Is the TV Licence fee worth it? Poll results/discussion

eherway

I think.....the TV license system is out of date with where modern society is. I've not had a TV for about 10 years now, except for periods when I've lived in shared houses and increasingly I meet other people or friends who've since got rid of theirs. I find increasingly I'm not the 'only one'. I'm only interested in the TV as way of keeping in touch with what's going on with the world - I can now do this online via 4OD documentaries, BBCiplayer, they even have news24 online now. Most shows have their own websites, where you can re-watch episodes, which even MSE is doing, and you can see the best bits of most shows on YouTube if nowhere else, and just like music sites, free TV sites keep springing up like TVlinks (which has now been closed down, but I doubt it will be long before another appears!)

I especially resent paying the annual fee, when game shows give away hundreds and thousands of pounds to people. With so many other choices of accessing information, news, podcasts and like, the need for a TV and the amount of time spent watching one, I would suggest is much less now. Paying for a channel, is archaic.

Badger_Lady

^^ Be careful - if you watch BBC News 24 online, you need a licence! :rolleyes:

Primrose

Even though I no longer work the only daytime programmes I ever watch are BBC News 24, and "Working Lunch". I'm just not interested in all the stupid game shows. quizzes and repeats and think the BBC is now very poor value for its licence fee. Maybe if they didn't pay their presenters such high salaries there would be more money to put into quality programmes. The only good thing about growing older is that at least you won't have to pay for all these junk programmes once you reach the age of 75 (unless the government moves the goal posts yet again).

Badger_Lady

Do they pay their presenters high salaries? I was always under the impression that wages were comparatively low (generally in the media but particularly in the BBC) because the biggest career benefit was on your CV.

special_k83

Badger_Lady wrote: »

Do they pay their presenters high salaries? I was always under the impression that wages were comparatively low (generally in the media but particularly in the BBC) because the biggest career benefit was on your CV.

Nope they are not low. Look at Jonathan Ross!!

And you should see the expensive dinners that they have on expenses! Your TV licence fee expenses!!

Lurkio

special_k83 wrote: »

Nope they are not low. Look at Jonathan Ross!!

And you should see the expensive dinners that they have expenses! Your TV licence fee expenses!!

Exception, rather than the rule. Apart from a handful of the real top presenters, job for job the BBC pays less than their commercial counterparts

worldwheeler

Hustle wrote: »

The TV License Fee is a total rip off, it should be scrapped and adverts should be on BBC.

The BBC is advert free which provides a cap for other commercial stations. Without restraint all channels would run mega advert breaks meaning to watch a half hour show you would have to sit through 60mins+ with the added adverts. The BBC has lost its way on a number of things but so has our entire society with dumbing down of everything. It used to be aspire to be the best and learn from failure. now it is there is no such thing as failure and EVERY thing (pronounced everythink in popular culture) is valid and acceptable.
The BBC still has a large part to play in broadcasting and if it can increase production of what it is good at, documentaries etc, it will always hold this valuable position.

Taffybiker

poor_man wrote: »

The total licence paid to the BBC is I have read about half what Sky tv rise from subs. and advert, so at about £2.60p a week is good value.

poor man south wales

It would be good value if they showed anything worth watching. It's all soaps and reality tv rubbish! Where is the quality programming we are paying for? For decades now commercial television has had better programs - unfortunately, DVB is destroying that too.
You can't even subscribe to just the channels you want - the one you want is bundled with half a dozen others that you will never watch.

TV Licence? - Rip off!!

pinginal

GileZ wrote: »

4OD Doesn't require a license fee because they make you watch those annoying adverts at the beginning. BBC iPlayer assumes you have a licence, you ar supposed to have one to watch it, which is why you can only watch it in the UK at the moment, i believe.

That's not the case. You do not need a licence to watch BBC iPlayer because you are not watching the programmes live.

harryhound

Channel4 can give the BBC a run for its money, when it comes to factual programs and innovative programming. Am I right in thinking Channel 4 is partly financed by a levy on the other commercial channels, or is that history now?
ITV has gone down the drain as advertising has drained off to the net and the 1001 new "carp" channels.
I would be prepared to pay quite a lot to keep a one channel, mainly factual, BBC TV plus Radio4, some of 2 & 3 and the wonderful World Service - which is not available on the car radio outside the Eastern Counties (?)

The rest of it is just celebrity fodder, leave it to the pathetic advert channels.