BBC licence fee could be means tested everyone pays regardless of whether or not they own a telev
- Thread starter Ilikeitblackplease
- Start date
When the BBC lost the rights to the Premier League highlights, everyone complained about the quality of ITV's offering and the constant adverts. Match of the Day has never been perfect but the grass isn't greener on the other side. The BBC's output might not be to everyone's tastes but it's the best British-owned broadcaster around by a country mile.
Do we really want to jeopardise that? Do we want to strengthen Rupert Murdoch's grip on the British media?
Do we really want to jeopardise that? Do we want to strengthen Rupert Murdoch's grip on the British media?
Associate
- Joined
- 25 Sep 2012
- Posts
- 2,495
- Location
- Scotland
In the UK yes, but in the broader world the network the BBC has built up over decades gives us a lot of influence we'd never have otherwise. No matter what we think here the BBC is trusted and respected in many parts of the world.
Does that mean it should be paid for by viewers of Eastenders in the UK? No. Should it be fully at the mercy of the commercial market, equally no, that would destroy it's unique position to spread influence beyond this little island.
I'd be happy to see light entertainment supported in some way by advertising or subscription but the tricky part is identifying what is light entertainment (Is the today show? I find it so, but it certainly isn't commercialy viable). We could well find the cost of classifying output is actually more than just paying for it from taxation in the first place
It may be trusted and respected in other parts of the world but certainly in Scotland where I live, only about half of the population trust the BBC. When those people who absolutely do not trust the BBC are then forced to pay for it with threat of fine or imprisonment something has went badly wrong.
Spreading influence beyond the UK sounds a bit imperialistic. Again, something about half of the population of Scotland want to get away from.
Shows like the One Show are definitely light entertainment. They offer no real value to the viewer other than the entertainment value (debatable). This is the type of show that the BBC should leave to the commercial broadcasters and if it isn't commercially viable then so be it. The fact that the people of the UK are forced to pay for such drivel as the one show just goes to show how much the BBC has lost it's way.
Soldato
- Joined
- 14 Feb 2004
- Posts
- 14,315
- Location
- Peoples Republic of Histonia, Cambridge
I think you're confusing democracy with fairness.
We all pay for the NHS, pensions, roads, air space, coast guard etc. But some of us never get ill, draw a pension, drive a car, go to sea etc.
Quite often democracy means the majority forcing their will upon the minority.
If the majority want a BBC funded by a means tested general tax, that's what we'll get.
It's not undemocratic, quite the opposite.
Although I do have issues with various elements of the BBC, I'm terrified of a world where things like Sky/ITV news are considers acceptable. The BBC insures this country isn't feed 100% BS by corporate media.
That alone is worth the fee.
Last edited:
You forgot the three minutes of ads between programs and the promotion of their website and news channels in the middle of the news. Yup totally ad free...
Majority gets a choice is democracy.
There wont be a poll
license fee
adverts
subscription service
Instead it will be decided by a minority for the good of the people....
what your describing sounds more like socialism or communism
I would be only worried about them losing their output of natural history programmes
I couldnt give a fig about eastenders or strictly, but missing out something like lost land of the volcano, or the recent Japan:earths enchanted islands would really annoy me
I couldnt give a fig about eastenders or strictly, but missing out something like lost land of the volcano, or the recent Japan:earths enchanted islands would really annoy me
Soldato
- Joined
- 14 Feb 2004
- Posts
- 14,315
- Location
- Peoples Republic of Histonia, Cambridge
We had a poll in May.
Influence is important, we are not a colonial military power, we do not have an empire and should hold onto what little soft-power we still have. I can guarantee America would give their left arm (or at least Hawaii) for something like it.
Agreed, but the today show (on R4) is commonly thought to be a bit more newsworthy than the one show. But I'm sure some would object to that definition also.
I was reading the highlights of a report into UK media the other week and a couple of surprising facts leapt out at me.
Apparently the BBC accounts for something like 90% of all new Childrens TV production in the UK now (anyone else remember when both ITV and C4 were significant players in that market?), and something like 50% of drama production, with the likes of ITV dropping their drama output spend a lot.
Much of it's output is commercially unviable because of the conditions of it's charter and licence, but from memory one report commisioned by the Tories about ten years ago suggested that a "pure PSB" BBC (no light entertainment, no top gear etc) would only save a fraction of the TVL.
Not quite.
Democracy is the majority electing people to make the decisions for the good of the people.
Permabanned
- Joined
- 28 Dec 2009
- Posts
- 13,052
- Location
- london
I always say that i think the BBC is worse than state media because they pretend like they are independent. They should quit the act and just say that they are state media and anti-capitalist. Instead of pretending to be balanced when no one thinks they are.
What would fans of the BBC think of the suggestion to change the BBC in to something like cspan with the added addition of documentaries. ie remove all entertainment shows and sports.
I think if the bbc did not monopolise the industry through the tv license then people who can only afford the TVL would probably then be able to afford sky or virgin. To have to pay for the TVL even if you don't watch it is the biggest con.
What would fans of the BBC think of the suggestion to change the BBC in to something like cspan with the added addition of documentaries. ie remove all entertainment shows and sports.
I think if the bbc did not monopolise the industry through the tv license then people who can only afford the TVL would probably then be able to afford sky or virgin. To have to pay for the TVL even if you don't watch it is the biggest con.
How does the BBC monopolise the TV industry?
The UK TV industry is something like 10-12 billion pounds per year.
From memory Sky raise more money through subs than the BBC via the TVL, and the TVL and advertising funding is about even.
So the BBC doesn't monopolise in income source, in channel numbers or in content, except maybe in one area - it certainly seems to produce more new UK content (other than sports) than any of the other broadcasters (and I think ends up training more new staff than other broadcasters).
The UK TV industry is something like 10-12 billion pounds per year.
From memory Sky raise more money through subs than the BBC via the TVL, and the TVL and advertising funding is about even.
So the BBC doesn't monopolise in income source, in channel numbers or in content, except maybe in one area - it certainly seems to produce more new UK content (other than sports) than any of the other broadcasters (and I think ends up training more new staff than other broadcasters).
Soldato
- Joined
- 23 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 13,598
There are some on here that still try to equate the TV Licence fee with the BBC, It is not.
There are some in the media, who have their own agendas, that constantly plug this lie.
It is a general Tax to receive TV signals.
As for the BBC programming they should get rid of the dumbed down aspect of their broadcasting. They should get back to investigative journalism and try to be independent of the Govt., especially on foreign matters where they just regurgitate any rubbish the Govt. puts out.
There are some in the media, who have their own agendas, that constantly plug this lie.
It is a general Tax to receive TV signals.
As for the BBC programming they should get rid of the dumbed down aspect of their broadcasting. They should get back to investigative journalism and try to be independent of the Govt., especially on foreign matters where they just regurgitate any rubbish the Govt. puts out.
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 17 Nov 2003
- Posts
- 36,747
- Location
- Southampton, UK
Since when does the general public have a right to choose whether to pay taxes?
Scrap the license to avoid "free men" avoiding paying it.
Add another slither of a percent to national insurance to assurae the BBCs funding.
Cry/Deal with it.
Just like i cried and dealt with funding hospitals, schools, flood defences, nuclear defence programmes etc etc that i never used or benefited from.
People that don't pay the license are an incredibly small vocal minority. Yeah its outdated so change it to be an a straight up taxation.
The BBC is as much of a world recognized institution as the Monarchy.
Add another slither of a percent to national insurance to assurae the BBCs funding.
Cry/Deal with it.
Just like i cried and dealt with funding hospitals, schools, flood defences, nuclear defence programmes etc etc that i never used or benefited from.
People that don't pay the license are an incredibly small vocal minority. Yeah its outdated so change it to be an a straight up taxation.
The BBC is as much of a world recognized institution as the Monarchy.
"although licence fee revenue is used to fund the BBC."
Which other media providers get licence fee revenue?
do it.
BBC centre near me will find it gets a lot more smashed windows.
since I don't use their services they can use my license tax to pay for new windows
Only ever said by british people nice propaganda eh mate