BBC Fears Losing Incomes Due to The Internet

[Filip Norrgard]

<div class='os_post_top_link'><a href='http://business.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,8209-1504284,00.html' target='_blank'>http://business.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,8209-1504284,00.html</a><br /><br /></div><i>"The BBC faces losing hundreds of thousands of pounds in licence fees because of a legal loophole that allows viewers to watch television on the internet for free. Soaring take-up of broadband and technological developments are making internet-streamed television a reality. Last summer, for the first time, the BBC broadcast coverage of the Olympic Games live on the internet for people to watch on their computers."</i><br /><br />It is worrying to see that governments are still having problems catching up to technology. The BBC is mainly concerned over viewers watching their programs over the Internet and not paying any licencing fees for their watching. It is quite sad to see the BBC spotting a potential market and not being allowed to utilize it.

[Philip Colmer]

The issues and ramifications are potentially huge.

Taking the Olympics as an example, the BBC will have paid for the rights to show the games in the UK. Broadcasters in other countries will, similarly, have paid and may be seeking to recoup some of those costs through advertising on their TV channel. The BBC doesn't have advertising - it is paid for through the licence fee. Therefore, anyone watching the Internet stream would bypass their local TV channel, and the advertising, and would affect the revenue flow.

I am, somewhat, surprised about the article, though, as the BBC have been trialling making their TV programmes available for up to 7 days after broadcast. They are intending to use BitTorrent to distribute the video without overloading their own bandwidth. Such an approach is, surely, at odds with the article since they obviously won't be able to control who watches the clips.

--Philip

[Felix Torres]

So, its not just the US advertiser-supported broadcast model that is broken.
The UK "TV-watching license" model is also broken.
Good. :twisted:

The more disfunctions that arise, the better the chance the laggards will wake up to the 21st century and realize they need to adapt to the tech, not try to legislate/regulate the tech away.

Its time for them to realize that they are in the media publishing business, not the broadcasting or advertising business and build up a sustainable business model off that reality.

[Jason Eaton]

Hrm, I stopped with the BBC once they went Real player. I know now they have some of their content in Windows player format but the luster is gone. Maybe one day I will try again.

As for the whole Advertisments model, ads are like a virus that slowly infect the host till it dies. In this case any medium that bases its business model on ads alienates the very viewers they are trying to attract. First Newspapers (some necrophilicas keep the corpse fresh), then radio (essentially dead), TV (in the intensive care unit), and now the internet (a bad cough and congestion).

I think licensing is a better model (subscriptions, paid services, ect) but those models can't take off when cheaper alternatives still exsist.

News needs to become a service, and not a business. That is my thought at least.

[Felix Torres]

As for the whole Advertisments model, ads are like a virus that slowly infect the host till it dies. In this case any medium that bases its business model on ads alienates the very viewers they are trying to attract. First Newspapers (some necrophilicas keep the corpse fresh), then radio (essentially dead), TV (in the intensive care unit), and now the internet (a bad cough and congestion).



Interesting metaphor. :-)
Ad-supported media carries in the built-in paradox that what pays the bills is the part of the product that end-users *don't* want.
TV networks' real customers are the advertisers, not the viewers. And with the emergence of ad-free alternatives (witness the booming popularity of series TV DVD sets) customers are finding ways to get their entertainment minus the ads. Just yesterday, a tv commentator was griping that the boxed set of Desperate housewives won't be available until september even though the season ends in may... :-)

FOX on the other hand is factoring DVD sales in their approach to the current season of 24; they're running it without repeats or preemption, one-time only. And you'll probably see the DVD set out a month later.

I wouldn't be shocked if the fifth "season" of 24 goes straight to DVD as the producers realize there is enough money in boxed set sales that they don't need to run it through "free" TV first. After all, a 4-million viewer show gets cancelled right up-front while a 4-million unit seller can generate 40 million in profits easy. The hard part is the first million copies. ;-)

[Jorgen]

The BBC is not losing viewers because of the Internet. They are losing viewers because they are terribly biased and their programs are not good anymore. They should have been closed long ago.

Jorgen

[Philip Colmer]

If anyone is interested in the BBC's plans for making their programmes available, here are some details:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/webwise/askbruce/articles/bbc.co.uk/imp_1.shtml

--Philip

[alanjrobertson]

Of course remember that the article is from the Murdoch-backed Times newspaper - famed for their hatred of the BBC (his company News International owns Sky - the major (well only!) UK satellite TV company that is trying to rival the BBC - although IMHO is nowhere close).

As far as the 7-day system the Beeb are talking about - I think the files would be encrypted and linked to having a valid TV licence, but of course its fairly likely these files would be a high-profile target for people trying to crack their DRM.