BBC/Tories at War..

Super_horns

Well-Known Member
Moderator
Messages
7,340
Likes
625
Supports
WATFORD
Thread starter #1
The Tories appear to be very keen to strip or even scrap the BBC licence fee altogether and only allow them to produce programmes which cannot be covered on commercials channels.

Middle class families will be forced to pay more for the licence fee than poor households under plans for a Finnish-style means tested broadcasting levy to pay for the BBC.

John Whittingdale, the Culture Secretary, will today publish a green paper which will propose “root and branch reform” of the BBC as part of its royal charter renewal.

He will consider plans for a new means tested levy to be paid by better-off taxpayers based on their annual income – regardless of whether or not they own a television
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/bbc...d-under-Government-charter-renewal-plans.html

What are your views...

Tories right to make the Beeb stand on their own feet or have some sympathy for the national broadcaster?
 

BigDaveCUFC

Well-Known Member
Messages
2,667
Likes
540
Supports
Curzon Ashton....and Carlisle
#2
it is a strange one in the respect if they ruin the BBC they could risk losing a portion of their voting group ie: Pensioners......the free TV license is a big boost but not if they take away any of the stuff they would watch.

but of course cynic that is am you can look at it that if we were all forced to subscription channels it probably highly benefits one of the conservatives big financial backers and I think they could be dictating this one, would not surprise me if they forced the government into this one.
 

Red

Well-Known Member
Messages
2,540
Likes
1,108
Location
Chesterfield
Supports
Opposing the pedestrianisation of Norwich city centre!!!!
#3
I don't watch much TV. In principle I'm in favour of paying for a TV licence because the Beeb do make some exceptionally good programmes. I do think the cost is too much though. Conversely I'd happily pay more if it meant all the cooking, property, auction and talent shows were gotten rid of. If it was up to me I'd get rid of all that shit and also moronic shit like Britain's got talent, X Factor and programmes about people on benefits. I know....I'm a philistine.
 

BigDaveCUFC

Well-Known Member
Messages
2,667
Likes
540
Supports
Curzon Ashton....and Carlisle
#4
I should have added they should just let BBC whack on adverts.

we ALL hate them, but if its going to help costs then do it.
 

Cheese & Biscuits

Well-Known Member
Messages
3,112
Likes
2,226
Location
Yarkshire
Supports
Daggers
#5
I don't watch much TV. In principle I'm in favour of paying for a TV licence because the Beeb do make some exceptionally good programmes. I do think the cost is too much though. Conversely I'd happily pay more if it meant all the cooking, property, auction and talent shows were gotten rid of. If it was up to me I'd get rid of all that shit and also moronic shit like Britain's got talent, X Factor and programmes about people on benefits. I know....I'm a philistine.
The cost is too much? I think £12 a month is exceptionally cheap for the output we get. Sure there's a lot of crap but it has to appeal to everyone.
 

BigDaveCUFC

Well-Known Member
Messages
2,667
Likes
540
Supports
Curzon Ashton....and Carlisle
#8
yes but the media.....ie Murdoch......is moaning because they are blaming the BBC for stealing their customers.

and oh...........who funds the conservatives I wonder.


My biggest moan with the conservatives right now is their first months as a majority has been a very very political based government, no worries about the real issues just trying to play their games to hit key areas............namely get Scotland to be more anti-Labour, attack Union backing to Labour, Sucker the SNP into an English-votes argument, hit the media who don't back them.
 

AFCB_Mark

Administrator
Staff member
Admin
Moderator
Messages
3,514
Likes
1,062
Supports
A single unitary authority for urban Dorset
#9
Like the BBC, happy to pay the license to ensure no adverts (although there has been a steady increase of inter-BBC adverts over recent years). I do think the license is a tad too much though, considering there are so many repeats and stuff.

There's always questions over the BBC impartiality and there always has been. I think the fact that both right and left slag the BBC off for bias suggests they get it about right.
 
C

Captain Scumbag

Guest
#10
Scrapping the existing license fee and replacing it with some kind of means-tested tax, which may be levied on people who don't even own a telly, is certainly not "making the Beeb stand on their own feet". It is an interesting idea, though.

The thing is, the license fee probably once was a genuinely 'progressive' tax, because in effect it was a mechanism by which money was taken from the affluent (i.e. those who could afford a telly) and invested – in part, at least – towards the provision of broadcasting services that were cheaper and much more widely available (i.e. radio).

But it's not 1946 anymore. Nowadays most households, including the poorest, have at least one TV set. We live in the digital age. The internet happened. Pretty much everyone has a telly, so pretty much every household, regardless of income, is expected to pay the same license fee. My wife and I have a combined six-figure annual income, but our household is asked to pay no more than a household run by a single mother who scrubs toilets for minimum wage. What is 'progressive' about that? Remarkable that the Tories may be the first to float this idea of funding it through a means-tested tax, but there we go.

Of course, the above is all predicated on an assumption that state-funded broadcasting is a good and desirable thing. For what it's worth, I would prefer the BBC to be genuinely independent and paid for by voluntary subscription. But what about all the 'progressives' out there who are broadly in favour of the status quo, i.e. the BBC being funded by a largely involuntary license fee: are they, in principle, against the idea of means-tested alternative?
 

Frealaf

Well-Known Member
Messages
2,332
Likes
752
Location
Cyprus
Supports
Grimsby Town
Twitter
@Gladders1980
#12
Don't really watch TV any more and what I do is all online anyway (netflix, amazon prime, iplayer, youtube etc.).

Adverts are a big turn off and one of the reasons I never watch ITV. That said if they scrapped the licence fee and had adverts it wouldn't bother me for the reason that I hardly watch TV any more, so I'm all for it.
 

silkyman

Well-Known Member
Messages
4,099
Likes
1,068
Supports
Macclesfield Town/Manchester City. It's complicated.
#13
If you don't watch TV, get rid of your TV and don't pay the licence.
 

silkyman

Well-Known Member
Messages
4,099
Likes
1,068
Supports
Macclesfield Town/Manchester City. It's complicated.
#14
I should have added they should just let BBC whack on adverts.

we ALL hate them, but if its going to help costs then do it.
If the BBC is allowed to advertise then it would saturate the market with additional broadcast advertisement slots which would bring down prices and increase competition for the likes of ITV. To compensate they would have to have more adverts to make up the loss.

Wouldn't be too long before it would be like watching TV in the U.S., which is irritating as hell.
 

Red

Well-Known Member
Messages
2,540
Likes
1,108
Location
Chesterfield
Supports
Opposing the pedestrianisation of Norwich city centre!!!!
#15
My concern if it opened up to advertising is that the quality of programming would diminish.
 

Womble98

Well-Known Member
Messages
880
Likes
265
Supports
AFC Wimbledon and Sporting Leyland
#16
Add the license fee to some other tax to ensure it is paid by everyone. "I don't watch TV" is a similar argument to "I don't use the health service". You still have to pay for it.
 

Frealaf

Well-Known Member
Messages
2,332
Likes
752
Location
Cyprus
Supports
Grimsby Town
Twitter
@Gladders1980
#17
If you don't watch TV, get rid of your TV and don't pay the licence.
Didn't say I never watch TV, said I "don't really watch" TV any more, meaning live TV or BBC, sky etc. everything for me is now through the internet to my TV including BBC iplayer which you need a licence for if you watch them at the same time as being broadcast which I do for formula 1, and the missus occasionally watches stuff live.
 

Kenneth E End

Well-Known Member
Messages
4,148
Likes
487
Supports
Luton Town
#18
I've never voted Lib Dem and never will, but I think the opening 2 months of this government are proving what we knew all along - that turkeys don't vote for Christmas. The Libs would've vetoed these proposals very quickly.
  • Gerrymandering which will positively effect Tory seats more so than Labour ones.
  • War with the BBC, traditionally a Tory foe due to their perceived left wing bias and a major rival to one of their main allies.
  • Reducing the power of the unions to an electoral level lower than what they were elected on.
  • Reducing funding to the Labour party through Union contributions.
  • Bringing back foxhunting.
The Labour Party however really aren't helping themselves at the moment, and electing Jeremy Corbyn will not help matters; in fact it will have the opposite effect.
 
Messages
4,776
Likes
1,756
Location
Walsall
Supports
Dr Tony's Villa Revolution
#19
Scrap the fee, stick adverts on it. Why should you have to pay for a fucking channel that you may not even use!? Every other channel in the world gets on fine using adverts. That argument by MorDon is utterly stupid, you pay for healthcare as you may need to use it at some point, do you pay for the TV just in case one day there is a life threatening problem that causes you to need to instantly turn on BBC fucking One before you die a slow painful death!? Bullshit.

Fuck the license fee. Scrap the shit.
 
Messages
4,776
Likes
1,756
Location
Walsall
Supports
Dr Tony's Villa Revolution
#20
Scrap the fee, stick adverts on it. Why should you have to pay for a fucking channel that you may not even use!? Every other channel in the world gets on fine using adverts. That argument by MorDon is utterly stupid, you pay for healthcare as you may need to use it at some point, do you pay for the TV just in case one day there is a life threatening problem that causes you to need to instantly turn on BBC fucking One before you die a slow painful death!? Bullshit.

Fuck the license fee. Scrap the shit.
 

Cardsfan

Well-Known Member
Messages
3,106
Likes
875
Supports
Woking
#21
Scrap the fee, stick adverts on it. Why should you have to pay for a fucking channel that you may not even use!? Every other channel in the world gets on fine using adverts. That argument by MorDon is utterly stupid, you pay for healthcare as you may need to use it at some point, do you pay for the TV just in case one day there is a life threatening problem that causes you to need to instantly turn on BBC fucking One before you die a slow painful death!? Bullshit.

Fuck the license fee. Scrap the shit.
It's an excellent service, its quality would be greatly diminished. I expect the vast majority of people use a service from the BBC in some shape of form, no-one is ever going to be happy with everything their money or tax goes towards. While the consequences will be small initially, it could get a lot worse, slippery slope and all that.
 
A

Alty

Guest
#22
Scrap the fee, stick adverts on it. Why should you have to pay for a fucking channel that you may not even use!? Every other channel in the world gets on fine using adverts. That argument by MorDon is utterly stupid, you pay for healthcare as you may need to use it at some point, do you pay for the TV just in case one day there is a life threatening problem that causes you to need to instantly turn on BBC fucking One before you die a slow painful death!? Bullshit.

Fuck the license fee. Scrap the shit.
People all around the world admire the BBC. Its output is genuinely excellent. There's not a cat in hell's chance of the standard being maintained if the broadcaster has to chase advertising revenues.

Your interpretation of MorDon's argument is completely erroneous too. Not sure whether you're being disingenuous or a complete imbecile.
 

Womble98

Well-Known Member
Messages
880
Likes
265
Supports
AFC Wimbledon and Sporting Leyland
#23
I'll put it in different terms. The BBC is a public good, and therefore the public should pay for its upkeep with a universal levy which is the easiest way to ensure everyone who uses it pays.
 
Messages
4,776
Likes
1,756
Location
Walsall
Supports
Dr Tony's Villa Revolution
#24
I am never going to agree on this subject, I believe 100% that the BBC should have to make its money through other sources.
 
Messages
4,776
Likes
1,756
Location
Walsall
Supports
Dr Tony's Villa Revolution
#25
I am never going to agree on this subject, I believe 100% that the BBC should have to make its money through other sources.
 
C

Captain Scumbag

Guest
#26
It's the 21st century. Should citizens in one of the freest countries on Earth be obliged, under threat of prosecution, to fund a particular broadcasting company just because others have decreed that it's good for them?

If it's as brilliant and cherished as is often claimed, why not make the license fee voluntary?
 
Messages
1,797
Likes
1,741
Location
Guildford, Surrey
Supports
mighty, mighty Ks
#27
Scrapping the existing license fee and replacing it with some kind of means-tested tax, which may be levied on people who don't even own a telly, is certainly not "making the Beeb stand on their own feet". It is an interesting idea, though.

The thing is, the license fee probably once was a genuinely 'progressive' tax, because in effect it was a mechanism by which money was taken from the affluent (i.e. those who could afford a telly) and invested – in part, at least – towards the provision of broadcasting services that were cheaper and much more widely available (i.e. radio).

But it's not 1946 anymore. Nowadays most households, including the poorest, have at least one TV set. We live in the digital age. The internet happened. Pretty much everyone has a telly, so pretty much every household, regardless of income, is expected to pay the same license fee. My wife and I have a combined six-figure annual income, but our household is asked to pay no more than a household run by a single mother who scrubs toilets for minimum wage. What is 'progressive' about that? Remarkable that the Tories may be the first to float this idea of funding it through a means-tested tax, but there we go.

Of course, the above is all predicated on an assumption that state-funded broadcasting is a good and desirable thing. For what it's worth, I would prefer the BBC to be genuinely independent and paid for by voluntary subscription. But what about all the 'progressives' out there who are broadly in favour of the status quo, i.e. the BBC being funded by a largely involuntary license fee: are they, in principle, against the idea of means-tested alternative?
Personally, I'm not totally wedded to the idea of the license fee to such an extent that I'd automatically rule out all other alternatives, but it does seem to me to be the least worst funding model. It's imperfect for the reasons you identify but it works reasonably well to my mind - a guaranteed regular income stream ensures that we have a strong, sustainable public service broadcaster.* And whilst it is somewhat regressive, it's really a very small sum of money in the grand scheme of things. I earn a pretty modest salary and live alone so it's probably more of an outgoing for me than for many and yet don't regard it as being anything other than really very good value for money. It amounts to a tiny percentage of overall household expenditure.

*given the way they usually "take care" of public institutions I rather fear this concern isn't shared by our new Tory overlords
 
Messages
1,797
Likes
1,741
Location
Guildford, Surrey
Supports
mighty, mighty Ks
#28
It's the 21st century. Should citizens in one of the freest countries on Earth be obliged, under threat of prosecution, to fund a particular broadcasting company just because others have decreed that it's good for them?

If it's as brilliant and cherished as is often claimed, why not make the license fee voluntary?
96% of the population appear to have decreed that it's good for them, or at least I assume they have, given that they regularly make use of the corporation's services
 
Messages
463
Likes
219
Location
Liverpool
Supports
Hull City
#30
BBC television is generally awful, aside from the odd documentary. All the other channels provided by British broadcasters are generally as bad if not worse.

The radio is still good though, and any move towards more Murdoch domination is a poor move.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
14,935
Messages
923,342
Members
5,090
Latest member
Bordon Shot

Latest posts