Senior tories with principles? I wonder how far they will get.
Senior tories with principles? I wonder how far they will get.
This is laughable – the Tories trying to have their cake and eat it too, just like they did with Sunak’s budget when ‘senior Tories’ supposedly criticised it for ‘not supporting the people’. It’s all about looking after their re-election chances.
They know exactly what they’re doing, & it’s never been clearer just how corrupt they are.
The lack of conservatism from the Conservatives is the reason they aren’t renewing their voter base. It’s really been happening since 2010.
Same thing happened with Labour under Blair/Brown.
But will they actually get off their arsea and do something about it?
>Dorries said government ownership was “holding Channel 4 back from competing against streaming giants like Netflix and Amazon” and that being sold will give it the “tools and freedom to flourish” in the future. The government plans to set out more details in a white paper.
It is a public service broadcaster.
It is not supposed to compete with the likes of Netflix and Amazon.
It is not required, actually not supposed to be profitable.
It is supposed to be, and is, self funding.
Its current public service remit is
>The public service remit for Channel 4 is the provision of a broad range of high quality and diverse programming which, in particular:
>* demonstrates innovation, experiment and creativity in the form and content of programmes;
>* appeals to the tastes and interests of a culturally diverse society;
>* makes a significant contribution to meeting the need for the licensed public service channels to include programmes of an educational nature and other programmes of educative value; and
>* exhibits a distinctive character.
It is also required to provide educational films for schools, and to produce a majority of its programming outside of greater London.
The problem is, that the Tories don’t like that they have less control over Channel 4. They cannot withhold funding, because even though the government owns the channel, it is self funding.
And apparently there is a tory party WhatsApp group and one comment in defence of the move was that currently, Channel 4 cannot borrow money except from the government…
Why is this an issue? And when have they been borrowing government money?
>[Dorries] added: “A change of ownership will give Channel 4 the tools and freedom to flourish and thrive as a public service broadcaster long into the future.”
So, she expects that a private, profit seeking company or individual, will pay the government for the obligation to follow a public service remit?
There are very few people in this world who would fork over a billion quid for the purpose of being the head of channel 4, and then calling it a day, they would want some benefit from it.
8 comments
I dunno, flogging off assets of the state for what will no doubt be a rock bottom price sounds *exactly* like (big C) Conservatives to me
There’s [a petition against it](https://www.change.org/p/stop-the-privatisation-of-channel-4-nadinedorries) you can sign.
Senior tories with principles? I wonder how far they will get.
Senior tories with principles? I wonder how far they will get.
This is laughable – the Tories trying to have their cake and eat it too, just like they did with Sunak’s budget when ‘senior Tories’ supposedly criticised it for ‘not supporting the people’. It’s all about looking after their re-election chances.
They know exactly what they’re doing, & it’s never been clearer just how corrupt they are.
The lack of conservatism from the Conservatives is the reason they aren’t renewing their voter base. It’s really been happening since 2010.
Same thing happened with Labour under Blair/Brown.
But will they actually get off their arsea and do something about it?
>Dorries said government ownership was “holding Channel 4 back from competing against streaming giants like Netflix and Amazon” and that being sold will give it the “tools and freedom to flourish” in the future. The government plans to set out more details in a white paper.
It is a public service broadcaster.
It is not supposed to compete with the likes of Netflix and Amazon.
It is not required, actually not supposed to be profitable.
It is supposed to be, and is, self funding.
Its current public service remit is
>The public service remit for Channel 4 is the provision of a broad range of high quality and diverse programming which, in particular:
>* demonstrates innovation, experiment and creativity in the form and content of programmes;
>* appeals to the tastes and interests of a culturally diverse society;
>* makes a significant contribution to meeting the need for the licensed public service channels to include programmes of an educational nature and other programmes of educative value; and
>* exhibits a distinctive character.
It is also required to provide educational films for schools, and to produce a majority of its programming outside of greater London.
The problem is, that the Tories don’t like that they have less control over Channel 4. They cannot withhold funding, because even though the government owns the channel, it is self funding.
And apparently there is a tory party WhatsApp group and one comment in defence of the move was that currently, Channel 4 cannot borrow money except from the government…
Why is this an issue? And when have they been borrowing government money?
>[Dorries] added: “A change of ownership will give Channel 4 the tools and freedom to flourish and thrive as a public service broadcaster long into the future.”
So, she expects that a private, profit seeking company or individual, will pay the government for the obligation to follow a public service remit?
There are very few people in this world who would fork over a billion quid for the purpose of being the head of channel 4, and then calling it a day, they would want some benefit from it.