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

xs2man said:
As do I. I am glad my fellow Scots, in the Majority, had the sense to stop what would have been a ruinous situation from happening.



Where do you get this information from? I've never seen a poll suggesting a now 50/50 split, unless from that wings over Scotland **** or some other speratist rag...

I know, the Tories eh? Whatever will they think of next to alienate us Scots. One of the highest minimum wages (if not the highest) in the world, and a good economy increasing jobs. What a bunch of ****'*
Click to expand...

The latest survation poll put YES on 48.2% and No on 51.8%.
 
Caged said:
So finally we've got to the point where we've found out that your desire to fundamentally change the BBC is entirely idealogical, and should therefore be ignored entirely.

I have no issues in theory with the government deciding to review what the BBC does and how it is funded, but not if the starting point is "this isn't a private company receiving no public funding therefore it's automatically satan".
Click to expand...

It is one reason I object to the proposed forced taxation for the BBC. The other is that it is grossly unfair and is the sort of thing the mafia would do.
 
Taken from this article:

https://archive.is/Hlkyn

"So who thinks the BBC is “good at representing my nation/region” in its network news and current affairs? In England and Northern Ireland, a very decent 61 per cent gave the thumbs-up. Some 55 per cent of people in Wales agreed. In Scotland, just 48 per cent of those surveyed thought their country was represented adequately across Britain by the British Broadcasting Corporation."

So it is clear that more than half the population of Scotland feel the BBC do not represent their interests. Why is it fair that they should be forced to pay for it?
 
M1k3H said:
The SNP wasn't elected on a platform for independence.

First google link: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/pol...I-didnt-lie-to-voters-about-independence.html
Click to expand...

Of course not. There are no current plans for another referendum but if the SNP want to hold another they will put it in their manifesto and if the people elect them they will have a mandate to hold another one.

People who say that because we have had one referendum we should never have another are anti democratic.

Can we please get back on topic.
 
The BBC already own a few Pay Channels, Dave etc I think it's called, so they're quite capable of putting it behind a paywall .... but they know the public wont pay, so they're desperate to keep the licence fee. Horrible company that's rotten to its core.
 
lovelyhead said:
No because that is not how democracy works. We are getting a bit off topic no?
Click to expand...

Yes it is for the ones that voted no, they want an end to the nonsense where as the yes voters claim that it should go on and on until you get what you want. That isn't democracy and democracy isn't what you want.

I bet if there ever was a yes vote and Scotland gained independance, the all people won't be pressing for a generational vote because that's how democracy works.
 
Bear said:
Yes it is for the ones that voted no, they want an end to the nonsense where as the yes voters claim that it should go on and on until you get what you want. That isn't democracy and democracy isn't what you want.

I bet if there ever was a yes vote and Scotland gained independance, the all people won't be pressing for a generational vote because that's how democracy works.
Click to expand...

You are talking nonsense. See my previous post. Please stop going off topic.
 
Brenn47 said:
The BBC already own a few Pay Channels, Dave etc I think it's called, so they're quite capable of putting it behind a paywall .... but they know the public wont pay, so they're desperate to keep the licence fee. Horrible company that's rotten to its core.
Click to expand...

Is that the channel that's a joint venture with BBC Worldwide (not 'the BBC' as we are discussing here) and isn't behind a paywall? The UKTV channels that are behind a paywall are paywalled on somebody else's platform.
 
Brenn47 said:
but they know the public wont pay, so they're desperate to keep the licence fee. Horrible company that's rotten to its core.
Click to expand...

This is basically true. Supporters of the BBC will find all sorts of arguments to try and justify their position but they know deep down this is the truth.
 
Caged said:
So finally we've got to the point....
Click to expand...

If this was a discussion about a Scottish variant (eg - SBC), then i suspect Lovelyhead's view would be entirely different :rolleyes:

Either way, i'm not sure why Scottish independence is being brought up as it has little to do with the main focus of this thread.

lovelyhead said:
But a bit of inconvenience and small expense would surely not be too big of an obstacle considering how loved the BBC supposedly is.
Click to expand...

It wouldn't be a small expense nor would it entail "a bit of inconvenience" as you put it; rather it'd be a headache and cost many millions to implement.

lovelyhead said:
I don't watch any live TV.
Click to expand...

Do you watch or listen to BBC (or BBC connected production companies) made content?

I'm curious to know what you'd, and others with a similar view, do in the event all BBC services, and in turn programming, is pay-walled? Would you then turn to piracy?

lovelyhead said:
Maybe it is a much needed service for you but for a lot of people it most definitely is not.
Click to expand...

Have you got a figure to back up your definition of "a lot"?

I suspect the "a lot" figure is a vastly smaller number than those that do see the BBC as a benefit.

lovelyhead said:
All it would take....
Click to expand...

Unfortunately, you're vastly simplifying it; it'd take a lot more than that :p

lovelyhead said:
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.
Click to expand...

How is that fair to those that would pay for BBC services? :confused:

lovelyhead said:
3. Use a similar system to Sky to stop sharing of cards. Anyway who shares their sky card? No one.

I'd Google 'Cardsharing'.

4. Sky have no trouble keeping their encryption system up to date.

They do, just like Virgin Media and other encrypted distributors, and it's costs them millions to run and constantly stay in the game of 'cat and mouse' with crackers/hackers.

5. The TV licence people already have a call center.

Would still require new systems and retraining/employing new staff.

6. Yes it would cost less.

It wouldn't!
Click to expand...

[TW]Fox;28330469 said:
How many people watch live TV but never consume ANY BBC services?
Click to expand...

It'd be impossible as the BBC is either connected to or directly involved in a lot of the infrastructure.

StriderX said:
I think what the BBC is really scared of is everyone getting faster Internet, so people will end up using free services/subscribed services via broadband with no desire for BBC channels.
Click to expand...

It isn't specifically the BBC that are worried about that as it affects all broadcasters and distributors.

Brenn47 said:
The BBC already own a few Pay Channels, Dave etc I think it's called...
Click to expand...

UK Gold is probably what you're thinking of, although it's owned and funded by BBC Worldwide.
 
visibleman said:
If this was a discussion about a Scottish variant (eg - SBC), then i suspect Lovelyhead's view would be entirely different :rolleyes:

Either way, i'm not sure why Scottish independence is being brought up as it has little to do with the main focus of this thread.



It wouldn't be a small expense nor would it entail "a bit of inconvenience" as you put it; rather it'd be a headache and cost many millions to implement.



Do you watch or listen to BBC (or BBC connected production companies) made content?

I'm curious to know what you'd, and others with a similar view, do in the event all BBC services, and in turn programming, is pay-walled? Would you then turn to piracy?



Have you got a figure to back up your definition of "a lot"?

I suspect the "a lot" figure is a vastly smaller number than those that do see the BBC as a benefit.



Unfortunately, you're vastly simplifying it; it'd take a lot more than that :p



How is that fair to those that would pay for BBC services? :confused:





It'd be impossible as the BBC is either connected to or directly involved in a lot of the infrastructure.



It isn't specifically the BBC that are worried about that as it affects all broadcasters and distributors.



UK Gold is probably what you're thinking of, although it's owned and funded by BBC Worldwide.
Click to expand...

Instead of going round in round in circles maybe you and other pro BBC posters could answer a simple question with either a YES or NO answer.

Would the BBC be successful if it adopted a subscription service that could only be viewed by those that have paid?
 
lovelyhead said:
You are talking nonsense. See my previous post. Please stop going off topic.
Click to expand...

You are talking nonsense. Just because people vote SNP, it doesn't follow that they want a referendum because they changed their minds, in the same way the Scots voted for SNP during the general election. They voted SNP because they didn't like the alternatives.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom