was probably unchanged from the old days. It had a strange “radio” in a high corner.

  15. So show the state programming from 3-6 am and record €1 in profit for the year and job done for broadcasters. I have a feeling that this wouldn’t be acceptable to the EU though.

  16. The internet could be an ideal place for a European and enlightened public space, in principle. But instead it risks becoming an anti-enlightenment echo chamber where fact and fiction merge into some kind of post-factual universe, which produces post-factual winners like Trump and Boris Johnson.

    Boris Johnson? Someone is holding a grudge. I wonder why.

    And when pluralistic media independence disappears in countries such as Poland and Hungary, this has a direct effect on the workings of Europe.</i.

    Poland and Hungary? I expect that both countries have more media independence than France. But for some reason it is only a problem when the wrong people win elections.

    Second, the EBC would not be, and should not be perceived to be, a propaganda instrument of the European Union.

    not perceived to be != is not. It is an odd and complex formulation when there is a much simpler alternative that they avoid. I wonder why.

    Instead, the EBC will also open up new sources of income for private quality media by acting as a platform for private journalistic content.

    So they will pay former EU politicians and their wives for their meanderings.

    The present situation where the click economy thrives while undermining any reasonable business model for quality journalism and engaging in the most aggressive kind of tax avoidance planning is simply no longer sustainable.

    Not sustainable for whom sonny boy? I am able to sustain the slow death of the Guardian – despite its aggressive tax avoidance plans – perfectly well.

  17. Idiots. The internet is the very definition of a pluralistic public space where anybody who can afford an internet connection or get to a public library can make their views known, a place where both Tim Worstall and Richard Murphy can present their opinions for public consumption by anybody who can afford an internet connection or get to a public library. The days of needing to be rich enough to own a newspaper or a television company to propagate your views are over.

  18. Is the EBC part of the EU? It has European countries like Israel as members. While the vote to leave was a bit of a blank slate I don’t think we were voting to leave the Eurovision Song Contest.

  19. Diogenes – I remember “radios” like that in Comecon countries. We used to insist they be turned on and when, inexplicably, they were apparently “broken”, we would address disobliging comments about the government to the “radio” and the ubiquitous “flower vases”.

    The difference between then and now is that then, we used to be able to return to the free world and now, it’s the erstwhile free world that’s curtaling freedom.

  20. Second, the EBC would not be, and should not be perceived to be, a propaganda instrument of the European Union.

    Hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha.

    CCTV news in China. 30 mins.
    10 mins: “China is wonderful”
    10 mins: “The rest of the world is shit”
    10 mins: “Watch your leaders kiss babies, help earthquake victims & do important stuff”

    Can’t imagine ECB news would follow any different format.

  21. I do recall a joint S4C/Polish WW2 drama about Welsh POWs in Poland that was very good, must be over a decade ago though, imagine that’s an exception not a rule though

  22. “The competitors of the EBC are neither public broadcasters like Germany’s ZDF and Italy’s RAI nor private media like France’s Le Monde and Germany’s Süddeutsche, but Facebook and Google.”

    Hmm, looks a bit different if you write “but Pearson, Reed Elsevier and Wolters Kluwer”, but at least we’re all agreed that Facebook and Google are neither public broadcasters or private media.

    “core funding for the EBC complemented substantially by a levy on the major digital platforms such as Facebook, Google and Twitter.”

    So not only will the major digital platforms have the 5% requirements, there’s going to be a straight forward tax on top of it as well.

    “At the beginning of 2019, at the latest, the EBC should be launched, with a well-produced talk show format, a kind of European Champions League of talk shows, during which European figures discuss, argue and seek solutions. Every week in a different place in Europe and with a different audience.”

    Christ Almighty. They’re going to take on the global giants of social media with… a fucking talk show?

    “The reason for this launch date is that the next European elections will take place in 2019. We just witnessed what an election in a post-factual filter bubble looks like. While not the only reason, this is a key reason why we urgently need a strong and trustworthy media to foster an enlightened and facts based European public sphere.”

    Just in case nobody had actually realised already…. but, a fucking talk show?

  23. “At least the BBC has never demanded that ITV must carry its programs, eh?”

    That’s a bit of a duff comparison, Tim: in the above proposal, the ECB seems more akin to a UK Public Service Broadcaster (PSB) being a ‘must carry’ obligation on Electronic Communication Networks. The quote below is from Page 7 of this report https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/417795/20150326_BOPS_condoc_draft_for_publication_finalfinal.docx&ved=0ahUKEwjPnqT7xZLSAhUpAcAKHZ65BtwQFgggMAA&usg=AFQjCNGyzFXiSvshsxc_YLRH1GmWNDvxOw (sorry about that, but thought you’d appreciate the source!)

    “Must Offer / Must Carry – the Communications Act 2003 requires that PSBs offer their core PSB channels for carriage to all major platforms, and that Electronic Communications Networks (ECNs) must carry them.”

    Anyway, the upshot of this is that should you receive cable TV/internet/phone, you can cancel the TV element and the service provider will continue to pump the ‘terrestrial’ channels down the pipe which, depending on your equipment set-up, a court may deem as sufficient evidence of ‘watching television as it is broadcast’ to fine you for not paying money to Stephen Fry. It also means that service providers are effectively prevented by law from offering on-demand-only services that would avoid a Licence Fee obligation. Yet again, the law protects the income stream of the smug parasites of the BBC.

  24. Didn’t the BBC have a tantrum when Sky threatened to start charging them market rates for their EPG/Programme guide slots?

  25. Rhyds, yes they did, was just after the launch of Freeview, about 2003.
    Slightly more complicated than that though, as access via the encryption platform had been ditched by the BBC, and Sky had decided to change the numbers within the EPG, so that BBC 1 & 2 were no longer going to be the first channels listed (as 101 and 102) in the EPG, and I think (not sure) the BBC’s decision to drop the encryption meant that you didn’t need to have the card in the box to view those channels, which meant that the regional sensing didn’t work (for BBC South East vs. BBC Scotland, say). The BBC also changed satellites around this time, and would begin work on iPlayer and Project Kangaroo (which sort of morphed into Canvas which became YouView) shortly after. The satellite switch was presumably in anticipation of FreeSat.

Leave a Reply

Name and email are required. Your email address will not be published.