bbc.co.uk Service Licence: Initial Feedback & Early Round-Up
Post categories: Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ Online
| 13:38 UK time, Thursday, 29 May 2008
Update: Nick Reynolds has posted with more reactions here.
Obviously, the document we've been scouring most round our way today is the review of bbc.co.uk by the Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ Trust. I expect there to be further posts from my colleagues reacting to this in the next day or so. I'm only just getting through what seems to be at least a dozen lengthy PDFs of consultation, review and recommendations. The early press coverage, from what I can tell, has focused on only a small amount of what the Trust had to say about the site. So - if your printers can bear it - it's worth ploughing your way through it.
You can read the document in full, the terms of reference, and supporting evidence on the Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ Trust site.
Documents summarising the considerable amount of consultation with "institutional stakeholders", the Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ's Audience Councils and the Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ's submission itself are also published in full.
As ever, the fullest press coverage (three stories in as many hours earlier today) , which even extended to a . There's also a lengthy piece in .
and are only starting to trickle in. Emily Bell and Patricia Hodgson went head-to-head on Today this morning but the audio for this will vanish into the ether in a few hours. [Update: the audio is now availabele here as an mp3]
Update: The Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ issued a statement in response to the report which is published over at the Press Office site.
Jem Stone is the Portfolio Exec, Social Media in the Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ's internet group.
Comment number 1.
At 2nd Jun 2008, amanfromMars wrote:This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 1)
Comment number 2.
At 2nd Jun 2008, Dan_G_WP wrote:Wow, 48% over budget, over Β£110 m spent *excluding * iPlayer, and this is all there is to show for it? Awesome mismanagement, awesome. In the highest traditions of British industry.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 2)