Save The Bbc

[chipfork 10]

I've just received this Save the BBC Petition from change.org, unusual as I never normally receive emails from them.

 

There's an overly hysterical diatribe for why the licence fee shouldn't be abolished. Unfortunately, there seems no option to vote against the petition 🙄

 

Each will have their own perspective. Personally, I think the changes are long overdue and I would imagine that by 2027 the options and way we consume media will make an even better case for licence to be abolished.

[ECCOnoob 1,043]

Just now, chipfork said:

I've just received this Save the BBC Petition from change.org, unusual as I never normally receive emails from them.

 

There's an overly hysterical diatribe for why the licence fee shouldn't be abolished. Unfortunately, there seems no option to vote against the petition 🙄

 

Each will have their own perspective. Personally, I think the changes are long overdue and I would imagine that by 2027 the options and way we consume media will make an even better case for licence to be abolished.

That's not how petitions work. If you don't support it you don't sign it...

 

However I am sure two seconds of your time Googling will easily find one of many petitions seeking to "scrap the BBC"  or  "abolish the licence fee". You can easily choose to sign one of those of those instead. 🙄🙄

[zoco 10]

I love this sentence:

 

"Unless we act the BBC as we know it will be destroyed, hidden behind a paywall, and only accessible to those who can afford it."

 

which to me implies that currently there are people who can't afford it who watch BBC TV content free of charge i.e. not buying a TV Licence.

[El Cid 220]

16 minutes ago, chipfork said:

Each will have their own perspective. Personally, I think the changes are long overdue and I would imagine that by 2027 the options and way we consume media will make an even better case for licence to be abolished.

Will I need a new aerial or even a new TV?

Edited January 17, 2022 by El Cid

[despritdan 241]

I'd hate the BBC to have to resort to advertising or only be available as some sort of pay per view. It's gone very woke recently but still produces some fantastic programmes esp. the wildlife documentaries. What I resent is the ridiculously bloated salaries it pays to some of its presenters, especially Gary Lineker and some of the radio presenters and also the management. If they took a big cut in their salaries, they could probably reduce the fee if only by a few pounds.

[hackey lad 3,976]

18 minutes ago, despritdan said:

I'd hate the BBC to have to resort to advertising or only be available as some sort of pay per view. It's gone very woke recently but still produces some fantastic programmes esp. the wildlife documentaries. What I resent is the ridiculously bloated salaries it pays to some of its presenters, especially Gary Lineker and some of the radio presenters and also the management. If they took a big cut in their salaries, they could probably reduce the fee if only by a few pounds.

[butlers 261]

Linekers salary  less than  10 p out of the license fee  

[Martin C 82]

1 hour ago, butlers said:

Linekers salary  less than  10 p out of the license fee  

10p more than he's worth.

[Baron99 795]

With a plethora of new platforms of tv viewing starting up such as Netflix & Disney, the BBC will be forced to go subscription at some stage in the future & let's face it, it's share of the viewing audience must have dropped in the last decade, if not the last 2 years as people bought into the likes of Netflix, Disney & Amazon Prime, especially among the younger generations.  Then you have the likes of YouTube to keep people amused. They've also got highly paid 'stars' like Lineker,  Winkleman & Ball to keep paying.  (Whether they deserve their salaries is another matter but you can be sure if the BBC cut their salaries by 50%, that feigned loyalty to the BBC would be out the window).  The 'big' names will eventually walk anyway when tbe likes of Netflix chuck more towards them. 

 

The BBC don't help themselves either by such as overspending tv licence money on tbe likes of the new Eastenders set to the tune of around £30 million. 

 

The basis for the tv licence is a bygone relic.  In this age of technology, where the population can get its tv entertainment from a multitude of sources, (including free tv such as Pluto) & where people can pick & CHOOSE who they pay a subscription too for their tv viewing, name me any other walk of life where people are  FORCED to pay money to an organisation they may make a conscious decision not watch, in order to watch live tv programmes. 

 

It's like saying I've got to give money to a privately run bus company in order to use my car on the road. 

 

Edited January 18, 2022 by Baron99

[despritdan 241]

7 hours ago, butlers said:

Linekers salary  less than  10 p out of the license fee  

He isn't the only one getting a bloated salary. You might think it's just a drop in the ocean 'yet what is an ocean but a multitude of drops?' (Cloud Atlas by David Mitchell).

[Delbow 700]

Once I'm not paying the licence fee I'll give the money to BLM instead.

[ab6262 202]

34 minutes ago, Delbow said:

Once I'm not paying the licence fee I'll give the money to BLM instead.

did you ever pay it????from one extreme to another!!!! better a properly deserving cause like Macmillan or heart foundation. 

i for one am glad the licence fee is being scrapped, the supercilious broadcasting for the woke and pc brigade, bias babble, dramas and comedies so unfunny and so unwatchable due to the pc agendas, bring on the funding by subscription and see how many sign up for the twaddle it puts out.

Edited January 18, 2022 by ab6262