BBC and license fee's for us in the countryside

[humpbackmaniac]

Working from home today and just overheard that smug BBC advert with the big head flying over the hillsides. And i am getting angry in the usual english manner of not actually doing anything about it but whinging.

I live in the suffolk countryside, i do not have cable or satelitte and our local transmitter does transmit digital.(too far from civilisation for cable, listed house not allowed sat dish).
BUT I STILL AM FORCED TO PAY FOR A PRODUCT, ON PAIN OF CRIMINAL PROSECUTION IF I DO NOT, THAT I CAN NOT RECIEVE.

Isn't that illegal? Is it just cos the BBC are too lazy to have an active database of users who can not see all eleventymillion of their new channels? or is it just a scam! I can see two channels of their 9 i believe, so can i pay less? I am more than willing to pay for the two I get, Top Gear and Tribe alone are worth the fee.

[Graham]

Actually I think you should pay the extra for the privilage of not having to wade through the eleventy million channels of utter $h1te that is available on cable etc.

Just think of it as a quality filter that your paying for you have 3 channels that you can flick through quickly and if there is nothing on you quickly know it.. with cable / sky etc it takes 20 mins to find out there is nothing on but drivel..


even the constant repeats on Motors TV are starting to Pish me off and the season has only just finished !!!!!

[Eric Mc]

LICENCE

[timmy30]

There's an echo on this thread

[Flat in Fifth]

timmy30 said:

There's an echo on this thread

Nah he was just hammering the point home re constant repeats.

[Raify]

I completely agree. The licence fee should be banded, so that 2 channels + radio = £x, 9 channels + radio = £y.
I got equally irritated by that smug advert.

That said, bbc2 did keep me in fits of laughter for about an hour and a half last night: Never mind the buzzcocks, Broken News + Have I got news for you...

[Hanslow]

You'll be alright when they turn the analogue signal off as you'll then have a TV that can't receive digital broadcasts (providing you don't have a digibox) so in theory, under the current rules, you'll not be able to receive their TV broadcasts so shouldn't have to pay the TV licence.

Of course this means you'll have no TV to watch, which is not a bad thing if you just want to watch DVDs and play games I'm sure they'll realise this though and introduce TV tax or something stupid.

[cotty]

Raify said:

I completely agree. The licence fee should be banded, so that 2 channels + radio = £x, 9 channels + radio = £y. :

No channels or radio = £nil

[Thelemming]

Perhaps the most pertinent question is WHY we are subsidising BBC programming globally when we cant recieve even a fraction of their materiel across the UK.

The BBC current supplies the following:

TV

BBC One
BBC Two
BBC Three
BBC Four
CBBC
CBeebies
BBC News 24
BBC Parliament
Interactive TV

Radio

Radio 1
1Xtra
Radio 2
Radio 3
Radio 4
Five Live
Five Live Sports Extra
6 Music
BBC 7
Asian Network

Other

England local television & radio
Scotland
Wales/Cymru
Northern Ireland
BBC Orchestras
BBC Singers
bbc.co.uk
The Digital Curriculum


BBC World Service

43 radio language services globally

There are also a host of other commercial joint ventures.

Is it just me or do I question why we are paying for radio stations broadcasting globally in 43 different languages rather than for the BBC to upgrade transmissions to cover the UK - The people PAYING for the service?

[Munter]

The main cost to the BBC is producing the programs. Not the cost of repeating them on several channels. Therefore you are getting all the expensive stuff anyway. It's just that you need to set the video rather than watch the repeat on BBC3/4.

And if you introduced 2 levels of licence the people who have less channels wouldn't pay less. But the people with more would pay more.

[scared but happy]

Perhaps this is due to the unique way the BBC is paid for? Don't they have shares in Freeview?
I agree.. Do you notice that they never mention BBC Palament when talking about their super BBC channels?

Oh and please stop these stupid Radio 1 adverts and channel that money into proper televison. I don't care if its technicaly clever thats NOT what I pay for.

[Raify]

When this analogue switch off happens, won't they have to give out free digiboxes to everyone??

[anonymous-user]

The licence fee is anomalous and should be scrapped.

The BBC should stick to public service broadcasting. We do not need the BBC to make "Bargain Hunt" ot "Flog It" or "Ready Steady Cook" or most of the drivel that it spends our money on. We don't need the BBC to have a 24 hour news channel or to run countless satellite channels that nobody wants and nobody watches but which we all pay for.

I would rationalise the BBC by selling BBC1 , all the crap satellite channels, Radios 1,2 3 and 5 live to the highest bidder and leaving a core public service broadcaster. This should reduce the cost of the BBC from around 2.5 billion to aroun 250 million and it can be funded from taxation.

[eccles]

there must be something about suffolk, i cant even get channel 5, let alone new fangled things like digital telly, or cable.
my parents are in the middle of rural wales, and they can get freeview fine, and suffolk is all nice and flat and i cant even get a good picture at all!

[vixpy1]

I don't actually have a problem with the lic... Lisc... Liesc.. EricMc Fee.

[jimothy]

Check the BBC's charter. I believe some guy never pays as he doesn;t believe they fulfil their charter, and he's got away with it.

Or I could be wrong...

[Eric Mc]

Hanslow - It's not only the BBC who repeat

On the subject of repeats, I watched a quality repeat last night - The Clangers. Good old BBC 4.

>> Edited by Eric Mc on Tuesday 15th November 13:31

[neil.b]

unrepentant said:

The licence fee is anomalous and should be scrapped. The BBC should stick to public service broadcasting. We do not need the BBC to make "Bargain Hunt" ot "Flog It" or "Ready Steady Cook" or most of the drivel that it spends our money on. We don't need the BBC to have a 24 hour news channel or to run countless satellite channels that nobody wants and nobody watches but which we all pay for. I would rationalise the BBC by selling BBC1 , all the crap satellite channels, Radios 1,2 3 and 5 live to the highest bidder and leaving a core public service broadcaster. This should reduce the cost of the BBC from around 2.5 billion to aroun 250 million and it can be funded from taxation.

Bang on the money.

To pick up on one of the other points about making your current TV set obsolete - I read a few weeks back that the US government have set a date in stone of 2009 (I think) for when programs will be broadcast in digital only. In addition they've pledged billions of dollars to either subisdise the cost of new TV sets or to purchase converter boxes for people who are unable to receive the signal. Think about it - for commercial TV it would be suicidal to instantly exclude a massive portion of the target audience for advertisers. I wouldn't be surprised if the US government pledge is backed by private companies with a vested interest in maintaining the signal into homes. Now the Beeb, on the otherhand, is supposedly not a commercial enterprise. I wonder what plan they have?

[c c]

I’m Sorry I Haven’t a Clue was back on Radio 4 yesterday. That’s almost worth the whole licence fee on its own..

[Munter]

unrepentant said:

The licence fee is anomalous and should be scrapped. The BBC should stick to public service broadcasting. We do not need the BBC to make "Bargain Hunt" ot "Flog It" or "Ready Steady Cook" or most of the drivel that it spends our money on. We don't need the BBC to have a 24 hour news channel or to run countless satellite channels that nobody wants and nobody watches but which we all pay for. I would rationalise the BBC by selling BBC1 , all the crap satellite channels, Radios 1,2 3 and 5 live to the highest bidder and leaving a core public service broadcaster. This should reduce the cost of the BBC from around 2.5 billion to aroun 250 million and it can be funded from taxation.

I like the licence fee bacause it means the programs that get shown are not just the ones the advertisers like to put their adverts around/in. I agree that the BBC should concentrate on a few core channels with top quality programming. I would pull you up on the scrapping of all but radio 4. I have no idea what's played on radio 4 but radio 2 is the most listened to station in the country so how about we keep that. Radio one is actually Chav radio and should be scrapped!