"This is a publicly funded channel, funded by EVERYBODY. Therefore, the content should be suitable for everybody.
It is not a minority interest broadcaster, it is a publicly funded broadcaster. I pay my licence, as do others, and I don't want these eedjits paid mega money using the contributions of people like me."

All i can tell you, G, is that there are lots of licence-fee-payers who enjoy the edgier comedy programmes produced by the BBC. They love the fresh, exciting and dynamic stuff that's been produced both by BBC radio and TV. In an effort to be all things to all people, the BBC has chosen to produce a diversity of content, rather than trying to pander to a single common denominator which would be horribly bland and reductive. As I asked earlier, who legislates for what's acceptable to "everyone"? Who is the arbiter of the common good taste?


Lizzie, we differed over far more than we ever agreed upon; not least of which was your belief that people singing songs is of paramount importance in changing the world. I thought your crusade in this respect was both pointless and excessive. But let me be absolutely clear about something, and you can choose to believe me or not: I have always been absolutely up front in arguing with you, and did not go to the BBC moderators to ask for you or your posts to be banned. There was no crusade, at least not on my part.

Again, I would ask you the same question I asked G: who gets to decide what's acceptable? Who is the arbiter for national taste and decency?

You say you detest dumbing down. So do I. I feel we must be in a pretty parlous state as a culture if grownups cannot be trusted to cope with mature content in the media.