大象传媒

鈥淔inancial Times: A columnist outlines why they believe the 大象传媒 is too big, too diverse etc.鈥�

At least it would not appear to be so if it stopped presenting the news as an excessively cast stage production with the addition of unnecessary commentators of doubtful relevance.

One newsreader, sitting down, reading facts (not highly selective), and not giving opinions. Please!

I do hope Mr Hammond makes a full and speedy recovery.

Too many people are killed or seriously injured as a result of speeding vehicles. A child killed by a speeding car doesn't warrant a mention on regional news, let alone exhaustive coverage on the 10 o clock news.

The 大象传媒 could usefully pause and question the role programmes such as top gear play in portraying speeding as "a bit of a laugh". It might be until someone you love gets hurt - or worse.

Ah the private sector wolves are circling again.

The FT has been (no pun intended) struggling, esp on internet front (poor content, too much change, too much advertising, too many hoops for users to jump through, bad design etc)

So not particularly interested or swayed about vested interests of private sector media looking to encroach into a successful public sector area.

The 大象传媒 has several things other firms lack: ethos, tradition, kudos, gravitas, professionalism, love/loyalty/respect of staff & audience & above all the ability to sustain the creation of original content.

The price of this is fiscal 鈥� a licence fee imposed on all households, which enables the Beeb to operate uniquely, justified because it uniqualy delivers a quality product (most of the time) the digital age, the net, 大象传媒3, 4, 7 etc are proof of this.

As a capitalist myself, I would argue that if economics & money are the key to success in any business (as the private sector advocates) then nothing is to stop private media hiring the best, to produce the best which audiences will pay for indirectly (via consumption of advertising) or directly via subscription.

The fact that they can't / won't is down to what they are trying to do, high return for low investment.

In the media world esp NCA it simply cannot be done - generation of sustainable quality product - on the cheap.

Yep, by all means keep an eye on the Beeb (it鈥檚 a watched pot) & they do throw wobblys (given dominated by liberal left).

But even I as a liberal conservative, acknowledge that we should not throttle one of our best brand & success stories, esp with its global impact, by heavy handed state intervention & private piecemeal sell offs.

The government has messed around, with great negative consequence, the civil service, military & esp CJS, education, health ,social services & has undermined services & the publics faith in the provision of such by the last 4 agencies/institutions.

As a success story - the 大象传媒 is a public good by public provision - leave well alone.

vikingar

Any global broadcaster should be run from a garden shed by two guys in everyday touch with their listeners, it stands to reason. Failing that, being run by some overseas-based private business corporation would obviously give us a greater sense of ownership than some globally-respected national flagship under parliamentary supervision. Except for Radios 1 and 6 - you can sell them, nobody would care any more.