Come back bbc all is forgiven

[Mr Prime]

Please present evidence that I have 'blatantly lied, time and time again', or withdraw the personally insulting, damaging accusation.

 

Where do we start? How about it being a blatant lie to distort information to the point that UK licence payers are paying for American entertainent so they don't have to.

[INTERVIEWER]

I was unaware (and horrified when I found out) until about 4 years ago that people in the UK were forced to pay for a TV license and I venture to say most Americans have no idea about this.

 

I am also in agreement that the BBC should become a fully fledged company that has to make its way in the market just like any other company.

 

Thanks for that, CottonTop.

 

When the BBC TV licence fee was first introduced, back in the 1940's, only the wealthy had TV and it was felt that they alone should pay the costs of running a television channel. Hence the 'TV licence' was born. Now the situation is reversed. The Queen and the Duke of Edinburgh are entitled to free television, whilst a single mother living on a very low income can receive a criminal conviction and be fined £1000 for not paying £145.50 to the BBC. If she can't afford to pay the fine, she will go to prison.

 

One of the most basic principles of a fair society is that the innocent should not have to prove their innocence. If you are accused of performing an unlawful activity, your accuser must present evidence to support their claim. TV Licensing, who collect the TV licence fee for the BBC, appear to work from the opposite point of view, and incorrectly assume that anyone who owns a television must also require a licence.

[Mr Prime]

I was unaware (and horrified when I found out) until about 4 years ago that people in the UK were forced to pay for a TV license and I venture to say most Americans have no idea about this.

 

I am also in agreement that the BBC should become a fully fledged company that has to make its way in the market just like any other company.

 

That's good for you, I am sure you must have gathered by now why the system is as it is? In short because most in the UK would agree that a neutral news service is gold and that can only be maintained through taxation to prevent interference from corporate interests. Fox news is a great example of how 'news' becomes when it is dominated by the will of one man who believes his one opionion is all important.

 

Don't get any impression from this thread either that Interviewer represents the majority in the UK. I can assure you with total confidence he does not.

[Forumosaurus]

the adverts are upsettingly manipulative too. Though Im finding them quite amusing.

 

anyway in conclusion I love the BBC:love:

 

Well that's what adverts are for.

[INTERVIEWER]

Where do we start? How about it being a blatant lie to distort information to the point that UK licence payers are paying for American entertainent so they don't have to.

 

Oh come on. The initial, substantial cost of BBC television production is met out of the TV licence fee - although sales to other territories may come later, helping to recoup some expense. It is not a 'blatant lie' to point this fact out to our American friends.

 

Currently, all of the content available on BBC AMERICA and BBC AMERICA on Demand is free (according to the BBC).

[Mr Prime]

Thanks for that, CottonTop.

 

The Queen and the Duke of Edinburgh are entitled to free television, whilst a single mother living on a very low income can receive a criminal conviction and be fined £1000 for not paying £145.50 to the BBC. If she can't afford to pay the fine, she will go to prison.

 

One of the most basic principles of a fair society is that the innocent should not have to prove their innocence. If you are accused of performing an unlawful activity, your accuser must present evidence to support their claim. TV Licensing, who collect the TV licence fee for the BBC, appear to work from the opposite point of view, and incorrectly assume that anyone who owns a television must also require a licence.

 

Another example of a lie? You have stated in earlier threads on this forum that people can not end up in prison for non payment of the licence fee.

 

For the benefit of cotton top I can also point out that the vast majority of the millions who have a TV happily pay the licence fee and don't spend their lives moaning and campaigning about it. It is also a fact that the BBC is cheaper than the market competitors and people shouldn't expect to get stuff for free in a market economy so much of the emotional implications from Interviewers arguments are lost when you realise some people are just payment avoiders.

[Mr Prime]

Oh come on. The initial, substantial cost of BBC television production is met out of the TV licence fee - although sales to other territories may come later, helping to recoup some expense. It is not a 'blatant lie' to point this fact out to our American friends.

 

Currently, all of the content available on BBC AMERICA and BBC AMERICA on Demand is free (according to the BBC).

 

I was quoting you, Americans getting subsidised by the hard done to UK licence payer. You are now backtracking. Distortion is still lying.

[INTERVIEWER]

Another example of a lie? You have stated in earlier threads on this forum that people can not end up in prison for non payment of the licence fee.

 

You really need to pay more attention. Where have I mentioned in this thread (or any other) that people can be imprisoned for non-payment of the TV licence fee?

[Mr Prime]

The non payment of the resultant fine is essentially the same thing or are you now going to tell me they are entirely unrelated? When I mentioned that people have ended up in prison for non payment you said this was not possible. Silly me, thought I, it must have been an urban myth I heard all these years, I expect Interviewer knows what he's talking about since it's his life's mission. Now the facts are reorganised when propagandising to Cotton Top to imply more innocents ending up in prison because they did not get a licence. More lies? No I beg your pardon it's just distortion as used by a politician or barrister.

[dosxuk]

When the BBC TV licence fee was first introduced, back in the 1940's, only the wealthy had TV and it was felt that they alone should pay the costs of running a television channel. Hence the 'TV licence' was born. Now the situation is reversed. The Queen and the Duke of Edinburgh are entitled to free television

 

Just like every other over 75 in the country, regardless of being a figurehead of the nation or a lifelong dole scrounger.

 

whilst a single mother living on a very low income can receive a criminal conviction and be fined £1000 for not paying £145.50 to the BBC. If she can't afford to pay the fine, she will go to prison.

 

Although, as you said yourself in another thread, the punishment is not decided by the BBC or TV Licencing, but by magistrates, and can be as low as £10 if that is what the law says is an appropriate punishment.

 

One of the most basic principles of a fair society is that the innocent should not have to prove their innocence. If you are accused of performing an unlawful activity, your accuser must present evidence to support their claim. TV Licensing, who collect the TV licence fee for the BBC, appear to work from the opposite point of view, and incorrectly assume that anyone who owns a television must also require a licence.

 

Misleading again Interviewer? TV Licensing will not prosecute everyone without a TV licence - they will write to you () and maybe even send someone to your house to look for a TV (:o), but without evidence that you are evading the fee you will not be prosecuted.