Is the licence fee worth it? Poll discussion

custardy

i must admit a few years ago i would have said no to the fee.however now with the podcasts and increasing online content and forthcoming BBCi player its more worth it now.
still begrudge the monthly DD though

Mercenary

We rarely watch anything on BBC channels...we usually record and watch (to skip ads) prime US shows on Channel 4 or 5 or Five US. We have basic 'free-with-phoneline' cable tv and also use Freeview.

We can't stand the wall-to-wall reality crap, quiz shows, house/garden/cooking progs or the singing-dancing-talent-idol type rubbish. It's totally taken over everything .

We are listening to Radio 2 and Classic FM more often than local pop as we get older though .... Ooh what an admission of getting to that 'old fogey' age :rotfl:.....but not for very long, as you have to listen to lots of stuff you don't like in order to hear the stuff you do.

nrobinson

We do not have a TV, don't watch one and therefore don't pay for a TV licence - however I am almost considering doingso to stop the abusive and threatening letters that we recieve from TV Licensing who will not disist in assuming that every household in the UK owns a TV!!

I have even been called "wierd" by a member of their staff!

The TV license was defendable in bygone years, being a licence to receive transmitted TV and Radio signals, now that TV and radio are distributed by various other means I think their should be a shake-up and the licence reviewed.

MAybe as some suggest - pay as you go - or alternatively similar to the french system of TV Tax on purchase of a TV (although in France it one tax per address). You could charge per TV unit, therefor if you have the capability to watch TV in 5 rooms in your hous you pay more than say a low income family who just have the one unit in the living room!

Cheers,

Nik.

Boggles1234

Whilst the BBC do provide some good programmes my arguement is that within 6 months you can view them all on UK TV Gold!!
Some days its like watching the entire BBC catalogue - for exapmle Dr Who!!

Remember channels like UKTV Gold and the like exist because the BBC had already commisioned the programming for them. Without the programming they would dissappear off the air.

Also, if considering the option of funding by advertising, remember that businesses are not going to suddenly discover an extra pot of funds that will pay for additional advertising. instead, the current budget will just be spread even thinner and lead to a reduction in services across exisitng networks.

And is it possibly that Defiant could actually consider that people other than Lefties support the BBC. Given my political leanings (card carrying Conservative) I have never before been described as a leftie!

Defiant_3

Boggles1234 wrote: »

Remember channels like UKTV Gold and the like exist because the BBC had already commisioned the programming for them. Without the programming they would dissappear off the air.

That's because the UKTV Channels are owned by the BBC and broadcasted from Television centre. They have a Partner of course (VM) but thats just to help put the public off the scent that the BBC do have commercial channels in the UK!

If anyone doesn't believe me send UK Gold an email and your reply will be from @bbc.co.uk

Boggles1234 wrote: »

Also, if considering the option of funding by advertising, remember that businesses are not going to suddenly discover an extra pot of funds that will pay for additional advertising. instead, the current budget will just be spread even thinner and lead to a reduction in services across exisitng networks.

Another old argument but strange don't you think that since that argument was first used we've been getting lots of new channels the latest one I believe will be ITV Movies (now ITV2+1)

I'd be much happier myself if the BBC went subscription after all according to the BBC supporters its the best thing since sliced bread so would thrive :rotfl:

Boggles1234 wrote: »

And is it possibly that Defiant could actually consider that people other than Lefties support the BBC. Given my political leanings (card carrying Conservative) I have never before been described as a leftie!

Then I'm sure you like the new leader because he seems to be very much on the left as I see it which is why he's having such a hard time but he's certainly no consertaive. This is a true Tory standing up for the Majority

http://www.shropshirestar.co.uk/2007/07/sell-bbc-and-give-back-fee-mp/

conkerex

apologies if I've repeated anything here, but I think I've read all the posts so far. I just wanted to say that the licence is to receive signals (or install something that can receive), not to own anything that can receive;
The BBC's TV content is available on DVD pretty quickly after it's on TV, and the radio and internet services are available freely to all, no licence required; The internet content is of course available to the world;
The BBC sells its content and related products worldwide, and so makes money there;
The remit to provide public service type content is important, and the quality of many programs is good, there must be a way to ensure this is continued without the licence fee, as it is now outdated and unfair.

(I have a TV, do not have a licence, but pay to receive DVDs from an online service and so watch the TV that I want when I want, no ads - including BBC ones - that was what made me make the decision in the end, lack of TV I wanted to watch, yes, but also the BBC advertising itself!)

It's good to find a major website discussing this, and I hope Martin is watching and is brave enough to get it out there!

Boggles1234

Defiant wrote: »

That's because the UKTV Channels are owned by the BBC and broadcasted from Television centre. They have a Partner of course (VM) but thats just to help put the public off the scent that the BBC do have commercial channels in the UK!

If anyone doesn't believe me send UK Gold an email and your reply will be from @bbc.co.uk

I wasn't aware that it was ever hidden. As far as I know the BBC have always been fairly open about the fact that 30% of their network funding is from commercial sources. Things like the advertising on the UKTV netowrk, the sale of magazines, product tie-ins etc etc.

Another old argument but strange don't you think that since that argument was first used we've been getting lots of new channels the latest one I believe will be ITV Movies (now ITV2+1)

We have been getting lots of new channels. We have also seen a massive explosion in the use of additional revenue streams to try adn pay for these channels. Phone in quiz shows, voting programmes adn so on. Plus as channel spread has increased advertising revenues have fallen. That is why ITV advertising revenues have fallen consistently over the past few years with a drop of around 6% so far this year alone.

Then I'm sure you like the new leader because he seems to be very much on the left as I see it which is why he's having such a hard time but he's certainly no consertaive. This is a true Tory standing up for the Majority

Actually no I don't. i didn't vote for Cameron adn i don;t support him as he is far to central for my tastes. i am one of the people who gets grouped under the party's right wing fringe.

avantra

If we look at countries that don't impose tax on viewing TV we will see that they have very bad channels and also very good ones (ARTA, Aljazira etc').

The point is they can choose. Free choice is the basic point here.

We can argue forever if the content is good or bad but at the end of the day this is a blanket stealth tax.

Personally I think the C4 model is much better, I am a documentaryholic and I can only say that sadly C4 and C5 do much better job than the BBC.

The BBC radio is good and the web site is also very good but if in the US they somehow manage to keep NPR (National Public Radio) open with good quality content by getting charity +advertising revenue I don't see why the BBC can't do it.

In comparison NPR is a much leaner operation but that’s due to the fact that they stick to the point of public debate and quality content and not trying to do "me too" media. :j

gvlewis

I agree with jacster on this one. It is hugely important to have an broadcaster independent of advertising as the BBC. Anyone who has ever been to the U.S. (as I have) and seen the trash broadcast over there would know why.

It is also important to have a broadcaster that is politically independent. I have concerns here in the direction which the BBC is currently going in, and quite frankly I think there needs to be a shake up. There appears to be a lack of control within certain areas - the incidences of rigged competitions are well known. I believe that senior management also needs to focus its attention on the News and Current Affairs (NCA) department. There appears to be a tendency for some journalists and editors to become rather remote from the people they are supposed to be broadcasting to, their attention instead being focused more on their own narrow interests. Witness the lack of reporting of the floods in Hull, covered by an earlier email. I would like to add the current Postal Strike - I have heard nothing about this for ages on the radio, although postal deliveries are in a real mess in our area.

I think the BBC needs to remember the issues that concern the majority of people in this country - education, hospitals, crime, the economy. Most of us are not interested in political tittle-tattle, the arts and other minority issues. For those who are, let them have there own programmes but do not bring it into mainstream NCA programmes like Today on Radio 4.

Finally, as someone who has never voted any further to the Right than the Lib Dems, I totally disagree with the rants of Lord Pearson, Frederick Forsyth and such like who seem to think that the the BBC broadcasts only Communism or hard left propaganda. However, I do have concerns when Anthony Jay remarks after working at the BBC on the predominance of people with strong left wing interests in the organisation. The BBC is right to employ people who have an interest in news and current affairs, but it should not employ those with strong political interests. It obviously leads to conflicts of interest such that opposing viewpoints are played down or issued with caveats, and instead a tendency to focus more on their own prejudices and interests.

Defiant_3

gvlewis wrote: »

I agree with jacster on this one. It is hugely important to have an broadcaster independent on advertising as the BBC. Anyone who has ever been to the U.S. (as I have) and seen the trash broadcast over there would know why.

I have and so I know the US have the same amount of adverts as the UK and the DVD's without the ads prove it. I'm sure I'd find what you like watching on television trash but the difference is people are forced to subisidise what you like while I watch FTA and subscription TV!

gvlewis wrote: »

It is also important to have a broadcaster that is politically independent.

politically independent? You really don't know what your talking about do you or perhaps you know more than a 25yr veteran of the BBC

http://youtube.com/watch?v=6_WEZloX2fQ

http://youtube.com/watch?v=OY4umBmJHjg

gvlewis wrote: »

Finally, as someone who has never voted any further to the Right than the Lib Dems, I totally disagree with the rants of Lord Pearson, Frederick Forsyth and such like who seem to think that the the BBC broadcasts only Communism or hard left propaganda.

Those guys are spot on and the proof is in the pudding & what other news organisation would employ someone to report on Hamas who works for them

http://www.camera.org/index.asp?x_context=4&x_outlet=12&x_article=821

Which other news organisation could use £250,000 of TV Licence money to stop a report (Balen Report) which proves the BBC is anti semitic ?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/10/15/nbeeb15.xml

I just can't believe how anyone could like this Anti British, American, cathlic organisation