Tv Licence Rip Off, Time To Stop.

We all (most of us) pay into the BBC which is a public service.

We all pay towards the parks and libraries etc, we don't all use them.

I personally would hate to loose what the BBC is. I would like to see the BBC stop joining in producing stuff that the commercial stations produce (they should not be trying to compete for audience size which IMO is irrelevant) and instead put the funds into the stuff they do best and that the commercial stations can't/don't do.

It should return to be more public service and not try to be commercial. If it were commercialised, then what would it offer different to what the hundreds of others already do?
 
Samantha said:
We all (most of us) pay into the BBC which is a public service.

We all pay towards the parks and libraries etc, we don't all use them.

I personally would hate to loose what the BBC is. I would like to see the BBC stop joining in producing stuff that the commercial stations produce (they should not be trying to compete for audience size which IMO is irrelevant) and instead put the funds into the stuff they do best and that the commercial stations can't/don't do.

It should return to be more public service and not try to be commercial. If it were commercialised, then what would it offer different to what the hundreds of others already do?
Click to expand...

I cannot disagree with any of your comments Samantha but there will always be people who will question BBC programming. After all, we all like different things. Also why should BBC make it easier for ITV? :D.
 
IMO - ITV, Sky etc have to make programmes that have 'mass appeal' - usually rubbish imo -to attract audience so that in turn it will attract advertisers.
The BBC need not compete for audience because their income is guaranteed by Parliament (licence fee) - hence they should concentrate on quality programming.
 
I agree with you Chris, but I was just saying that there will always be people who won't watch the 'quality' programmes and protest at having to pay their licence fees. There won't ever be a perfect solution but I think they generally get it about right.
 
Yes, quite right, Dev.
At least I can watch the few BBC progs on iPlayer occasionally.
My wife, however, wants me to buy a licence so we can watch Match Of The Day as broadcast, and it would be useful for recording odd programmes onto my dvd recorder (not possible from iPlayer!)
 
Dev - it's not that the licence fee is unwarranted or misused in my opinion. I believe in the BBC and think it should continue. If I had a TV I'd pay the licence and not complain about it.

However, I don't have a TV, and I object to being treated as though I'm a criminal for not having a TV licence. I don't have people threatening me with fines or court over not having a gun licence, HGV class 1 licence, public entertainment licence or a licence to sell alcohol.

Nor do I have the possibility of someone breaking into my house over those things. Yes, they need a court order to do so, but the court will automatically grant a warrant to tv licencing should they apply for it.
 
What a crazy system. This would never fly in the United States. The first "detector van" (my first thought was to imagine Michael Palin or Rowan Atkinson sitting in some crappy van with outdated equipment listening in to people shagging) that showed up in NJ would be turned on its side, torched, and the occupants given a rather rude beating.

Cable is expensive enough here. It is bundled with the phone and internet.

We get BBC America here and Sky, and it doesn't have a really large audience as the shows don't translate well. Something about funny sounding English.

BBC Radio is something I would pay for if I could get it. Radio here sucks. Even with a good tuner.
 
Czechchris said:
IMO - ITV, Sky etc have to make programmes that have 'mass appeal' - usually rubbish imo -to attract audience so that in turn it will attract advertisers.
The BBC need not compete for audience because their income is guaranteed by Parliament (licence fee) - hence they should concentrate on quality programming.
Click to expand...

The other side is that the BBC being funded by pretty much everyone, means they *do* need to make programs with mass appeal.
 
hi guys, the issue has somewhat got lost here "FREEVIEW" what is the misswording of the word? we pay "those of us" who have sky and we can view bbc programs via their service provided they also charge a fee, what then when the bbc goes with terrestial on to digital? in small letters it says that licence is to pay for terrestial trnsmition!!! the mind bogles,
nando.
 
nando said:
hi guys, the issue has somewhat got lost here "FREEVIEW" what is the misswording of the word? we pay "those of us" who have sky and we can view bbc programs via their service provided they also charge a fee, what then when the bbc goes with terrestial on to digital? in small letters it says that licence is to pay for terrestial trnsmition!!! the mind bogles,
nando.
Click to expand...

Analogue terrestrial? Digital terrestrial? What difference does it make, it's still terrestrial television, received through an aerial, rather than via satellite.
 
Nando
Sky are not charging you for BBC programmes. Check this out by cancelling your Sky subscription. The screen doesn't go blank. You can still receive all the Freeview channels.
 
nando said:
hi guys, the issue has somewhat got lost here "FREEVIEW" what is the misswording of the word? we pay "those of us" who have sky and we can view bbc programs via their service provided they also charge a fee, what then when the bbc goes with terrestial on to digital? in small letters it says that licence is to pay for terrestial trnsmition!!! the mind bogles,
nando.
Click to expand...

Mark Telkman said:
Analogue terrestrial? Digital terrestrial? What difference does it make, it's still terrestrial television, received through an aerial, rather than via satellite.
Click to expand...

Bob McC said:
Nando
Sky are not charging you for BBC programmes. Check this out by cancelling your Sky subscription. The screen doesn't go blank. You can still receive all the Freeview channels.
Click to expand...

Guys, I think what Nando is saying that since Freeview is called "Freeview", we shouldn't need to pay anything else at all for receiving TV broadcasts if we purchase a Freeview unit. If so, I'm not sure where Sky entered the discussion.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top