Freedom from TV license oppression
Discussion
Bill said:
Look on it as herd immunity, a vaccination against stupid. 
Either way it's not like it's not easily avoided.
Well...the question wasn't about how, but why it should be necessary Either way it's not like it's not easily avoided.
ETA Yes I did read the part before how easy it is, but still consider the 'why' wasn't addressed - the stupid bit links forward so well to the easy bit.
Edited by turbobloke on Sunday 1st March 21:58
Funk said:
Derek, that's like saying drinking piss is better than eating s
t.
I don't want either.
The BBC churns out crap. That it's 'less crappy' than the crap in other countries is not the point. It's still crap whichever way you dress it up.
Out of interest, are Americans and Aussies forced to pay for their crap TV or is it subscription like Sky/Virgin?
5 free to air channels (plus lots of subsidiary digital only channels showing repeats basically).t.I don't want either.
The BBC churns out crap. That it's 'less crappy' than the crap in other countries is not the point. It's still crap whichever way you dress it up.
Out of interest, are Americans and Aussies forced to pay for their crap TV or is it subscription like Sky/Virgin?
7, 9 and 10 are commercial channels. You get an ad break every 5 minutes making anything impossible to watch. What's on there generally isn't worth watching. Tabloid news, 2 and a half men, that kind of stuff.
SBS is a mix of commercial and public funding and shows very good international films and series as well as having excellent news and current affairs. Ad breaks every 20 minutes or so. Good quality content.
ABC is a publicly funded broadcaster. The funding comes out of general revenue. The far left hate it because it is a bastion of the middle class hegemony, the far right hate it because OMG COMMUNISTS!!!1111!!!
Mix of locally created and BBC shows. News and current affairs excellent, particularly in regional areas. Current government has decimated it for cheap political reasons.
Colonial said:
Current government has decimated it for cheap political reasons.
That's the advantage of a specific tax and corresponding budget - much harder to meddle in opaque general taxation-derived budgets out of political ideology. It's not the way I'd like to see that achieved though.turbobloke said:
With respect, it doesn't matter what the range is, and the cost per hour would sound even better (artificially) but paying anything for something you don't want isn't good value for money.
It is an optional payment. If you don't want or use the service, don't pay. Just like VED.Cheese Mechanic said:
eldar said:
It is an optional payment. If you don't want or use the service, don't pay. Just like VED.
Not if you wish to receive a live a tv broadcast. A criminal offence if you do not cought up. the selfish ? immature / proto libertarian demand for all the services without actually paying for them .
mph1977 said:
Cheese Mechanic said:
eldar said:
It is an optional payment. If you don't want or use the service, don't pay. Just like VED.
Not if you wish to receive a live a tv broadcast. A criminal offence if you do not cought up. the selfish ? immature / proto libertarian demand for all the services without actually paying for them .
mph1977 said:
and here's what it;s increasingly boiling down to , especially on this thread
the selfish ? immature / proto libertarian demand for all the services without actually paying for them .
Rubbish. The BBC is not in the same category as roads, hospitals, and schools. It does not merit a tax. I want the same payment options for it as I do with Murdoch's rubbish - don't watch it, don't buy it.the selfish ? immature / proto libertarian demand for all the services without actually paying for them .
The desperate scrabbling of the lefties on this thread for a justifications for their hands in our pockets is amusing though. We are in danger of being hit by the shrapnel!
grumbledoak said:
mph1977 said:
and here's what it;s increasingly boiling down to , especially on this thread
the selfish ? immature / proto libertarian demand for all the services without actually paying for them .
Rubbish. The BBC is not in the same category as roads, hospitals, and schools. It does not merit a tax. I want the same payment options for it as I do with Murdoch's rubbish - don't watch it, don't buy it.the selfish ? immature / proto libertarian demand for all the services without actually paying for them .
The desperate scrabbling of the lefties on this thread for a justifications for their hands in our pockets is amusing though. We are in danger of being hit by the shrapnel!
mph1977 said:
grumbledoak said:
mph1977 said:
and here's what it;s increasingly boiling down to , especially on this thread
the selfish ? immature / proto libertarian demand for all the services without actually paying for them .
Rubbish. The BBC is not in the same category as roads, hospitals, and schools. It does not merit a tax. I want the same payment options for it as I do with Murdoch's rubbish - don't watch it, don't buy it.the selfish ? immature / proto libertarian demand for all the services without actually paying for them .
The desperate scrabbling of the lefties on this thread for a justifications for their hands in our pockets is amusing though. We are in danger of being hit by the shrapnel!
supersingle said:
mph1977 said:
grumbledoak said:
mph1977 said:
and here's what it;s increasingly boiling down to , especially on this thread
the selfish ? immature / proto libertarian demand for all the services without actually paying for them .
Rubbish. The BBC is not in the same category as roads, hospitals, and schools. It does not merit a tax. I want the same payment options for it as I do with Murdoch's rubbish - don't watch it, don't buy it.the selfish ? immature / proto libertarian demand for all the services without actually paying for them .
The desperate scrabbling of the lefties on this thread for a justifications for their hands in our pockets is amusing though. We are in danger of being hit by the shrapnel!
the objections to the licence fee tend to be from those who think that BBC1 and 2 and Radios 1 and 2 are too commercialised in their output but forget all the rest of the BBC
uk commercial local radio is frankly rubbish, Uk community locla radio is extremely variable in quality and output
uk commercial national radio attracts significant criticism Classic FM in particular
becasue the BBC doesn't have to appease advertisers and/or a corporate person with a particular personal agenda ( i.e. Murdoch) it can afford to be slightly more experimental in it;s prpoductions
compare ITV 2 and 3 with BBC3 and 4 for examples of that a steady diet of repeats and jeremy kyle vs some innovative and high quality TV making
Channel 4 is in a nintersting position and while we'd all hope that commercial only TV production i nte UK would be some kind of Channel 4 crossed with HBO utopia ,. what in fact it would be is Britain's got the strictly pop factor on ice and Faux News
mph1977 said:
why ?
the objections to the licence fee tend to be from those who think that BBC1 and 2 and Radios 1 and 2 are too commercialised in their output but forget all the rest of the BBC
uk commercial local radio is frankly rubbish, Uk community locla radio is extremely variable in quality and output
uk commercial national radio attracts significant criticism Classic FM in particular
becasue the BBC doesn't have to appease advertisers and/or a corporate person with a particular personal agenda ( i.e. Murdoch) it can afford to be slightly more experimental in it;s prpoductions
compare ITV 2 and 3 with BBC3 and 4 for examples of that a steady diet of repeats and jeremy kyle vs some innovative and high quality TV making
Channel 4 is in a nintersting position and while we'd all hope that commercial only TV production i nte UK would be some kind of Channel 4 crossed with HBO utopia ,. what in fact it would be is Britain's got the strictly pop factor on ice and Faux News
Faux News?........Is that similar to CBS or Fox News? the objections to the licence fee tend to be from those who think that BBC1 and 2 and Radios 1 and 2 are too commercialised in their output but forget all the rest of the BBC
uk commercial local radio is frankly rubbish, Uk community locla radio is extremely variable in quality and output
uk commercial national radio attracts significant criticism Classic FM in particular
becasue the BBC doesn't have to appease advertisers and/or a corporate person with a particular personal agenda ( i.e. Murdoch) it can afford to be slightly more experimental in it;s prpoductions
compare ITV 2 and 3 with BBC3 and 4 for examples of that a steady diet of repeats and jeremy kyle vs some innovative and high quality TV making
Channel 4 is in a nintersting position and while we'd all hope that commercial only TV production i nte UK would be some kind of Channel 4 crossed with HBO utopia ,. what in fact it would be is Britain's got the strictly pop factor on ice and Faux News
mph1977 said:
supersingle said:
mph1977 said:
grumbledoak said:
mph1977 said:
and here's what it;s increasingly boiling down to , especially on this thread
the selfish ? immature / proto libertarian demand for all the services without actually paying for them .
Rubbish. The BBC is not in the same category as roads, hospitals, and schools. It does not merit a tax. I want the same payment options for it as I do with Murdoch's rubbish - don't watch it, don't buy it.the selfish ? immature / proto libertarian demand for all the services without actually paying for them .
The desperate scrabbling of the lefties on this thread for a justifications for their hands in our pockets is amusing though. We are in danger of being hit by the shrapnel!
the objections to the licence fee tend to be from those who think that BBC1 and 2 and Radios 1 and 2 are too commercialised in their output but forget all the rest of the BBC
uk commercial local radio is frankly rubbish, Uk community locla radio is extremely variable in quality and output
uk commercial national radio attracts significant criticism Classic FM in particular
becasue the BBC doesn't have to appease advertisers and/or a corporate person with a particular personal agenda ( i.e. Murdoch) it can afford to be slightly more experimental in it;s prpoductions
compare ITV 2 and 3 with BBC3 and 4 for examples of that a steady diet of repeats and jeremy kyle vs some innovative and high quality TV making
Channel 4 is in a nintersting position and while we'd all hope that commercial only TV production i nte UK would be some kind of Channel 4 crossed with HBO utopia ,. what in fact it would be is Britain's got the strictly pop factor on ice and Faux News
There is literally nothing on TV that I want to watch enough to make me pay the BBC for the privilege. The stupid thing is that this hurts the commercial broadcasters more than the BBC - without paying TVL (and almost all of it going to the BBC) I can't legally watch any other output. So I don't.
It really should be simple; you all seem to feel strongly that the BBC is wonderful and that's cool - there will be others like you. So make it subscription-only, you lot can watch it to your heart's content and anyone who doesn't wish to see it can't. If the TVL were spread fairly amongst all broadcasters as a 'viewing charge' then it would be fair, however it isn't, it's almost exclusively funding the BBC to the detriment of the commercial broadcasters.
It should not be made into a tax where everyone pays, it's not important enough for that (or wanted in many cases). It's digital so lock it down, make it subscriber-only like Sky and if it's worth paying for, it'll survive.
"How much does Sky cost?"
You decide what you want to watch and decide if its worth the fee.
More to the point, just how much will the fee be if it were the BBC?
I watch very little on the BBC, even less on iPlayer. Yet regardless of my viewing level the payment is the same. I would estimate the fee would increase to 4 or 5 times the fee it is now, along with many smaller less known programmes being dropped.
Top gear as an example, could easily sustain itself on another channel. Though I would not pay the fee just to watch it. In fact I struggle to think of a number of programmes that are available all year round - TG is 6 - 12 shows a year?
You decide what you want to watch and decide if its worth the fee.
More to the point, just how much will the fee be if it were the BBC?
I watch very little on the BBC, even less on iPlayer. Yet regardless of my viewing level the payment is the same. I would estimate the fee would increase to 4 or 5 times the fee it is now, along with many smaller less known programmes being dropped.
Top gear as an example, could easily sustain itself on another channel. Though I would not pay the fee just to watch it. In fact I struggle to think of a number of programmes that are available all year round - TG is 6 - 12 shows a year?
mph1977 said:
supersingle said:
mph1977 said:
grumbledoak said:
mph1977 said:
and here's what it;s increasingly boiling down to , especially on this thread
the selfish ? immature / proto libertarian demand for all the services without actually paying for them .
Rubbish. The BBC is not in the same category as roads, hospitals, and schools. It does not merit a tax. I want the same payment options for it as I do with Murdoch's rubbish - don't watch it, don't buy it.the selfish ? immature / proto libertarian demand for all the services without actually paying for them .
The desperate scrabbling of the lefties on this thread for a justifications for their hands in our pockets is amusing though. We are in danger of being hit by the shrapnel!
the objections to the licence fee tend to be from those who think that BBC1 and 2 and Radios 1 and 2 are too commercialised in their output but forget all the rest of the BBC
uk commercial local radio is frankly rubbish, Uk community locla radio is extremely variable in quality and output
uk commercial national radio attracts significant criticism Classic FM in particular
becasue the BBC doesn't have to appease advertisers and/or a corporate person with a particular personal agenda ( i.e. Murdoch) it can afford to be slightly more experimental in it;s prpoductions
compare ITV 2 and 3 with BBC3 and 4 for examples of that a steady diet of repeats and jeremy kyle vs some innovative and high quality TV making
Channel 4 is in a nintersting position and while we'd all hope that commercial only TV production i nte UK would be some kind of Channel 4 crossed with HBO utopia ,. what in fact it would be is Britain's got the strictly pop factor on ice and Faux News
I'm not saying they're worse than any other channel, they're not. But they're no better in truth, just free of the real commercial pressures that the others face
4v6 said:
The solutions a simple one, If you want to watch the bullst broadcasting corp's output then you cough up and pay for it, dont expect anyone not wanting their output to pay them, let them survive in the real world like any other broadcaster.
Whys that such a hard thing to do?
Because, I think, there are a lot on the Left who always expect others to help pay for their confirmation bias. t broadcasting corp's output then you cough up and pay for it, dont expect anyone not wanting their output to pay them, let them survive in the real world like any other broadcaster.Whys that such a hard thing to do?
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff