TV Licence article Discussion

System

Bedsit_Bob wrote: »

Trouble is Paul, the BBC would almost certainly cite the "preventing or detecting crime" exemption.

Very true but it doesn't stop their goons falsifying forms after they've been signed so they hit the targets and commission.

I'm sure we can both agree perjury is being carried out in Magistrate courts to obtain civil search warrants too based on "we think" like the guy who had one issued on him when he didn't even own a television

Marches

Not really related to the license, but a little experience of mine...

So upon moving into a new place, paid for TV license, moved in TV, plugged in the aerial lead present in the property and guess what?.............
No signal! :mad: :mad: :mad: Typical!

Checked the freeview website and said only a reduced "Freeview light" service was available (BBC + ITV + 4 and Five channels basically), but couldn't even pick that up. Bought an indoor aerial, still no joy.
Found a satellite connection at the back of the property and had to buy a Freesat box and satellite cable and bring it all the way through hoping that the dish worked. Luckily it did.

Previous Freeview box recorded though, couldn't afford a Freesat + box at the moment (and they need 2 feeds to record to channels at once anyway, I only have one - although the Humax Foxsat ones can record 2 channels via one feed if they're at the same frequency, but they're not cheap). Now I have to watch live TV for a month after having years of lovely on demand TV and not having to sit down at set times to catch a programme. Woe is me.

Nilrem

TheWise1 wrote: »

Its high because the BBC keep on growing and growing. Remember when Skynews started, the BBC had to create a news channel then too.

They then went on to create BBC3 (another BBC1) and BBC4 (another BBC2)

You then have all those national and local radio stations, it's a HUGE gravy train

BBC News probably costs a lot less than you think...
It's basically transmission costs and a small number of extra staff - most of the staff needed for News 24 would have been needed for the rest of the BBC news (IIRC the BBC generally had to have a news broadcast team either in the building, or on standby for news occurring "out of hours"*).

As for BBC3 and BBC4, I seem to remember the BBC being tasked with encouraging the take up of digital services, and thus the additional channels (which have tiny budgets).
As for them being another BBC 1 and another BBC 2, I'm not sure how serious you're being, given their different program styles, and the fact that BBC3 for example has been used as a test bed for new directors/writers and shows.

IIRC the actual licence fee hasn't increased much over the rate of inflation for a very long time, except when the BBC has been specifically given additional tasks.
For example the digit switch over help scheme was funded by a ring fenced increase in the licence fee, and the BBC wanted to give the excess left at the end of the scheme back to the TVL payers (but the government decided to use it for other things).
2

*I remember when Diana died and the on call news reader apparently had to get into the news studio fast (with his black suit), and presumably so did a producer, camera man, and sound man.

Steve059

Paul_Varjak wrote: »

<snip> I think debt collection agencies have been successfully sued/prosecuted for harassment.

The last time I checked, they've all settled out of court. The last thing they want is a legal precedent and the publicity.

System

Nilrem wrote: »

BBC News probably costs a lot less than you think...

No it doesn't and niether does Public Relations, you know the people they pay to keep things sounding good for them here and at Digitalspy, Nilrem

Nilrem wrote: »

It's basically transmission costs and a small number of extra staff - most of the staff needed for News 24 would have been needed for the rest of the BBC news (IIRC the BBC generally had to have a news broadcast team either in the building, or on standby for news occurring "out of hours"*).

You always seem to know everything when needed about the BBC don't you Nilrem, sorry but I don't believe a word from the BBC

stevemcol

Nilrem. Be careful making posts that bring any pro-BBC balance to this discussion. You might get labelled!

anotherbaldrick

Not wishing to bump up an old thread but I thought this was priceless
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PPwNgIsH9BA

Cornucopia

There are some classic TVL-related videos. This is my favourite (long but both interesting and entertaining)...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aRQTkOk__48

Nilrem

stevemcol wrote: »

Nilrem. Be careful making posts that bring any pro-BBC balance to this discussion. You might get labelled!

It's alright, apparently I'm one of the BBC 13 or something (makes it sound like an Enid Blyton book, or a comic book)

Although the number may have gone up, as it seems to be anyone who is able to point out factual inaccuracies in the statements of some people, and who happens to be fairly (but not fully) happy with the BBC (although the funniest thing is, that apparently I spend I day "defending the BBC", yet I post far less about it than some of those who are unhappy)

It's almost like it's impossible to like (or even just, not mind) the BBC in some minds, unless you're paid for it.

Cornucopia

If you've read the thread you'll see that some of the BBC's behaviour is unacceptable. So if you're minded to try to defend that, by all means go ahead, but expect some vociferous opposition.

The rest of the BBC? Clearly it's a political view - do we need publicly-funded TV/Radio/Web - yes, no or maybe? It's not a question of balance, since it is not a question of fact.

But if we are talking about balance and bias in a public forum, I'm sticking with MSE. It's a much more tolerant, open-minded place than certain forums that you are a member of.