Is the TV Licence fee worth it? Poll results/discussion

Saucepot · 2 April 2008 at 11:34AM

I'm of the view that there is a need for public service television, paid for through tax.

However the BBC go far beyond that remit. 90% of the output is clearly commerical. Most sport, entertainment shows, drama and soap is comercial tv paid for through enforced tax.

The tax they raise is a regressive poll tax. The majority of people prosecuted are single mothers on benefits and at the bottom rung of the wealth ladder. We actually have people in jail in this country for none payment of fines, the fines being for tv tax evasion. Thats people taking up jail space for watching TV, when muggers walk free.

I'd abolish tv tax, break up and privatise the beeb and put it into comercial world for real, and fund a smaller single public service TV and radio station offering news, classical music and a bit of opera through general taxation.

Abertyke72 · 2 April 2008 at 11:42AM

One thing which gets missed in the debate about the BBC Fee is how much we pay in our shopping bills for the ads on ITV, surely? The Fee is more obvious, of course, but I watch comparatively little on ITV but don't get an opt-out at the check-out, do I?

Does anybody have any figures for how much ITV costs the average household in a year through its shopping bills?

Bob Vant

Saucepot · 2 April 2008 at 11:45AM

Bob_Vant wrote: »

One thing which gets missed in the debate about the BBC Fee is how much we pay in our shopping bills for the ads on ITV, surely? The Fee is more obvious, of course, but I watch comparatively little on ITV but don't get an opt-out at the check-out, do I?

Does anybody have any figures for how much ITV costs the average household in a year through its shopping bills?

Bob Vant

you don't have to buy advertised products, and you won't go to jail if you buy generic none advertised products. It's called a free market.

I can buy and read the torygraph and will not go to jail if I choose not to buy the guardian.

However its illegal to watch TV, any TV, even if you don't watch the beeb, unless you buy the beeb tv tax licence. It's a disgrace.

mikemidlands · 2 April 2008 at 12:10PM

I think the fees are reasonable value for money, BBC output is of very high quality, the news is trusted and relied upon throughout the world...however I'd like to raise some points..BBC transmits via Astra sat throughout Europe without any restriction on who receives it, everybody in Ireland watches it as do the Dutch etc..my problem is WE pay for everyone elses viewing and I think thats unfair, also the BBC sells the vast majority of its content worldwide, BBC America is a subscription service, and BBC world is aired overnight in both Australia and New Zealand,along with Eastenders etc etc etc, with so much content why cant the BBC be self funding?..ie make programs and sell them,id like a better understanding of why the licence fee is still necessary.

really boring note re 'detecter vans' (ex tv engineer)
they used to work by detecting 3 different frequency signals emited by standard tv's
1. detect a 15.625kHz oscilator ( line signal confirmed a TV was present)

2. local oscilator in tuner ( about 500Mhz) this determind what channel you were watching.

3. A 4.43361875 Mhz confirmed the TV was a colour one (reference osc)

none of the above are valid if you have a LCD/Plasma/freeview its all different for digital..see see I told you it was boring:rotfl:

darkly · 2 April 2008 at 12:31PM

I was under the impression that the license was originally for the right to receive wireless broadcasts. While the government utilises the money to fund the BBC with this interpretation you need a license regardless of the broadcaster you choose to use. It is officially classified as a tax.

darkly · 2 April 2008 at 12:32PM

Oh, and just found a breakdown of what the fee is spent on. Looks fairly reasonable if you ask me...

Organic12 · 2 April 2008 at 12:55PM

I've not had a TV signal since 2003. DVDs make up for anything worth watching. I rang TV licensing people regarding watching things like The Apprentice and was told it was fine to access online so long as not near the time of broadcasting. It goes out on Wednesday, I watch it some time on the weekend afternoon.

News etc the same, I access it all online and buy the Sunday papers.

Colonial · 2 April 2008 at 1:14PM

The TV Licence fee is actually even more exorbitant than it appears, since it is paid out of personal income that has already been taxed.

Is it worth it? Of course not. Is there any other country on earth that specifically taxes people who watch TV? Would the citizens of any other country just automatically pay it?

Lurkio · 2 April 2008 at 1:36PM

Sky TV / Fox has shown us what happens when you forfeit quality for ratings chasing.....

BBC is not going to please all the people all the time, but it is a well respected organisation throughout the world. As soon as you make it a 'free market' as Mr pots says, everything changes and the quality will go down the pan at the expense of the cheapest possible television to appeal to the lowest common denominator (BB anyone?)

For that reason alone, the BBC is WELL worth the money.

BTW Pots - that is one of the weakest arguments I've ever seen you post! Buck up, man!

Badger_Lady · 2 April 2008 at 1:40PM

I think it's entirely worth having, since I abhor advertising (particularly on the radio) and I enjoy having the BBC. However, the license is SO expensive! If it were a commercial argument, I'd want the product but would probably decide that I couldn't justify the cost.

I really don't know what the answer is...

Is the TV Licence fee worth it? Poll results/discussion

Comments

Categories

Get our FREE Weekly email full of deals & guides - and it’s spam-free