Talk:BBC World Service

PBS

From article: "Some PBS stations in the US carry daily half-hour programmes from BBC World Service." - PBS is TV isn't it? I think someone's got BBC World and the World Service mixed up. Am I right..? -- Tom- 23:53, 2 Apr 2004 (UTC)

I've removed that line from the article as I can find no evidence that PBS relay the World Service. -- Tom- 07:35, 5 Apr 2004 (UTC)

I think you mean NPR (National Public Radio) who are the radio equivalent of PBS. Stations like WNCY in New York relay the World Service several times a day - see http://www.wnyc.org/shows/bbc_ws.

Dramatic programming

hi, I'm not sure about the exact meaning of dramatic programming in this sentence: In addition, the World Service provides educational, dramatic, and sports programming. - could the original author clarify this? See my question and the replies over at Wikipedia:Reference_desk. regards, High on a tree 16:24, 6 May 2004 (UTC)

I would have taken it to mean radio dramatisations of books and plays. Tom- 18:57, 21 Jul 2004 (UTC)

News

Would anyone care to provide a list of newsreading staff (similar to on other BBC Radio station pages)? I only know a few of their names and am unsure of much of the spelling. Thanks.

Landmine attack on Broadcasting House

"After a landmine damaged the service's original home" -- this is just plain weird. Did someone drop one from the sky? Could someone give more details and also update the Broadcasting House page.

Landmines were large bombs with parachutes attached which were dropped from aircraft. -- Arwel (talk) 14:29, 25 October 2005 (UTC)

I have updated the sentence to use a more understandable term "parachute mine". Xunker (talk) 20:43, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

North america under Transmission section

There's a lot of information about receiving BBCWS in the transmission section. The second paragraph has gotten messy (partly my fault). Perhaps it should be cut down to a simple paragraph about receiving via shortwave. The north america/satellite radio/NPR/domestic material could be moved to a new paragraph. Should the cessation of NA shortwave be moved to history? Jtatum 21:52, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I tidied up this section. Hopefully it looks a little better now. --Che Fox 06:39, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Interval signals

There was stuff in both the History and Transmission sections about interval signals, and it has grown quite a bit lately, so I've moved it into a new section of its own. I'm not sure that the 2nd and 3rd paragraphs agree entirely about the V signal; it needs work by someone who knows the history of this. Spliced 19:21, 28 July 2005 (UTC)

Television service

Removed "first television service by the World Service" as the BBC had run a television channel as part of the overall World Service in the early 1990s. The service later became BBC World. 62.55.149.206 00:13, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

When did it become the World Service?

I've removed the claim: It became known as the "World Service" in 1988.

I have in front of me the 1986 edition of the World Radio TV Handbook which lists frequencies for the BBC World Service. I'll grant that the book also has a separate section of 'european services' and it's not entirely clear what theis refers to. But nonetheless it's clear that this source that the name BBC World Service was in use prior to 1988 for at least some services. (And my recollection is that was the generally accepted name for the service when I first started listening to it around that time). Roy Badami 23:26, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

• At one time all the BBC's overseas services were known collectively as the "External Services". The term "World Service" referred specifically to the English language service. This changed, and the term External Services was replaced by World Service. I don't know if this change occurred in 1988, but it sounds about right. Harumphy 09:04, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

-- The BBC World Service states: "The External Services were renamed BBC World Service in 1988" (from http://www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/faq/news/story/2005/08/050810_wsstart.shtml) Just thought I'd mention it. Griffindd 13:56, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

The name 'BBC World Service' was first used on 1st May 1965. 80.229.219.189 (talk) 20:56, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Hours/languages details

I think the article would be improved with some info on the rough hours in each language per day. matturn 12:20, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

It really depends on where you are in the world and which language service you listen too, I think some services broadcast in "foreign" most of the time (Hindi, Arabic etc.). - TheKeith 13:14, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

That may be so, but I was thinking about total output by the service - so if they broadcast say 12 hours of unique Mandarin programming a day everywhere in the world (covering theoretical transmitters in the PRC, Taiwan and Singapore), the appropriate figure would be "12 hours". The deeper question I was trying to ask I guess was "how many full-time equivelent channels does it produce?" matturn 06:47, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

I have added links to BBC languages section by going to the languages section at the BBC.Then to the individual language.Foreign language websites are translated when your cursor hovers over them.Then I went to the about us sections.If I could see the year written I added it to the site. User:Kathleen.wright5 23:39, 8 September 2007 (UTC).

Neutrality issue

I am afraid that I must question the neutrality of this wiki-page. The author seems to take it for granted that the WS is in-fact propaganda. This is unacceptable.

Sources, documentation? I think both are necessary before slapping the NPOV disclaimer on the article.--Lord of the Ping 18:25, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Removed the tag as no explanation on the talk page. - FrancisTyers 11:33, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

The stop date for the Finnish language service is definately wrong. I remember it going well into the 1980s, and I think also into the early 1990s. 80.217.234.80 10:12, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

---

from http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm199899/cmselect/cmpubacc/219/9020305.htm "The Finnish service had closed at the end of 1997" just thought I'd mention it. Griffindd 13:55, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

and there's also

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/43788.stm "The Finnish language section of the BBC World Service has broadcast its last programme, after fifty-seven years of transmissions from London.", dated Wednesday, 31 December, 1997 Griffindd 13:55, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Reorganization

The introductory section is getting to be much too lengthy. A lot of the introduction seems to talk about the broadcast's point-of-view and perception in other countries. This is relevant, but the details should probably have its own subsection. A Pattern O 21:20, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

I gave it the title "Mission", and removed a section that's too current-event-ish, not to mention controversial:

There are a number of examples in the BBC World Service Broadcasts illustrating its remit of following British policy and world view. Currently the BBC World service gives widespread coverage to the those who oppose Iran’s nuclear program, some say this coverage presents a critical slant and not a netural point of view. Under International law, Iran is entitled to enrich uranium for peaceful purposes and is entitled to have its own facilities to do so. At present Iran is exercising a legitimate right by creating facilities for Uranium enrichment. However when the BBC World Service reports on on the issue, this fact is almost never mentioned. This in in contrast to Indian, Chinese, Russian and Arab broadcasters. Others critical of the BBC say that the organisation never mentions the Israeli nuclear weapons program when discussing nuclear proliferation in the context of Iran. However this fact is always mentioned by other news media like Beijing News, Shin Wa, Arab News, The Hindu India.

Some good points, but needs cites and NPOV. - mako 02:02, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

Please Edit articles, but do not censor

Seems the truth is unpalatable the [above] keeps being removed

Yes some good points - Added cites and NPOV above paragraph is OK

However fans of BBC keep removeing it without any reson

There are certain requirements for citation and attribution: please read WP:CITE and WP:V. - mako 06:47, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

I've taken it out again. I checked out Newswatch India (which acts as a directory of articles published elsewhere, so in itself does not say anything), but could not find anything making this claim. Perhaps I missed it, but accusations of media bias are in a sensitive area and need proper citations. The editoralising about Iran is neither here or there for this article. The second paragraph is really interesting, but again needs citiations and 'some' and 'others' defining. I am afraid that without this it just comes over as POV bluster. MAG1 20:45, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

The BBC Boys From Bush House AND the censorship of the Revert & Delete Button

Seems all IP addresses of people who delete critical content on the BBC, on this wiki are from Britain.

One only has to look at the history page to get a audit trial, which points to a pattern of behevior, from a group who will defend the BBC World Service at all costs - These 'Chaps' are all from England.

Newswatch India is a highly respected media audit organisation - you visited the wrong newswatch - Perhaps you think because has it Head Office in a non Western Country, it lacks credibility - The BBC broadcasts is news to the third world and is funded by the UK Govt with millions of pounds for a very good reason, and that reason is not charity.

When part of the internet community try and show the reason why the BBC recives huge amonts from Her Majesties Govt by comparing the BBC coverage with Asian, Russian, Chinese and South Amerian Broadcasts, illustrating the BBC bias towards an US/British world view, this is not tolerated.

The Colonies are the past 'Old Boy' stop trying to prevent the decolonisation of the media.

Did the BBC World service ever condemmm Britain for the illigal war on Iraq. Like the rest of the World media (except USA)

No - we heard Broadcast after Broadcast, getting the listner confused in a tangle of legal issues on the invasion. And then after the shock and awe bombing how the Good British Boys were restoring water in Basra and handing sweets to kids, and training Iraqi police. How about the trial of seven British soldiers for torture, how much of that did the BBC report.

WE DO NOT WANT A BRITISH/USA POINT OF VIEW IN THIS ARTICLE - WE WANT A NEUTRAL WORLD VIEW, wich is a wiki netural point of view.

Perhaps you are so brainwashed by your own media you are unable to make the distincition.

However to end I still love the BBC, Its still one of the worlds best broadcasters

England too, comes top of the tables in democracy, and human rights, despite your colonial past, today you 'Old Chaps' are rathe 'Swell'

Hope you did not mind this comment 'old boy' We love your Queen, pity about your Prime Minister though.

with regards

Hao Li Wu

(A BBC World Service Listner for over Forty years)

Hello

Sorry its a boy from Denmark MAGI who keeps deleting the BBC content not the Brits from Bush House

Well MAGI the BBC did help the resistance in Denmark when the Germans invaded by broadcasting secret messages, as part of the war against facisism.

Well we know all about your own media - Publishing cartoons and insulting other religions and cultures for no reason except increasing circulation and trying to create sensation.

Toddle off, and contribute to the Islamic Cartoon page

Hao Li Wu

(A BBC World Service Listner for over Forty years)

PS No opologies for the typo/spelling - How many Chinese Characters Do you Know?

Hi, If you took the trouble to read my comment, the problem is the lack of citations. If I got the web site wrong (and again read the comment: the site looked good, but the material did not seem to be there), then put a proper link in. Same with the other stuff: what are your sources? You seem very keen on this, so what is the problem with including them? By the way, I've never even been to Denmark.MAG1 22:18, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

Hao Li Wu may care to read WP:V in Chinese: zh:Wikipedia:可供查證. - mako 23:31, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

I wish to point out that the English language news broadcast on the BBC World Service is provided by BBC Radio News and not the BBC World Service. BBC Radio News is funded from the British television licence fee and all the other commercial revenue streams that the BBC has. The news however is written and produced by BBC Radio News employees based in the BBC World Service newsroom and may use different variants of reports that are broadcast on BBC domestic radio and television. Regards, a former BBC Radio News Studio Manager who worked on both BBC domestic radio and the BBC World Service.

Recent Examples of the BBC following the British Point of View

Removed the whole section, as it's completely uncited. I googled http://www.newswatch.in/ for references to this and only found a collection of articles from other news services, and none referring to BBC, Iran and nuclear. If anyone finds a cited, credible source for this, please reinsert:

There are a number of examples in the BBC World Service Broadcasts illustrating its remit of following British policy and world view. The widely respected third world Indian Newswatch media monitoring services, reporting on the BBC coverage said, that their research shows that the BBC World service gives widespread coverage to the those who oppose Iran’s nuclear program. Newswatch and others independent media monitoring services also say this coverage presents a critical slant, and not a netural point of view. The Iranian point of view, according to critics, is not mentioned.

With increased competition from television (stations like Al Jazeera and Al Arabya) and an increasing number of radio news broadcasters offering information from different points of view, the BBC has lost listeners in some areas. In the Middle East some criticise the BBC as being too close to British Policy. Others disagree, however, saying it is much fairer than its competitors. In India the BBC is regarded by some as less credible than local broadcasters but still has large audiences, particularly across the north of the country.^{[citation needed]}

-213.219.161.27 20:43, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Found a Cited Credible Sources

Visit Vidihya Anand's Decolonisation of the Media- Vidhya runs newsfax a media monitoring service from 2 Paddington street Near Baker street London, and a News clipping Service - Also reports about BBC bias in New world - Newspaper and Article on Decolonisation of the Media - This was written by an examination of audio archives of the BBC world Service Kept at the British Libarary. Also a well reserched Dessertation by Chen Xiao Lun at the Department of media studies Westminister University London. T%hese all point to BBC Media Bias - I should also add whem Zimbabe nationalised the lands of White farmers the BBC gave dispropotionate coverage of this. The BBC support of apartheid in White S Africa is well know,

NPOV query

I've tagged this article as I'm unsure about the following sections:

• "The BBC plans to scrap its hugely popular Polish service in order to enhance funding to its Middle Eastern service."
• "This was in contrast to the BBC’s domestic service broadcasts to British viewers, which were critical of the British invasion of Iraq."
• "There are a number of examples in the BBC World Service Broadcasts illustrating its remit of following British policy and world view" (what remit? That's not what I understood by the stated "mission")

Hopefully we can find resolutions to these extracts. --James 14:27, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Hi, there was a reference to the first fact (though its several services, mostly in Eastern Europe, not just Polish), but it keeps getting lost because the Anon IP editor trying to put in POV stuff keep just pasting in old versions of the page. The second fact is contentious: the British government have said the BBC coverage is anti-invasion, but they would, wouldn't they. I agree with you on the third point. I've reverted back to a version that does not contain your NPOV section. I think the points in it would be relevant, but only if they are verifiable. MAG1 15:10, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

The BBC Boys From Bush House AND the censorship of the Revert & Delete Button

Seems all IP addresses of people who delete critical content on the BBC, on this wiki are from Britain.

One only has to look at the history page to get a audit trial, which points to a pattern of behevior, from a group who will defend the BCC World Service at all costs - These 'Chaps' are all from England.

Newswatch India is a highly respected media audit organisation - you visited the wrong newswatch - Perhaps you think because has it Head Office in a non Western Country, it lacks credibility - The BBC broadcasts is news to the third world and is funded by the UK Govt with millions of pounds for a very good reason, and that reason is not charity.

When part of the internet community try and show the reason why the BBC recives huge amonts from Her Majesteys Govt by comparing the BBC coverage with Asian, Russian, Chinese and South Amerian Broadcasts, illustrating the BBC bias towards an US/British world view, this is not tolerated.

The Colonies are the past 'Old Boy' stop trying to prevent the decolonisation of the media.

Did the BBC World service ever condemmm Britain for the illeagel war on Iraq. Like the rest of the World media (except USA)

No - we heard Broadcast after Broadcast, getting the listner confused in a tangle of legal issues on the invasion. And then after the shock and awe bombing how the Good British Boys were restoring water in Basra and handing sweets to kids, and training Iraqi police. How about the trial of seven British soliders for tourture, how much of that did the BBC report.

WE DO NOT WANT A BRITISH/USA POINT OF VIEW IN THIS ARTICLE - WE WANT A NEUTRAL WORLD VIEW, wich is a wiki netural point of view.

Perhaps you are so brainwashed by your own media you are unable to make the distincition.

However to end I still love the BBC, Its still one of the worlds best broadcasters

England too, comes top of the tables in democracy, and human rights, despite your colonial past, today you 'Old Chaps' are rathe 'Swell'

Hope you did not mind this comment 'old boy' We love your Queen, pity about your Prime Minister though.

with regards

Hao Li Wu

(A BBC World Service Listner for over Forty years)

We haven't been able to verify your source. - mako 05:29, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

You need to relate each fact to a source, using the <ref></ref> tags, and for the Newswatch article, give the URL. The idea is that people can go off and read the original articles, if they feel so inclined. Manage this properly (have a look at a featured article for a template), then everyone will be happy. The way you are putting in your material, pasting in an entire old text, is also eliminating intermediate edits that have nothing to do with the section you are interested in. Please stop this, it's very anti-social. You might like to consider getting an account as well. MAG1 14:24, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Broadcasting in Australia

Although the Short Wave service to Australia has apparently been discontinued, it's rebroadcast on some of the local AM/FM stations in many places here, although this isn't mentioned in the article. Any objections to adding something to this effect in the main article? --Commander Zulu 13:44, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

BBC World Service Biasin Iraq

During the US siege of the Iraqi town of Falluja in April, the international media including the BBC World Service was telling the world the wrong story.

American occupation forces said they had entered the town to flush out a small number of "Saddam loyalists" and "terrorists" after four US security contractors were killed and mutilated.

But Rahul Mahajan, an anti-war activist who was one of the few independent reporters inside the battered city, rejected the official version of events which the world's media was reporting as fact.

The truth is rather different, he said. The Falluja resistance was not a small group of isolated "extremists" repudiated by the majority of the town's population. Rather, Falluja had been in revolt against occupation since last year when US troops opened fire on a group of 100 to 200 peaceful protesters, killing 15.

Like other independent journalists and media professionals, Mahajan says many of the big western broadcasters and newspapers including the BBC World Service are failing to tell the world what is really happening in Iraq.

Major media players, such as CNN and the BBC, rely too heavily on official occupation authority sources at the expense of Iraqi opinion.

So much so that the line between objective journalism and partiality is often blurred.

The BBC Correspondonts in fear for their lives never leave the Green Zone and rely hevily on Press Briefing by the US Occupation forces both to protect them and to feed them the news.

This is all very interestiing stuff, but it is controversial, so it is really important that you give verifiable sources. Please also be careful with your edits: you are destroying the work of other editors. MAG1 22:17, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Also, talk pages are not meant for editorializing. - mako 06:04, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Expand

A better comparison would be listenership, as opposed to output. Output is, by definition, easily manipulated by the organisation outputting. A more objective measurement would therefore be how many listeners each station / network gets.

Examples of BBC world service bias Bias monitored over a few days during fighting in Iraq

March 14: On The BBC Report reports that Saddam is planning to use flood water as a weapon by blowing up dams and causing severe flood damage. <rest of off topic discussion removed>

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 81.170.6.31 (talk • contribs) October 18, 2006.

Thats nice! However, this isnt a discussion forum, its a place for discussing the content of this page. As a side note, I wonder how many of these "examples" of bias were reported by other news outlets? Pit-yacker 18:44, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Revert button Censorship of Mr Pit-yaker

You are not here to defend the BBC. This is not a Political forum, If you are a varnish man for the BBC then wikipedia is not the place for you- The BBC is a fully funded organization of the British Government - Ministers have justified funding for the BBC because it projects the British point of view and British Foreign policy. Do you think the British government funds the BBC for Charitable reasons? If you think so you must be daft. The article is factual – If you have any disagreements be more specific, so that we may understand your logic of using the revert button to destroy a good article.

You are really missing the point here: You need to source statements of fact you make. Your changes are replacing sourced statements with unsourced or unverifiable ones. Pit-yacker 17:51, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

BBC In Iran

"Following the British Governments aim at promoting its point of view to the Iranian people and as a prelude to a possible war with this country" - clearly nonsensical. Replaced with "In line with the shift away from a Eastern European focus the BBC World Service is to launch a television news and information service in the Farsi (Persian) language for Iran." Willing to replace the origional statement if somonebody can provide a source for it. Seydlitz 10:33, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

Hi have changed this to:

"Following the British Governments aim at promoting its point of view to the Iranian people and as a prelude to a possible war with this country, British Government is funding a new Farsi service. This move is significant as the British Government has been demanding that the BBC cut its other transmissions in Eastern europe in order to save money. The BBC World Service is to launch a television news and information service in the Farsi (Persian) language for Iran, The service will complement the BBC's existing Persian radio and online services for Iran. The service is expected to launch early in 2008 and will be based in London. While the world Service has faced cuts in its Polish and other E European services the British Government has asked the BBC to extend its service aimed at the Irananian People." —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 81.170.35.181 (talk • contribs) October 19, 2006.

No, that's not acceptable either. Please provide a source for "as a prelude to a possible war with this country" or else I'll revert. Also, sign your comments. Seydlitz 19:25, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

Hrmm somebody seems to have deleted the entire Farsi section. I'm sure we can reach some sort of agreement here over how it should be worded, why was it removed? Seydlitz 19:32, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

As a BBC World Service Listener in Africa my Comments

The BBC is a propaganda machine which is illustrated by ...<discussion snipped> Martin Olulu —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 81.170.35.181 (talk • contribs) October 19, 2006.

Again, thats very nice but this isnt an opinion forum.

BTW, dont you think its eerily wierd that all these anonymous comments from all over the world, come from what appear to be similar IP addresses in London, UK? ;) Pit-yacker 18:33, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

Sorry Mr Yaker you must give a reason for reverting you have destroyed an article to which many have contributed to. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 81.170.35.181 (talk • contribs) October 20, 2006.

I have given a reason as have numerous other posters, please see above. You need to source the statements you make. You are replacing sourced statements with unsourced ones. BTW, I would be thankful if you please avoid resorting to posting threats on my talk page. Pit-yacker 13:28, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

Martin, please read WP:CIVIL, WP:NPOV and WP:V. Also, please don't use this page as discussion forum for your views on the BBC World Service. — Matt Crypto 13:55, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

Well is this the sort of debate we can expect from the other side

My comments above under the heading "As a BBC World Service Listener in Africa my Comments" were deleted. I have been a contributor of wikipedia for many years THIS IS THE FIRST TIME I HAVE SEEN A POSTING ON THE DISCUSSION PAGE DELETED.

Lets have no more of this childish hysteria from those who wish to protect the BBC and cannot tolerate anything critical of this organisation.

The article needss to stand as there is a popular myth that the BBC is neutal the evidence and historical record says otherwise

my edits of the page are fully sourced, cited and verified.

Martin

(a Blackman from South Africa who lived in an apartheid state supported by Great Britain)

You've already been told that talk pages are not for editorializing. Your off-topic material has been refactored accordingly. And again, please do read the guidelines. - mako 02:00, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Semi-protection for recent spate of uncited edits?

Is it time to request this article be protected under the semi-protection policy? We've been getting the same uncited edits from 81.170. and 81.1. IP addresses wiping out existing content for a few months now. I assume there's a better solution, especially since the policy says semi-protection shouldn't be used "[a]s a response to regular content disputes, since it may restrict some editors and not others". Thoughts? --Che Fox 06:43, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

198 LW always transmitting?

Transmission on 198 longwave is continous. Handy if travelling without wanting to retune. I'd like to know where 198LW coverages goes 82.33.8.127 17:25, 3 January 2007 (UTC)jago25

--- 198LW is the broadcast of BBC Radio 4, not World Service. Although it should be mentioned that Radio 4 does relay World Service during the early hours of the morning. 198 is the UK's longwave frequency allocation, so it broadcasts to most of the UK from Droitwich, and also most of Western Europe and some of North Africa, with the area widely increasing after dusk. Hope that helps. :)

Language Table (Nearly) Complete!

Found this link on the BBC site and I've used it to edit the dates on the Range of Languages table. One thing I should point out though, I couldn't find English Carribean or Swedish on the link so they may need verifing. Other than that, the date are now correct. I must say many of the dates (esp years) were wrong. I don't know if this is the fault of whoever wrote the info in the first place or the source but never the less, the table is corrected. I have also removed the tag that was previously there as one source provided for all the languages (bar Carribean and Swedish, as said before).--gottago 14:23, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Internal Links Added

I have added Internal Links to this article. Kathleen.wright5 16:12, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

And as I've said elsewhere - many seem unnecessary! Please don't create redlinks (look here) or link every other common word in articles..... Zir 17:58, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Lead sentence

I've been bold and edited the opening sentence. It previously mentioned "shortwave radio programming." I think that is intended to describe the traditional radio genre of Voice of America, Radio Moscow World Service, etc. But there's nothing specifically shortwave about it: BBC, VoA and RMWS/VoR have used mediumwave (AM) for decades. It then jumped straight to Internet broadcasts and podcasts. Podcasts have only just come out of beta, and are hardly representative. So I've gone for a comprehensive phrase to be explained in the transmission section. Seektruthfromfacts 09:13, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Well done — and for all the work you've put in over the past few days knocking the article back into shape, some of which was caused by overenthusiastic wikilinking (see above).

I've introduced the concept of grant-in-aid into the first para & given telly licence less prominence... Zir 09:12, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Removed Excess Internal Links

I have further removed excess links which were my fault (see above). Kathleen.wright5 09:00, 28 September 2007

Great work! Repentance takes courage, but it's the right thing to do... Seektruthfromfacts 09:27, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Talk: Interval Signals

Traditionally, most of the BBC relay stations all over the world has delivered so-called the 'Bow Bells' interval signals a few minutes before the start of the BBCWS English transmission of a particular shortwave frequency.

Until 2006, the relay station in Kranji, Singapore had delivered the interval signal. If you tuned into 9740 kHz at 8.00 or 9.00 GMT and 15360 kHz at 0.00 GMT in the Far East, you could hear the 'Bow Bells'.

However, recently the station does not seem to send out the signal any longer. In addition, 'exchange' relay transmissions via NHK shortwave plant on the Japanese mainland, which had always sent out the signal, through 9605 and 11945 kHz have ceased.

Strangely, so called 'B-B-C toned' interval signals are still transmitted by the time the Chinese Mandarin morning broadcast of the BBC World Service is beginning to start. (If in the Far East, tune into 6020 or 6090 kHz in the morning!)

I wonder if other BBC relays have ceased delivering the interval signals or the are still carried out. How about other relays in UK mainland (Skelton, Rampisham, Woofferton), Cyprus, Oman, and Ascension Island?

(NOTE: let me excluse the BBC relay in Nakhon Sawan Thailand; it has never sent out the 'Bow Bells' interval signals.)

Stats & Languages

Is it really necessary to have a list for all the languages? Could they not just as informatively-- perhaps more impressively-- be telescoped into a normal paragraph? i.e.

Albanian, Arabic, Azeri, Bengali, Burmese, Caribbean English, Cantonese, French, Hausa, Hindi, Indonesian, Kinyarwanda/Kirundi, Kyrgyz, Macedonian, Mandarin, Nepali, Pashto, Persian, Portuguese for Africa and Brazil, Russian, Serbian, Sinhala, Somali, Spanish, Swahili, Tamil, Turkish, Ukrainian, Urdu, Uzbek, and Vietnamese.

I think that looks better. Comments?

SimonTrew (talk) 20:54, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Trouble with DAB reception

I know this is off-topic in the sense it is not about the article but the article's subject. But I should like to know if anyone else has this problem, purely in case it is notable on the article.

I tend to work nights (British time i.e. UTC + 1 for summer, UTC + 0 for winter) and listen to world service during the night. Last week it was not the advertised programming but the African service. Quite enjoyable but not as advertised. Now (SimonTrew (talk) 02:29, 25 September 2009 (UTC)) it is simply not available and reverts to Radio 4 which is BBC 4 Schools i.e. programmes broadcast deliberately in the small hours for teachers etc to record. I wonder if any others have had, in the small hours (1am-5am BST, 12am-4am GMT oh UTC if you must) had odd experiences? guess is it is not the feed itself but the metadata, but I don't have a mediumwave or longwave radio here any more.

I just put the wireless to FM and it picks up world service on the R4 feed (as it is, at 93.30Kh). Which definitely indicates it is the DAB feed that is erroneous, or if deliberate, not advertised. They did say on R4 it would switch to schools, so I switched over to World Service, but it was dead after the switch over. Pah

And yes I remember how carefully "This is London" was announced so that others could come in or out before or after. I lived in some strange places. I miss this "This is London" too.

Signing off, oh two thirty hours, greenwich mean time (da da da da da da da da da... dadadadadada da ada da da ,, ) S,

At 4am BST (UTC + 1) it switched back to World Service on R4 DAB. world service still dead on DAB as its own channel. This could be notable, not for this incident but it is happening a lot, it seems, I recorded two the african spell and this one, and I know this is primary if that but I listem to it a lot. I am not expecting you to take my word for it, please not, but I will get on to BBC Engineering to decide why it is not on DAB.

It is coming through the cable TV about 3 seconds before the DAB on R4. SimonTrew (talk) 03:12, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

Aim section

This section contains three citation needed tags that have been there for some considerable time. The first one relates to a quote from Thatcher, supposedly in Hansard, and has been tagged since 2006. There is no record that I can find in the online Hansard [1] (note that you can narrow the search down by year), and googling the full phrase give no hits except wiki mirrors. Some variants appear on blogs and forums but never with a precise reference. I propose to remove it unless someone provides a reference.

The second tag belongs to the "Some would argue" sentence in paragraph 3. This kind of editorialising has no place in the article - since it has been tagged since 2006 again I will remove it unless someone can provide an appropriate reference to someone "arguing" this.

The last tag belongs to the sentence claiming that the world service is widely respected in parts of the world where the media is not free. Again this needs a reference, and has been fact tagged for a long time. If I can't find a source I will remove it.

Lastly, the figure for government spending on the w.s. is out of date and uncited. I should be able to find a source for this.

All in all, the article needs some serious work... 86.15.141.42 (talk) 23:23, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

Now done. 86.15.141.42 (talk) 12:07, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

"radio network"? / BBC Arabic TV / BBC Persian TV / BBC Turkish

The info box describes BBC WS as a "radio network". Isn't that a bit limiting, considering for example that they broadcast TV in Arabic and Farsi and make TV programmes for Turkish television? Griffindd (talk) 11:04, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

Condolences, and welcome

Please see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject BBC. BrainyBabe (talk) 00:47, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Worldwide?

Following the recent and previous cuts in BBC transmissions to Europe and elsewhere the claim to worldwide coverage in the infobox is looking a bit thin. The BBC argues that Europeans will still be able to listen in via digital television channels and internet. Alas these are a different kind of and far less portable media than radio. Welcome to the "Bits of the World Service" Everybody got to be somewhere! (talk) 00:06, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

Corrections

BBC world service no longer transmits on shortwave to the Carribean.96.230.232.49 (talk) 23:30, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

File:BBC World Service red.svg Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:BBC World Service red.svg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests February 2012 What should I do? Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:BBC World Service red.svg) This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 01:28, 28 February 2012 (UTC)