Without free-to-air, we wouldn’t have 'Doctor Who' in the archives. What will we lose when it moves to Disney?

It’s a real pitty the BBC doesn’t open up Globally, like Netflix ,Hulu or Disney + by themselves. I’d happily pay that subscription fee to the BBC, instead of Disney. The BBC could probably make more money from it in the long term than from Disney.

Abe234

Today 07:45 am JST

It’s a real pitty the BBC doesn’t open up Globally, like Netflix ,Hulu or Disney + by themselves. I’d happily pay that subscription fee to the BBC, instead of Disney. The BBC could probably make more money from it in the long term than from Disney.

Agreed. I would gladly pay to get BBC iPlayer in Japan.

On the other hand when Disney+ gets Doctor Who they might make people in Japan aware of its existence. The 50th anniversary was shown in cinemas in two hundred countries but not in Japan, and that's poor quite frankly.

Definitely everything Disney touches rots..

The streamers have been stealing content from public access for years now. Exclusivity ensures subscribers. Champions league football vanished from free to air in the UK some years ago. All I see now are the results and a few paragraphs on the match. As a result, I no longer bother with the tournament.

As stuff vanishes to streaming, the audience will shrink considerably and the knock-on commercial benefits will vanish too. The sack of cash the broadcasters get now, for selling their soul, is a bad deal.

There may be pressure on parents to sign up to multiple streaming services - a problem as we head into a global depression - but for the rest of us, it will be time to walk away. It is actually easier than you might think.

'Dr. Who' fans would have been able to watch box sets on DVD from the UK, courtesy of a region-free player, or local releases. The streamers will be ending that too. If you enjoyed a series, get the box set whilst you can, so that you can watch it again whenever you want. I have dozens of them. 'Dallas' arrived the other week. I'll be stocking up on some of the silent era classics next.

The golden era of TV may be coming to an end and the BBC may be fading as a broadcaster. It is trying to push people on to streaming, but the audience who still watch TV aren't interested, and the kids who stream don't watch broadcast TV any more. It now fills BBC 1's morning schedule - previously lifestyle and magazine programmes - with news, mainly politics and war, like Pravda, and acts as a primary enabler for whatever the Nudge Unit is up to. Public service should not mean propaganda and manipulation.

It still rocks for children's TV, some of the documentaries and lifestyle programmes are good and 'Dr. Who' still delivers, retaining many of the original writers. But the good stuff is getting thin on the ground.

It's not just the BBC being damaged by streaming. The streamers have been stealing the cathartic endings from kdrama, ruining them by replacing the ending with the promise of a continuation - a next series or new 'story arc', that may never be made. It's a commercial, American thing that is killing kdrama by removing one of the core ingredients of it - the emotional hit at the end.

And as the article says, there will be no archive. Any of the actors get 'cancelled' for being idiots when they were young (and if we are honest, most of us were), the entire series will simply vanish, globally, at the click of a mouse, as if it never existed.

You only really miss stuff when it has gone, so buy those DVDs now, whilst you still can.

So, British taxpayers have to pay for this show, but Disney gets to profit from it? Uh, okay. Weird business decision, but go for it, I guess.

British taxpayers do not fund Doctor Who, the licence fee does as does the BBCs worldwide arm making deals with organisations outside the UK. The Disney deal means more money in the BBC coffers. Whether this is good for Doctor Who in the long term, I don’t think so.

I'm for more things remaining free-to-air. Boxing used to be and everyone used to be really into it. Now you have to per-per-view and far fewer "regular" people watch it except for the those really into it. It's like this with many types of genres.

More and more things are becoming available only if you pay for it. Even many movies that are over 60 years old. Don't like this trend.

I pay ¥1000 per month for BBC World but I cannot have the iPlayer.

LudditeToday wrote (at 12:21 pm JST:}

British taxpayers do not fund Doctor Who, the licence fee does

It's still a tax, but one paid by television owners in Great Britain.

As for me, I will not give any money to Disney. Therefore, I must sadly say goodbye to The Doctor. Wait--I actually did that when Chibnal and Whittaker killed the franchise (at least in my eyes.)

The TV licence is not a tax.

I pay ¥1000 per month for BBC World but I cannot have the iPlayer.

Surely wallace has a vpn?

The TV licence is not a tax.

If you have a TV and use it, you have to pay or face prosecution. Sounds like a tax to me.

£159 is a bargain though for what they provide.

OKNewshawkOct. 28  09:15 pm JST

Therefore, I must sadly say goodbye to The Doctor. Wait--I actually did that when Chibnal and Whittaker killed the franchise (at least in my eyes.)

Mine too, although I assume it was mainly Chris Chibnall's doing.

Dr Who is currently on Japanese Hulu. BBC iplayer is easily accessible by VPN if necessary

The TV licence is not a tax.

You can only argue that from a very technical stance. It is a tax on owning a TV set. It's pretty good value for money, but still a tax on every meaningful sense.