BBC licence fee

[Fame Monster]

Sky, Netflix and Amazon are all dearer than the BBC plus once again you are concentrating on TV output rather than the bigger picture which is the local radio stations, the world service and all its other parts. It is a prize well worth grabbing hold of for the likes of Murdoch and as we already own it and pay a small maintenance fee for it what will we get in return for its demise. Fuck all, that is for sure, all those years of UK taxpayers and UK licence fee monies gone for the benefit of a capitalist who is no doubt a donor to the Tory party.

The propaganda of the #defundtheBBC campaign has worked a treat hasn't it, the people who run this organisation blocked me on twitter for asking who funds them. They are being funded by vested interests and they don't want people to know that.

Corrupt as fuck it is,

Netflix isn't dearer than the BBC, and I'm not sure Amazon is either.

I'm sure the Defund movement will be part-funded by wealthy people who have a financial interest in its privatisation but I think most people who support the 'Defund' movement are already aware of that.

I'm guessing their main concern is more likely that the BBC have become politically partisan and there have been countless examples listed in this thread, most recently the Grimes case, reported by everyone but those bastions of neutrality: the Guardian, the Mirror, and sadly, the BBC. If this took place in Iran, the BBC would be all over the story.

I think a lot of people are beginning to suspect that it wouldn't be any less partisan in private hands and could be a lot less cheaper for them personally, depending on the funding model.

 

[Rascal]

I care not a jot about some hashtag campaign as i dont bother reading any fucker who thinks a hashtag makes their voice important. The truth is society has changed. Ratings for the Beeb have dropped considerably and so to has the income as many simply will not pay the enforced license fee any longer for something they dont watch. We could go back to sticking folk in prison for it i suppose but i dont think that will go down too well or we could tell the Beeb to operate in a commercial world like everyone else and if it wants to pay a star £2M a year then its program will have to earn that money commercially and if its that good, it will.

It seems to me the Beeb wants its cake and eat it. Huge amounts on salaries, less and less original content, more and more replays of absolute fucking turgid daytime dross and oh, BTW you can all pay for it.

I've no issue in paying more for my license fee so long as im being entertained. The odd Match of the Day now and then and wanting to boot the fucking tv in because Linekar wants to be political and some other fucker wants to pander to the rags and dipper fanbase and slag us off doesn't leave me feeling like i want to pay for it any longer. Dont get me started on the websites!

#defund........ No doubt it vested interests. Politically everything is up for sale these days and the #defund is being applied to things far more serious than a tv license mate.

Again you concentrate on content, some of which is amazing and sells world wide for huge amounts of money. Its only because the BBC are staved of money and that rules regarding sport were changed that the BBC lost sport coverage to channels that are now wanting to charge £14.95 to watch a game live. The Govt have been complicit in running down the BBC and using it as a political football, Osborne moving the licence fee to the BBC instead of it being a Govt duty was the start. I would make it free BTW, with it being properly funded by the Govt from taxation, but there is now way the Tories will do that because they would rather sell it to one of their donors.

The #DEFUNDTHEBBC movement is a political movement financed by pro free marketers, so if you think #BLM is the same then be consistent and against both. You may think its not serious but it has serious implications for the fil and tv industry in this country because so many of our brilliant technicians started off working for the BBC . They got trained there, do you really think a private company has any interest in training staff when they can bring them from abroad. It will be the death of yet another British industry.

Lineker s not political on MOTD, he does his job, what his private views are should not bar him from working for them, Andrew O'Neill the editor of the very right wing Spectator worked for the BBC and didn't express his own personal views, nor does the Ex Young Tory leader Nick Robinson. James O'Brien left newsnight because he wasn't allowed to express his own personal politcal opinions.

The country is being conned once again and if the BBC is taken over it will cost a damn sight more than what the current licence fee is to be able to access its platforms.

 

[Rascal]

I'm sure the Defund movement will be part-funded by wealthy people who have a financial interest in its privatisation but I think most people who support the 'Defund' movement are already aware of that.

If you are aware of that, tell me who they are then?

Because the people behind it wont tell you.

 

[Rascal]

I'm guessing their main concern is more likely that the BBC have become politically partisan and there have been countless examples listed in this thread, most recently the Grimes case, reported by everyone but those bastions of neutrality:

Grimes the odious little prick is one of those behind #DEFUNDTHE BBC along with the usual right wing suspects from the Tufton Street mafia. Calvin Robinson,, yep Lawrence Fox's mate, Dan Wooten from Murdochs Talk radio, Becky Ryan who started the Standup4brexit campaign. Within 48 hours of James Yucel the leader of Glasgow Uni young Conservatives starting the campaign on twitter it had 50K followers and was being promoted by that **** Paul Staines and the Guido Fawkes mob, Westmonster and the Pro free marketeer Tory group. Yucel has been in the Daily Express and Murdochs Talk Radio surprise surprise.

It fucking stinks, the British public is being conned by these cunts.

 

[Fame Monster]

If you are aware of that, tell me who they are then?

Because the people behind it wont tell you.

I think Rupert Lowe's a funder but I was talking in general terms. Whenever there's money to be made, sharks will always be circling. Despite that, a lot of people support the movement for political reasons and we shouldn't lose sight of that.

You mentioned that you voted leave yet I'm sure you're aware there were many dodgy people trying to profiteer from that result. I also think it would be an insult to your intelligence to say that you were conned or unaware that there were people like that in the same camp as you.

 

[Ancient Citizen]

The people have been conned by nefarious interests.

The choice they have made has been influenced by those interests as we seeing the corporatisation of the UK, you know what comes with corporatisation dont you.

I’m sorry, but because many people do not share your political views, saying that they’ve been conned, influenced by entities deemed by yourself as evil, or other nefarious assumptions, doesn’t mean they’re wrong and you’re right.
With the choices available now, and the dislike of partisan influences, they are beginning to scrap the BBC, in numbers now increasing daily.
There is a groundswell getting more and more pissed off with being forced to pay for something they’re not now holding any affection for, those days are gone, and it’s my view that the fee won’t be around in a few years, maybe less.

 

[Pedestrian]

BBC TV is crap. I never listen to the radio. I should be able to opt out and still continue to watch the free to air channels and the subscription services I choose. I can’t fathom any reason why this isn’t the best option.

Fox News type rubbish is already on its way, Andrew Neil has just announced his next project.

 

[TheRemainsOfTheDave]

BBC TV is crap. I never listen to the radio. I should be able to opt out and still continue to watch the free to air channels and the subscription services I choose. I can’t fathom any reason why this isn’t the best option.

Fox News type rubbish is already on its way, Andrew Neil has just announced his next project.

The BBC is public funded, like your council charges, to provide a range of services for the people residing in its boundaries. Whether you choose to use the services is up to you but many others certainly do. If you use the BBC website, that is funded via the licence, Freesat and Freeview (which improve the FTA experience) are part funded by the BBC so some of the licence goes to that. In the past, it has also funded broadband rollout, possibly what you are using now.

If you DON'T want Fox News style channels, a public service is probably better.

 

[Pedestrian]

The BBC is public funded, like your council charges, to provide a range of services for the people residing in its boundaries. Whether you choose to use the services is up to you but many others certainly do. If you use the BBC website, that is funded via the licence, Freesat and Freeview (which improve the FTA experience) are part funded by the BBC so some of the licence goes to that. In the past, it has also funded broadband rollout, possibly what you are using now.

If you DON'T want Fox News style channels, a public service is probably better.

Again Andrew neil announced his Fox News type tosh yesterday so it’s already enroute.
My council tax covers many essential services inc those I already use and ones I may need at times. The bbc provides a service I don’t ever use. The bbc website is shit. That’s already been mentioned. The partisan football coverage is embarrassing. I shouldn’t be forced to pay for something I don’t want. The fairest way is to make it a subscription service then folk like you can enjoy Zoe ball and Laura kuenssberg and folk like me will be better off financially. I’m not particularly against it as a service, I equate it to the metro free newspaper. It suits certain types and I don’t have any issue with that. It’s the compulsory licence that I object to especially since I don’t use anything it provides. I also think it’s dated and would benefit from a new direction. Turning it into a optional subscription service would give it an opportunity to modernise.

 

[denislawsbackheel]

I get that people in the 70's were forced to have just 3/4 channels with limited options for personalisation, but as you say it's 2020 and people can personalise what entertainment methods and needs that they want and their choice is all that should matter.

Being forced to pay a 'licence fee', which is anything but (because whenever people talk about defending the licence fee, ITV is rarely if at all mentioned) in truth it's "pay for the BBC in order to enjoy the live TV you WANT to watch", and it's morally wrong.

If the BBC is considered as a "service", then what about ITV? Or UK TV? SKY? Its all excuses made to try and justify an outdated premise that no longer has any validity to endorse in a modern, digital, personalised world. It all boils down to "You can't watch live TV unless you pay for the BBC".

And quite right too.