• Notice regarding image hosts and attachments. See here.

TV Licence Super Thread

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ken
  • Start date Start date
I would never have expected to go on such a forum and genuinely find stuff on such a topic that is so unexpected. I am highly amused on such things so this is a thread where people are for and against it but also talk about it. fascinating. personally I have a sheet of paper on my front door for TV licence people to read they don't even knock on the door and walk away unhappy.
 
The Whitehall source explained that the move was “because people are able to use them to avoid paying currently”. They added: “It’s not fair that people are essentially able to watch television content but avoid the licence fee.”


Are they having a laugh with this comment?
 
It also follows the BBC director-general Matt Brittin’s comment that he wants BBC News to be on streaming sites such as Netflix in a bid to reform how the broadcaster’s content is consumed and paid for.

BBC News on Netflix?!?!?

What on earth is going on
 
JonRGV250 said:
From director-general Matt Brittin..

“I’d like to see reform that allows us to be where audiences are. I think BBC content should be on Netflix, on YouTube, on TikTok, on Spotify, and Instagram, and everywhere where audiences are.

People are there because the BBC aren't you ******* imbecile.
The arrogance is almost unbelievable.
Click to expand...
Wonder what this lady has to say on the matter?

qypz4394fjtf1.webp
 
JonRGV250 said:
From director-general Matt Brittin..

“I’d like to see reform that allows us to be where audiences are. I think BBC content should be on Netflix, on YouTube, on TikTok, on Spotify, and Instagram, and everywhere where audiences are.

People are there because the BBC aren't you ******* imbecile.
The arrogance is almost unbelievable.
Click to expand...
Now you are just being silly, take a step back and read what you’ve written. People aren’t on those services because the BBC isn’t they are on them because they are convenient and offer the content the algorithms tell them they want. BBC content is officially available on all those platforms so you can stop frothing!

I have no problem with people’s reasonable objections to the license fee but your post is just hyperbole!
 
If people want to consume bbc content on platforms such YouTube/amazon prime and netflix then give them the option of subbing. Things like a 'members only' channel on youtube where you input your tv license number to unlock it, ditto with amazon prime where you can sub to a bbc channel with a tv licence number.

Of course that means that those that want to watch bbc content would pay/carry on paying for a tv license, unless what the bbc really means is they want to catch as many people as possible under an umbrella who have stopped because they don't believe its value for money, what better way is there for a failing corporation to boost its revenue then forcing people to pay who don't want its content.
 
Nabinium said:
It also follows the BBC director-general Matt Brittin’s comment that he wants BBC News to be on streaming sites such as Netflix in a bid to reform how the broadcaster’s content is consumed and paid for.

BBC News on Netflix?!?!?

What on earth is going on
Click to expand...
The BBC and Netflix go hand in hand in my book.
 
C Kent said:
If people want to consume bbc content on platforms such YouTube/amazon prime and netflix then give them the option of subbing. Things like a 'members only' channel on youtube where you input your tv license number to unlock it, ditto with amazon prime where you can sub to a bbc channel with a tv licence number.

Of course that means that those that want to watch bbc content would pay/carry on paying for a tv license, unless what the bbc really means is they want to catch as many people as possible under an umbrella who have stopped because they don't believe its value for money, what better way is there for a failing corporation to boost its revenue then forcing people to pay who don't want its content.
Click to expand...
They know that switching to a sub model would be a net loss as they rely on less tech savvy generations to not know any better. While those who subscribe to Netflix, Disney etc already have massive sub fatigue.

My dad's 61 he'd still be paying the licence if I didn't repeat myself over and over to him for years about it. Took years to convince him to stop.

Add YouTube and things and there will be another piracy boom as more people go looking for solutions.

Although on the whole add to broadband crap they are trying it's already getting push back from providers for being a very silly idea.
 
Last edited:
So will people who use Amazon Prime for shopping and not watching videos be stung with this additional TVL fee? That is a bit **** isnt it, needing a TVL to buy a set of usb powered reading lights
 
So if I currently only subbed to Netflix for £96 a year, the BBC are proposing that i should pay them £180 a year for the privilege.

This is an absolute joke, the fee should be abolished and the BBC go subscription model
 
antijoke said:
So if I currently only subbed to Netflix for £96 a year, the BBC are proposing that i should pay them £180 a year for the privilege.

This is an absolute joke, the fee should be abolished and the BBC go subscription model
Click to expand...
To be fair, £180pa is a subscription. The TV license has always been a subscription.
 
Last edited:
mrochester said:
To be fair, £180pa is a subscription. The TV license has always been a subscription.
Click to expand...

Not really - I would say a subscription is something that I volunteer to sign up to. I make the choice to pay for it.

The TV licence has always been seen (until more recently) something that you have to pay for. No choice. You watch TV? You pay this. Period.

At this rate, I'll end up cancelling my subscriptions and just pirate everything! A lot bloody simpler too!
 
I'm still sitting continuously disappointed they don't split up the BBC into the essentials to inform and educate and then spin off the entertainment side into a subscription/independent self funded organisation. The idea of a compulsory tax making celebrities and executives excessive richer without accountability of consumer choice is wrong in my mind.

If they don't do the above, a substantially cheaper household/broadband tax is the better option, but I will continue to call out the lack of accountability.
 
Trifid said:
I'm still sitting continuously disappointed they don't split up the BBC into the essentials to inform and educate and then spin off the entertainment side into a subscription/independent self funded organisation. The idea of a compulsory tax making celebrities and executives excessive richer without accountability of consumer choice is wrong in my mind.
Click to expand...
I guess the issues there are, where do you draw the line? Is, say, one of David Attenborough's documentaries entertainment or education? If it's part of the education side then it's still going to require a decent level of funding. If they cut the essentials part down to real essentials, possibly news, some current affairs etc. and full on educational content (like the schools stuff, Open University (do they still show that?)) are they going to end up with a service that everyone just ignores because it's "boring", then people will complain they're having to pay some small amount of tax for a service that no one is interested in.

By mixing the content together somewhat there is maybe more inertia for people to watch the more informative stuff, and more awareness of it. I think that would become even more pronounced in the streaming age, where if the BBC essentials stuff was off on it's own service, people would maybe not even bother to see what was on there.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom