The Beeb - why are they so good or aren't they?

C Elegans · Post by **C Elegans** » Mon Sep 03, 2001 6:42 am

Everytime I see a good documentary, it seems to be produced by the BBC (or sometimes some other Britsh broadcasting company).

When the Soviet Union fell, the Beeb were first out to make two great nature series (with sir David Attenborough) about the realms of former USSR. Areas that had never before been open to the west, were shown for the first time on TV.

Historical documentary, like the series "People's century". The BBC did not only dig up material from their own archives and managed to find people who had actually experienced the big events of the 20th centrury. They also managed to find (and get permission to show) previously secret material from Russia and Japan that had never been showed before.

Countless undercover documentaries about trafficking of women and children, endangered species, drugs etc. The Beeb were first out to show how children from Asia were sold as sex-slaves to European pedophiles.

In countries where it's near impossible for journalists to film, the Beeb has managed to sneak around. The first documentary from North Korea was shown on Swedish TV earlier this year, and showed concentration camps, starving children and atrocities too horrible to write at a public message board.

When the royal family in Nepal was murdered, everybody was worried that the Maoist guerilla would make a move. The Maoist guerilla refuse to have any contact with media, but when the Beeb came, they let themselves be interviewed at night time, with scarves covering their faces.

Now, why don't any other broadcasting company in the world seems to produce this kind of journalism? Is it a question of tradition? Or is it a question of selection? Is, for instance, the US, France or Germany making equally good documentaries, but I never see them? Strange, since most of what's shown of Swedish TV is produced in the US, and we as many German and French TV channels as British.

Anyone has an explanation?

Kameleon · Post by **Kameleon** » Mon Sep 03, 2001 6:45 am

License fees

C Elegans · Post by **C Elegans** » Mon Sep 03, 2001 6:51 am

Originally posted by Kameleon:
<STRONG>License fees </STRONG>

We have licence fees in Sweden too, and that doesn't help.

Kameleon · Post by **Kameleon** » Mon Sep 03, 2001 6:59 am

Oh well - maybe it's the immense dedication and urge to find the truth. The Beeb ends up with all the best journalists and researchers, taken straight from university. And also they have a ton of newsreels, past programs to reference from and the name - most people will clam up when faced with a journalist, but mention the BBC and suddenly words start flowing. They are the best-known broadcasters on the face of the earth. The fact that the BBC were the only broadcasting company in Britain for many years, and so have exclusive access to old materials can only help things.

fable · Post by **fable** » Mon Sep 03, 2001 7:03 am

I can only speak knowledgeably about the US, but over here, there *are* some fine documentary makers. Typically, they don't focus on mainstream issues, because they lack the kind of financial resources necessary to do the expensive research and recoup their expenditures. (Forget mainstream television. None of the major networks will fund such projects.) Instead, they seek grants for covering unknown aspects of American society. A good example of this is Les Blank, whose documentaries in clude Garlic is as Good as Ten Mothers, Chulas Fronteras, and In Heaven There is No Beer? (a tribute to the polka). You could say that at a time when America was praising its own homogeneity, Blank was deliberately celebrating the ethnic diversity that remained.

There have been a few successful "documentaries" recently on our public stations that focused upon the Civil War/War Between the States, and on a History of Jazz. The former was criticized for its overtly emotional character (though it certainly conveyed the personal tragedy of war, well), while the latter has been called "a jazz documentary by documentarians who knew nothing about jazz."

That the BBC flourishes as it does is a tribute to a culture that recognizes the importance of news and arts as something beyond commercialism. We have news on public radio, but it's extremely self-indulgent, and has gradually come to resemble over the years (in slickness, quality and length of pieces) commercial news.

[ 09-03-2001: Message edited by: fable ]