Do you believe in the BBC licence fee?

MediaWeasel

BNT wrote: »

I don't object to a licence fee for public service content. I don't see the point of paying a license fee for programming that could be supported commercially. There are plenty of channels that would quite happily broadcast the Olympics for example, without need a licence fee to do so.

Yup that irks me. I don't have a television, and haven't had one for some years. I have a laptop with broadband but I don't watch TV - can't stand it as a general rule, but I do watch catchup on Channel 4 sometimes. My problem is with wanting to watch the opening ceremony for the Olympics on Friday and possibly watching some events over the three weeks - but you can't do that without a licence. I rang them and found they don't do "short term" licences, and I'd have to do a direct debit, either monthly or quarterly, with no refund for anything under a quarterly period. What a fricking rip off. Not to mention that the first payments would be DOUBLE what the usual payment is.

Why not short term licences for online viewing, at the same price as that of the ordinary licence and on a weekly and monthly basis. The time runs out, the short term licence runs out. Simples. And hardly difficult to manage if it's online.

Grrrr.

martinthebandit

Another one here who thinks the licence fee is excellent value for money and I listen to radio more than I watch tv.

The main value for me is that it tends to keep factual programmes honest.

I suspect very much if we lost the licence fee paid for bbc our tv would end up even more like american tv than it is now.

Fox news anyone ? <shudder>

Edwardia

Don't have a TV, we buy DVDs, go to the cinema, read, talk to each other and watch catch up on laptops (no licence needed as not live) - mostly Channel 5 and Channel 4 for Homeland, The Mentalist, True Blood and CSI Miami.

I suspect that the BBC is an inefficient megolithic organisation which wastes huge amounts of licence payers' dosh and I don't believe that Jonathan Woss was ever worth £1 million !

janiebquick

Yes, the licence fee certainly exists. I think you meant to ask 'Do you believe we should have to pay a licence fee?', which is a completely different question.

I rarely watch commercial channels these days as I loathe the amount of time taken up by adverts and the way documentaries take twice as long as the presenters have to keep repeating everything. And, this summer, we've had a really good example of the difference between the BBC's coverage of the Olympics and Channel 4's coverage of the Paralympics. Advert-free BBC won hands down. But, I accept that television has to be funded somehow.

carl5000

I believe that you should be able to opt out of receiving the BBC channels if you want to. When there were only a few channels to choose from it was different, but with so many available now there will be many who rarely watch the BBC at all.

Fazza

Personally I'd like to see ads fund the BBC, I think the license is outdated and extremely unfair for those who don't even use their services

droiderm

The BBC is well worth the money, it's an institution we all should be proud of. Happy to pay and any chance in how it's funded will no doubt result in a less quality service. Long live the BBC