Re: Funding of the BBC
 

And there’s the flaw in your proposition- "you think".

I would rather the dismantling of a world-reknowned organisation, admired and respected by many other countries, was based on pragmatic fact-based information, rather than "feels".

No business should, or would, change it’s funding model based on ‘think", rather than "know"...

Re: Funding of the BBC
 

How would anyone 'know' until a subscription BBC became a reality? This constant quest for 'proof' that something will happen in the future is rather amusing, because one cannot know until we get there.

And yet those who say something won't happen appear not to believe they need to offer any 'proof' at all.

Very curious. :rolleyes:

Re: Funding of the BBC
 

And if the subscription model didn’t work?

Oops?

No business changes its funding model without in depth market research, due diligence, and impact & risk assessments - not just "let’s try it, what’s the worst that could happen?".

Re: Funding of the BBC
 

As per usual, this topic is getting stuck on the “the BBC should go subscription because that’s a bit like the licence fee innit” nonsense.

As has been said many times before, public service broadcasting in the U.K., with the single exception of the BBC, operates on a free-to-view, advertising-supported model. This is the model that is proven to work for a broadcaster that requires universal, or near-universal availability in British homes. In the event that the licence fee is ended at the next charter review, that is the model the BBC will adopt.

(But the licence won’t be terminated at the next review - that wouldn’t give them time to prepare. If things were going to change, they terms of the next royal charter would likely specify that they would occur at some point within the next charter period, so that would be the second half of the 2020s at the earliest. *If* Parliament decided to end the TV licence. Which I still don’t think it will.)

Re: Funding of the BBC
 

Except that they have plenty of time to prepare. It was a consideration this time around, remember? Do you seriously think 10 years + is not enough time to prepare?

I note you have not commented on the unfairness of having people pay for a service they don't use. How bizarre!

Re: Funding of the BBC
 

Its only unfair to those who can't see through their own very selfish insular vision the great scope and breadth of content that the BBC does whether its TV, online , Radio , etc , etc , etc.

Re: Funding of the BBC
 

How is it selfish not to want to pay for something you don't use. I keep seeing what great value the BBC is at just £12 per month, how is it great value if you never watch it, I watch about 12 hours tv per month, never the BBC, explain how I'm getting great value for money, I can see how others are though due to their viewing being subsidised by mugs like me

---------- Post added at 08:16 ---------- Previous post was at 08:14 ----------

You heard any of those local radio stations recently, no thought not, no one has and how many are putting out unique livr content all day?

Re: Funding of the BBC
 

Well if you could miss those 12 hours TV a month, you wouldn't need to pay a licence fee. ?
As mentioned the BBC isn't just TV; and a lot of paid for cable channels are repeating BBC output. If nothing new is made we'd soon get bored. There's some great new drama this Christmas, and it's mostly on the BBC. Every other channel is 95% repeats.

Re: Funding of the BBC
 

I don't actually know the numbers but quite a few people do listen to BBC Local Radio. It's an underappreciated part of the BBC's output since it's often where the public service aspect is strong, covering local stories and events which would otherwise go ignored by a wider population. I think this is more pronounced outside of London where the media tends to have less of a natural interest.

And yes they do tend to do a lot of unique content. Here is Cumbria's schedule: https://www.bbc.co.uk/schedules/p00fzl79#on-now

Most of it is live and unique other than the early hours where they fall back to Radio 5 Live.

This is in contrast to the media landscape in the United States where theoretically there would be larger audiences for local content but in reality most local stations are owned by major media companies and play syndicated national radio shows to save money.

Re: Funding of the BBC
 

There's talk of a digital license where a little thing like not having a telly won't protect you from having to pay that notwithstanding I'm not getting value and neither are many, many others and whilst we are at it why are we subsidising mps tv viewing



It's literally a few people listening and falling all the time

Re: Funding of the BBC
 

So you're calling me selfish just because i don't want to pay the License Fee, as i don't watch BBC TV or Listen to Radio, i have more important things to spend that £12 on which i would then get a choice to do, that comment is just ridiculous............... Thanks Den!

Re: Funding of the BBC
 

The TV licence is not a BBC subscription. It is, in effect, a tax on the consumption of broadcast TV. The proceeds of this effective tax are mostly, but not entirely, used to fund the BBC’s freely available TV, radio and internet services. This continues to be justified in law in precisely the same way other public services are. Their availability is what you’re paying for, not their use. Arguing that it’s unfair that you’re paying for something you don’t use is as pointless as arguing you should get a council tax reduction if you don’t send your kids to school.

The next charter comes into effect at the beginning of 2027, which is 8 years from now, not 10+. As the review process only occurs in the two years running up to this date, there is no chance of the BBC being cut off from all licence fee funding on that time scale. If Parliament is minded to change or end the BBC’s access to public funds, it would do so on a staged basis, which in law could not commence before January 2027.

Re: Funding of the BBC
 

A lot of things are subsidised to a extent on many things in this country which some don't use as but sometimes we have think of the wider good that something does rather then ones own self.

---------- Post added at 09:53 ---------- Previous post was at 09:50 ----------

Perhaps the comment is a bit OTT but many things are subsided to a certain extent SnoopZ and IMO BBC does far more for the greater good in this country then the others put together.

Re: Funding of the BBC
 

Not selfish at all.

Being forced to pay the fee is ridiculous. When TV started and it was only the BBC being broadcast and getting those services for that fee.

Most people pay enough for TV and streaming services now so many don't see the need for it.

Re: Funding of the BBC
 

tv isn't an essential service and shouldn't be subsidised, tv licencing is a relic from a bygone era that's long past it's sell by date and it's purpose is no longer relevant imo