Is the licence fee worth it? Poll discussion

The Fee is totally outdated and should have gone a couple of decades ago.

They produce as much rubbish as ITV and Channel 4 these days.

If they were more realistic with their spending, cut back some of the costly services and the fee was say £50 a year, I think I'd be content, but at about £140 odd, it has to go.

Has anyone thought of starting an online petition on the PM website and making a national campaign of this?

tillboy wrote: »

In addition to the above two dedicated childrens channels with high quality programmes in English with no adverts for my 3 year old to watch makes this more than worth the money for me!

While there is an argument that some people may believe it is worth the price. There can be no justification for it being compulsory.

My biggest gripe is how they attack parents through the children going to University.
Remember the (BBC) adverts implying that the parents get a £1k fine for the kids at university watching tv without a license. Actually the kids are fined but it is clear that the parents get the bill. Also as they can no way afford to pay such a high price for the license, the advert directly used scare tactics to force the parents to pay the license. The company is immoral, more like gangsters than a business.

We should have a choice, if we don't want to watch BBC we shouldn't be forced to pay the license.
We should be allowed to watch non BBC transmissions without paying a license for the BBC.

I think the BBC is great but I agree they should cut back a bit and reduce the licence fee to a more reasonable amount.

Maybe they could start with Jonathan Ross's multi-million pound salary. I like his show, but I'd happily watch it on ITV if it saved a few quid.

The Beeb should stick to the stuff no one else does...can't imagine ITV doing anything as quality as Planet Earth etc.

As an actor, I've probably got a stilted view on this, but I do think that the licence fee is worth it. However, I don't necessarily agree with the way the BBC uses it.

For instance; the government cuts the TV licence fee to under the rate of inflation for the next five years. the BBC responds by saying it will have to make cuts. Will this be to the big stars salaries or the executives, the shareholders et al? Of course not, it will be at the expense of those lower down the food chain.

I do think it is a big insult to the public when they see that Jonothan Ross has been paid that amount by the BBC, but he won't be receiving as much as the execs and their chums.

I do think that The licence fee IS worth it though for the sheer range of programmes that the BBC produces, top notch comedy both on the main channels and the freeview channels (The Mighty Boosh, Monkeydust, Roman's Empire, The Smoking Room, etc etc), Great documentaries such as Planet Earth, dramas, current affairs etc etc.

I do think their programmes are of a higher quality than ITV or Channel 5 and satellite channels. I can't think of anything worse than an evening of ITV television to be honest. And at least the content of their programmes I not affected by their "sponsors", or companies buying advertising space unlike the other channels.

However, I do think they could do less splashing of their cash so publicly and maybe be a little quicker improving their coverage, and maybe even supplying subsidised freeview boxes so more people can receive the extra channels.

Also you pay when you go to the cinema, the theatre, a concert, so why not when you watch a programme that has taken just as much effort to be produced?

The BBC has not forced anyone to go out and buy a TV to the best of my knowledge.

Does Martin get paid by the BBC for his appearances? If so, his site has technically started a debate about whether one of his employers should remain in business!

:money: