TV licensing rant

Rainmaker · 22 Apr 2011 at 15:27

J-FRO said:
Yeah, thats the case we've all been talking about.

That'll teach me to skim. Apologies.

Adam_151 · 22 Apr 2011 at 15:33

vonhelmet said:
Technically you can collect the RF radiation from a CRT and tell what someone is watching, but it's not terribly simple. It can't be done with an LCD or whatever else people have nowadays.

In any case, a mate of mine did some work for the Tv license people and said the van works purely by intimidation ie people think it works so they confess. It's just an empty van, apparently.

Half there, the techology does work to an extent, but most of the vans were decoys in order to get folk to buy a tv license.

Its the tuning circuits which are picked up, not the method of display, so it'll work fine for LCD televisions, but with the advent of digital tv, you'll only be able to detect what muliplex they are tuned into, not what programme (channel if you prefer) they are viewing from this

steve-h · 22 Apr 2011 at 15:37

Cleeecooo said:
It may be easier to end it now and just let them in.

David_VI · 22 Apr 2011 at 15:57

I'm amazed its just working on honesty. Surely most people are just scared and if they knew most of the stuff in the smallprint and written on this thread (not needing a licence unless you're using the TV) they probably wouldn't pay.. Amazing I didn't know this.

Myself and my girlfriend moved into this flat and didn't pay the licence for 6months until a man came to the door and said we have to pay an amount now and set up a direct debit or would have to be charged/fined more.. I just agreed as I obviously didn't know how it all worked and of course felt slightly guilty like we'd been caught :rolleyes:

. Weren't forced to pay for the 6 previous months though.. and it was a rather friendly man, chatting about all kinds of things as I filled in the form..

Doh'

Calder · 22 Apr 2011 at 16:08

I've lived in four different properties over the past four years and we have been getting these letters at each one of them... it never amounts to anything, they just try and scare you into it.

Vonhelmet · 22 Apr 2011 at 16:08

To be honest I'd pay more for the tv license, considering how much stuff the BBC provides.

hawker1986 · 22 Apr 2011 at 16:27

Yeah personally I dont understand peoples stance saying that the TV license is a scam. Your paying the BBC for their broadcasting? whats wrong with that. Fine dont pay if your not using it, but if you are you should pay for it. All the other channels use advertising costs to run the service hence you pay them nothing. The BBC charge you so you dont have to put up with bull**** ads. Fair play.

Sky and the like are the real bar stewards, they take a stack of your money then make you watch adverts too, grabbing the money with both hands.

Hawker

Rainmaker · 22 Apr 2011 at 16:32

hawker1986 said:
Yeah personally I dont understand peoples stance saying that the TV license is a scam. Your paying the BBC for their broadcasting? whats wrong with that. Fine dont pay if your not using it, but if you are you should pay for it. All the other channels use advertising costs to run the service hence you pay them nothing. The BBC charge you so you dont have to put up with bull**** ads. Fair play.

Sky and the like are the real bar stewards, they take a stack of your money then make you watch adverts too, grabbing the money with both hands.

Hawker

Ever tried not paying your TV licence on the grounds that you don't watch the BBC? Hint: It's a tax to watch ANY channel.

csmager · 22 Apr 2011 at 16:33

vonhelmet said:
Technically you can collect the RF radiation from a CRT and tell what someone is watching, but it's not terribly simple. It can't be done with an LCD or whatever else people have nowadays.

They could also tune into the intermediate frequency oscillator in the tuning circuitry, which almost certainly leaks straight back up through the aerial on the top of your house. They can even tell what channel you're watching doing that, and it doesn't matter if it's an LCD tv.

Get it from multiple points and you can even pinpoint where it is too (roughly).

Calder · 22 Apr 2011 at 16:40

vonhelmet said:
To be honest I'd pay more for the tv license, considering how much stuff the BBC provides.

I can understand the way they currently do things when it was implemented however many years ago, as they were a large proportion of the channels available. Nowadays many people don't watch the BBC, or certainly wouldn't miss it if it wasn't there, so should it really be a compulsory thing for anyone who owns a TV?

BunnyKillBot · 22 Apr 2011 at 16:53

vonhelmet said:
To be honest I'd pay more for the tv license, considering how much stuff the BBC provides.

I would happily pay more for the bbc license if the following grounds were met

1) The BBC increased their season run length in line with america. Making 6 to 8 episodes and calling it a series is not on.

2) The BBC actually produced some good Sci-Fi rather than the UTTER PAP they churn out. You can site budgetary differences all you like, there is no excuse for the poor quality of programming that comes out of british television studios. There is no reason why they have to employ script writers out of the nearest polytechnique and actors straight out of the Holyoaks School of hammy acting

All in all, the BBC do documentaries, nature and environmental programming extremely well, and everything else is laughable.

meghatronic · 22 Apr 2011 at 16:56

vonhelmet said:
To be honest I'd pay more for the tv license, considering how much stuff the BBC provides.

Documentaries + No adverts (especially those during programmes) + iPlayer + BBC News (website, I've excluded the TV news as it's partisan).

BARGAIN.

csmager said:
They could also tune into the intermediate frequency oscillator in the tuning circuitry, which almost certainly leaks straight back up through the aerial on the top of your house. They can even tell what channel you're watching doing that, and it doesn't matter if it's an LCD tv.

Get it from multiple points and you can even pinpoint where it is too (roughly).

Could you explain that, in retard terms? Sounds interesting.

CMOS · 22 Apr 2011 at 16:57

BunnyKillBot said:
I would happily pay more for the bbc license if the following grounds were met

1) The BBC increased their season run length in line with america. Making 6 to 8 episodes and calling it a series is not on.

2) The BBC actually produced some good Sci-Fi rather than the UTTER PAP they churn out. You can site budgetary differences all you like, there is no excuse for the poor quality of programming that comes out of british television studios. There is no reason why they have to employ script writers out of the nearest polytechnique and actors straight out of the Holyoaks School of hammy acting

All in all, the BBC do documentaries, nature and environmental programming extremely well, and everything else is laughable.

£145 i paid don't even watch tv that much now.

meghatronic · 22 Apr 2011 at 16:59

Rainmaker said:
Ever tried not paying your TV licence on the grounds that you don't watch the BBC? Hint: It's a tax to watch ANY channel.

Well didn't they pay for the infrastructure in the first place? Plus other channels get subsidies from Auntie.

Rainmaker · 22 Apr 2011 at 17:03

meghatronic said:
Well didn't they pay for the infrastructure in the first place? Plus other channels get subsidies from Auntie.

I was replying specifically to this:

hawker1986 said:
Your paying the BBC for their broadcasting? whats wrong with that. Fine dont pay if your not using it, but if you are you should pay for it. All the other channels use advertising costs to run the service hence you pay them nothing.

Raumarik · 22 Apr 2011 at 17:16

Remove the TV license, make the BBC a commercial organisation and save millions. Alternatively remove the TV license, take it out of "normal" taxes instead and remove the need to chase people up over the license, saving millions.

meghatronic · 22 Apr 2011 at 17:26

Halfmad said:
Remove the TV license, make the BBC a commercial organisation and save millions. Alternatively remove the TV license, take it out of "normal" taxes instead and remove the need to chase people up over the license, saving millions.

Latter, although it wouldn't be taken lying down by a small minority.

Personally, I don't see why we don't merge all taxes (well, most)... Income/NI/Road/Council etc. But that's another thread

SDK^ · 22 Apr 2011 at 17:38

Seriously, If you are receiving a TV signal just pay the annual fee.
If you're not then it's pointless playing games with the authority. Just let them do the necessary checks and they'll leave you alone.

Life doesn't have to be so complicated

Absomalutely · 22 Apr 2011 at 17:48

Would I rather have £130 in my pocket and have adverts on the BBC? Yes.

Werewolf · 22 Apr 2011 at 18:33

Absomalutely said:
Would I rather have £130 in my pocket and have adverts on the BBC? Yes.

Would you also like the idea of losing any programming that doesn't pull in big viewing figures? (IE the factual/minoirty interest stuff), and getting the likes of Topgear to be gushing and full of praise for everything (if they upset the advertisers too much the advertisers can/will pull adverts from a channel*)

The other issue is that the advertising pool is limited and already spread quite thin (look at ITV etc), so the budgets for all the TV channels that show adverts would go down.

I'm not a huge fan of the TVL, but at the moment it's the least worst way of providing some decent UK produced TV content for most/all tastes (and not just X-factor and the like).

*I've heard that apparently a couple of the foreign car company heads have said to do exactly that over comments on TG (without realising that the BBC doesn't have adverts).