BBC licence fee to be reviewed by Conservatives

[Ramrod]

Originally Posted by Pierre

My kids, don’t watch anything on the BBC at all, and they’re the future. The next generation as they grow up will not be able to comprehend to be forced to pay for a service they simply do not use.

Ah, but they aren't just paying to watch the BBC. They are paying to watch any live TV.

[Sirius]

Originally Posted by gba93

Which freeview channels are you referring to? If you receive anything via Freeview you need a licence (see https://www.freeview.co.uk/help/do-i...watch-freeview). I can only assume you fall into the the category of "You don’t need a TV Licence if you never watch or record programmes as they’re being shown on TV, on any channel, or live on an online TV service, and you never download or watch BBC programmes on iPlayer – live, catch up or on demand.This applies to any provider or device you use, including a TV, desktop computer, laptop, mobile phone, tablet, games console, digital box or Blu-ray/DVD/VHS recorder" as defined on the TV licencing website (https://www.tvlicensing.co.uk/faqs/FAQ99). If so, that's fine but a lot of people won't fall into that bracket.

I do not watch the BBC or use any other BBC output however due to the TV tax i have to pay the BBC because i decide to watch a program on SKY. The BBC tax means that the BBC are being paid for another company's broadcast even thou they had nothing to do with it. How is that fair ?

I do not watch or use the BBC at all now as the BBC has shown they are not independent any more, i realised that the way they covered the last election.

Subscription will sort it out.

[gba93]

Originally Posted by Sirius

I do not watch the BBC or use any other BBC output however due to the TV tax i have to pay the BBC because i decide to watch a program on SKY. The BBC tax means that the BBC are being paid for another company's broadcast even thou they had nothing to do with it. How is that fair ?

I do not watch or use the BBC at all now as the BBC has shown they are not independent any more, i realised that the way they covered the last election.

Subscription will sort it out.

As Ramrod correctly points out you aren't just paying to watch the BBC you are paying to watch any live TV.

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by Ramrod

Ah, but they aren't just paying to watch the BBC. They are paying to watch any live TV.

When the TV licence was introduced is was specifically just to watch BBC.

Define “TV”?

My eldest watches, almost exclusively, you tube. He watches it on his iPod, iPad, and Mac. But just because he may also watch it on a television, that attracts a fee whereas the other mediums don’t?

It’s farcical and needs review to make it fit for the future.

I’m not saying that I wouldn’t pay for BBC content, but how, why and what you pay for should be reviewed and non-payment should absolutely not result in criminal proceedings. Non-payment should just mean no access to BBC content as with all other providers.

[Sirius]

Originally Posted by gba93

As Ramrod correctly points out you aren't just paying to watch the BBC you are paying to watch any live TV.

I ask again WHY is it fair the BBC are paid for something they had no input with. Why should i have to pay the BBC for watching a SKY broadcast ????

[gba93]

Originally Posted by Sirius

I ask again WHY is it fair the BBC are paid for something they had no input with. Why should i have to pay the BBC for watching a SKY broadcast ????

Who ever said life was fair? My taxes go to fund education from which I currently don't benefit - is that fair? True I benefited from it when a child but then you probably watched one or more BBC programs when you were little. To clarify you don't pay the BBC you pay to:

• watch and record programmes as they’re being shown on TV or live on an online TV service, and
• watch and download BBC programmes on iPlayer – live, catch up and on demand.

This covers all TV broadcasts not just BBC programs.

[Sirius]

Originally Posted by gba93

Who ever said life was fair? My taxes go to fund education from which I currently don't benefit - is that fair? True I benefited from it when a child but then you probably watched one or more BBC programs when you were little. To clarify you don't pay the BBC you pay to:

• watch and record programmes as they’re being shown on TV or live on an online TV service, and
• watch and download BBC programmes on iPlayer – live, catch up and on demand.

This covers all TV broadcasts not just BBC programs.

But the BBC get all the money of the back of every other broadcaster from the TV Tax. I so hope they get made to go subscription and as soon as possible. It will save me money that i can make far better use of.

[pip08456]

Originally Posted by gba93

Who ever said life was fair? My taxes go to fund education from which I currently don't benefit - is that fair? True I benefited from it when a child but then you probably watched one or more BBC programs when you were little. To clarify you don't pay the BBC you pay to:

• watch and record programmes as they’re being shown on TV or live on an online TV service, and
• watch and download BBC programmes on iPlayer – live, catch up and on demand.

This covers all TV broadcasts not just BBC programs.

So what. The Government are going to scrap it. Now who should I feel sorry for and why?

[nashville]

Interesting to see what happens ,

[Mr K]

Originally Posted by nashville

Interesting to see what happens ,

What is interesting is that the Govt. have proclaimed the results of their 'consultation' whilst it's still ongoing !

[gba93]

We'll see.

[Mythica]

Originally Posted by heero_yuy

That'll put a stop to the wokeness when they have to EARN the right to broadcast.

Can't come soon enough. We've not paid the BBC tax for the last 15 years. We don't watch the BBC either because most of it is complete crap.

Mind you that applies to most broadcast TV across the board but at least you're not forced to pay for the rest of the crap.

You are, you would still need a TV licence.

---------- Post added at 21:24 ---------- Previous post was at 21:22 ----------

Originally Posted by TheDaddy

No concern at all for people watching or not watching tv, I have concern for people who are homeless or can't affotd to feed themselves but have zero concern for those that can't afford to watch tv or about the same level of concern shown for me who doesn't watch tv but is still forced to pay this outdated tax

If you don't watch TV, why are you forced to pay it?

---------- Post added at 21:29 ---------- Previous post was at 21:24 ----------

Originally Posted by Pierre

When the TV licence was introduced is was specifically just to watch BBC.

Define “TV”?

My eldest watches, almost exclusively, you tube. He watches it on his iPod, iPad, and Mac. But just because he may also watch it on a television, that attracts a fee whereas the other mediums don’t?

It’s farcical and needs review to make it fit for the future.

I’m not saying that I wouldn’t pay for BBC content, but how, why and what you pay for should be reviewed and non-payment should absolutely not result in criminal proceedings. Non-payment should just mean no access to BBC content as with all other providers.

That wouldn't attract a fee. The licence is to cover watching/recording live TV as it is broadcast.

[Sephiroth]

I would shed no tears if the BBC as it stands was to be abolished.

Everything necessary will be picked up by the survivors and the left wing bias of the BBC will be banished.

Even now they are arrogant and unrepentant. Banning Guvmin ministers from a flagship news programme is unforgivable political bias.

The licence was originally for radios, long before TV came along. Even though the BBC was founded as a private company it was given a royal charter and the right to collect licence fees as an effective means of paying for a comprehensive news and entertainment service.

It was extended to TVs and eventually the need for a radio licence was dropped. The portability of radios had a lot to do with that change. The “portability” of TV receivers is now creating pressure for further change.

The justification for continuing the system has changed down the years, especially as commercial alternatives to the BBC have emerged, but where we are at now is with a licence fee that funds the BBC, which uses the money to produce content that (in theory at least) sets the bar for quality of output across the British TV industry, particularly ensuring that content for minority audiences is of a similar high standard to that made for mass audiences. While the BBC isn’t to everyone’s taste, by and large I think it achieves that.

Making changes that significantly reduce the BBC’s income is not without risk. The very large amount of money flowing in to TV production in the UK, relative to the size of the market, supports a lot of jobs, and also ensures the commercial spend from advertisers is concentrated elsewhere. There is a finite amount of money to be spent on advertising and it is far from clear that advertisers would spend more in the event that slots became available on the BBC. It is more likely that their spend would simply be spread more thinly, with a serious detrimental impact on other broadcasters.

I think the system does have to change, not because I think a fee - a tax, in effect - designed to ensure universal availability of a quality tv service is a bad thing, but because in this multi channel age we are now in, concentrating all that money on one broadcaster is increasingly hard to justify.

I suspect in time the fee pot, or some of it at least, will be forcibly opened up to allow other broadcasters to bid for money to fulfil their public service obligations. I expect that at the same time the mechanism will be decoupled from the use of receiving equipment. A precept on council tax is one possibility.

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

I would shed no tears if the BBC as it stands was to be abolished.

Everything necessary will be picked up by the survivors and the left wing bias of the BBC will be banished.

Even now they are arrogant and unrepentant. Banning Guvmin ministers from a flagship news programme is unforgivable political bias.

The BBC has its faults and didn't earn the alternative title of Brexit Broadcasting Corporation for no reason.
That being said, it's the UK Government that has banned ministers from appearing on Today and not the BBC.
The survivors who "pick up everything necessary" will most likely be US broadcasters and not UK ones, thus reducing the UK's soft influence in the world.