TV Licence article Discussion

Cornucopia

There is (another) special place in Forum Hell reserved for people who wilfully misquote, especially on matters of fact that are easily proven. MSE is a friendly and relatively well-mannered place to debate a range of issues, and I would hate to see us importing the bad habits of other areas of social media.

Zapito wrote: »

The BBC don't make the rules, and it is not the BBC that is annoying Cornucopia or making assumptions about him, it is the enforcement people, TV Licensing, who are doing that. The BBC simply makes and broadcasts programmes, using the money granted by govt edict, raised by the TV Licensing folk.

I'm presuming that you see yourself as someone who is reasonably well-informed about BBC and the Broadcasting industry of the UK. It's somewhat disappointing, therefore, that you appear to hold such basic misconceptions about the structure and governance of the BBC (especially when such information is reasonably readily available in the public domain).

TV Licensing is not an organisation independent of the BBC, it is part of it. In fact TVL is not an organisation in the normal, business sense at all - it is a department of the BBC. Its overall head is Pipa Doubtfire, the BBC's Head of Revenue Management. She is a BBC employee. The policies, procedures, systems and data are all the property and responsibility of the BBC, as is the legal advice and "marketing" input behind the threatening letters and any TVL advertising. The BBC is ultimately legally responsible for the deeds and misdeeds of all staff working under the TV Licensing brand name, although many of the staff work for Capita plc under an outsourcing arrangement. The name "TV Licensing" is a brand name - a trade mark and nothing more. TV Licensing is not mentioned in legislation or in the BBC's Charter documentation. In fact, there appears to be no legislative basis for Licence enforcement, nor any detailed "rules", enforcement processes or statutory definitions specified there. Such processes that TVL seek to apply to the public are created for and authorised by the BBC, and operated on their behalf by Capita under a contract (guess what) owned and instigated by the BBC.

Complaints about TV Licensing escalate to the BBC, and then the BBC Trust. I am following this process - their process.

The are two broad areas of concern on my part:-

- Policy and conceptual errors, and governance issues - these are solely the responsibility of the BBC.

- Operational misconduct - this is a shared responsibility between Capita and the BBC, though the BBC is the senior partner in the relationship and is ultimately legally responsible.

There appears to be no distinction made between these two areas by the BBC in their complaints process, and matters from both areas follow the BBC - BBC Trust escalation path.

So Cornucopia is grumbling about them.

No. If you'd had read my document, you would know that my issues are directed, correctly to the BBC, and are hardly "grumbling" as I have already pointed out to you.

But the only reason the TV Licensing people are so suspicious is that there really are people who break the licencing rules. If they were to stop doing that, then TV Licencing wouldn't need to try and catch them (because they wouldn't be doing it). So it is those people who Cornucopia should rightly berate, because it is their activity which is at the root of the grief he is experiencing. (IMHO)

No.

As I explained to you before... agencies of the State, such as the BBC, have a responsibility to treat everyone fairly, proportionately and in a legally-compliant way irrespective of the behaviour of other citizens.

Cornucopia

Zapito wrote: »

Write to your MP.

I've written to my MP. He's asked me to pass him a copy of the response I get to my latest complaint to the BBC Trust.

I think that's a positive sign.

Cornucopia

Zapito wrote: »

I continue to maintain that in the eyes of the UK and all over the world, the BBC is a precious jewel.

This is bizarre.

If there had been a representative survey which asked the very specific question: "is the BBC a precious jewel", then, yes, you could express that as a fact. Most likely in the form: "a poll has established that...". I could forgive you the use of hyperbolic terms like "in the eyes of" and "precious jewel" in that context, though typically factual claims would avoid them.

In the absence of a survey, you could state an opinion on the matter, typically of the form: "Most of the people I've discussed this with lead me to believe that the rest of the World regards the BBC as what I choose to call a precious jewel" or maybe even "An acquaintance of mine once described the BBC as ..., and other people I've discussed the matter with lead me to believe they regard it similarly highly".

I don't want to go overboard with the pedantry, but I think those are the only valid approaches.

Zapito

The experience of a lifetime during which I have communicated with many people of many countries regarding the status of BBC, combined with many reports on the subject that I have read, heard or seen on various media, have led me to the conclusion that the vast majority of the population of the UK, together with vast numbers of people abroad, would agree with the statement that the BBC is a precious jewel and that only a fool would seek to wreck it.

Zapito

Cornucopia wrote: »

I've written to my MP. He's asked me to pass him a copy of the response I get to my latest complaint to the BBC Trust.

I think that's a positive sign.

IMHO that is the most sensible approach. Well done.

Zapito

beerleo wrote: »

I have always been a big fan of the BBC ... it could bring an end this insipid elitist control of British society.

Break your post into readable paragraphs and I might even try to plough through it.

I read it anyway. However I'm not clear what you mean by "posh" people. Do you mean people who are able to communicate clearly? Who are rich? Or what?

enfield_freddy

if you want to see the "stogyness" and the way the BBC use the law , locate a copy of the boat that rocks http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1131729/ and look at the way the BBC forced the government , using thed police to do there work for them


howver it was to late , people wanted more and independent radio was born , no longer the home service , things moved on

Cornucopia

Zapito wrote: »

IMHO that is the most sensible approach. Well done.

Well done, you, for recognising that the democratic/political approach is a sound route for voicing these concerns, even though you disagree with the concerns (and, I suspect, the voices behind them).

I think it's worth saying that it isn't the sole approach, it's part of the list of things that I can do either personally or in collaboration with others. Without wanting to sound too much like Mr. Neeson, I have a very particular set of skills, skills I have acquired over a very long career. Skills that make me a nightmare for corporate bullies like BBC/TVL.

It's not in my nature to stand by and watch the BBC bullying innocent people (and worse). I'm sure you will have your view on that, possibly one or more of -

- There is no bullying
- There is behaviour that could be described as bullying, but it is justified (not by the Law, though)
- Challenging the policies and behaviours of a major organisation are beyond the "pay grade" of a private individual.

You're entitled to voice any of that. But I disagree with all of those notions.

Challenging BBC/TVL is the public-spirited thing to do, especially in this era of technological change and new experiences of poverty which means more and more people are being dragged in to its dysfunctional enforcement regime.

beerleo

Zapito wrote: »

Break your post into readable paragraphs and I might even try to plough through it.

I read it anyway. However I'm not clear what you mean by "posh" people. Do you mean people who are able to communicate clearly? Who are rich? Or what?

Sorry about lack of paragraphs but this type of forum format often removes them anyway and compresses the text when sent, so I did not bother.

By 'posh', I mean those who use Received Pronunciation (RP); especially the more affected extremes, e.g., Robert Peston. Regional or national accents or dialects can still be spoken with clarity.

[Deleted User]

I think we all have a duty to challenge, defy and frustrate, any organisation which bullies and harrasses innocent people.

I'm quite proud that I'm annoying and frustrating the BBC.