TV licensing rant

Mickie · 3 Jul 2011 at 11:58

Spleenus said:
Let us not forget that the TV licence fee also pays for the BBC's radio service which is vastly superior to any other radio service in the country and has no adverts.

And before everyone chimes in with 'I don't listen to radio' well the breakfast shows on Radio 1 and 2 have combined figures around 15 million people. BBC Radio is worth the fee alone imho.

they dont have adverts but they talk for hours, thats why i stopped listening..

i find channel 4 the best on tv, bbc i find boring.. i still pay it though, its a lot to pay just to watch top gear i find, the only thing i watch on bbc

wannabedamned · 3 Jul 2011 at 11:59

BunnyKillBot said:
I just did a no tv declaration myself. I take it you have not had a visitation then?

No visitation yet, But then i work nights, So I sleep through the day with ear plugs in lol. Although I suppose they would possibly put a card through if they had been? Not sure of that. I don't like the idea of being checked up on though.

Mickie · 3 Jul 2011 at 11:59

Longbow said:
Only if you access iPlayer, in the same way you should pay if you access the live broadcasts on a TV.

what im saying is, he has access to the bbc, and even if he doesnt watch anything to do with bbc he still should be paying

Vonhelmet · 3 Jul 2011 at 12:38

Mickie said:
they dont have adverts but they talk for hours, thats why i stopped listening..

i find channel 4 the best on tv, bbc i find boring.. i still pay it though, its a lot to pay just to watch top gear i find, the only thing i watch on bbc

That would be the Channel 4 that receives funding from the licence fee, yes?

nutcase · 3 Jul 2011 at 13:24

BBC Licence fee is worth every penny imo. And I hardly watch any television. The BBC being an independent organisation is incredibly important, especially when it comes to News. The BBC is the envy of many countries. And no adverts can ONLY be a good thing.

frosty03 · 3 Jul 2011 at 14:07

nutcase_1uk said:
The BBC being an independent organisation is incredibly important, especially when it comes to News. The BBC is the envy of many countries. And no adverts can ONLY be a good thing.

Done be silly... it is in no way "independent".... it is a mouthpiece of the government of the time... envy of many countries... care to name afew?

I'd rather watch adverts than pay 140 pounds a year.....

mehuk · 3 Jul 2011 at 14:10

I thought, now im probably wrong as I dont really read or listen to anything that I should, but I thought that if you had the internet and watched BBC Iplayer then you needed a TV licence? As basically you are getting that service free, when the rest of us are coughing up for it.

Probably hard to prove that you do that, and probably not a law either - but its what I thought

Le_Petit_Lapin · 3 Jul 2011 at 14:27

OCdude said:
Plus i'm sure if I did let them in, they'd gleefully rub their hands together when they see my setup... then i'll no doubt have to spend ages actually explaining that it's not a "TV"...

They're actually pretty reasonable.

BunnyKillBot · 3 Jul 2011 at 14:38

mehuk said:
I thought, now im probably wrong as I dont really read or listen to anything that I should, but I thought that if you had the internet and watched BBC Iplayer then you needed a TV licence? As basically you are getting that service free, when the rest of us are coughing up for it.

Probably hard to prove that you do that, and probably not a law either - but its what I thought

Only for watching broadcasts as they are streamed live on 'normal' tv. Everything else (on demand) is fair game. This wording and caveat is, quite frankly, bizarre, and exemplifies the archaic and stoic nature of the tax. Despite the fact the BBC provide many different services across a range of media, to be eligible to financial support them you have to receive live streamed television? It perplexes the mind of insanity.

Its the nature of the wording that makes the whole situation so stupid. I would gladly pay into their online services and radio but its TV i find particularly disgraceful - and yet that is what the funding is implicitly associated with.

Despite a number of posters implying 'how it should be' : it is how it is. This is not a BBC tax. This is, by its own admission, a live video receiving tax. If you dont receive live video, you dont pay. Doesn't matter what other services you use, or how things should be. You don't pay. The systems fault, not yours.

singist · 3 Jul 2011 at 15:04

I find it amusing that some people will pay something like £50 A MONTH for sky tv which is full of adverts, yet complain about paying £145.50 A YEAR for the BBC service.

I have no axe to grind but in the scheme of things the licence is pretty good value IMO.

Bloomfield · 3 Jul 2011 at 15:06

Mickie said:
you have the internet, which gives you access to bbci player, so shouldnt you be paying ?

No, having the internet doesn't mean you have to pay the TV license.

singist said:
I find it amusing that some people will pay something like £50 A MONTH for sky tv which is full of adverts, yet complain about paying £145.50 A YEAR for the BBC service.

I have no axe to grind but in the scheme of things the licence is pretty good value IMO.

Why? I'd assume that they watch the Sky/Virgin channels that they pay for, whereas they probably don't watch the BBC channels that they're forced to pay for.

nutcase · 3 Jul 2011 at 18:46

frosty03 said:
Done be silly... it is in no way "independent".... it is a mouthpiece of the government of the time... envy of many countries... care to name afew?

I'd rather watch adverts than pay 140 pounds a year.....

They've always been independent of whoever is in power, and have fought "takeovers" in the past.

The US seem to love buying BBC programmes, but the BBC is also the second biggest seller of programmes to countries other than their home (hope that makes sense). Only the US (combined) studios sell more.

BunnyKillBot · 3 Jul 2011 at 18:51

nutcase_1uk said:
They've always been independent of whoever is in power, and have fought "takeovers" in the past.

Naivety at its best.

nutcase · 3 Jul 2011 at 19:18

BunnyKillBot said:
Naivety at its best.

Thanks, but no thanks.

Nexus · 3 Jul 2011 at 19:28

I wish people would just be honest that they aren't paying.

Rather than having to listen to excuses about never watching it or giving reasons why they don't like the BBC.

frosty03 · 3 Jul 2011 at 21:19

Le_Petit_Lapin said:
They're actually pretty reasonable.

No it isnt. He's written and explained in a letter already.

It's up to them to prove he is breaking the law. Innocent until proven guilty.

Why should he waste his time in explaining how he is innocent. Once he lets them in, god knows what loophole or technicality they can find. Keep them out. If they want in, return with a warrant.

arknor · 3 Jul 2011 at 21:31

Nexus said:
I wish people would just be honest that they aren't paying.

Rather than having to listen to excuses about never watching it or giving reasons why they don't like the BBC.

maybe they dont? the only thing on british tv i watch is formula one , all the american series i watch but not on tv

mattyfez · 3 Jul 2011 at 21:47

Le_Petit_Lapin said:
They're actually pretty reasonable.

Thinly veiled threats are not reasonable. I dont ever recall being harassed for not having a fishing licence.

gothic_hobbit · 3 Jul 2011 at 22:04

Well it could be worse.

We could have adverts every 5 minutes like in the good old US of A

Nexus · 3 Jul 2011 at 23:07

arknor said:
maybe they dont? the only thing on british tv i watch is formula one , all the american series i watch but not on tv

I just find it ridiculous that people may have spent upwards of £1000 on a TV and then maybe a home cinema system too and then supposedly don't have it plugged into an aerial.

There may be some out there who honestly never do use their TV for watching any TV signals, but I'm sure everybody switches it on every now and again. What if you had people over for example?