The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
Well do you?
I could easily assume three things of the people who write on this forum.
Number One You like watching some Television and would like a wider choice of none subscription channels.
Number Two - You play or have played previously the national lottery or associated lottery games.
Number Three - You have no or little interest in Opera, the theatre, museums or art galleries compared to you interest in television.
So why the hell doesn't the culture sectary wake up to the 21st century and realise that the average person in England would rather have lottery money spent on providing a sustainable none subscription digital terrestrial television service (now there's a mouth full), one that would appeal the whole population, one that could provide quality television through a diverse range of original programming over a multitude of channels.
Now don't get me wrong, of cause there are far better things that lottery money could be spent on and I am not against all none media cultural spending, we do need museums and galleries, and I suppose opera but what we don't need is Millennium Dome's or Bridges and what about the Pop museum in Sheffield, who would have preferred that money being spent on a quality music TV station?
OK, we have SKY which is an option for the majority of the country and on a technical note offers a wider coverage area than digital terrestrial and has an incredible amount of bandwidth but does everybody want Sky? Probably not is the answer. With investment Digital terrestrial TV can and in the future have to be able to be accessible by the majority of the country, because if you didn't know analogue (normal) TV is to be switched off by the government, hopefully not by Labour as the date is provisionally pencilled in for between 2006 and 2010.
The Plan -
1. ITV Digital closes, the government sells half the available bandwidth to another Provider.
2. Assuming the former has worked, use the money to upgrade the Digital Terrestrial Network.
3. Using lottery money start development of a Digital Terrestrial box.
4. Start devolving ideas for about 20 new channels which must cover everything from entertainment, Popular music and sport to drama, the arts and Opera.
5. OK assuming all is well the year is about 2004, a mini Pay TV service of operating in place of ITV digital and both the Box's and channels are ready for distribution.
6. Start distributing and testing the box's and channels in preparation for a full release in 2005. Start this in London and then other major cities.
7. 2005, Now Sky has about 500 channels, cost's £60 per month and still features hardly any original UK content.
8. Time to Launch, every household in the UK will receive 1 free BOX and subsequent box's will be extremely cheep.
9. Channels start to launch, all channels feature a minority Original UK content and are not available on Sky. All except the BBC feature advertising which helps with funding but the remaining funding comes from the Lottery and No.10
10. For once the government will have done something right, analogue TV is switched off for 2006 and the money from selling off the Bandwidth to mobile phone companies will not disappear but instead be in a trust to continue providing FREE quality TV programming.
OK that's what I would like and think should happen but it never will, The lottery money will be squanded on ridicules projects for the minority of the population while the rest of us pay endless amounts to Sky to receive half decent programming content.
I could easily assume three things of the people who write on this forum.
Number One You like watching some Television and would like a wider choice of none subscription channels.
Number Two - You play or have played previously the national lottery or associated lottery games.
Number Three - You have no or little interest in Opera, the theatre, museums or art galleries compared to you interest in television.
So why the hell doesn't the culture sectary wake up to the 21st century and realise that the average person in England would rather have lottery money spent on providing a sustainable none subscription digital terrestrial television service (now there's a mouth full), one that would appeal the whole population, one that could provide quality television through a diverse range of original programming over a multitude of channels.
Now don't get me wrong, of cause there are far better things that lottery money could be spent on and I am not against all none media cultural spending, we do need museums and galleries, and I suppose opera but what we don't need is Millennium Dome's or Bridges and what about the Pop museum in Sheffield, who would have preferred that money being spent on a quality music TV station?
OK, we have SKY which is an option for the majority of the country and on a technical note offers a wider coverage area than digital terrestrial and has an incredible amount of bandwidth but does everybody want Sky? Probably not is the answer. With investment Digital terrestrial TV can and in the future have to be able to be accessible by the majority of the country, because if you didn't know analogue (normal) TV is to be switched off by the government, hopefully not by Labour as the date is provisionally pencilled in for between 2006 and 2010.
The Plan -
1. ITV Digital closes, the government sells half the available bandwidth to another Provider.
2. Assuming the former has worked, use the money to upgrade the Digital Terrestrial Network.
3. Using lottery money start development of a Digital Terrestrial box.
4. Start devolving ideas for about 20 new channels which must cover everything from entertainment, Popular music and sport to drama, the arts and Opera.
5. OK assuming all is well the year is about 2004, a mini Pay TV service of operating in place of ITV digital and both the Box's and channels are ready for distribution.
6. Start distributing and testing the box's and channels in preparation for a full release in 2005. Start this in London and then other major cities.
7. 2005, Now Sky has about 500 channels, cost's £60 per month and still features hardly any original UK content.
8. Time to Launch, every household in the UK will receive 1 free BOX and subsequent box's will be extremely cheep.
9. Channels start to launch, all channels feature a minority Original UK content and are not available on Sky. All except the BBC feature advertising which helps with funding but the remaining funding comes from the Lottery and No.10
10. For once the government will have done something right, analogue TV is switched off for 2006 and the money from selling off the Bandwidth to mobile phone companies will not disappear but instead be in a trust to continue providing FREE quality TV programming.
OK that's what I would like and think should happen but it never will, The lottery money will be squanded on ridicules projects for the minority of the population while the rest of us pay endless amounts to Sky to receive half decent programming content.
Even if I disagree with you completely, I would just like to say thanks for posting an interesting topic on what has otherwise been a terrible day for intersting topics.
Boblin Brown wrote:
> Maybe if we halved the money going to the royal family
> and spent it on other stuff instead... *ponders*
No money goes to the royal family. And they now pay taxes too.
Why on earth should the government fund TV? It probably wouldn't be allowed to anyway in case it was accused of trying to influence the masses. That's why the BBC is a relatively autonomous institution.
If you want digital TV then spend the money you save from not having to pay for opera/museums/education/health on it, and don't take away the money that goes to the arts.
> Maybe if we halved the money going to the royal family
> and spent it on other stuff instead... *ponders*
No money goes to the royal family. And they now pay taxes too.
Why on earth should the government fund TV? It probably wouldn't be allowed to anyway in case it was accused of trying to influence the masses. That's why the BBC is a relatively autonomous institution.
If you want digital TV then spend the money you save from not having to pay for opera/museums/education/health on it, and don't take away the money that goes to the arts.
Thank God you are not running the country. Your hate for haut-culture frightens me...
Hard as it may be to believe, the National Lottery is not a voluntary tax, thus a govenment use of that money to subsidise digital TV would be a non-starter.
I can't help but hope that one day you will see that the theatre and museums and libraries and art are wonderful things that are far more worthy than providing an unsustainable television service.
I love going to the theatre. believe it or not plays can be good; entertaining and challenging. In fact most of the plays I have seen were far better than the turgid dramas that ITV and the BBC proliferate with license payers' money. The theatre and the opera are all part of our cultural mish-mash and you can't exclude them completely to focus on TV. Where do you think actors come from? They don't fall into your screen fully formed. Most of them have spent years honing their art in the theatres of our land, and most of the TV actors use the theatre to make ends meet.
Libraries, museums and galleries form an integral part of our society. The government provides these services free. You can go to a library and have access to virtually any book you want at no more than the 75p charge for the inter-library loan scheme. That is brilliant. You have the combined knowledge of mankind at your fingertips for 75p. Museums catalogue our heritage, our past and our hisory. We are a race of people moving forward in a car with the windscreen blacked out; we don't know what the road in front looks like or what obstacles it might contain, and the only way in which we can guess is by looking to our past and making estimates. The majority of museums are free and they let you have acces to all that history for nothing. I think that's a great thing. If you cut off funding then museums would have to charge to stay in existence and many people, often the people most in need of education, would be denied access to them, disenfranchised from their own history. Government and lottery funding has also allowed art galleries like the Tate Modern in London to be free. If you've ever been to that gallery then you will know how awe inspiring it can be.
The reason that we fund high culture is so that everyone can participate in it. TV is transient, throwaway stuff. Your scheme could be funded in the phonelines revenue from a series of crass "Idol" and "Star" shows.
You would have us replace "Tosca" with t*****s, on "Club Reps", "An Inspector Calls" with "Inspector Morse" and Andy Warhol with the Dandy Warhols. Yeah, good for you; remove our entire cultural heritage in the flick of a button.
Maybe I should take you back o Florence in the late 15th Century. The patriachal family of the time, the Medici's if memory serves correctly, opened up their private library to the people of Florence. What ensued was the cultural revolution known as the Renaissance. Writers emerged from the gutters of society and artists and artisans flocked to the city. In that city a concentration of intellectual and artistic genius developed, such has never been seen since. Sure we may not achieve same in our libraries. And Sharon from the local hairdressers may never discover Dostoevesky but a few will. A few people will discover that the key to social equality lies in the freedom to learn. We don't live in a complete meritocracy but if you have intellect then very few doors remain closed in the corridor of life.
High-culture shouldn't be limited to the elite. And television shouldn't be forced upon the masses. What we hae now is perfect for the time being. Those with the desire to utilise the free facilities to learn and expand their knowledge and experience do so. Those who want to cut themselves off into a world of Eastenders and Pop Idol can do the same. So don't try to wipe out high-culture in the name of television.
Hard as it may be to believe, the National Lottery is not a voluntary tax, thus a govenment use of that money to subsidise digital TV would be a non-starter.
I can't help but hope that one day you will see that the theatre and museums and libraries and art are wonderful things that are far more worthy than providing an unsustainable television service.
I love going to the theatre. believe it or not plays can be good; entertaining and challenging. In fact most of the plays I have seen were far better than the turgid dramas that ITV and the BBC proliferate with license payers' money. The theatre and the opera are all part of our cultural mish-mash and you can't exclude them completely to focus on TV. Where do you think actors come from? They don't fall into your screen fully formed. Most of them have spent years honing their art in the theatres of our land, and most of the TV actors use the theatre to make ends meet.
Libraries, museums and galleries form an integral part of our society. The government provides these services free. You can go to a library and have access to virtually any book you want at no more than the 75p charge for the inter-library loan scheme. That is brilliant. You have the combined knowledge of mankind at your fingertips for 75p. Museums catalogue our heritage, our past and our hisory. We are a race of people moving forward in a car with the windscreen blacked out; we don't know what the road in front looks like or what obstacles it might contain, and the only way in which we can guess is by looking to our past and making estimates. The majority of museums are free and they let you have acces to all that history for nothing. I think that's a great thing. If you cut off funding then museums would have to charge to stay in existence and many people, often the people most in need of education, would be denied access to them, disenfranchised from their own history. Government and lottery funding has also allowed art galleries like the Tate Modern in London to be free. If you've ever been to that gallery then you will know how awe inspiring it can be.
The reason that we fund high culture is so that everyone can participate in it. TV is transient, throwaway stuff. Your scheme could be funded in the phonelines revenue from a series of crass "Idol" and "Star" shows.
You would have us replace "Tosca" with t*****s, on "Club Reps", "An Inspector Calls" with "Inspector Morse" and Andy Warhol with the Dandy Warhols. Yeah, good for you; remove our entire cultural heritage in the flick of a button.
Maybe I should take you back o Florence in the late 15th Century. The patriachal family of the time, the Medici's if memory serves correctly, opened up their private library to the people of Florence. What ensued was the cultural revolution known as the Renaissance. Writers emerged from the gutters of society and artists and artisans flocked to the city. In that city a concentration of intellectual and artistic genius developed, such has never been seen since. Sure we may not achieve same in our libraries. And Sharon from the local hairdressers may never discover Dostoevesky but a few will. A few people will discover that the key to social equality lies in the freedom to learn. We don't live in a complete meritocracy but if you have intellect then very few doors remain closed in the corridor of life.
High-culture shouldn't be limited to the elite. And television shouldn't be forced upon the masses. What we hae now is perfect for the time being. Those with the desire to utilise the free facilities to learn and expand their knowledge and experience do so. Those who want to cut themselves off into a world of Eastenders and Pop Idol can do the same. So don't try to wipe out high-culture in the name of television.
Well do you?
I could easily assume three things of the people who write on this forum.
Number One You like watching some Television and would like a wider choice of none subscription channels.
Number Two - You play or have played previously the national lottery or associated lottery games.
Number Three - You have no or little interest in Opera, the theatre, museums or art galleries compared to you interest in television.
So why the hell doesn't the culture sectary wake up to the 21st century and realise that the average person in England would rather have lottery money spent on providing a sustainable none subscription digital terrestrial television service (now there's a mouth full), one that would appeal the whole population, one that could provide quality television through a diverse range of original programming over a multitude of channels.
Now don't get me wrong, of cause there are far better things that lottery money could be spent on and I am not against all none media cultural spending, we do need museums and galleries, and I suppose opera but what we don't need is Millennium Dome's or Bridges and what about the Pop museum in Sheffield, who would have preferred that money being spent on a quality music TV station?
OK, we have SKY which is an option for the majority of the country and on a technical note offers a wider coverage area than digital terrestrial and has an incredible amount of bandwidth but does everybody want Sky? Probably not is the answer. With investment Digital terrestrial TV can and in the future have to be able to be accessible by the majority of the country, because if you didn't know analogue (normal) TV is to be switched off by the government, hopefully not by Labour as the date is provisionally pencilled in for between 2006 and 2010.
The Plan -
1. ITV Digital closes, the government sells half the available bandwidth to another Provider.
2. Assuming the former has worked, use the money to upgrade the Digital Terrestrial Network.
3. Using lottery money start development of a Digital Terrestrial box.
4. Start devolving ideas for about 20 new channels which must cover everything from entertainment, Popular music and sport to drama, the arts and Opera.
5. OK assuming all is well the year is about 2004, a mini Pay TV service of operating in place of ITV digital and both the Box's and channels are ready for distribution.
6. Start distributing and testing the box's and channels in preparation for a full release in 2005. Start this in London and then other major cities.
7. 2005, Now Sky has about 500 channels, cost's £60 per month and still features hardly any original UK content.
8. Time to Launch, every household in the UK will receive 1 free BOX and subsequent box's will be extremely cheep.
9. Channels start to launch, all channels feature a minority Original UK content and are not available on Sky. All except the BBC feature advertising which helps with funding but the remaining funding comes from the Lottery and No.10
10. For once the government will have done something right, analogue TV is switched off for 2006 and the money from selling off the Bandwidth to mobile phone companies will not disappear but instead be in a trust to continue providing FREE quality TV programming.
OK that's what I would like and think should happen but it never will, The lottery money will be squanded on ridicules projects for the minority of the population while the rest of us pay endless amounts to Sky to receive half decent programming content.
I could easily assume three things of the people who write on this forum.
Number One You like watching some Television and would like a wider choice of none subscription channels.
Number Two - You play or have played previously the national lottery or associated lottery games.
Number Three - You have no or little interest in Opera, the theatre, museums or art galleries compared to you interest in television.
So why the hell doesn't the culture sectary wake up to the 21st century and realise that the average person in England would rather have lottery money spent on providing a sustainable none subscription digital terrestrial television service (now there's a mouth full), one that would appeal the whole population, one that could provide quality television through a diverse range of original programming over a multitude of channels.
Now don't get me wrong, of cause there are far better things that lottery money could be spent on and I am not against all none media cultural spending, we do need museums and galleries, and I suppose opera but what we don't need is Millennium Dome's or Bridges and what about the Pop museum in Sheffield, who would have preferred that money being spent on a quality music TV station?
OK, we have SKY which is an option for the majority of the country and on a technical note offers a wider coverage area than digital terrestrial and has an incredible amount of bandwidth but does everybody want Sky? Probably not is the answer. With investment Digital terrestrial TV can and in the future have to be able to be accessible by the majority of the country, because if you didn't know analogue (normal) TV is to be switched off by the government, hopefully not by Labour as the date is provisionally pencilled in for between 2006 and 2010.
The Plan -
1. ITV Digital closes, the government sells half the available bandwidth to another Provider.
2. Assuming the former has worked, use the money to upgrade the Digital Terrestrial Network.
3. Using lottery money start development of a Digital Terrestrial box.
4. Start devolving ideas for about 20 new channels which must cover everything from entertainment, Popular music and sport to drama, the arts and Opera.
5. OK assuming all is well the year is about 2004, a mini Pay TV service of operating in place of ITV digital and both the Box's and channels are ready for distribution.
6. Start distributing and testing the box's and channels in preparation for a full release in 2005. Start this in London and then other major cities.
7. 2005, Now Sky has about 500 channels, cost's £60 per month and still features hardly any original UK content.
8. Time to Launch, every household in the UK will receive 1 free BOX and subsequent box's will be extremely cheep.
9. Channels start to launch, all channels feature a minority Original UK content and are not available on Sky. All except the BBC feature advertising which helps with funding but the remaining funding comes from the Lottery and No.10
10. For once the government will have done something right, analogue TV is switched off for 2006 and the money from selling off the Bandwidth to mobile phone companies will not disappear but instead be in a trust to continue providing FREE quality TV programming.
OK that's what I would like and think should happen but it never will, The lottery money will be squanded on ridicules projects for the minority of the population while the rest of us pay endless amounts to Sky to receive half decent programming content.