BBC and the licence fee - a good thing?

[Danzaivar]

I spend £50 on a naff second hand TV, 10 years down the line how much would it cost me?

ONE AND A HALF GRAND.

My TV is used to play Xbox/Wii and watch the Big Bang Theory every day at half 6 on E4. A channel which doesn't even benefit from the license fee. If I don't pay for a license then I'm deemed a criminal who's stealing TV.

It is quite literally one of the reasons why I'm emigrating as soon as I can. What kind of country requires you pay for a license to own a TV...

 

[Trebort]

The license fee needs to be lowered considerably. The only thing I'm willing to fund is BBC News. Some of the shit on BBC1, BBC2, BBC3 and BBC4 really should not have my money funding it.

 

[Alex Cowan]

I, for one, get really angry whenever newspapers irrationally attack the BBC. I think they do a great job, and I plan on paying the license fee, no matter what percentage of it goes to Jonathan Ross. The quality of programming hasn't really declined, and for every 'Strictly Come Dancing' I would cite the excellent 'Sherlock', or some of the other high-class output recently displayed. Although it has its faults, I still think the BBC deserves every penny of the license fee.

Maybe it only attracts so much ire from the rest of the press because its financing is virtually enshrined in law? It has the luxury of a guaranteed income, therefore it can afford to experiment and have some creativity, which commercial broadcasters are lacking. The press jump with glee every time a minor upset occurs internally (see the phone-voting scandal and the *shocking* Blue Peter cat misnomer) yet commercial broadcasters receive very little criticism ( I would reference the issue of ITV wilfully auto-tuning X-Factor contestants to make them sound worse/more entertaining - this was almost covered up by the majority of the press).

 

[Plinglebob]

The license fee needs to be lowered considerably. The only thing I'm willing to fund is BBC News. Some of the shit on BBC1, BBC2, BBC3 and BBC4 really should not have my money funding it.

Unfortunately there are probably people who think the crap is worth paying for and why am I having to fork out for the news when I don't care about it.

 

[tomtom94]

Ooooooooooooooh. I personally love Doctor Who, but:
Mock the Week, Have I Got News For You, Russell Howard's Good News, Mitchell and Webb, Armstrong and Miller, The Impressions Show, Total Wipeout, New Tricks, Spooks, Torchwood, TOP GEAR...

Mock the Week kinda lost it after Frankie Boyle left, fair enough for the next three, dunno what the next two are, Total Wipeout is done (for now?), never heard, don't like it, finished (I think), and I fucking hate that **** Jeremy Clarkson.

Whilst I think the Beeb is a dinosaur and should economise instead of charging a frankly outrageous fee every year to people to watch one channel. None of the others do it, so why should they?

I will be honest, adverts ruin a viewing experience.
Not showing adverts forces the BBC to fill a full half hour, which means more programming which does actually improve the experience.
Also, lower budgets certainly force comedic writers to think a lot more.

It might be because the endless reality TV and celebrity-driven drivel has jaded me, but barring a few programs-none of which are showing at the moment- I'm quite sickened by the Beeb; if they ear so much money a year, why the hell is 8/10 stuff they do utter shite?

Never, EVER tell me that Mock the Week lost it after Frankie Boyle left. It irritates me that people believe he was the be-all-and-end-all of the show.

But regardless, I can see your point about the bad programming, but you only need to look at what happened when they cancelled Last of the Summer Wine to realise how vocal the older population of Britain can be.
And what they do if you take away their beloved programming.
(God help them if they cancel Cash in the Attic!)

If the BBC played itself to the right audience instead of trying to muscle in on ITV's territory (remember the disaster that was the revamped Strictly Come Dancing?) then all would be well. Until then, there will be flaws.

 

[Trebort]

The license fee needs to be lowered considerably. The only thing I'm willing to fund is BBC News. Some of the shit on BBC1, BBC2, BBC3 and BBC4 really should not have my money funding it.

Unfortunately there are probably people who think the crap is worth paying for and why am I having to fork out for the news when I don't care about it.

Cos the news is important, crap like Rev, Strictly Come Dancing, The One Show, anything with James Corden is simply not worth funding!

 

[DSK-]

I don't watch TV unless someone in the house has the channel on something interesting, top gear is on or there is football (soccer) on.

I wouldn't pay the license fee if I moved out as I don't watch enough TV to warrant it. I'd probably get done for not paying it regardless of not having a TV though.

Also, somewhat off-topic, I have never noticed that the BBC doesn't have adverts. That's fucking wierd.

 

[Plinglebob]

The license fee needs to be lowered considerably. The only thing I'm willing to fund is BBC News. Some of the shit on BBC1, BBC2, BBC3 and BBC4 really should not have my money funding it.

Unfortunately there are probably people who think the crap is worth paying for and why am I having to fork out for the news when I don't care about it.

Cos the news is important, crap like Rev, Strictly Come Dancing, The One Show, anything with James Corden is simply not worth funding!

Sadly Strictly is very popular and also a money maker so technically it (like Top Gear) isn't actually costing you money I agree that the quality of some of the programs has dropped especially their Science output. I remember watching a documentary about black holes on the BBC when I was about13 that would never get aired now as it was far to complex.

 

[jasoncyrus]

snip

The bbc isnt worth £150 a year to me. Not at all. INHO they only have 2 good shows, Top Gear and Doctor Who. (the news doesn't count). The rest is a waste of money as its outdated and rather inferior in general.

I'd much prefer purchasing episode of Doctor who for £1 or so each onlne. Instead of being forced to pay the BBC money just because I own a tv and dont watch BBC 99% of the time. Sky is a far better television corporation. I watched countless things on there. It's friggen criminal that you can't opt out of the BBC if you own a TV. My brother had their thugs banging on the door demanding he pay a liscence fee because he owns a tv (yet has no ariel and only uses it for his 360). Thankfully you are well within your rights to tell them to shove it up their arse and slam the door in their faces.

 

[SenseOfTumour]

I thought I'd covered this:

The idea is you pay in and they make everything, so there's something for everyone, if they made 10 TV channels and 10 radio stations all aimed at you, that's 50 million licence payers pissed off. Enjoy your shows with a budget of £150 for 500 hours of entertainment per week for a year.

Rev I thought was very good, personally, again, that quote from earlier...

'the BBC isn't a taxi to take you only to exactly where you want, its a bus you share with others that goes past everything, get off and on where you like, but don't complain just because you have to pass by stuff you don't like' (Yes, I'm paraphrasing rather than quoting).

I heartily agree with the licencing rules tho.

The rules are, that ONLY if you use a device to watch or record live television, do you need a TV licence. Owning a TV to watch DVDS, play games, etc , no need for a licence, watching iplayer or other TV sites, no need for a licence, unless you use a TV card connected to an aerial.

Unfortunately, the TV licencing dept will outright lie to you at every turn to get you to pay for a licence. The main advice I hear is 'Never forget their just salesmen for the licence fee, they're not 'officers', they have no more rights than the milkmen, and the worst thing you can do is to communicate with them as it gives them the idea you have a reason to need a licence. They operate on guilty til proven innocent, but that's not how the law works.

Sadly, they are the one black mark against the BBC in my book. Lying, bullying snake oil salesmen, when in fact they're selling a great service, and acting like they need to con people into it.

 

[Trebort]

The license fee needs to be lowered considerably. The only thing I'm willing to fund is BBC News. Some of the shit on BBC1, BBC2, BBC3 and BBC4 really should not have my money funding it.

Unfortunately there are probably people who think the crap is worth paying for and why am I having to fork out for the news when I don't care about it.

Cos the news is important, crap like Rev, Strictly Come Dancing, The One Show, anything with James Corden is simply not worth funding!

Sadly Strictly is very popular and also a money maker so technically it (like Top Gear) isn't actually costing you money I agree that the quality of some of the programs has dropped especially their Science output. I remember watching a documentary about black holes on the BBC when I was about13 that would never get aired now as it was far to complex.

That's true. Dumbing down is rampant at the BBC.

 

[SenseOfTumour]

snip

The bbc isnt worth £150 a year to me. Not at all. INHO they only have 2 good shows, Top Gear and Doctor Who. (the news doesn't count). The rest is a waste of money as its outdated and rather inferior in general.

I'd much prefer purchasing episode of Doctor who for £1 or so each onlne. Instead of being forced to pay the BBC money just because I own a tv and dont watch BBC 99% of the time. Sky is a far better television corporation. I watched countless things on there. It's friggen criminal that you can't opt out of the BBC if you own a TV. My brother had their thugs banging on the door demanding he pay a liscence fee because he owns a tv (yet has no ariel and only uses it for his 360). Thankfully you are well within your rights to tell them to shove it up their arse and slam the door in their faces.

fully agree shutting the door and not talking or replying to letters is the only way to deal with them.

However, you don't need a licence, and you're in the right legally and morally.

I would say you can't just say 'the news doesn't count' if you watch it. I also imagine most of us watch rather more than the 2 shows a week most of us are claiming, even if we don't claim to be fans of whatever it is.

 

[SenseOfTumour]

Trebort, I'd suggest it's because the BBC is facing more pressure to show value for money, in terms of audience ratings. Sadly 10 million people vaguely satisfied with a show, is a 'better' result than 3 million people overwhelmingly thrilled by a show.

Here's one suggestion I think they could use, the BBC site should have a space for you to fill in your TV licence number, and it would gain you a huge discount on all BBC dvds and box sets. We've already paid for them, we should get money off, carry on selling em full price internationally, of course.

 

[jasoncyrus]

I thought I'd covered this:

The idea is you pay in and they make everything, so there's something for everyone, if they made 10 TV channels and 10 radio stations all aimed at you, that's 50 million licence payers pissed off. Enjoy your shows with a budget of £150 for 500 hours of entertainment per week for a year.

Rev I thought was very good, personally, again, that quote from earlier...

'the BBC isn't a taxi to take you only to exactly where you want, its a bus you share with others that goes past everything, get off and on where you like, but don't complain just because you have to pass by stuff you don't like' (Yes, I'm paraphrasing rather than quoting).

I heartily agree with the licencing rules tho.

The rules are, that ONLY if you use a device to watch or record live television, do you need a TV licence. Owning a TV to watch DVDS, play games, etc , no need for a licence, watching iplayer or other TV sites, no need for a licence, unless you use a TV card connected to an aerial.

Unfortunately, the TV licencing dept will outright lie to you at every turn to get you to pay for a licence. The main advice I hear is 'Never forget their just salesmen for the licence fee, they're not 'officers', they have no more rights than the milkmen, and the worst thing you can do is to communicate with them as it gives them the idea you have a reason to need a licence. They operate on guilty til proven innocent, but that's not how the law works.

Sadly, they are the one black mark against the BBC in my book. Lying, bullying snake oil salesmen, when in fact they're selling a great service, and acting like they need to con people into it.

Clearly you havn't seen the majority of Daytime TV from the BBC, those shows give it about 400 million black marks on their own.

Also: They'd have more money if they didn't pay so much to their presenters.

Sure Clarkson etc are funny. But they do NOT deserve 1M+ as a bloody salary. Thats fricken ridiculous. They've got mostly bad shows, bad salesmen and terrible accountants.

In short. Ballocks to the BBC.

 

[Daveman]

One thing I find, as my mum works not for them but gets contracts from them, is that they employ far too many idiotic, posho oxbridge fucktards who probably haven't the vaguest idea what is and isn't good TV. Mock the Week, Never Mind the Buzzcocks and QI have been done to death and simply aren't funny any more. Certain Stand ups get far too much exposure. But at least they have Charlie Brooker.

My favourite Channel at the moment is Channel 4. While it pumps out brain killing things like Skins endlessly it also gives us borderline mental comedy like The Inbetweeners and the only Sitcom that's any good at the moment, The IT Crowd. Also it supports The Daily Show, my favourite bit of american comedy. It is hit and miss but at least it's current and always changing.