Birchy
Money List Winner
Not that easy though is it?
They could quite happily shove the terrestrial channels for all i care but whether i watch them or not i have to fund them to watch other stuff thats worth watching.
Not that easy though is it?
They could quite happily shove the terrestrial channels for all i care but whether i watch them or not i have to fund them to watch other stuff thats worth watching.
D
Deleted member 15344
Guest
I dont make the rules - its a tenner a month - and i reckom through the 12 months people will watch something on BBC1 or 2 or 3 or 4 or listen on the radio to any of the channels or 5 live or use the website or i player.
I want to use some of their services so i pay for it
If people dont and get caught then they either pay for it or fined a grand.
Birchy
Money List Winner
The trouble is there's no choice.
I'd be happy to have all them you mention cut off and keep the money.
I'd be happy to have all them you mention cut off and keep the money.
D
Deleted member 15344
Guest
So you dont watch or listen to anything from the BBC - no watching World Cup with them or Olympics
Not one single thing on BBC
Like i said though i dont make the rules - but maybe if more did pay as they are supposed to then the BBC could get more money in to pay for more sport.
Qwerty
Tour Winner
Me too and I'd imagine plenty more would do also if given the choice.
Whether it's viewed as value for money or not is irrelevant, just the fact they've got us by the balls is plain wrong IMO
D
Deleted member 15344
Guest
Guess there needs to be a way to stop people being able to watch or read or listen to BBC services if they wish not to pay the license fee ? So they give people the choice ?
JustOne
Ryder Cup Winner
Maybe the thuggish footie fans need to get off benefits and buy Sky, no need for them to have it for free anymore. :mmm:
MegaSteve
Tour Winner
We pay even higher "enforced taxes" to drive on crappy roads...
richy
Journeyman Pro
True, but I can't get away with not paying road tax due to all the number plate recognition technology etc they have now.
C
c1973
Guest
So all footie fans are thugs, on benefits and can't afford sky? :rofl:
Wonder how they can afford all that Aquascutum and Stone Island gear.........
Hacker Khan
Yurt Dwelling, Yoghurt Knitter
As a defender of the BBC (most of the time) I'm happy paying the license fee for all the content I get. When you compare with how much you pay for Sky IMHO it is great value. I am not just talking the sport part for the whole package. Said it before many times but it is not the fault of the BBC that the sports rights are so expensive. And the people that sell the TV rights of the particular sports are the ones that are to blame/praise. Bernie ensured that some F1 was on terrestrial TV as he saw the benefits of doing that. Any other sport could do the same if they wanted, they could split the package and some on terrestrial and some on pay TV. But they don't and just chase the big pay packet in return for a reduced amount of viewers.
I think a lot of brits vastly underestimate the benefits of a commercial free public broadcasting channel that does not have to pander to the political leanings of it's owners or the whims of the sponsors. I do a lot of travelling and have seen a lot of TV overseas and most of it does not hold a candle to the BBC. Try watching a TV station in the US and you will be driven mad with the amount of adverts or blatant political bias. Also BBCs news output is trusted throughout the world and when I want an unbiased view as possible of what is happening in the world then it is the place to go to.
I could also make a coherent argument to say that BBC radio has been one of the major factors why the British music scene punches way above its weight in the world. The value of having a national radio station that does not play highly formatted music to please the sponsors from just one genre is immense, opening up many different types of music to many people. Again, listen to most commercial radio stations, it't mostly dull as dishwater as they are so frightened of upsetting the sponsors and just play the same limited number songs that have no doubt been proven to appeal to the specific target audience they are after on heavy rotation.
I think a lot of brits vastly underestimate the benefits of a commercial free public broadcasting channel that does not have to pander to the political leanings of it's owners or the whims of the sponsors. I do a lot of travelling and have seen a lot of TV overseas and most of it does not hold a candle to the BBC. Try watching a TV station in the US and you will be driven mad with the amount of adverts or blatant political bias. Also BBCs news output is trusted throughout the world and when I want an unbiased view as possible of what is happening in the world then it is the place to go to.
I could also make a coherent argument to say that BBC radio has been one of the major factors why the British music scene punches way above its weight in the world. The value of having a national radio station that does not play highly formatted music to please the sponsors from just one genre is immense, opening up many different types of music to many people. Again, listen to most commercial radio stations, it't mostly dull as dishwater as they are so frightened of upsetting the sponsors and just play the same limited number songs that have no doubt been proven to appeal to the specific target audience they are after on heavy rotation.
bluewolf
Money List Winner
I'm a supporter of the concept of the BBC.. If only to provide a News channel that brings balance to the other commercially available News Channels. I also predominantly listen to BBC Radio (whether it be R1, 2 or 5). I use the Iplayer quite often. I still believe that the BBC provides some of the best Drama on TV, and that one of the reasons for this is the fact that it doesn't have to justify its broadcasting to an advertising department..
It has dropped the ball recently with its Sports coverage though. Prioritizing Football is a mistake IMO. It should be using its unique income stream to provide exposure to plenty of Sport that does not get decent coverage.
Damn.. I've just realized that I agree with Hacker T Dog on nearly every point he made above...
It has dropped the ball recently with its Sports coverage though. Prioritizing Football is a mistake IMO. It should be using its unique income stream to provide exposure to plenty of Sport that does not get decent coverage.
Damn.. I've just realized that I agree with Hacker T Dog on nearly every point he made above...
Doon frae Troon
Ryder Cup Winner
One of my old golf partners was a TV licence 'enforcer' he could tell some great stories.
Remember no licence is a criminal charge and you go to court.......sticks with you for a long time.
Stops you from doing a lot of things and can be very expensive.
Fyldewhite
Tour Winner
I'm a big supporter too. Aside from purely the content, the BBC sets the standard in nearly every area. Even sport is still good...and uninterrupted. The effect of this on other broadcasters cannot be underestimated. Without the BBC providing the service it does Sky, ITV and other commercial stations (radio too) would pretty soon plummet to the standards prevalent in most other countries. Anyone who thinks that we could ditch the BBC or change the system and happily watch Sky just as it is now is frankly in cloud cuckoo land.....it would change, massively. Do you think Sky would be covering the Open with 4 add breaks an hour if the BBC wasn't competing? No chance.
jp5
Q-School Graduate
Whilst the principle of having to pay both the BBC and Sky in order to be allowed to watch Sky TV is a touch antiquated, in reality for £10 a month the breadth and quality of content the BBC is fantastic so no complaints from me. BBC has certainly opened my eyes to a whole world of sports, let alone the documentaries and dramas it produces. And that's not even starting on the excellent content on the radio and website.
So keep going BBC :thup:
So keep going BBC :thup:
Hacker Khan
Yurt Dwelling, Yoghurt Knitter
I'm a supporter of the concept of the BBC.. If only to provide a News channel that brings balance to the other commercially available News Channels. I also predominantly listen to BBC Radio (whether it be R1, 2 or 5). I use the Iplayer quite often. I still believe that the BBC provides some of the best Drama on TV, and that one of the reasons for this is the fact that it doesn't have to justify its broadcasting to an advertising department..
It has dropped the ball recently with its Sports coverage though. Prioritizing Football is a mistake IMO. It should be using its unique income stream to provide exposure to plenty of Sport that does not get decent coverage.
Damn.. I've just realized that I agree with Hacker T Dog on nearly every point he made above...
Probably true. But in the public interest it would never get away with it as every man and his dog would be complaining they don't pay their licence fee to watch yachting. I'd personally love to see loads of badminton on the BBC and they could probably get the TV rights for tuppence ha'penny, but realistically know it would never wash.
I think the BBC is over a barrel with the football, as it has to try and get it just so it can fulfill it's public remit. Football, rightly or wrongly is by far the most prominent sport in this country so the BBC is under a lot of pressure to show it. And I suspect the price it pays to get these rights mostly blows its budgets, leaving less and less left for innovative improvements to the actual coverage.
S
Snelly
Guest
You must be joking! The BBC is just as biased as the worst of Fox News! It is just that you don't see it because you share the same world view.
The news output is little more than a mirror of the Guardian. Very left leaning, pro EU and with a skewed climate change agenda to boot. Just about every programme drips with the same myopic agenda.
It is an over-funded, bloated, self-serving monopoly and the sooner it is privatised the better.
Fyldewhite
Tour Winner
You must be joking! The BBC is just as biased as the worst of Fox News! It is just that you don't see it because you share the same world view.
The news output is little more than a mirror of the Guardian. Very left leaning, pro EU and with a skewed climate change agenda to boot. Just about every programme drips with the same myopic agenda.
It is an over-funded, bloated, self-serving monopoly and the sooner it is privatised the better.
If you stand far to the right and listen to something in the centre it will appear on your left. Though I think there maybe sometimes a valid argument in what you are saying I also think you are overstating it massively. Overall I think the BBC does a good job on being impartial. It really is a "can't please all the people...." situation though. You are obviously one of them.....your comparison with Fox News is probably the only joke I've seen on this thread.
Hacker Khan
Yurt Dwelling, Yoghurt Knitter
You must be joking! The BBC is just as biased as the worst of Fox News! It is just that you don't see it because you share the same world view.
The news output is little more than a mirror of the Guardian. Very left leaning, pro EU and with a skewed climate change agenda to boot. Just about every programme drips with the same myopic agenda.
It is an over-funded, bloated, self-serving monopoly and the sooner it is privatised the better.
Look, I've told so lots of time to not believe everything you real in the Daily Mail, it just makes you seem paranoid
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-press-baron-foe-evidence-Left-wing-bias.html
Also I've honestly never voted labour in my life so that stuffs that argument slightly as well.
pendodave
Tour Rookie
My understanding is that the BBC is legally obliged to report the news in an even handed fashion. Don't you think that the Tories would be straight in there if they felt that there was a "left wing bias". They're not, so I'm thinking that silence speaks for itself.
The majority of media in this country is controlled by right wing, self interested 1% ers. Even if the BBC were a little left, it would scarcely be enough to balance things up.
Just because is it is flawed (and I agree with many of the points) doesn't mean that it needs to be destroyed.
And a final point. Does anyone think that the wholesale selling off of every asset of value that the country ever had has led to the UK being a much better place for all? Me neither....
The majority of media in this country is controlled by right wing, self interested 1% ers. Even if the BBC were a little left, it would scarcely be enough to balance things up.
Just because is it is flawed (and I agree with many of the points) doesn't mean that it needs to be destroyed.
And a final point. Does anyone think that the wholesale selling off of every asset of value that the country ever had has led to the UK being a much better place for all? Me neither....
