Happ Hazzard Posted October 27, 2013 Share Posted October 27, 2013 I don't pay it. Have a TV but don't watch TV on it, just DVDs and occasional playstation. I watch what little TV I watch online. I think the TV licence and BBC are on their last legs. Can't really be justified nowadays. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magilla Posted October 27, 2013 Share Posted October 27, 2013 The BBC is manipulated by interests too and I for one could live my life quite happily without it and largely do, I resent paying for something I don't particularly care for, or want. I wonder where our other public services would be if that were applied across the board? Surely if you want to pay for it then there are many ways for the BBC to charge you or gain it's revenue through advertising like other channels do. Then it wouldn't be public service and would have to pander to corporations/advertisers and the lowest common denominator. It couldn't possibly function, like every other public service couldn't. ---------- Post added 27-10-2013 at 18:02 ---------- Can't really be justified nowadays. Can't it? Can you name any rival service that offers the same range and quality of programming for the price? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthernStar Posted October 27, 2013 Share Posted October 27, 2013 I wonder where our other public services would be if that were applied across the board? Then it wouldn't be public service and would have to pander to corporations/advertisers and the lowest common denominator. It couldn't possibly function, like every other public service couldn't. ---------- Post added 27-10-2013 at 18:02 ---------- Life long conservative Lord Patten, is Chairman of the BBC Trust when he is also the senior advisor to Care UK and heavily invested in the demise of the NHS. Strange then that the BBC news coverage was virtually nil on the passing of the NHS bill and the current news shows daily reports how bad the NHS is doing. It stinks of propergander with an obvious agenda to favour low life corporate rats to me. I no longer trust the beeb it looks comprimised and grubby these days but you can draw your own conclusions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robbie Loving Posted October 27, 2013 Share Posted October 27, 2013 Can't it? Can you name any rival service that offers the same range and quality of programming for the price? I get full sky package for £24 a month. Lets call it £290 a year. This has numerous channels, many many dedicated channels for various things, sports, education, comedy, children, news, movies etc. With this you get many others services, a whole back log of movies and tv on demand Lets call the tv licence being £145 for the year, so 50% less. For approx 6-8 channels. Few radio channels, bla bla bla. That's it. I can see which one is more worthwhile. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ECCOnoob Posted October 27, 2013 Share Posted October 27, 2013 I get full sky package for £24 a month. Lets call it £290 a year. This has numerous channels, many many dedicated channels for various things, sports, education, comedy, children, news, movies etc. With this you get many others services, a whole back log of movies and tv on demand Lets call the tv licence being £145 for the year, so 50% less. For approx 6-8 channels. Few radio channels, bla bla bla. That's it. I can see which one is more worthwhile. How many of those sky channels are made up of bbc productions, how many channels are part of the UKTV network - a company in joint partnership with the BBC, how many of those audio channels within the sky platform are part of the BBC's own national and digital networks. How many of the digital platform +1, spin off channels have been created as part of the Digital UK switchover which was partly funded by guess what?.... the licence fee. There is far far more to the licence fee than just bloody BBC1 and a few radio stations. We have already seen the absolute decline in quality, balance and independence brought out by corporate stranglehold on television and news. I for one would rather keep the licence fee and have at least one service with some sense of public service. I can guarantee, lose it and we would be well and truely down the rabbit hole. Product Placement, Sponsorships, Commerical Presentations disguised as programmes and of course the ad breaks themselves every 8-10 minutes will just keep getting worse and we will lose all sense of control altogether. I would rather put up with the 40p a day thank you. ITV were not prepared to keep regional identities and regional television thanks to the hands of the profit hungry. They chopped and chopped merged and merged and now half the supposed "local" news shows are bearly recognisable with totally unconnected areas merged into one newsroom. All sense of local identity lost thanks to the hands of branding and marketing. Losing all BBC radio would mean the same again. Left to commerical stations to fill the void and broadcast not what is necessary but simply what makes a profit. Take unappreciated but important broadcasting, schools programmes, higher educational programmes, religious programmes, arts and literature, parlimentary broadcasts, election coverage...etc.. None of it mass market appeal and none of it profitable. What commerical station would be prepared to take the hit and broadcast it as part of public service? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
avidcameron Posted October 27, 2013 Share Posted October 27, 2013 Couldn't disagree more, in an age where private interests own and shape the news we see, the BBC is more relevant today than it's ever been. The best value from any tax I've ever paid, long may it continue. I actually agree with your sentiments Mark.How do you find New York these days? ---------- Post added 27-10-2013 at 21:32 ---------- I get full sky package for £24 a month. Lets call it £290 a year. This has numerous channels, many many dedicated channels for various things, sports, education, comedy, children, news, movies etc. With this you get many others services, a whole back log of movies and tv on demand Lets call the tv licence being £145 for the year, so 50% less. For approx 6-8 channels. Few radio channels, bla bla bla. That's it. I can see which one is more worthwhile. With the BBC,especially,radio you do receive a diverse range of programmes.From a Sky package you get mere entertainment,with many programmes being somewhat bland.You also have the dubious pleasure of enriching Rupert Murdoch Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happ Hazzard Posted October 27, 2013 Share Posted October 27, 2013 Like him or not, Murdoch has fought and scratched and clawed his way to success, against all the wishes of the media establishment. The BBC is firmly part of the establishment. Why should we be forced to pay for it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vague_Boy Posted October 27, 2013 Share Posted October 27, 2013 I would rather put up with the 40p a day thank you. I would rather the BBC believed me when I say I don't need a licence and not send their Capita goons to intimidate me, thank you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ECCOnoob Posted October 27, 2013 Share Posted October 27, 2013 Like him or not, Murdoch has fought and scratched and clawed his way to success, against all the wishes of the media establishment. The BBC is firmly part of the establishment. Why should we be forced to pay for it? Taking over an established business from daddy is not exactly fighting, scratching and clawing your way to success. Neither is years cosying up with Australian Liberals coming over the UK and seeking alliance with the tories, cosying up to Mrs Thatcher and establishing links with the Police, Civil Service, Central Government and Armed Forces to ensure you can pass those brown envelopes around easy to ensure stories for his papers. Oh yeah, a real man of the people. Real anti-establishment. If it wasn't for that "Establishment" he would not have got where he was. His hot air does not persuade me. Murdoch is anti BBC - well I wonder why that is? Nothing to do with him owning a rival media platform. Murdoch screams BBC news has political bias. :hihi::hihi: so says the man who owns fox news. Just a quick glance over to the States shows exactly what a life without a BBC and a Murdoch control is like. Have you seen their media? Have you seen their television? Have you seen their so called "News"? If that's the future.... god help us. Amazing to think that despite all that some federal tax monies still have to go towards paying for public broadcast services in the US. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daid Posted October 28, 2013 Share Posted October 28, 2013 Have to say my argument on the licence is whether or not I want to afford it or not. I know, the price per day works out to mere pence but it's a sizeable chunk to lash out in one go when chunks of money are in short supply. Having read the thread and swinging first one way then the other with regard to the BBC, I agree that their programmes are of a good quality in the main (not that I watch all they show) so if paying for a licence gives me that then i'll continue all the time there is a licence to pay for or, until such time as affording it becomes impossible. We've had Sky in the past and I found it to be a mind numbing experience of tat. Sport and films didn't justify the price for us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.