TV Licence Super Thread

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ken
  • Start date Start date
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-54119758

"We made good progress, if you look across the industry we're in a good place, but we've got work to do," Mr Davie said.

And while 26.5% of actors and presenters were from BAME backgrounds, it was a different story behind the camera, with 9.8% of production staff from ethnic minorities.
Click to expand...


I despise this organization more every day they not only keep putting images of BAME on articles when it doesnt represent the UK but thier cult of diversity is now exposed by themselves as over represnting BAME people. Lets face facts people in NI watch this, They pay the fee yet i never once seen anyone who was black apart from one time in my entire life. So when 15% of the population is BAME why is there work to be done when they just admitted 26.5% of the actors are BAME? That is blatant over representation it should not exceed 15% thats fair when i looked at TV or the BBC website i wonder is this what the UK looks like?


Is the UK nearly 27% non white? NOPE but the BBC want to race bait so you got a fight on your hands guys. No more fee and if this continues then we will have to get some kind of E-Gov petition on over representstion and political games being played by the BBC. If we do not do something i guess that they will simply split it where as TV shows will on say a cast of 4 be required to be Two men, Two Women and half BAME and half White.
 
Rofflay said:
. . . Rant about over representation of the BAME community on the British Broadcasting Corporation . . . etc., etc., etc.
Click to expand...
I guess that they don't have this problem on RTÉ?

The sooner that Northern Ireland breaks away from Great Britain and rejoins the Republic of Ireland the better all round ;)
 
stockhausen said:
I guess that they don't have this problem on RTÉ?

The sooner that Northern Ireland breaks away from Great Britain and rejoins the Republic of Ireland the better all round ;)
Click to expand...

At least get your insults right, RTE? We do not get that foreign TV here incase you all forgot NI is part of the UK not Ireland. Oh and its great you think joking about its existence is also funny. Guess what? I know people who were shot and killed because of the struggle to remain part of the UK. And did you forget about the 31st Ulster Division at the Somme?


You cheeky git you might be speaking German if it were not for patriots like us. And going by your post and MANY here NI is the last bastion of British patriots. I mean its disgustinng that you joke about us rejoining Ireland because gues what fella? Me and all the men i know locally would simply go to war like the last time we had to defend ourselves so i guess you hope that thousands die? Thats what would happen so sorry but a wink isnt going to save you from being flamed and educated on how distasteful this is. And this is the second or third time you did it.


Being annoyed by representation is one thing, Hoping another persons country dies and a war comes is another kettle of fish and way below the morality of what i wrote. So i do not understand really why you keep doing it?
 
Rofflay said:
You cheeky git you might be speaking German if it were not for patriots like us. And going by your post and MANY here NI is the last bastion of British patriots.
Click to expand...
Hilarious that this thread has managed to produce this comment.

I'm not casting an opinion on what you've said, but it's certainly not TV licensing related!

[Wink face redacted]
 
LuckyBenski said:
Hilarious that this thread has managed to produce this comment.

I'm not casting an opinion on what you've said, but it's certainly not TV licensing related!

[Wink face redacted]
Click to expand...

So ask a mod to delete his off topic post then and delete my response. Job done and everyone smiles.
 
Soon NI might want to be part of Ireland. Once the brexit process bites, Scotland has left and all we have is our fishing!

Oh no I didn't! :D
 
Well, in regards to BBC producing cack and bame-ing everywhere, adults don't care and the young don't care either. The young too busy with their other technology. BBC should produce based on what viewers really want, seems like they're massively disconnected, they're digging their own grave.
I imagine this has already been mentioned in the past hundred pages :P

Sooner adults realise how easy and cheap streaming is, licence fee is dead. Many still think you need an aerial for it.
 
Bouton Aide said:
It’s not cheap when you add up different services. If you get 2x streaming services that’s the cos of a tv licence per month.
Click to expand...
That's not comparable though. For instance all the standard channels don't actually cost anything, so paying for a steaming service is an extra.
I just have Amazon and watch all the on demand stuff from channel 4 and 5, and uktv. Which brings the total cost to around £80 a year.
 
Bouton Aide said:
It’s not cheap when you add up different services. If you get 2x streaming services that’s the cos of a tv licence per month.
Click to expand...

Very true. But look at it like this. What's on and what's good is personal preference, but i'd still argue current TV is just poor content vs streaming. Streaming opens doors to a variety of tech. Youtube being the big one, on-demand channels, photos/slideshows/videos on the big screen from their phone.
I wonder how many adults haven't discovered the ease of audio books and kindle too.
Back to pricing. Rolling month contracts. Binge netflix, move to prime, binge that, move to nowtv. Sure some repeated services, but not as repeated as listening to bbc/sky news broadcast over exaggeration to scare people into watching the next episode of what's wrong with the world :P
Maybe a bit pessimistic from me there :D
 
robj20 said:
That's not comparable though. For instance all the standard channels don't actually cost anything, so paying for a steaming service is an extra.
I just have Amazon and watch all the on demand stuff from channel 4 and 5, and uktv. Which brings the total cost to around £80 a year.
Click to expand...

Well it is though, you buy one tv licence you get a range of channels even if they are on repeat. if you take all known main ones like sky+virgin out the way then it's only like £12.00 odd a month for a colour licence. However if you are streaming on top of this, it's where it gets expensive.

People are content mad but sometimes some people don't watch streaming services so the cost really is actually less than streaming services and other TV packages like Sky e.t.c.

I think, what we have to think about here is the audience that certain models are aimed at. While streaming services is good, some people don't need it.
 
Bouton Aide said:
It’s not cheap when you add up different services. If you get 2x streaming services that’s the cos of a tv licence per month.
Click to expand...
It doesn't work like that for many of us because the x2 Streaming Services cost is not an extra we have to get when we get rid of the TV License. With the content being better quality and more of it on the Streaming services many people will already have them even if they have a TV license. So they are lowering the monthly bill be getting rid of the TV License.

I would argue x2 streaming paid services gives for many people more and better content that what you get without x2 streaming and a TV License.
 
What I'm saying is Pottsey is a 75 year old granny doesn't want 1000000 channels. When someone gets to a certain age they just want simple. For people who want streaming services and don't pay a TV licence the content is massive.

But it comes at a cost.
 
Bouton Aide said:
Well it is though, you buy one tv licence you get a range of channels even if they are on repeat.
Click to expand...
What you are missing is you can get a range of those channels for free via streaming. So you drop the license and you don't lose all those channels like 5, 6, UKTV e.c.t Its only really BBC channels you lose and those are not very good.
 
Bouton Aide said:
Well it is though, you buy one tv licence you get a range of channels even if they are on repeat. if you take all known main ones like sky+virgin out the way then it's only like £12.00 odd a month for a colour licence. However if you are streaming on top of this, it's where it gets expensive.

People are content mad but sometimes some people don't watch streaming services so the cost really is actually less than streaming services and other TV packages like Sky e.t.c.

I think, what we have to think about here is the audience that certain models are aimed at. While streaming services is good, some people don't need it.
Click to expand...
It's really not though.
For instance if my parents streamed the things they watch it would be totally free. Fair enough they'd loose BBC but everything else would be free.
Streaming such as Netflix and Amazon are more comparable to sky ie am optional extra.
 
Bouton Aide said:
What I'm saying is Pottsey is a 75 year old granny doesn't want 1000000 channels. When someone gets to a certain age they just want simple. For people who want streaming services and don't pay a TV licence the content is massive.

But it comes at a cost.
Click to expand...
Which is why they seem to be switching to streaming as its easier and simpler. Plenty of 70, 80's and I even know one person at 89 years old that has swapped to Streaming and love it. The streaming AI shows them what they want. When I visit the 89 year old she gets tons of war films and such in her home page. Its way better then channel hopping to find what they want. Far simpler to use.

They don't have 1000000 channels they effectively have 1 channel made up of what they like once the AI learns what they watch. EDIT: Its also the reason I like it. Effectively I have 1 channel that shows me everything I like. My other half has 1 channel which a completely different set of programs. Way simpler then channel hopping and getting TV guides out.

EDIT2: Old people today are not like the old people of 10 or 20 years ago. They have been exposed to technology for decades. Its pretty common now for someone in there 60's to have a smartphone and I dare say most 70's would also be used to the smartphone age. 80's gets a little more hit and miss. But give it another 10 years and even the people in the 80's will be part of the smartphone age and so used to technology.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom