TV Licence article Discussion

cw18

Cornucopia wrote: »

- things that people were told by others and never thought to question (e.g. "you need a licence to own a TV" - this is not true)

I get told that one all the time :mad:

At least half the people I mention not having a licence to look at me aghast as they say "so you don't have a TV?". When I say that I do but that I only use it to watch DVDs, they invariably state that I'm breaking the law . need a licence. I politely suggest they visit the website and check the information on there

Cornucopia

phoenix_w wrote: »

It's a pretty poor analogy. The license fee funds a lot of broadcasts the commercial sector won't touch because they wouldn't be commercially viable. The shows on BBC local radio, for example, are worlds apart from the commercial stations but are highly valued by those who listen to them.

I agree that the original analogy doesn't particularly work.

However, I would also question your view: do radio or TV broadcasts, no matter how worthy or well-targeted ever justify public funding? Or are they superficial, transient fripperies (generally speaking) that people will get over if deprived?

What would be interesting would be if you could give some examples of these programmes that are not commercially viable.

Cornucopia

cw18 wrote: »

I get told that one all the time :mad:

At least half the people I mention not having a licence to look at me aghast as they say "so you don't have a TV?". When I say that I do but that I only use it to watch DVDs, they invariably state that I'm breaking the law . need a licence. I politely suggest they visit the website and check the information on there

I know.

Even people who know of my battles with TV Licensing still try to tell me that I don't know what I'm talking about when it comes to licences not being required to own a TV.

I do wonder sometimes, whether our society is destined to die out not because of war or disease, but because ultimately everyone will be afflicted with this mania to "know wrong 'facts', with a passion". Curiously, the Internet doesn't seem to help.

phoenix_w

Cornucopia wrote: »

What would be interesting would be if you could give some examples of these programmes that are not commercially viable.

Off the top of my head, I can think of disability programming on bbc 2 - the commercial channels only feature disability in an exploitative manner, and just about everything on bbc local radio - from in depth sports coverage of local teams not big enough to get coverage elsewhere, local talk radio, through to Asian and new music - local commercial radio around here covers pop music, golden oldies, national news and little else. Hell even bbc national radio covers stuff the commercial stations won't touch, back when I was in my teens radio 1 was the only place to hear new music of various genres that wasn't in the pop charts, and this has branched out into 1xtra and 6music, things I don't listen to myself but feel happy they're there, and evidently the listeners would agree given the backlash when an ace was wielded at 6music...

Having written all that has made me realise how much the bbc's radio output made to my generation growing up, and continues to be important to me today. I very rarely watch bbc tv. I'm very passionate about bbc local radio, the quality of content has suffered since the last round of cutbacks with national programming filling some voids. It's the jewel in the bbc crown that needs protecting above everything else, because there is NO commercial alternative.

enfield_freddy

locate a copy of a DVD called "the ship that rocks" to see how stuck in there ways the BBC was , and it was only the pirate radio stations that stopped the stupid stuck up "old" people at the BBC from continuing in there ways.
they had to start radio 1 as an alternative to pirate radio.


with other TV stations cropping up now (legally) , sky , virgin etc , the BBC don,t give a hoot , they just sit back take the money and produce less good output.

Cornucopia

phoenix_w wrote: »

Off the top of my head, I can think of disability programming on bbc 2...

Yes, I think this is a good example of appropriate use of the Licence Fee. ISTR there being disability programming on C4 earlier in its history - presumably not now? However, this is not a hugely expensive genre, nor one that demands rigorous independence (and therefore could be funded in any number of ways, if the Licence Fee went).

... back when I was in my teens radio 1 was the only place to hear new music of various genres that wasn't in the pop charts,

I had the opposite experience. When I was a teenager, the music I wanted to listen to was only on R1 when it charted, and R1 was mostly AM-only. Capital and even R Luxembourg were much better (especially since BBC Radio London only broadcast in mono at the time, which is not great for music).

...and this has branched out into 1xtra and 6music, things I don't listen to myself but feel happy they're there, and evidently the listeners would agree given the backlash when an ace was wielded at 6music...

This is not really about the BBC and the Licence Fee, though, but about things like transmission licences and PRS payments. There is no shortage of people who want to run their own radio stations to cover a particular niche music interest. (Indeed in many parts of the country there are those who do).

Perhaps I haven't understood, but I don't really get the difference between R1 & R1X, or between R2 & R6M.

It's the jewel in the bbc crown that needs protecting above everything else, because there is NO commercial alternative.

I only really listen to LBC and BBC Radio 4 these days. Very occasionally Jazz FM. I find local radio too parochial, so I don't really have a sense of why you favour it.

wymondham

... all this radio talk... Am I correct in that you don't need a license to listen to Radio anyway??

Cornucopia

Yes, no licence is required for radio. The radio licence was abolished in 1971, IIRC.

Kolobos

Hello. Can anyone help? i currently do not have a TV Licence, and as a result of this! i have had people from TV Licensing calling at my home. I do own a TV, Computer, & PS3! how ever i do not watch any sort of TV though my PS3 or Computer. My PS3 is only used for gaming... and watching Blu-Ray films. My computer is used for only watching S-Korean Music Video`s and Pre-Recorded Korean show`s! though Youtube. As for my TV? i use Virgin Catch-up! but dont acutaly watch it! due to being stuck in front of my Computer watching Korean Entertainment, though Youtube. My TV... only acts as back-ground noise only. Now IF i was unlucky enough to open the door to someone from the TV Licensing people! and they did come into my home? im guessing they would try to prosecute me! for not having a Licence? but how can/could i prove to them, that i dont watch TV? and there fore not needing a TV Licence.
Thank you.

cw18

In order to have access to Virgin Catch-Up do you have a subscription with Virgin which also allows access to live shows? Or to have equipement hooked up such that you could access the freeview type channels?

If so, then I think you'd find it harder to prove you don't watch/record any - although I also thought it was down to them to prove that you do.

I've always worked on the basis that the safest position is to not have any equipment which will allow access to Live TV (other than internet connection), and for that reason I disabled my terrestrial aerial when I cancelled my licence (I've never had Sky or Virgin, so I've no kit from either of those that could cause issues).