egafd.com

While the number of staff sent over to Beijing for the Olympics may on its own seem massive, lets not forget that there are 302 events competed by 10,500 athletes, all of which have been covered by the BBC in some form or other - lets not forget that we have the option, if we're fortunate enough to own digital tv, to watch 4 - 5 sports simultaneously.

You state that the BBC has been taken over by the Games. What is the problem with this? The Olympics are once every 4 years, and are watched by almost 50% of each broadcasting country's viewing public, so why is it considered a bad thing that the BBC is broadcasting it? Would you prefer ITV to broadcast it (adverts every 15mins), or Sky (Adverts every 15mins and a very limited market who could watch) or would you prefer the state broadcaster of the next country to hold the Olympics, which broadcasts into every single tv-owning house in the country?

You also state that this is all being paid for from the Licence fee. Quite correct. However, what would you prefer the licence fee be spent on?

The has-been, Madonna, is taking 250 people on her new world tour - let's hope she gets lost somewhere down in the southern hemisphere..

stewie_McGriffin wrote:

"You also state that this is all being paid for from the Licence fee. Quite correct. However, what would you prefer the licence fee be spent on?"

By choice i don't want a tv tax.......please don't call it a tv licence.......i don't mind adverts.....and i love the channel change button on the remote control......its then MY CHOICE !



ALSO how can friends of mine in Switzerland, Canada and Australia all watch and listen to BBC programes via the BBC web site.....and they DON'T PAY A BLOODY PENNY TOWARDS IT !!

Von Boy wrote:

> Someone has told me the BBC sent 437 staff to china to cover
> the olympics !
>
> PS Also I was told the BBC expects to send 75 staff to cover
> the US elections in November !

It's a disgrace! Who cares about the Olympics or the US elections anyway.