Get a Grip, Britain
From the BBC Website today: 'YouTube should give videos made by channels like the BBC, ITV and Channel 4 more promotion to help tackle a "serious threat" to the UK's public service broadcasting, according to media regulator Ofcom.'
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/clyl07nekzxo
08:40 Tuesday 22 July 2025
The article continues with pointing out that children spend more time watching YouTube videos than all the public service broadcasters combined.
This reasoning is precisely why I support hegemo. It is the thinking behind Ofcom and the BBC that drives me crazy. If there are more viewers of a channel not controlled by a corporation or business, it is because the content is better elsewhere. For some strange reason, there is still a sentiment that having a media degree is a free pass to success. I suggest, it is exactly this thinking that holds back British success. The top YouTubers have come up with formulas for entertainment that the BBC seem to be unable to fathom, let alone emulate. I don't doubt that a degree in media studies is immensely valuable but I am also certain that to be a success in the media there is something else required that a degree does not and cannot teach or provide. However, in retrospect, I might suggest that there have been so many years where there is a curtailing of creativity, that now we don't need to be have an imagination any more, in order to work in television.
I am fairly certain that I can often tell when a YouTuber presenter has a degree. There is an introduction, main content, and a conclusion. Sections are clearly defined like paragraphs in essays. I think, kids and most people find this academic approach dull. I don't watch those videos because they are too constrained. Creativity and entertainment is replaced with a set of rules and procedures that don't work outside of an office or academic environment. I once saw a stage magician reveal the trick he was, supposedly, going to do as an introduction, only to surprise us with a different trick. That is the only time an introduction was interestingly used, in my opinion.
Once upon a time, there were regional television companies. I think Thames TV ran the Fawlty Towers series. These companies got bought up and a homogenised format became the norm. When Margaret Thatcher told us that she wanted to remove the class society and would clear the way for everyone to get into debt by obtaining credit, she wanted to boost the economy, not make people in the north of England like TV productions that people in the south of England like. Yet, mergers, acquisitions and monopolies were encouraged to go ahead, it seems.
I suggest that, no-one watches British television because the programs are made by people who have no sight of what they want to accomplish, beyond a payment that allows them to pay for a Netflix subscription. There are few programs on sociology, history, animals, economics, global issues, Africa, Australia, or anything interesting. Stacey Dooley made her way into our lives through appearing in a program on Fast-Fashion. I think she was in her teens. Her sunny disposition was a clear advantage to success. However, I think she worked hard, on an independent basis to produce her own programs that terrestrial TV were slow to pick up on.
I don't own a television because it does not provide me with information. I don't have a Netflix subscription and I don't have a VPN that allows me to see other countries TV feed. I don't watch television at home because it dulls my mind. It used to just hypnotise me into being a zombie, so I stopped watching.
Back to the opening Ofcom statement. If I was Ofcom, I would be advising the BBC to hire YouTubers. It is as simple as that. There are some good producers on YouTube. There are a myriad of characters to choose from. Mr Beast is now a billionaire. I would cut back on the silly magazine style news-casting format, and just TELL US the news. There is news in the north of England and the south; in Wales and Scotland. There is news in France and Kenya; in Vietnam and Alaska. It all started to go wrong when Channel Five made the news-casters leave their desks and wander around the studio, in a 'friendly' and 'approachable' manner. For goodness sake, it is the news - facts. List the facts! On another feed give us opinions. Simple! Just stop up-dating and start down-dating.
YouTubers use technology as a tool, not because they can, because they have to. Take the election results on TV. Huge great screens across the studio. Why? A flip-chart would do it. I am not suggesting we have Benny Hill's scantily dressed women holding up cards with pie charts and bar charts on them, but a series of studio staff walking across the set holding result figures printed on cards would make things more interesting. Throw in a stage magician and you have an entertaining and watchable program that provides raw information in a fun way. Whoops! I just highlighted something that YouTube videos have in them; creativity and good production ideas on a low budget. 'Go figure', as our American friends sometimes say.
I think Anglia TV used to fund a lot of programs on wildlife. Certainly, they showed a program called 'Survival'; a program about animals in the wild. No opinions, just animals. This is how animals live. Here is a lion attacking a zebra. NOT here is a lioness who loves her cubs dearly and spends a lot of time licking them. Lions are apex predators; I want to know that.
Something that I really don't get is this: If YouTube is so popular and directly competes with terrestrial TV why do big businesses advertise on terrestrial TV channels? Why does YouTube have Lucozade ads and weirdo cures for 'fattiness' advertisements? You know, drink hot water before bed to lose weight, and butter is called butter because it has Butrylic Acid in it! It isn't anythng to do with Latin or Greek is it?
It just goes to show that British TV producers are comparable to the makers of the ads that deny that the word 'butter' comes from the concatenation of cow and cheese; the Greek "βούτυρον" (bouturon).
Get a grip!
A letter from British TV:
'Dear YouTube, We are not very good at making watchable programs - we have lost our way. We think you are being mean to us by showing superior quality content on your channel. We are certain of this because you also promote weirdos with crazy ideas about butter. We think you should consider our weak and bland content as being suitable for your attention. We know that YouTube thrives on 'out there' content. Please help us to survive with our boring programs so we can do the same thing and expect different results.'
From youTube: 'Dear British TV. Are you kidding? You are pranking us right? That sort of prank isn't even funny. Your content is dull, dull, dull! Get some new people and get rid of your top management in favour of content writers'