Inform, Educate, Entertain What has the BBC ever done for us?

[bickster]

I think looking at the bias issues in the news / politics output is a red herring. It can be fixed with a change of government with a desire to repair the BBC.

For me it's not going to make me think we shouldn't pay the licence fee, it makes me think it needs fixing

[mjmooney]

19 minutes ago, bickster said:

I think looking at the bias issues in the news / politics output is a red herring. It can be fixed with a change of government with a desire to repair the BBC.

For me it's not going to make me think we shouldn't pay the licence fee, it makes me think it needs fixing

Nail. Head. 

Same tactics the Tories have used with the NHS. Deliberately make it shit, then tell people that selling it off to their mates will fix it. 

[MakemineVanilla]

The BBC is financed by a hypothecated tax, and so there is now not even a pretence that they are in anyway independent from the state.

The fact that people say it can be fixed shows that it is understood that it is a branch of the state, open to political influence.

Other countries have observed how the BBC functions and have thought it useful to create their own version.

 

[Demitri_C]

8 hours ago, Seat68 said:

There is grumbling in the BBC News Bias thread about the wider BBC and if there is a need for them, or indeed the license fee. Thought it would be a good opportunity to start a new thread. 

One thing I see, more on other forums than here, is "I don't watch programmes live, I watch them on catch up, so why should I pay the license fee". My answer to that, is without the license fee would those programmes on catchup be able to be made?

Another is that people don't watch the BBC at all, lets assume that they also don't look at the BBC for news on the web, or listen to local or national travel updates on the radio, or music or sport on the multiple radio stations. Lets say that all of a persons viewing is streaming, the BBC is a training ground for comedy and drama, so many actors, writers and technical staff started or had their break via the BBC, Brian Cox in Sucession? Netflix didnt give him his start out of theatre, it was the BBC. Ashley Walters of Top Boy, he started on the BBC. The point is, the BBC helps people to make an impact. It takes risks, it tries out new comedy. It brings a vast range of music, it brings viewers and listeners sport.

If the BBC was a streaming service, and you looked at its entire offering, £13 per month, for TV, Radio, Web and News. That's a ludicrously low price.

Thanks for creating a new thread about this

As i said in the other bbc thread i think a streaming service for those that want it would be better. Thats the way it seems to be doing these days. The 'netflix' way

[Seat68]

6 minutes ago, Demitri_C said:

Thanks for creating a new thread about this

As i said in the other bbc thread i think a streaming service for those that want it would be better. Thats the way it seems to be doing these days. The 'netflix' way

I think potentially thats where the future might be for them, but I personally don't think its the right way, it would be more ruthless, no room for experimentation or failure, where as the BBC can give something a stab now. I also feel that we need to retain the non linear TV elements of the BBC and moving to a subscription model could see that ending.

[icouldtelltheworld]

6 hours ago, sidcow said:

 

I think it probably actually is the best, maybe of a bad bunch but you at least get a modicum of sane reporting.

In an age where most are relying on Twitter and Tictok they're a bastion of reporting.

 

Wholeheartedly agree mate  

[Demitri_C]

2 hours ago, Seat68 said:

I think potentially thats where the future might be for them, but I personally don't think its the right way, it would be more ruthless, no room for experimentation or failure, where as the BBC can give something a stab now. I also feel that we need to retain the non linear TV elements of the BBC and moving to a subscription model could see that ending.

I am curious at the demographic age group that watches bbc. My perception is its for more of a older crowd. If they went this royte i dont think the younger generation will pay the fee and that would be a huge revenue loss for them. That's why i cant see ut happening 

[luckyeddie]

14 hours ago, Seat68 said:

It isn't compulsory, a large number of people do not have a TV license. You know this I am sure, but if you aren't watching live television, you don't need a license. As for the programmes being made? We will never know, would a proper version of Radio 3, 4 and 6 Music exist without the BBC, I think not. As for comedy, I think potentially Dave would make the programmes that the BBC would make, but as Dave is massively reliant on BBC content, in time that wouldn't exist either.

I stopped getting a TV license about 2 years ago. My main gripe is that you need one to watch live TV, like Sky Sports. That's just a con. Also, I just didn't watch anything on BBC except Only Connect, so £160 a year was just money down the drain.

[bickster]

4 hours ago, luckyeddie said:

I stopped getting a TV license about 2 years ago. My main gripe is that you need one to watch live TV, like Sky Sports. That's just a con. Also, I just didn't watch anything on BBC except Only Connect, so £160 a year was just money down the drain.

How is it a con? You know exactly what it’s for

it isn’t a fee for using the BBC, it’s a fee for owning a TV that is used to watch live TV. The money goes to the BBC. There is no con

[Demitri_C]

4 hours ago, bickster said:

How is it a con? You know exactly what it’s for

it isn’t a fee for using the BBC, it’s a fee for owning a TV that is used to watch live TV. The money goes to the BBC. There is no con

Why does money go to bbc ? I dont know the history on how this arrangement was made

[bickster]

Just now, Demitri_C said:

Why does money go to bbc ? I dont know the history on how this arrangement was made

Because that is how the BBC is funded, it's one of the very few taxes that doesn't go into the general taxation pot. It is the reason the licence was introduced

[villa4europe]

Same as all things British, it's a cash sink hole, way behind the timed, desperately needs reform, modernising and stream lining... But it's tradition so you can't criticise or touch it

[chrisp65]

55 minutes ago, villa4europe said:

Same as all things British, it's a cash sink hole, way behind the timed, desperately needs reform, modernising and stream lining... But it's tradition so you can't criticise or touch it

You can criticise it and it has very much been ‘touched’ the last few years with the license fee frozen, the cost of pensioners licenses absorbed by the BBC, whole channels appearing and disappearing etc..

Local radio is being stripped, and laughably, much local radio is now shared content with lots of other local radio from other places. Minority language programming, arts and sports sponsorships, charity work and fundraisers, all sorts of things are shifting to accommodate budgets and goals.

But the narrative, as always, has to be condensed down for people that want to know all about a vast industry, but in 7 seconds. So it’s either BBC is wonderful I remember Christmas specials by the Two Ronnies. Or BBC rubbish, £200 to watch stuff I can see on twitter for free. 

Our current crop of politicians like stuff to be binary and tribal, so you can vote preserve, or you can vote dismantle. In the culture war there is no room for big picture / soft power / innovation / employment statistics stuff. 

When Netflix are doing regional programming and regional news and supplying the good people of Leicester with new Asian sounds and raising money for charity and sponsoring some northern Irish football league and putting tutorials online for GCSE students and funding S4C, then I guess we can compare price points.

Personally, I don’t use the vast majority of BBC services. Just like I’ve not had much call for gynaecology from the NHS or the road bridges across the Humber, or secondary schools in Croydon. But I do understand why I pay towards them for the societal cohesion they bring. Should they all be improved? Hell yes. Will scrapping them improve life for people? Hell no. 

[luckyeddie]

5 hours ago, bickster said:

How is it a con? You know exactly what it’s for

it isn’t a fee for using the BBC, it’s a fee for owning a TV that is used to watch live TV. The money goes to the BBC. There is no con

The con is the money goes to the BBC, who have nothing to do with most live TV. 50 years ago they basically owned TV, so if was fair, but now times have changed. Why should I pay BBC to watch ITV. I don't pay Tesco to shop at Morrisons. 

[ender4]

I don't mind paying the £13/month for the BBC because i see that it does provide a useful service. 

However, i don't use its services and wouldn't subscribe to it as a subscription service.   

What do i not use? No BBC or Ch4 or Ch5 programmes, no BBC radio stations, no iPlayer.

So what do i watch? Mainly Netflix, Prime, Apple TV, Youtube, and ermm downloads/IPTV for those Hollywood films and HBO series. I've not just switched on the TV in the last 10 years and just watched something on a broadcast channel. I have not watched any British dramas or panel shows or quiz shows in 15 years. 

For music - Capital Radio, Google Home, Alexa, Youtube, Spotify.

 

However, there is one exception - BBC News. I use their website and occasionally watch it on TV. Worth £13/month - no. Would i miss it - yes.

 

 

[mjmooney]

33 minutes ago, chrisp65 said:

Our current crop of politicians like stuff to be binary and tribal, so you can vote preserve, or you can vote dismantle. In the culture war there is no room for big picture / soft power / innovation / employment statistics stuff. 

When Netflix are doing regional programming and regional news and supplying the good people of Leicester with new Asian sounds and raising money for charity and sponsoring some northern Irish football league and putting tutorials online for GCSE students and funding S4C, then I guess we can compare price points.

Personally, I don’t use the vast majority of BBC services. Just like I’ve not had much call for gynaecology from the NHS or the road bridges across the Humber, or secondary schools in Croydon. But I do understand why I pay towards them for the societal cohesion they bring. Should they all be improved? Hell yes. Will scrapping them improve life for people? Hell no. 

Spot on. 

[bickster]

39 minutes ago, luckyeddie said:

The con is the money goes to the BBC, who have nothing to do with most live TV. 50 years ago they basically owned TV, so if was fair, but now times have changed. Why should I pay BBC to watch ITV. I don't pay Tesco to shop at Morrisons. 

You pay tax when you go shopping at Tesco or Morrisons, you don't complain where it goes, it doesn't go to Tesco or Morrisons, the tax goes into the general taxation pot

You pay a tax to watch live TV (or stream on iPlayer). That the money goes to fund the BBC isn't that relevant, apart from you know where the money goes

You pay a tax to drive a car, it does not go to fix the roads, it goes into a general taxation pot

If the TV Licence didn't go directly to the BBC and went into the general taxation pot this line of argument wouldn't exist.

Taxation goes to run the country, in theory for the benefit of all (yes lol), you and I only get to (sort of) say where it gets spent when we vote for people at a general election

You using the BBC isn't relevant here, I presume you aren't unfortunate enough to be homeless, a very small part of your taxation goes to fund help for those people, maybe you shouldn't have to pay that because you aren't homeless.

A fully functioning democracy really should have an independent state broadcaster, whether you choose to use it or not is up to you but you do need it to exist for the sake of the democracy that you live in. WIthout it..... well, look across the Atlantic.

Again, it is not a con, there is no confidence trick here, apart from you fooling yourself that you don't need the BBC

[Xann]

Maybe the kids will be more switched on than their f*ckwitted Tory Brexit enabling parents?

[Demitri_C]

2 hours ago, bickster said:

Because that is how the BBC is funded, it's one of the very few taxes that doesn't go into the general taxation pot. It is the reason the licence was introduced

Yeah i get that but how comes it was designed like this and not like how itv c4 and c5 were they make money through adverts?

[bickster]

2 minutes ago, Demitri_C said:

Yeah i get that but how comes it was designed like this and not like how itv c4 and c5 were they make money through adverts?

You shouldn't have a state broadcaster endorsing products by running adverts for them.