I was watching this report on the BBC's website just a few moments ago. And I'm totally stunned at what a "journalist" who does a lot of technology stories for the BBC describes as being "really quite difficult and complicated". It really makes me question just what the license fee is being spent on? It can't all being going on Doctor Who and East Enders. Can it? So what do other people think. Is the license fee worth it? Do we get our monies worth?
What's worse about it is being forced to pay for BBC in an age where every other provider let's us pick and choose what we watch.
I haven't had a TV in use in my home in over 8 years. Every once in awhile I get an itch to see if things are still as unbearable as they were last time I looked. A few minutes watching and I am convinced that I made the right choice. I have the internet, DVD's, books, the radio (although it is getting pretty dire these days... why can't the BBC jocks close their cake holes and not spout such nonsense that is supposed to pass as banter?) and access to Sky or whatever in the pub should something really interesting (like the Rugby World Cup :' ) come on. Otherwise, if I am really stuck I can watch stuff that has already been broadcast without a license either on something like BBC I-player or something that has been on already in another country. You only need a license if you are watching a program that is being transmitted on the TV at the time you are viewing it. I am not interested in paying for what passes for journalism and put my money where my mouth is... the first year's fees went to by this netbook :' ). FWIW LFD
i haven't had a television since my student days. sure i've seen programmes at friends houses but don't miss most of what gets put on. if iplayer downloads for programmes were keepable then I wouldn't mind paying, i got someone to cleverly save the fashion series that was on a while ago to a couple of dvds, and enjoyed the series on scotland too
BBC IPlayer does require a license. The only TV I watch at the moment is the Apprentice on BBC, other than that, nothing. I mostly watch American shows which I catch online via Netflix or Sky Go and so on.
As moving house, I recently had to change my details. I'm on the £11pm direct debit system, but its shocking to see how much its risen! I swear 2yr ago it was £100 per year..its now £145!
Just out of curiosity for... what would the American equivalent of this type of fee be? Is there one? Is it analogous to a fee for cable or satellite television. Or is the whole structure of British broadcasting entirely different?
BBC gets about 3/4 of its funding from the license fee. That goes towards both TV and radio and internet BBC services. Perhaps PBS would be the nearest comparison in the US. But the BBC is much larger and wider in scope. Since the BBC is apparently the world's biggest broadcaster, I find it hard to imagine how it would manage without the license fee unless it started allowing commercial breaks, or cut back massively, or its funding came from elsewhere in the government budget. I can't see any of those happening.
With regards to the BBC yes I would. Either give us the channel for free and have adverts like everyone else or give us the choice to opt out and pay for it via subscription or through our digital TV providers.
Personally I don't mind the licence fee. I like my daughter being able to watch kids TV without an advert for toys coming up every 5 minutes. There isn't a network in the world that makes wildlife programmes like the BBC and I don't think a purely commercial based business would be able to do it in the same way. Radio 4 is first class and 6 music has some great shows. I find it very hard listening to commercial radio. It blows my mind that people dismiss TV because a lot of it is crap (but then seemingly watch it on i-player or DVD anyway?). There's an awful lot of crap books but that doesn't mean I think libraries or bookshops are a waste of time. There are some real gems on TV. Anything with the saintly Attenborough. The recent series on roman life by Mary Beard.
I think the licence fee is becoming a bit of an anachronism, given the way that broadcasting has changed in the last decade or so. It was easier to justify when there were three channels, and two of them were from the BBC. The flipside is that the BBC still provides the best service (IMNSHO) and it's a pleasure to watch a whole programme without any advert breaks. Unless you need a pee, in which case it's bloody annoying.
Since when? You only need a license if you are watching live broadcasts and that applies to Sky as well as the BBC.
I was totally going to post this. The licence fee is worth Cbeebies and the Cbeebies online content alone. As a father of a 3 yr old I have no problem paying this.
In ireland we get analouge BBC for free, but hey 800 years of oppression. (Loosing the analouge signal will be a pity) We also have a TV licence, but get adverts aswell. Personally I think they should start licencing fridges to help combat the growing problem with obesity
Since it's inception. When you watch an I-Player prog if you read the T's & C's you are acknowledging you have a valid license. Same goes for streaming News 24.
So let me get this straight...there are people complaining about the licence fee, don't have a telly but are happy to stream BBC programmes from i-player on their computer? Hypocritical no?
