To U.K. Posters: How do you feel about the Television License Fee?

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by kds1, Mar 4, 2015.

  1. kds1 Suspended

    kds1

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2013
    Location:
    New York, New York
    #1
    Recently, The Independent ran a headline " BBC Accepts The End Of The Licence Fee". Personally, I'd gladly pay the fee if we had something like the BBC in the U.S.

    *IIRC it was The Independent
     
  2. sim667 macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2010
    #2
    Its not true. The BBC is currently trying to change it so you have to pay the licence fee, regardless of whether you own a tv or not, on the basis and assumption that you can access all your content on the internet. They also want to abolish the reduced fee for all black and white TV. Currently you can legally not pay the fee by detuning your tv from the BBC and saying that you don't use online services, but they still try to enforce payment using the courts and bailiffs.

    Personally I don't mind the BBC, its not my favourite broadcaster in the UK, I much prefer Channel 4. But BBC 4 documentaries, and quite a lot of the stuff on 1 and 2 are very good...... BBC 1 and 1Xtra radio are excellent. Their online content is very good too.

    I do take exception with some of their stances, their decision to omit certain political parties from the debates into the elections was disgusting, they always act as a propagandist for Israel in their reporting of the Israel vs Palestine issues, and they harboured and protected paedophiles for a long time.

    Its still advert free of course, which I guess to someone from the US is unheard of.

    What does annoy me is some of the rights they try and use to enforce payment for the license fee, and the way its used, via sending bailiffs round, but normally thats not the BBC, its the companies they sell the debt on to.
     
  3. Scepticalscribe Contributor

    Scepticalscribe

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2008
    Location:
    The Far Horizon
    #3
    I am in favour of the licence fee and the general principle of state funded broadcasting.

    Whatever its flaws, - and I am not blind to them - the BBC remains the standard against which the rest of the world's broadcasting services are judged.
     
  4. MagicBoy macrumors 68040

    MagicBoy

    Joined:
    May 28, 2006
    Location:
    Manchester, UK
  5. kds1 thread starter Suspended

    kds1

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2013
    Location:
    New York, New York
    #5
    Well I will agree with that. BBC is who I turn to for international world news on television. France24 is the other. I do watch Sky because it's on my AppleTV but I prefer BBC any day of the week (though I am addicted to Press Preview). I also will listen to the World Service on radio. And I did enjoy BBC 7 radio online quite a but is it still around?
     
  6. Huntn macrumors G5

    Huntn

    Joined:
    May 5, 2008
    Location:
    The Misty Mountains
    #6
    My son told me about this when he was based in England. I thought it was rather ridiculous, but I understand the idea of collecting revenue anyway you can! In Houston, I pay a security system fee to insure that police will come to my house when it goes off (it never has), while disregarding that my system makes my house less likely to be broken into. It's revenue, just like every new highway being built in most cases is a toll road.
     
  7. kds1 thread starter Suspended

    kds1

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2013
    Location:
    New York, New York
    #7
    It's really not about collecting revenue any way you can. The BBC is advert free, and is the public interest broadcaster. That's why it's funded by the licence fee (I use the U.K. spelling here). If you own a TV, you pay it. Unless you are a pensioner or I think there is or used to be a radio only license and even a cheaper one for TV if you had a Black and White TV.
     
  8. Scepticalscribe Contributor

    Scepticalscribe

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2008
    Location:
    The Far Horizon
    #8

    I think it is a bit more subtle than your post suggests. It seems to me to be not so much a case of 'collecting revenue any way you can' but of answering to different imperatives, where revenue collection is not necessarily the guiding principle of programme making.

    Now, developing the sort of reputation for your products whereby much of the rest of the world may wish to buy them, certainly helps the revenue flow, but that is not why the programme was made in the first place.

    Thus, public device broadcasting tends to have a mandate where its stated mission includes the need to 'inform, educate and entertain' the public. The third function is not elevated solely at the expense of the other two.

    This means that it is usually in a situation where it can be pretty independent of the dictates of the market, and of the lowest common denominator of public taste in order to be able to make programmes. It also means that - at its very best - it can focus on making and producing the sort of expensive and resource hungry programmes that ought to be made - but which would never actually get made in an environment where commercial imperatives determine what gets made, such as first class current affairs, outstanding documentaries and so on.

    When David Attenborough served as Controller of Programmes for BBC2 in the 1960s, he took the public service ethos (the old 'inform' educate' as well as 'entertain' mandate) of public service broadcasting exceptionally seriously, to the extent that he commissioned two of the very best television series ever made, 'The Ascent of Man' (with Jacob Bronowski), and Civilisation' (with Kenneth Clark).
     
  9. MagicBoy macrumors 68040

    MagicBoy

    Joined:
    May 28, 2006
    Location:
    Manchester, UK
    #9
    It's not a new idea, the TV license has existed since the end of the Second World War.
     
  10. Ironduke Suspended

    Ironduke

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2006
    Location:
    England
    #10

    spoken by a person who has not investigated at all how the BBC works.

    what a stupid thing to say:rolleyes:
     
  11. MagicBoy macrumors 68040

    MagicBoy

    Joined:
    May 28, 2006
    Location:
    Manchester, UK
  12. Gav2k macrumors G3

    Gav2k

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2009
    #12
    I'd rather have 4 minutes of adverts every 15 minutes personally. The bbc cut half the f1 broadcasts. That was bang out of order in my books
     
  13. nebo1ss macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2010
    #13
    I am pretty sure much of what you have written is incorrect.

    De-Tuning your TV makes no difference if you own a device that that has a Tuner included you have a legal requirement to pay the license fee.

    Watching BBC on the internet requires you to have a license. It may be difficult to enforce but legally if you use IPlayer you pay the license fee.

    Personally I would like to see the license fee scrapped and some other funding model implemented. I have no problem with commercial TV and enjoy ITV as much as the BBC. I think there is a comflict with some of the things done by the BBC and the concept of public funding.

    The other problem I have with the license fee is that I have two homes and have to pay twice. I am only ever in one home at a time and hence only watch one tv.
     
  14. Huntn, Mar 4, 2015
    Last edited: Mar 4, 2015

    Huntn macrumors G5

    Huntn

    Joined:
    May 5, 2008
    Location:
    The Misty Mountains
    #14
    Admittedly, it's an uniformed opinion based on what the individual (me) is used to. In the States, Public Radio/TV is donation based, with a subsidy that the government provides. Of note Conservatives have been trying to kill it as unworthy for as long as I remember, but really because it takes them to task on occasion, does not see eye to eye with them. It's the best non-commercial US based news source I know of with a variety of human interest stories unlike the commerical big boys. Of note, they feature a BBC News Hour. :)

    There seems to be parallels to Public TV in the US with the difference touched on above. I have no problem with my taxes going to PBS. User fees in the UK are just a different way of finding revenue. However, my security system fee imo is a misappropriation of the idea of a user fee considering the police are paid for with my tax dollars and they are supposed to respond to all calls for help. That's a great idea, charge more to citizens who have made your job easier and more efficient paying out of their pocket 3 times.. :p
     
  15. kds1 thread starter Suspended

    kds1

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2013
    Location:
    New York, New York
    #15
    Sometimes I think people in the UK who moan about the license fee and would like the BBC to go commercial just don't appreciate what you have in it. They take it for granted now, and would miss it in it's current form if changed and had to bend to the will of ratings and advertisers. Be grateful. As I said, I would gladly pay a licence fee if we had the equivalent of the BBC in the U.S.
     
  16. Peterkro macrumors 68020

    Peterkro

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2004
    Location:
    Communard de Londres
    #16
    Only if you watch live TV, for watching catch-up no licence is necessary .
     
  17. kds1 thread starter Suspended

    kds1

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2013
    Location:
    New York, New York
    #17
    Which isn't right. Live broadcast or not, you should still pay.
     
  18. Peterkro macrumors 68020

    Peterkro

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2004
    Location:
    Communard de Londres
    #18
    That's why the Beeb is talking about changing it,the law regarding collection is being outdated by technology changes.
    I personally think something similar to the system Germany brought in in 2013
    would be fairer (providing poor people,pensioners etc were protected.
    Part of the problem is they have employed private collection agencies to go after people who don't have a licence (more than a few of who don't need one) and the are nasty in the extreme with their methods none of which have any legal basis.

    The people who are caught are often women at home during the day looking after kids who open the door and let them in.So there is a constant stream of poor women going through the courts being fined or even jailed if they don't pay their fines.
    The more sussed among the population (whether they need a licence or not) on opening the door and identifying the git from Serco or whatever tell them to bugger off pronto and slam the door in their face,they have no legal right of entry.
     
  19. zin macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    May 5, 2010
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    #19
    I strongly support public broadcasting and the television licence fee.

    It should, however, be reduced or indefinitely frozen (beyond 2017) and non-payment should be decriminalised. Non-payment when you must pay should be pursued through civil court.
     
  20. nebo1ss macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2010
    #20
    The US is an extreme view of commercial TV. There are other channels in the UK that are commercial and successful. There are limits and controls on how much advertising they are allowed.

    I have watched sports programs in the US and the amount and timing of adverts is not something I would want to see in the UK. Like it or not it is impossible for the BBC not to have a political slant of one type or another and the scandals particularly with sexual abuse have been very disturbing.
     
  21. kds1 thread starter Suspended

    kds1

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2013
    Location:
    New York, New York
    #21
    The sexual abuse scandals with Jimmy Saville have nothing to do, however, with the programming they produce.
     
  22. nebo1ss macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2010
    #22
    Except the scandals are not just about Jimmy Savile.

    The BBC was accused by the Police of using a Blackmail strategy to force the police to give them a tip off of a raid they planned on the property of a popular Pop star. The police claim the BBC threatened to expose all they knew about the proposed situation in advance of the raid unless they were given a tip off and could be there to report it.

    The BBC executive pay offs: Multiple executives were given hugh pay offs that they were not entitled too in most cases multiple of hundred of thousands and in some cases millions. When you pay a license fee you feel this is your money they are wasting.

    There are many other examples I could quote for you.
     
  23. kds1 thread starter Suspended

    kds1

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2013
    Location:
    New York, New York
    #23
    Are you talking about Cliff Richards?

    Actually, a bit of topic, but what is it lately with sex scandals in the UK? Jimmy Savile, Cliff Richard being investigated, girls groomed for sex in Rotherham, officials in Westminster accused of sexual abuse and Thatcher knew about it, but kept it hidden, Rolf Harris just had his CBE striped by the Queen (or will soon), that pediatric cancer doctor, ...it's like every other week there's been a new sex abuse scandal over there lately.
     
  24. Mildredop macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2013
    #24
    I'm in favour of the licence fee, but probably more in a way that it would fund less profitable/less popular/educational programming on all channels rather than an entire corporation.

    There's no doubt the BBC is good value with all the TV, radio and online services, but it's increasingly just becoming another commissioning broadcaster. They make the same programmes as the other channels and very little differenciates their content from that of their competitors.

    The BBC no longer really trains its staff either - mainly because it barely has any staff. As such, the people that really make the programmes aren't BBC 'born and bred', they're just the same as the people that work elsewhere in the industry.

    The golden days of the BBC are certainly over and I think the licence fee needs to reflect that.
     
  25. nebo1ss macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2010
    #25
    Yes the Blackmail incident is about Cliff Richards.

    Most of the Sex scandals are historic. What happened is that after Jimmly Savillle situation became public a special group was set up to investigate historical abuse and people starting coming out of the woodwork to report situations they have kept quiet about for years. Unfortunately the BBC has been at the centre of quite a few of them.
     

Share This Page