TV Licence Super Thread

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ken
  • Start date Start date
BBC weather will soon be using Met office data again, which is government funded, I get your point but bad example ;)
Not really if you actually think about it the BBC have weather apps for android and iOS, a weather website and RSS feeds all paid for by the licence payer.

They tendered the contract out some time between 2015-18 to save money and moved from the Met Office to Meteo Group all they are doing now is going back to the Met Office presumably because they won the latest tender.


 
BBC weather will soon be using Met office data again, which is government funded, I get your point but bad example ;)

Soon the BBC will want people to pay the license fee to check the weather.

Anyway, whatever they have been using since 2015 has been rubbish. They are probably swiching back because people stopped using them. I never rely on the BBC for accurate weather.
 
Last edited:
BBC weather is dire. Anyone who watches the met office youtube channels will know how good met office weather is.

If I'm doing anything outdoors I will watch the video from the met office.

Also, their deep dives are incredible for anyone interested in meteorology. Really technical stuff
 
They do make money from some of their content things like Top Gear and Dr Who are sold / licenced to platforms outside the UK.
says 65% of their income is from the licence fee

Good. Then they can expand their commercial operations and scrap the regressive TV license. £180 a year is not a trivial amount of money for everyone. Weirdly, they still do a £60.50 per year black & white TV license. (That's as archaic as having a tick-box on the Census form if you still use an outside toilet!)

But if you say the news needs to be paid for by the tax payer then what about BBC Weather, BBC Symphony Orchestra, BBC Radio, all the archive footage they have etc...

There is a reasonable case for making the BBC's news, historical education and political coverage taxpayer funded. Although, in the USA, PBS (15% funded by the taxpayer) and C-SPAN (not at all funded by the taxpayer) fulfil the last two roles. C-SPAN focuses primarily on live coverage of the House of Representatives, C-SPAN2 is dedicated to airing the live proceedings of the Senate and C-SPAN3 airs other federal government hearings, public policy events and educational historical programming.

However, BBC radio, arts, documentaries, entertainment etc should be paid for with subscriptions, advertising and commercial sponsorship deals. This isn't the 1940s or 50s, they shouldn't be using government coercion to pay for "Strictly Come Dancing" etc in this day-and-age.

It's not going to be a simple job to pick it all apart and if the BBC News was funded directly from Gov then there are going to be people complaining that its no longer independent.

But the UK Government already decides how much money the BBC receives from the TV license. The amount is decided by the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport. TV license revenue goes directly into the government's Consolidated Fund. They then pass the collected revenue back to the BBC as a grant.

BBC News was heavily whipped by the government after the last Iraq war due to its coverage of that. They were able to bring pressure to bear on the BBC using the current system of funding.

There isn't a simple solution and I think eventually they are going to make it harder for people that don't watch live streams to opt out.

They will if we let them because they want the gravy train to keep on rolling! People in the UK are too passive. Can you imagine the outcry if people in the USA were ordered to pay $240 a year to watch live TV broadcasts? They would be out on the streets!
 
Unless you are nocturnal weather starting at daybreak/6am is useful, for planning outdoor running and cycling in the UK having an accurate 2hour rain forecast +/-5miles invaluable
plus less acurate 24 hour cast and week cast, I use a couple of european sites,
can't seem to get that in the UK for free, the data fro the accurate models is licensed.

-

BBC have temporary reprieve on scandalsa with channel 4 now mired in sexual scandal on married at first site reality show, exposed by the bbc/panorama.
that kind of programme and love island (already castigated) seem to be something streamers haven't yet engaged in, because it's localised I guess.
so not enough profit ... viewers perversely like american series' but wouldn't want to watch love island / bake-off .... from another culture.
 
Given you can't have Prime just for delivery, as Prime Video is bundled in, that would be super dodgy to force the licence on that.

I assume no way to watch the world cup, even if your find a stream with a delay to try and circumvent 'live'?
 
I assume no way to watch the world cup, even if your find a stream with a delay to try and circumvent 'live'?
Delay doesn't really count, it is either live or it's on-demand. Watching the live matches 15 minutes behind counts as live.

If you were to watch the match later that day once you get up/back from work etc, that is on-demand or catch-up.
 
 
Having a big BBQ that falls on the final, so was just checking if we could have it on in the background, will skip then.
Well if a guest that has got a TV licence was to bring a portable battery powered device then you can probably use that:



Failing that just stick the radio on or if its really important to you then buy a licence then cancel and ask for a refund so you only pay for a month...
 
forgot to re-declare the fact i do not need a license back in December, sent me two letters so far with the latest one addressed to "current occupier"

I do intend to tell them i still do not need one, but there really should be an option for " I do not need one, and i will let you know if i ever do, please stop asking"
 

Brought to you by the corporation that is the precise reason why.
I’m convinced the beeb employees are deliberately trying to nail shut their own coffin.

Even though I don't want to pay for the BBC (because I don't consume it) I do trust it more than a lot of outlets.

I'd say this is a symptom of peoples lack of trust in established bodies like government, scientists and the old guard.
 
what exactly are these alternatives people use for news (from report)

Globally, 30% of people now say social media and video networks are their main source of news – up from 22% five years ago. The reasons for this shift will be mixed: for some, these third-party sources are just a better way of getting news; for others it is more likely to be a consequence of reduced usage of TV and news websites and apps. The proportion of people now only using social media and video networks for news has risen to 12% this year (doubling from 6% in 2020) – many of these individuals are in effect withdrawing from getting news in a variety of different ways and relying instead on seeing news occasionally when doing other things online.
so people just scroll on their social media(x, tiktok, youtube) feeds and read what others have prioritized from journalists etc. output.


I did wonder why Netflix/Amazon has not payed for FIFA world-cup distribution rights (perhaps they are only granted exclusively) and broadcast that to it's disciples -
Lineker apparently participates in a WC review program from them ... rather than stuck in a virtual studio in Salford.
(BBC would need to grant an amnesty like for royal events)
 
Does the BBC app now suddenly require a user account to use? I can't seem to get past the sign in page.

If so, any recommendations for a general news app?
 
Back
Top Bottom