Jeremy Paxman attacks BBC World Service cuts
Jeremy Paxman attacks BBC World Service cutsVeteran BBC Broadcaster Jeremy Paxman has attacked the plans to downsize the World Service. Budget cuts mean the loss of 650 jobs, five language services – including the end of broadcasts in Russia, India and China – will reduce its reach by 30m global listeners.
Veteran BBC Broadcaster Jeremy Paxman has attacked the plans to downsize the World Service. Budget cuts mean the loss of 650 jobs, five language services – including the end of broadcasts in Russia, India and China – will reduce its reach by 30m global listeners.
Paxman argues this will significantly impact the UK’s international influence and undermine foreign policy.
“I don’t imagine there are many heroes who wear cardigan and cords. But that’s how I imagine the BBC World Service” he wrote in The Guardian, “I have never heard anyone say a bad word about the World Service. It is more trusted that its American equivalents, more lively that Deutsche Welle, more imitated that any of them.
“How many millions listen to the World Service in some form? A mere 241 million they say – the figures are so vast as not to mean very much. But it must be many more than will ever clap eyes on William Hague, listen to an ambassadorial speech or attend a Foreign Office leadership conference.
“The World Service’s misfortune was to be controlled by the Foreign Office.
“I can imagine the scene when the menacing note comes across from treasury. ‘Good Heaven!’ says the permanent secretary, ‘they want us to save money. Got any ideas?’
“No one suggests recognising that perhaps the whole diplomatic service belongs to the days before the email and the internet – the telephone even.
“Then a voice pipes up, ‘I know why don’t we hand the BBC World Service over to the BBC and make it their problem?’ ‘Excellent’, says the PS. ‘Shall we have a cup of tea?’”
New to The Drum
You will be sent a verification email. Click on the link in the email to post your comment.
Comments
I agree absolutely a false economy when we need more then ever to box above our weight and particularly in many countries where the current Coalition government aims to enhance UK exports. However,I do not believe that it was the FCO who devised such a cunning plan to save their assets. In any case I fear they,(FCO) have few left having already sold much of the "family silver" they were able to profit by. It is really a question of political choice - a leaner diplomatic global reach which most commentators would agree it has become or closure of sovereign posts, thats where we are at! Given that choice: our man on the ground surely beats email and the twitterati. The days of our Consul luxuriating in some sinecure post are sadly the fantasies and history of old novels. Perhaps Mr Paxman's brother might assure him of that.
Write Your Comment