New World Notes

The BBC is funded by the UK taxpayers through a license fee, and various programmes are often shown abroad when other networks purchase the rights to broadcast them. As the BBC doesn't show advertisements on its network, it's not silly that they limit their shows to the UK at all. We pay the tax, hence we watch the shows =)

If you get lucky, they might put it on BBC America soon. Either way, the way of the internet means you can usually find these shows lurking around online.

Exactly Jovin. There have been times I wanted to view content on a US news channel or other website showing video, but popups come up saying only viewable in the US.

I saw the first episode and found it a great history lesson on the origins of where we are now...altho...she does pose a lot..:))

Well, is it legal in this case to use Bittorrent to view the show? It is available here: http://thepiratebay.org/torrent/5323942/The.Virtual.Revolution.S01E01.HDTV.XviD-FTP

I think the short answer, Pivo, is that it is illegal to do that.

"You think that US networks don't block us here in the UK from watching their shows?"

Of course they do, but they're for-profit corporations that want to control their revenue stream. The BBC is a publicly-financed entity which is also one of Britain's most well-known brands, and the nation stands to gain in all kinds of ways by making its content widely available throughout the world. In any case, they already do that in other mediums -- you can access the BBC website and written content on it from all over, you can hear BBC Radio programming from all over. Why make that content open, while selectively blocking their video content? It's inconsistent.

The BBC is one of the UK's best advertisements for itself, the nation's ingenuity and values, and the more its content is propagated internationally, the more Britian becomes a thought leader in the world. And yes, it's a great potential revenue source for the UK too. This Internet documentary should be playing on Hulu or another similar site raking in ad dollars from US tech companies *right now*. The Beeb will probably get around to syndicating it eventually, but the program loses its relevance and value with every passing day Auntie doesn't.

Prad, I know about the charter, but charters can be changed, especially if the BBC higher-ups advocate for them. I recently had a long frustrating talk with another friend at the BBC -- it's a very conservative, ossified bureaucracy with lots of major players unwilling to adjust to the Internet era, while younger staffers pull their hair out at the missed opportunities. It's not just this show. There's decades and decades of awesome, essential, historically important BBC reportage that's sitting in their vaults, inaccessible online. The British taxpayer doesn't benefit from that, neither does anyone else.

Hey,

Digital Nation, http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/digitalnation/view/#
aired the 1st installment on Tuesday (2/2)(90 minutes). What is very cool about this Frontline series was that it was a website for over a year, airing film clips, asking for comments, asking for contributions of content. This episode has a nice treatment of Second Life and Phil, BTW.

and we need more William Kamkwambahttps ://edition.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/africa/11/03/malawi.wind.boy/index.html

and people to donate to http://laptop.org/en/

and time for me to learn to embed a url here.

LOVE these types of discussions.

-Leo

Most people have already detailed the BBC's standing here - nicely, too.

I think that to sum up, the BBC is funded by the license fee, paid by UK residents, which funds TV projects directly and has also gone to fund ventures (as decreed by its remit) in radio, news and digital content. It sells its programmes to other countries but under guidelines I couldn't begin to speculate upon. The important part is that the BBC cannot channel money it gathered through a tax towards projects which earn it money, or else the British commercial stations would be in uproar - the likes of ITV and Five don't have the luxury of a License Fee to fund their commerce; it has to come from advertising alone. That is why it cannot sell programmes individually.

And yes, I too am sick of being told that I can watch the latest episode of something or to watch a news clip only to be region-locked by Hulu. But the fact is the BBC has done a lot for digital TV and other technology like the sheer virtue of the iPlayer by force of its remit. I think they've done pretty well, far from seeming backwards.

So ner - I'm gonna go and enjoy this programme that I have partly funded, just as American viewers can enjoy stuff they've had to sit through commercials for. :P

Shes Great is Aleks, some of us brits might remember her as being one of the 3 chicks on channel fours Bitz video games series 10 years ago..... as you can see from this youtubevideo http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N6mcf9t3GFw

Speaking as a british resident, I fully and absolutely agree on your points Hamlet.

It makes sense, you just gotta look the well-earned reputation that BBC has, and this reputation fully falls back on the country itself, one of those rare occasion where stereotypes in societies play an effective role.

Ever since I stepped foot on the BBC website, I kept wondering at the interesting effects that the online distribution of the articles had.

I think the general attitude of "It's ours, we paid for it." is just your usual greed in humanity within us all. The issue just needs better awareness and exposure to show the good spotlight of digital distribution, then the attitude falls aside. (albeit replaced for the bigger greed for reputation, which I cringe at the thought of, but it is a good trade-off since it is REALLY a win-win situation for everyone)