Cable Forum
Page 12 of 25 « First 2891011 12 1314151622 Last »
Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

Cable Forum (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/index.php)
-   Current Affairs (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/forumdisplay.php?f=20)
-   -   Funding of the BBC (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/showthread.php?t=33707081)

Sephiroth 02-02-2019 13:35
Re: Funding of the BBC
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr K (Post 35981748)
It's a point of view, there are others, which should be heard. I think you and many others want a broadcaster that only reflects your views. [SEPH]: Not me, Squire. I don't like to see the bias that the BBC displays on topical items.

The Govt. has done nothing less than try to bully the BBC since 2010, with the threat of hitting funding if they don't comply. It'll be a sad day if they submit and we don't have independent reporting any longer.

Getting back to funding, freezing the licence fee for 6 years has led to more repeats and the loss of BBC3. As with everything else pay less, get less. Blame HM Govt., not the BBC [SEPH]: Other than the political bias, the BBC is pretty much doing fine.
.

Hugh 02-02-2019 15:10
Re: Funding of the BBC
 
Strange how, if the BBC is "anti-Brexit", it is often labelled "the Brexit Broadcasting Service" on lots of Leaver social media, and on websites like "Order-Order", which are very pro-Brexit.

Seems to be in the eyes of the beholder...

papa smurf 02-02-2019 15:14
Re: Funding of the BBC
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 35981769)
Strange how, if the BBC is "anti-Brexit", it is often labelled "the Brexit Broadcasting Service" on lots of Leaver social media, and on websites like "Order-Order", which are very pro-Brexit.

Seems to be in the eyes of the beholder...
Brussels Broadcasting Corporation.:nono:

Hugh 02-02-2019 15:50
Re: Funding of the BBC
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by papa smurf (Post 35981771)
Brussels Broadcasting Corporation.:nono:
Mmmm - wonder how it manages to be both?

OLD BOY 02-02-2019 18:58
Re: Funding of the BBC
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimmy-J (Post 35981753)
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ence-year.html

'Netflix effect' sees nearly a MILLION Britons cancel their TV licence in last year as viewers ditch BBC in favour of streaming services
Thank you, Jimmy. Unfortunately, all the evidence in the world will not shake Chris and jfman from their infathomable beliefs that our future world will not look rather different from today.

Digital technology is moving at such a speed that a lot of people find it difficult to keep up. That's fair enough, but to keep challenging the clear trends that are happening and have been evidenced without any facts to support the challenge is tiresome and futile. In my humble opinion. :shrug:

Chris 02-02-2019 19:59
Re: Funding of the BBC
 
Err ... I asked you to cite your source for the evidence that switching from a licence to a subscription would result in only a small reduction in payers. The item from the Daily Wail - aside from having all the academic credentials of a public urinal - addresses a different issue entirely. So stop pretending we don’t all know you’re just making stuff up and try harder.

Hugh 02-02-2019 20:25
Re: Funding of the BBC
 
The same article, but in the Times - they had a line the Fail missed out.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/v...hold-fj3lfgk9c

Quote:
Television licences are compulsory for anyone who watches live television or uses the BBC’s iPlayer catch-up service. As of March last year 25.8 million licences were held, a record high driven largely by population growth.

Chris 02-02-2019 20:33
Re: Funding of the BBC
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 35981803)
The same article, but in the Times - they had a line the Fail missed out.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/v...hold-fj3lfgk9c
Funnily enough, the Wail article does eventually admit to the fact that the high number of cancellations is in large part due to house moves and singletons getting married and moving in together. The number they quoted is an absolute number of cancellations, not a reduction in the overall total. The only useful thing you can do with the figure the Mail has quoted is use it alongside the figure for new licence fee payers to arrive at the total number of TV licences held. Oddly the Mail hasn’t done so. Can’t think why.

But frankly it’s a waste of pixels pointing this out to OB because it’s facts and evidence, which he wouldn’t understand if it came accompanied with a copy of Facts And Evidence For Dummies.

telegramsam 17-02-2019 12:12
Re: Funding of the BBC
 
The BBC,in my opinion, is stuck in the past and the license fee is likewise. It must be scrapped and forced into a subscription service. People argue that it would cost too much and the quality of programs would suffer. I disagree. The money raised through subs plus advertising revenue would provide more than enough for them to make or buy good programs. Also,if they stopped paying the likes of Gary Lineker silly money for jobs that anyone could do they'd save a hell of a lot of money.

jfman 17-02-2019 12:33
Re: Funding of the BBC
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by OLD BOY (Post 35981791)
Thank you, Jimmy. Unfortunately, all the evidence in the world will not shake Chris and jfman from their infathomable beliefs that our future world will not look rather different from today.

Digital technology is moving at such a speed that a lot of people find it difficult to keep up. That's fair enough, but to keep challenging the clear trends that are happening and have been evidenced without any facts to support the challenge is tiresome and futile. In my humble opinion. :shrug:
If you have any clear evidenced trends I’d certainly like to read them.

Sephiroth 17-02-2019 13:23
Re: Funding of the BBC
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by telegramsam (Post 35983424)
The BBC,in my opinion, is stuck in the past and the license fee is likewise. It must be scrapped and forced into a subscription service. People argue that it would cost too much and the quality of programs would suffer. I disagree. The money raised through subs plus advertising revenue would provide more than enough for them to make or buy good programs. Also,if they stopped paying the likes of Gary Lineker silly money for jobs that anyone could do they'd save a hell of a lot of money.
The BBC is indeed stuck in the past but if they were on a subscription model, they would die - unless they can compete with the likes of Amazon & Netflix which they can’t because they would also have to fund the PBS side of things like the News, QT, etc and would thus be uncompetitive.

Maggy 17-02-2019 15:23
Re: Funding of the BBC
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris (Post 35981797)
Err ... I asked you to cite your source for the evidence that switching from a licence to a subscription would result in only a small reduction in payers. The item from the Daily Wail - aside from having all the academic credentials of a public urinal - addresses a different issue entirely. So stop pretending we don’t all know you’re just making stuff up and try harder.
:rofl:

---------- Post added at 15:23 ---------- Previous post was at 15:21 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 35981769)
Strange how, if the BBC is "anti-Brexit", it is often labelled "the Brexit Broadcasting Service" on lots of Leaver social media, and on websites like "Order-Order", which are very pro-Brexit.

Seems to be in the eyes of the beholder...
Which underlines the point that the BBC is actually doing the job it is supposed to when all sides accuse it of bias.:D

Sephiroth 17-02-2019 16:19
Re: Funding of the BBC
 
I do happen to think there is bias at the BBC. My subjective view is based on editorial choice when bad news is reported and attributed to Brexit when that is not the only cause. Rarely/never do they attribute economic good news to “despite Brexit”. I’ve also noticed panel bias on QT.

Hugh 17-02-2019 16:37
Re: Funding of the BBC
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 35983438)
I do happen to think there is bias at the BBC. My subjective view is based on editorial choice when bad news is reported and attributed to Brexit when that is not the only cause. Rarely/never do they attribute economic good news to “despite Brexit”. I’ve also noticed panel bias on QT.
You noticed that as well!

Nigel Farage appeared 32 times since 2000, and UKIP appeared in 24% of the QT shows in 7 years, despite never having more than 2 MPs, and there hasn’t been a pro-EU MEP on QT since 2002.

Definite bias...

Sephiroth 17-02-2019 16:54
Re: Funding of the BBC
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 35983441)
You noticed that as well!

Nigel Farage appeared 32 times since 2000, and UKIP appeared in 24% of the QT shows in 7 years, despite never having more than 2 MPs, and there hasn’t been a pro-EU MEP on QT since 2002.

Definite bias...
Maybe I should have said since 2016.


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 22:45.
Page 12 of 25 « First 2891011 12 1314151622 Last »
Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
All Posts and Content are © Cable Forum