Freedom from TV license oppression

[McWigglebum4th]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-26623...

Moves are to make it only a civil offence to stop paying for the constant communist output from the BBC

So who is going to stop paying for the 24 hour non stop Labour party broadcast?

though personnally i can't see the huge left wing bias probably because i'm lefty scum

[McWigglebum4th]

Mr Pointy said:

I wonder if it's a case of 'be careful what you wish for'. If it becomes a civil offence then you could foresee a scenario in which the TVLA develops itself a nice little business case where they push for the right to enter premises suspected of evasion (cf the RSPCA) & then the right to add on their costs. Anyone who didn't pay up gets taken to court & if they still don't pay then the TVLA gets those nice Sheriffs come round & take your property away, having added on their costs.

Could be a nice little earner.

Mmm and they could probably reduce the level of proof

How can i prove i've never watched x-factor in the privacy in my own home.

I can't

[McWigglebum4th]

Ozzie Osmond said:

"communism?"

"state intimidation?"

It's less than 40p a day!!!!

Which is worth it in my opinion

But i am in a minority, here many belive that the huge cost is unafforable mainly as they give hundreds of pounds a year to Sky

[McWigglebum4th]

Ozzie Osmond said:

To my mind one of the biggest issues for the BBC is that its traditional "advantage" is evaporating. Namely, being the only channels with "no adverts".

With more and more people watching online or using digital recorders it's become very cheap and easy to suppress the massive amount of ads shown per hour on the live commercial channels. Never takes me anything over 45 minutes to watch a one hour show.

I haven't seen an advert for at least 5 years

Oh and ITV is still crap even without adverts

Which is odd as they produced a wonderful program that was shown on BBC2 only

Edited by McWigglebum4th on Tuesday 18th March 18:04

[McWigglebum4th]

Funk said:

No, no, no! Make it subscription, then those that want it can have it.

Your comments about 'reality TV' made me chuckle as the BBC have thrown hundreds of millions into following the commercial broadcasters into this sort of programming. The sad thing is that of all the millions of hours of supposedly-diverse programming the BBC produce, I find value in none of it.

Okay

Where is the commercial version of radio 4?

make it subscription and you kill the BBC and what makes it good stone dead

So just fire everyone in the organisation and give all the assets to Sky for free

[McWigglebum4th]

dxg said:

And, somewhat topically, this is what I've just come home to:



I mean, look at the wording. It was even folded in the envelope so that the "What to expect in court" heading was the first thing visible.

And note the last sentence. It basically says "Tell us what you want. We won't believe you and we'll continue to hassle you."

It's not exactly cricket, is it? Imagine your gran getting that.

(Although, interestingly, I've had this particular one before: perhaps I've gone back to the bottom of the cycle).

Edited by dxg on Saturday 22 March 22:34

I've seen that letter before

along with the enforcement officers have called letter saying they had evidence of a telly being used


They were in a house we were looking at to buy.

It didn't have a telly, or any occupants or a roof come to think of it


That side of the BBC should be shut down

[McWigglebum4th]

With these feet said:

chris watton said:

What?

Anyway, I'm about to watch True Detective now, had it on record long enough to skip through the adverts now...

This is what we do also, we know what time the programmes start, Grimm, True Detectives etc on Sky and when they start put the kettle on or walk the dog for 10 minutes then sit down to watch. Gives a nice buffer to speed through the ads at X30!

I can't see that ability to last to be honest

As Sky control your sky box i can see them blocking the ability to skip adverts as that is where their money comes from

[McWigglebum4th]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-26727068

We can rise up from under the terrible yoke of oppression and embrace freedom

the true and honest freedom we dream off

The freedom to send £85 a month to sky for adverts and endless repeats


Rejoice my brothers

[McWigglebum4th]

chris watton said:

Excellent - A step in the right direction for those of us who don't watch/listen to the state behemoth.

So will you keep paying for the BBC (most that get upset about the BBC pay for sky) when it is no longer a criminal offence?

[McWigglebum4th]

DonkeyApple said:

Yes. However, if the private company can't utilise courts then I imagine that what will happen is an enormous increase in the vending of unproven 'debts' to third party aggressive collectors and collection amounts spiralling out of control.

As such, people could end up longing for the protection of the courts in that regard!!!

The real upside in the event of debt vending and the inevitable PR shocker is that it will speed up the need to totally overhaul the current concept of the 'license'. No Govt will surrender a system that generates £5bln/year so it will morph into something new, effectively a re-branding to something like a 'media license' that any household with an aerial, telephone, cable, broadband etc connection is liable for, while at the same time changing the BBC to a centrally funded model or similar.

Yep be careful what you wish for

I can see the BBC being shut down and the media license being about £300 per year for the pleasure of owning anything that could potentially allow you to see moving pictures

[McWigglebum4th]

grumbledoak said:

McWigglebum4th said:

the true and honest freedom we dream off

The freedom to send £85 a month to sky for adverts and endless repeats

IF WE SO CHOOSE.

^^^ Quite important, that little bit. And, good. I don't watch either of them but at least Murdoch has the decency not to bill me for my choice. Hopefully the BBC can now also stick their bills, threatening letters, inspectors, and bogus 'TV detector' vans up their arse.

Wait till they are free from having to use the criminal courts

I bet you will see the amount of people getting a kicking for not paying the telly tax increases


Somewhat like the sudden freedom from clamping has brought

[McWigglebum4th]

Chlamydia said:

Exactly, the BBC can do whatever they want, churn out any garbage they want, and not worry about it as they will always have the money coming in from the licence fee payer. They do make a few outstanding programmes but so do commercial channels, and if a commercial channel pumps out crap like Strictly Come Dancing etc then I can turn it off and that's the end of it. With the BBC I'm paying for it whether I watch it or not. Scrapping of the licence fee is the only fair way to go and make the BBC a subscription service.
I've yet to see a convincing argument for it to remain.

Try stop paying for X-factor

It is quite hard

[McWigglebum4th]

Funk said:

X-Factor was one of the most popular shows on TV. It was still st. Being the 'most something' isn't an indicator of quality or value, it just shows how wrong large groups of people can be. Remember that 50% of the world's population is of below-average intelligence!

You can't escape paying for x-factor

[McWigglebum4th]

10 Pence Short said:

Why should the BBC be funded by taxation at all?

I can't give you any reason other then they turn out the occasional excellent program in a sea of garbage


Where as commercial telly appears to be 100% braindead lowest common demoniator garbage

If there was a commerical channel which beat the BBC on the 5% they get right i'd happily pay for it

[McWigglebum4th]

mph1977 said:

- do you think you'd get the kind of presenters and not a playlist outside office hours policy that BBC R1 in the past ( especially while John Peel was alive) and to some extent R1 and 6music currently play ...

would any commercial station allow their presenters/ DJs the freedom that radio 1 and 6 music does - i don;t see any cmmercial stations being willing to all 'Mark and Lard' the kind opf stuff they did on the 'graveyard shift' in the 90s ( at the beginning of the week , later in the week being Mr Peel 10 pm -midnight)...
..

I firmly believe that John Peel and the BBC put the UK where it is in the world stage in the music industry

We punch way way above our size

[McWigglebum4th]

Funk said:

And so it begins:

"BBC wants you to pay TV licence fee even if you don’t own a set, as shows go on iPlayer for longer":

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/bbc/...

.

Be careful what you wish for

[McWigglebum4th]

4v6 said:

McWigglebum4th said:

Be careful what you wish for

Whats so funny about a corporation whos business model is so f*cked up that it requires public funds to prop it up?
Furthermore, whats so all mighty special about the bbc that it alone is deemed worthy of such an economic and financial advantage over every other broadcaster in the uk?

They largely turn out shyte, they shouldnt be rewarded for that they should be utterly condemned.

Because

Currently it is a small cost which is easily avoided

The new improved model will cost 3 time the amount and you won't be able to escape the "media" tax unless you live in a cave and the output from the BBC will be ten times worse

That is what is so funny is you moaners are going to explode with rage

[McWigglebum4th]

4v6 said:

McWigglebum4th said:

Because

Currently it is a small cost which is easily avoided

Their threats arent. Thats half the issue.

McWigglebum4th said:

The new improved model will cost 3 time the amount and you won't be able to escape the "media" tax unless you live in a cave and the output from the BBC will be ten times worse

Of that I have no doubt, I dont see why anyone wants to fund such an organisation.

McWigglebum4th said:

That is what is so funny is you moaners are going to explode with rage

And the first prize goes to McWigglebum4th for services to stupidity and the establishment of a new paradigm.

Obviously you find it acceptable to fund the bbc out of general taxation/media licences and other similar tax methods, presumably you also approve of funding the lifestyles of dole dossers and the feckeless in much the same manner, theyre as productive as the bbc, why shouldnt they be funded?

Ignore nasty letters and throw them in the bin

As to me thinking the BBC isn't st means i want to give all my money to a doley


Oh fk off

Enjoy your media tax

[McWigglebum4th]

4v6 said:

Why shouldnt the bbc pay its own way? Like any other commercial enterprise and not be leeching off of all and sundry?
Why the objection to them getting their funding from THOSE WHO WANT IT?

The majority of the UK population are morons

Hence the majority of stuff they produce is for morons

Thankfully they use 5% of their budget to produce a few quality programs that aren't for morons



If you object to this

Hard st

I object to having to pay for crap on sky which i have to pay for via the small amount of money from everything i buy going towards advertising on sky.

I don't have sky but is still have to pay for it


At least with the BBC i have a choice

Sky, ITV, Channel 4, Channel 5 etc no choice

[McWigglebum4th]

Crafty_ said:

Disagree entirely.

BBC you have no choice.

I don't want to watch it, at all. None of it.

I have no choice but to pay for a licence, because I want to watch F1 on Sky.

I can decide if to fund Sky or not, by simply not purchasing it.

I do not have the same choice with BBC.

I see no redeeming qualities in the BBC that make it so important that we should force people in to paying for it.

So there is no adverts on any of the Sky channels

When did this happen?