Do You Need The BBC?

[Car Boot]

What absolutely awful tacky programmes....including terrible rehashes the BBC is putting on lately.

 

Why doesn't the BBC offer its first months viewing for free?

 

The same deal as Netflix and Amazon Prime offer to potential customers? That way customers might decide if the cheap and tacky BBC programming was to their preference or not?

[ECCOnoob]

Why doesn't the BBC offer its first months viewing for free?

 

The same deal as Netflix and Amazon Prime offer to potential customers? That way customers might decide if the cheap and tacky BBC programming was to their preference or not?

 

.....and what about people who watch broadcasts from ITV, C4, C5, Sky, Virgin, BT......

 

You still dont get it do you.

[A.B.Yaffle]

The BBC license could be compared with making a law that if you shop at Tesco, Challenge, Asda, lidl etc you must pay at that shop but also pay Sainsburys for the privilege of shopping at another store. We should have a choice of subscring to other channels without paying for the BBC. It is a ludicrous and outdated law.

[ECCOnoob]

The law is a licence to receive television broadcasts.

 

That's it. Simple as that.

 

The fact that the money generated happens to fund the BBC operation is irrelevant. The law still stands just as it would if money raised from it funded 1001 other television, communications or other government funds.

 

I ask the question again. If the BBC was completely scrapped tomorrow - do you really really think the Television Licence would disappear??

[A.B.Yaffle]

The law is a licence to receive television broadcasts.

 

That's it. Simple as that.

 

The fact that the money generated happens to fund the BBC operation is irrelevant. The law still stands just as it would if money raised from it funded 1001 other television, communications or other government funds.

 

I ask the question again. If the BBC was completely scrapped tomorrow - do you really really think the Television Licence would disappear??

 

Nobody is saying the law doesn't exist. But it is a vary outdated unjust law.

 

You keep asking questions, but I will ask you one. If someone only watches Sky Sports and pays hundreds of pounds to Sky, has all the advertising etc, is it fair for that person to be forced to fund the BBC just because some people who like the BBC want their choice of programs to be subsidised by other people? Do you agree that is unfair?

[Magilla]

You keep asking questions, but I will ask you one. If someone only watches Sky Sports and pays hundreds of pounds to Sky, has all the advertising etc, is it fair for that person to be forced to fund the BBC just because some people who like the BBC want their choice of programs to be subsidised by other people?

 

The same could be said for any public service or government funded scheme, is it fair that people who will never use a particular service are forced to subsidise other people that do?

 

Do you agree that is unfair?

 

It's as fair/unfair as any other public service, part of living in a civilised/fairer society.

 

The BBC retains more public trust than any other news source, that's not by chance but rather as a result of how it's funded.

Edited April 2, 2018 by Magilla

[Car Boot]

The BBC is beaming un-encrypted signals into my home, giving me no choice but to accept them. Then it demands that I pay for them, whether or not I actually view them. The BBC is still sending me threatening begging letters, it's an absolute disgrace.

 

The BBC is becoming increasingly irrelevant to a small but growing section of the population. Those who have ditched live TV broadcasts entirely for download streaming and don't require the past its prime iPlayer.

 

Never mind the BBC TV licence being gone in 10, 20 or 30 years. Its gone for me now. My current payment scheme to BBC TV licensing is:

 

£0 per month.

 

Balance to pay: £0.

[ECCOnoob]

Nobody is saying the law doesn't exist. But it is a vary outdated unjust law.

 

You keep asking questions, but I will ask you one. If someone only watches Sky Sports and pays hundreds of pounds to Sky, has all the advertising etc, is it fair for that person to be forced to fund the BBC just because some people who like the BBC want their choice of programs to be subsidised by other people? Do you agree that is unfair?

 

No I dont think its unfair. I am aware that the licence fee pays for other things beyond just BBC tv shows.

 

Licence fee monies went towards significant amounts of infrastructure, research and development - many things which Sky have benefited from. It also contributed to the national broadband rollout and freeview. It provides many minority and specialist services such as AD, subtitling, minority language and community television services which the commerical broadcasters would ditch like a short if they were left unfunded.

 

In the real world we dont pick and choose what our taxes go towards. I dont have kids but I cant start deducting my income tax which funds nursery care and child benefits because I dont use them can I.

 

---------- Post added 02-04-2018 at 19:17 ----------

 

The BBC is beaming un-encrypted signals into my home, giving me no choice but to accept them. Then it demands that I pay for them, whether or not I actually view them. The BBC is still sending me threatening begging letters, it's an absolute disgrace.

 

The BBC is becoming increasingly irrelevant to a small but growing section of the population. Those who have ditched live TV broadcasts entirely for download streaming and don't require the past its prime iPlayer.

 

Never mind the BBC TV licence being gone in 10, 20 or 30 years. Its gone for me now. My current payment scheme to BBC TV licensing is:

 

£0 per month.

 

Balance to pay: £0.

 

What do you want, a round of applause?

 

So YOU dont watch BBC services. YOU dont pay a licence fee. Whoopie Doo. Nobody cares.

 

Lots of people still do watch it. You have failed to provide any credible submission that the licence fee will magically disppear if it goes and now you are trying to do a mystic meg on its future with wildly long ranges as between 10 - 30 years!! God sake, if you are going to make a prediction at least narrow it down a bit.

Edited April 2, 2018 by ECCOnoob

[Car Boot]

I ask the question again. If the BBC was completely scrapped tomorrow - do you really really think the Television Licence would disappear??

 

The TV tax would certainly be scrapped in its current form if there were no BBC to justify it's existence.

 

With British teenagers recognising the name ‘YouTube’ more than they do ‘BBC’, and Netflix spending more than £6 billion on content last year alone, the BBC TV licence fee is increasingly being exposed as inadequate, old fashioned and definitely not fit for the digital age.

[A.B.Yaffle]

The same could be said for any public service or government funded scheme, is it fair that people who will never use a particular service are forced to subsidise other people that do?

 

 

 

It's as fair/unfair as any other public service, part of living in a civilised/fairer society.

 

So you think it should be funded by general taxation, rather than being unfairly funded by Sky TV or ITV viewers. That would be fairer than the current system.