One has a right to judge of a man,” wrote Oscar Wilde in The Picture of Dorian Gray, “by the effect he has over his friends.” One also has the right to judge an institution by the effect it has over its enemies. The BBC’s enemies include a clutch of Right-wing newspapers, the Conservative Party and Elon Musk. This should suggest to anyone sane that the BBC should be cherished and championed but this past weekend Lucy Frazer — a person I had literally never heard of but who is apparently the Culture Secretary — announced that the Government was reviewing the licence fee.
“I do think it might need to look at a variety of sources for its funding,” Frazer said. “I’d like to ensure the BBC is properly funded. The licence fee isn’t the only way.” If I hadn’t realized Frazer was Culture Secretary it is because they change so often — there have been 13 culture secretaries in 13 years. Frazer’s comments echo Jacob Rees-Mogg, who recently told “anti-woke” and not very good channel GB News that “the licence fee has passed its sell-by date and it needs to go”. Ironically, this was the same message voters sent to Rees-Mogg’s party in the council elections.
It seems slightly reckless for him to be criticising the BBC since he will likely be begging them to commission “Jacob Rees-Mogg and Miriam Margolyes go Camping” after the next election. The critics of the licence fee argue that it is anachronistic, undemocratic and a waste of money. If those are the reasons to get rid of something we should have abolished the monarchy a long time ago but instead millions tuned in, most of them to the BBC, to watch the Coronation.
The BBC should not be above legitimate criticism. I find it hilarious how in a desperate desire to ensure its dramas are racially diverse, seemingly every person in a BBC drama happens to be in a mixed-race relationship. I find it sad that BBC bosses routinely fail to appreciate talent — Ken Bruce is a recent example — and cause them to leave. I had long been promised that due to the BBC’s apparent obsession with positive discrimination, people with mediocre talent who are minorities could enjoy long and fruitful careers at the BBC.
Sadly, despite being both mediocre and a minority, I never found a home on either radio or television at the BBC. I find all those things sad but what I find most so is that the BBC seems capable of telling great stories — except about itself.
I grew up in a house without books. I was educated, entertained and inspired by what I saw and heard on the television and the radio. Now there is of course so much more choice — Netflix, Amazon Prime and so on — but no one does or can do what the BBC does and it can only do that because of the licence fee.
For all its faults the BBC is a Good Thing, so rather than undermine it I wish we could appreciate it while we still have it rather than surrender the argument to critics with vested interests who, to quote Oscar Wilde again, know the price of everything and the value of nothing.
Let it be: national anthem should be a Beatles song
I was relieved to read this week that a third of Britons now believe the national anthem should be replaced. Now I can admit that I have always felt deeply uncomfortable with God Save the Queen/King and the way loyalty to country seems to demand loyalty to a monarch. I would have so much respect for the King if he signalled a willingness to replace the national anthem with a song that would truly make us proud to be British.
Land of Hope and Glory is often mentioned but I think we can do better. There is no British musical act more influential or popular as The Beatles — so how about a Fab Four song as the new national anthem? I would choose All You Need is Love for the melody and message but given the British fondness for wistfully looking at the past, perhaps it should be Yesterday.
