BBC licence fee could be means tested everyone pays regardless of whether or not they own a telev

M1k3H · 18 Jul 2015 at 18:09

I'm now single al4x said:
Have the dreaded feeling is going to essentially become a tax.
If you have the Internet you are capable of watching iplayer etc

They are too scared to implement a robust sign in system for it as they no it wouldn't bring in the revenue to anywhere near what they get now

Surely if they had to build a sign-in system and administer it, it would push prices even higher.

Plus, how do you sign in for radio?

Caged · 18 Jul 2015 at 18:19

Encrypting the signal is a total non-starter unless you decide to set the date for implementing it at 2030 to give TV manufacturers (and the BBC) a chance to build in the necessary hardware / software to ensure cost-effective, simple and reliable authentication. People complain about the cost of enforcing the TV license at the moment, imagine what that figure would be if they had to distribute smart cards, CAMs, and keep on top of the encryption.

Werewolf · 18 Jul 2015 at 18:22

Brenn47 said:
There's no *if*, it was released in a FOI request ... the BBC outsource their online PR to several companies to spam forums, Digital Spy is their main battle ground as far as I know, anyone criticises the BBC and the thread gets flooded with spam to lose the original post in masses of rubbish.

Haven't been there in about a year, but one of their logins (mossy) had about 50k posts mostly defending the BBC! He (or more likely THEY) was at it 24/7 .. the only people to get temp bans were the people who argued with the login Mossy. Mossy never got banned for anything, despite being far more obnoxious than anyone (they) were arguing with.

Basically it went .. OP would criticise the BBC, the Shills would pile in and start an argument, original post get lost in a flood of garbage. It was pretty pathetic.

Ah, so outsourced PR for social media = spamming forums, not doing things like running Twitter accounts, facebook and myspace pages (of which the BBC has quite a few and some are only maintained for short periods of time during major events hence temp or outsourced staff).

Also having just gone over to Digital spy for the first time in a while I notice that this Mossy guy seems to have 60k posts across the whole forum over a decade (he actually appears to be more active outside of their broadcasting section).
I'd suggest you look at some of the post counts on this forum for users with 10 years worth of posts for an idea of why assuming that because someone posts an average of about 15 times a day on a forum doesn't mean much.

You're verging on a CT with your comment on the only people that got temp bans being "non BBC supporters", when I last spent any time on there* I noticed that those members were tending to be very unpleasant at times about the so called BBC supporters (I vaguely remember commenting in a thread and getting called a shill, and laughing about the sillyness of it), throwing allegations around at random, and disrupting virtually any broadcasting thread at the time.

*Back when VM took over NTL and Sky were playing games with the retransmission deals.

Werewolf · 18 Jul 2015 at 18:26

Caged said:
Encrypting the signal is a total non-starter unless you decide to set the date for implementing it at 2030 to give TV manufacturers (and the BBC) a chance to build in the necessary hardware / software to ensure cost-effective, simple and reliable authentication. People complain about the cost of enforcing the TV license at the moment, imagine what that figure would be if they had to distribute smart cards, CAMs, and keep on top of the encryption.

Aye, from memory total costs for the TVL collection is about £200 million.
I doubt that would even cover the costs of running the encryption system, let alone the hardware subsidies if the BBC were to aim to do it securely without relying on the VM or Sky platforms completely.
don't think there are many modern encryption broadcaster that allow open platforms for their services, most seem to use their own limited range of approved receivers.

Brenn47 · 18 Jul 2015 at 18:43

Werewolf said:
Ah, so outsourced PR for social media = spamming forums

I can't remember the forum names, but one of the BBC gang replied angrily to his own comment using the same login by mistake! Obviously the Anti TVL lot were straight on it.

If I remember correctly, they retired that login sharpish.

lovelyhead · 18 Jul 2015 at 18:46

Ooooh it's too dificult to set up a pay per view system. The oldies wouldn't be able to figure it out etc etc. It is much easier just to force everyone to pay whether they like it or not.

Balls. They managed to get everyone from analogue to digital. They could do the same for pay per view. Except they won't as they would soon find out that not nearly as many people care for the BBC as they think they do.

BBC = Parasites

413x · 18 Jul 2015 at 18:47

M1k3H said:
Surely if they had to build a sign-in system and administer it, it would push prices even higher.

Plus, how do you sign in for radio?

I'd be happy to pay a tiered system.
50 quid for radio
140 for the lot

Radio 4 is the ****

M1k3H · 18 Jul 2015 at 18:50

I think it should be funded by government directly. That way everyone is paying a much needed service.

lovelyhead · 18 Jul 2015 at 18:58

M1k3H said:
I think it should be funded by government directly. That way everyone is paying a much needed service.

Maybe it is a much needed service for you but for a lot of people it most definitely is not. For me, the BBC actively fights against my interests.

StriderX · 18 Jul 2015 at 19:03

Not even the NHS is much needed, as long as such things can be funded privately, they should.

Government should only concern itself with Defence, Environment and Regulation, not dis-functioning wells of infinite growth.

Caged · 18 Jul 2015 at 19:05

lovelyhead said:
Ooooh it's too dificult to set up a pay per view system. The oldies wouldn't be able to figure it out etc etc. It is much easier just to force everyone to pay whether they like it or not.

Balls. They managed to get everyone from analogue to digital. They could do the same for pay per view. Except they won't as they would soon find out that not nearly as many people care for the BBC as they think they do.

BBC = Parasites

If it's so easy why don't you go and solve the problem and make billions?

M1k3H · 18 Jul 2015 at 19:08

lovelyhead said:
Maybe it is a much needed service for you but for a lot of people it most definitely is not. For me, the BBC actively fights against my interests.

Someone with private healthcare could argue the NHS is against his interests.

Should we listen to him as well?

gothic_hobbit · 18 Jul 2015 at 19:55

If BBC 3 goes, the license fee should be reduced.

lovelyhead · 18 Jul 2015 at 19:59

Caged said:
If it's so easy why don't you go and solve the problem and make billions?

You are just being silly. I don't claim to be some genius with the ability to single handedly invent the tech to solve the problem but it is obviously not beyond the wit of man to come up with a solution.

The problem is the BBC don't want to solve the problem. Instead they are happy to sit back and force people with threats of fine and imprisonment to pay for the BBC's continued existence.

arknor · 18 Jul 2015 at 19:59

M1k3H said:
Someone with private healthcare could argue the NHS is against his interests.

Should we listen to him as well?

since when is health care anything like the bbc?

if anything it's more like the job centre for middle classes

lovelyhead · 18 Jul 2015 at 20:06

M1k3H said:
Someone with private healthcare could argue the NHS is against his interests.

Should we listen to him as well?

That person would be selfish. It is easy to make a case for the NHS being funded through taxes. You may not need it's services today or tomorrow, but someday you might need it to save you or a family members life.

You simply cannot compare the BBC to healthcare.

When I said the BBC was actively working against my interests I was referring to the way the conducted themselves during the Scottish referendum. For a corporation that has a mandate to be impartial it failed miserably last year.

The BBC is damaged goods in Scotland.

lovelyhead · 18 Jul 2015 at 20:08

arknor said:
if anything it's more like the job centre for middle classes

How very true! (much respect to the people that actually do the work though!)

Caged · 18 Jul 2015 at 22:30

lovelyhead said:
You are just being silly. I don't claim to be some genius with the ability to single handedly invent the tech to solve the problem but it is obviously not beyond the wit of man to come up with a solution.

The problem is the BBC don't want to solve the problem. Instead they are happy to sit back and force people with threats of fine and imprisonment to pay for the BBC's continued existence.

Well you claimed it was easy and wouldn't cost more than the overhead of license enforcement at the moment, so you got called on it. Implementing a move from analogue to digital when the standards have already been written and the necessary equipment just needs purchasing, and you have a decade to make the transition is a lot simpler than encrypting the BBC feeds across TV and radio and providing access for the cost of the current license fee without a large chunk of the revenue being eaten up by administration costs of the encryption.

Strife212 · 18 Jul 2015 at 22:40

lovelyhead said:
When I said the BBC was actively working against my interests I was referring to the way the conducted themselves during the Scottish referendum. For a corporation that has a mandate to be impartial it failed miserably last year.

The BBC is damaged goods in Scotland.

Asking hard questions isn't bias.

lovelyhead · 18 Jul 2015 at 22:41

Caged said:
Well you claimed it was easy and wouldn't cost more than the overhead of license enforcement at the moment, so you got called on it. Implementing a move from analogue to digital when the standards have already been written and the necessary equipment just needs purchasing, and you have a decade to make the transition is a lot simpler than encrypting the BBC feeds across TV and radio and providing access for the cost of the current license fee without a large chunk of the revenue being eaten up by administration costs of the encryption.

I never made any claims on how much it would cost.

The technology already exists. All it would take would be digital boxes similar to a Sky box that could take a card that would decrypt the signal. For iPlayer usage you would be required to enter a code to access it. All of which could be paid for via direct debit / at the post office etc.

As for radio that could carry on the way it is and be funded via the payments for TV. Encryption for radio wouldn't be required.

Administration would be less than is at present as there would be no need for TV licence inspectors. It would also have the advantage of freeing up court time as no one would ever be prosecuted for failure to pay for a licence.

What is wrong with this plan?