TV licence thread

[Grumpycatweasel 85]

watching live television in 2024 is pathetic

[Pyrotequila 405]

14 minutes ago, Grumpycatweasel said:

watching live television in 2024 is pathetic

 

Excellent contribution as usual Mr Meldrew 😂

[Pyrotequila 405]

21 minutes ago, butlers said:

Part funds channel 4 and the last thing the commercial channels want is to compete with for advertising is the BBC

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Channel_4#:~:text=Channel 4 is a British,its commercial activities%2C including advertising.

 

Quote

Channel 4 is a British free-to-air public broadcast television channel owned and operated by Channel Four Television Corporation. It is publicly owned but, unlike the BBC, it receives no public funding and is funded entirely by its commercial activities, including advertising.

Are you sure about that?

[_lecro_ 16]

1 hour ago, Grumpycatweasel said:

watching live television in 2024 is pathetic

Wouldnt go as far as saying pathetic but i havnt watched any for a good few years,

i prefer to watch what i want and when i want to watch it and certainly dont watch anything that would require a licence from the BBC Gestapo

[butlers 261]

2 hours ago, Pyrotequila said:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Channel_4#:~:text=Channel 4 is a British,its commercial activities%2C including advertising.

 

Are you sure about that?

It certainly was the case  until very recently 

[Norbert 145]

6 hours ago, Grumpycatweasel said:

watching live television in 2024 is pathetic

I don't know about pathetic but it's about on the level of subscribing to streaming services. 

[hackey lad 3,987]

7 hours ago, Grumpycatweasel said:

watching live television in 2024 is pathetic

Does Babestation count  ?  . 

[pfifes 309]

Just a thought - I wonder how many of those rallying against the TV licence fee look at the BBC news website?  Or use the BBC weather website or app?  
I have a suspicion that is a case ‘be careful for what you wish for’.  In some ways I find the arguments to abolish the BBC/TV licence similar to those that favoured privatisation of utilities and railways.  Every would be shiny, modern, streamlined, competitive, efficient and cheaper but we all know how that ended up - pretty much the opposite.
 

[Pyrotequila 405]

1 hour ago, pfifes said:

Just a thought - I wonder how many of those rallying against the TV licence fee look at the BBC news website?  Or use the BBC weather website or app?  
I have a suspicion that is a case ‘be careful for what you wish for’.  In some ways I find the arguments to abolish the BBC/TV licence similar to those that favoured privatisation of utilities and railways.  Every would be shiny, modern, streamlined, competitive, efficient and cheaper but we all know how that ended up - pretty much the opposite.
 

I think the resentment is more the whole "you MUST pay this fee, even if you don't use the service, or we will fine you/ send you to prison" thing.

 

Personally I don't tend to search for news on the BBC site, and I use the Met Office weather (who got ditched by the BBC a few years ago) 🤷‍♂️

[pfifes 309]

27 minutes ago, Pyrotequila said:

I think the resentment is more the whole "you MUST pay this fee, even if you don't use the service, or we will fine you/ send you to prison" thing.

 

Personally I don't tend to search for news on the BBC site, and I use the Met Office weather (who got ditched by the BBC a few years ago) 🤷‍♂️

I think the enforcement of TV licences needs reviewing.  Apparently it disproportionately impacts on vulnerable people and I don’t think anyone should go to prison for not paying for a flipping TV licence.

And of course not everyone uses BBC websites for news etc but an awful lot do.

My comment was more aimed at those criticising the BBC because I suspect the alternatives will not be the all singing, all dancing, shiny, whizzy, modern, high tech, cheap and competitive wonder service they think given time.

 

[Pyrotequila 405]

8 hours ago, pfifes said:

My comment was more aimed at those criticising the BBC because I suspect the alternatives will not be the all singing, all dancing, shiny, whizzy, modern, high tech, cheap and competitive wonder service they think given time.

The alternatives already exist; Sky, Virgin media... they don't get any money from the TV licence fee, not that I could find out at any rate.

[pfifes 309]

2 minutes ago, Pyrotequila said:

The alternatives already exist; Sky, Virgin media... they don't get any money from the TV licence fee, not that I could find out at any rate.

Yes, and there is lot of rubbish in those alternatives. Sky Sports is fine but you still get the adverts on live sport as well as the subscription. A lot of news sites are behind a paywall and I suspect many of those who object to the TV licence don’t subscribe to any of these.  I think we’ve all experienced buggy free news sites with constant pop ups.
As I said, it’s more a case of be careful of what you wish for and thinking this through rather than making sweeping statements about the BBC.