[chrisherald]

Re: the loss of BBC World (and the stages of grief/accepting the reality), that, a tragedy itself. To most folks, it's all just "the BBC," so the substance of the thing comes down to the underlying economics, corporate governance/regulatory-influence, and output editorial policy (and what staff and technical arrangements those things allow for). I reckon we've been right to mostly focus on the visible substance of the change (staff, technical implementation, domestic/international slant, etc, with just a bit of fuss over the branding). This is a presentation/continuity forum after all but there's no escaping what's lost here, and I'm glad the conversation and community here is supportive to the wide scope of this remarkable watershed moment. Yes the brands (and presenters) as we know them, and have loved and hated them through many changes for years, they're lost, something new emerges, but ultimately it's about what institutional capacity (cultural, technical, etc) is left to destroy and how it unfolds over the coming years. It's not a new fight, this, but a very new chapter.

To be clear, when the new channel format launches on the 6th, or even in April, this is still day one of a very new phase of the BBC's struggle to survive (or rather, exist in a worthwhile way). I don't even care as much that "we've lost reasonable capacity for UK domestic coverage outside of the bulletins," or of the brand and commercial impacts, or even the layoffs as a separate matter.

I lament the continued destruction of what was once the world's leading public service broadcaster, at a editorial and technical standards level, and the failure of the UK public (and gov) to recognize what they once had in the BBC (in it's people, it's buildings, it's values driven editorial stance, and the confluence of surrounding forces that spark innovation and deliver value, and speak truth to the world), a shining global beacon, a voice of reason at home and abroad (simultaneously a tool for soft power, a lifeline for those in unfortunate circumstance). Today, already, Al Jazeera has the cleanest global output, and Sky picks up the domestic market, other PSBs across Europe and the world do their jobs (and well!), but the BBC's fading beacon in news and current affairs slips further, the beast as a whole, less fierce, less nimble, the richness lost. Yet more poverty in England.

In this time when changes are needed for so many broadcasters, the BBC will be forcibly transformed by economic realities and hostile government influence (financial not editorial) into the most unnecessary of things to all people, all cherished capacity lost, all funding misallocated as the coffers run dry, and what is funded is done so in a way that it dies off quietly. No, I think we're all sad here. These islands get smaller. I see adverts for internships at the BBC, and I think, now, in dying days (not a new thing, mind you), who would want to get into broadcast, never mind how important it is that stories get told, voices heard, as the world goes dark and everyone is deafened. This isn't a news channel (whether it's "two streams" or not), it's people, voices and stories, lost. It takes courage to speak truth to power. And we don't get that back.

EDIT: Paragraphs added at the suggestion of @Moz