BBC execs criticise calls for channel closures

Splitting the BBC up into more defined internal departments has had the side effect of causing executives from each department to fight for their own corner, hence the belated BBC Vision response to the recent BBC News onslaught triggered by the MacTaggart lecture delivered by Jeremy Paxman.

But the Vision response seems to consist more of corner-defending than making a logical case for the existence of a particular service, even if the suggestions being made have some logic to them.

As for complaints about these arguments being made public, the licence fee-payers deserve to be given access to all the arguments in relation to the effects of any budget cuts; not so long ago we were being perpetually told that "It's your BBC". And you can't keep a good journalist quiet!

There may be other 24-hour news channels available, but when it comes to a predominantly domestic news agenda BBC News 24 and Sky News are the only two channels in existence that provide such a service and this is particularly true on Freeview where there are only those two news channels available (plus Sky Sports News of course).

BBC local radio news is usually in competition with commercial local radio news, so should we axe BBC local radio news to save money? EastEnders is up against Coronation Street on ITV1 so should EastEnders be axed as well? It's a dangerous game when it comes to picking services to axe solely on the basis of duplicating commercial services.

BBC News 24 provides a public service-driven rolling news channel that's free of the subtle commercial bias that's sometimes to be found on Sky News, and BBC News 24 could end up being the only such channel on Freeview if BSkyB eventually gets its way with its terrestrial pay-TV proposal. So as long as there's a demand for a rolling news channel then News 24 should stay.

But those days could be numbered. Nowadays I look first to the BBC News website, which gives me all the headlines and video clips I could desire without having to wait for the news summary on News 24. These days I only watch News 24 properly if there's major breaking news, and in such circumstances it's also very likely that BBC One is simulcasting News 24.

Singling out the investment (£93 million) being made in productions by BBC Three is also rather disingenous when that money could be perhaps be effectively used better elsewhere such as ensuring fewer repeats on BBC Two. Or saved, as seems to be the overriding issue at the moment.

And are all of the so-called "quality productions" on BBC Three truly of good quality? All that tends to be made these days are dramas and comedy that often end up being compromised by a lack of budget, which in turn may end up causing its discerning target audience to think twice about watching the channel unless there's something truly compelling on offer.

And BBC Three's target audience could equally be well served by BBC Two. Video on demand services will become the key battleground for attracting young viewers who make heavy use of the internet as opposed to a poorly-funded channel that relies too heavily on repeats despite having some innovative content.

Thankfully the final word on this issue will come from the head of the BBC Trust (Sir Michael Lyons), who just happened to be a member of the audience listening to that MacTaggart speech. So unless Mark Thompson has some firm proposals to offer in two weeks' time that don't involve further cuts to news and current affairs, he will certainly have some explaining to do.