Sooo....a Punative Tax On Everybody Is "the Way Forward"

[bazwillrun]

http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/tv/news/a632374/reduced-bbc-will-damage-the-uk-says-tony-hall.html#~p5LODgKJr9Hl0W

"We've always said that the licence fee should be updated to reflect changing times," Lord Hall is expected to add. "Adapting the licence fee for the internet age... is vital.

Yeah, lets not follow other business /market models, we need to adapt so lets tax everybody instead....good luck with that !

[tonyav]

Unlikely to happen until 2026 according to this link.
http://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/end-of-the-licence-fee-bbc-to-back-radical-overhaul-of-how-it-is-funded/ar-BBi7V3U

[youngmafbog]

This man is a *** joker.

Proof that this outdated institution and the dinosaurs that run it needs to be canned, with immediate effect.

[mikey4444]

The BBC is the finest broadcaster in the world, and I will defend it against all comers. I would gladly pay the licence fee to retain it. We have discussed this many times here on AB, and I am not going to repeat my arguments why the Beeb is the best again.

However, the way in which the funding is raised does perhaps need looking at, as long as it doesn't mean endless adverts. The thought of the "Today Program" being interrupted every few minutes, by mind-numbingly crass and boring adverts doesn't bear thinking about !

[tonyav]

Hope it doesn't go down this path !.


“The BBC is at a crossroads. Down one path lies a BBC reduced in impact and reach in a world of global giants. Damaging the UK’s creative industries. A sleep-walk into decay for the BBC, and Britain diminished as a result. Which means a UK dominated by American taste-makers.

[hc4361]

Too many channels chasing advertising that fewer of us watch. I certainly don't watch commercial channels live and fast forward through the ads.
The money available from advertising is not infinite and I can see it reducing massively over the coming years as businesses realise that tv advertising is less cost effective.

I am a massive supporter of the BBC and believe it to be worth every penny.

[mikey4444]

Well said hc........lets stand up for the finest broadcaster in the world !

[youngmafbog]

// I would gladly pay the licence fee to retain it. //

So Mickey does that translate to you paying in full for your entertainment?

Or are you still expecting others who dont want it or need it to subsidise you?

//The BBC is the finest broadcaster in the world,//

you would say that of the labour mouthpiece though wouldn't you?

[Rosetta]

I agree with mikey and hc about the bbc's quality generally, American and Australia tv is rubbish in comparison. If they want to start cutting costs how about reducing the number of reporters sent out to cover emergencies and events abroad, surely reporters can cover for more than one individual programme

[youngmafbog]

//American and Australia tv is rubbish in comparison//

The absence of the BBC will NOT cause us to have American or Australian style tv.

If you like the BBC so much then fine, keep it. But be prepared to pay for what YOU want in FULL. dont expect others who dont want it to fund your whim.

[Svejk]

Why on earth was my answer removed? Am I not allowed an opinion on the BBC?

[Hypognosis]

I don't like adverts but can't help thinking they'd be more effective if they were confined to the margins between programmes and kept to a duration not much longer than current BBC programme trails are - just enough to make a cuppa, or nip to the loo.

In the meantime, I find the licence fee is a fair trade for their output and I get an extra 13 minutes per hour of entertainment material, compared to its competitors. So it's a bit like paying a premium for the ad-free version of a phone app.

If absorbed into general taxation, it's going to be less than a penny in the pound, isn't it?

[Zacs-Master]

I'd gladly pay double the license fee to see the BBC survive.

[Sir Alec]

My sister and I wrote a sitcom episode and entered it into the BBC's competition to find a new series. We were included in the last 13 entrants and were invited to the BBC to meet sitcom writers and hear their advice. We had to lie about our ages just to be considered, since the BBC are renowned for ageism in writers.
The hallowed Geoffrey Perkins, RIP, was surly and rude to everybody. As it turns out, he probably had a hangover.
The writers' talks were brilliant and I'm glad that I got to meet John Sullivan and Paul Mayhew Archer, who now has Parkinson's Disease. Just to be in the presence of Graham Linehan, (who was very modest and stayed to listen to other more established writers), was an inspiration.
However, we had to keep re-writing and re-writing our original idea, until it was ruined and resembled 'a BBC sitcom'. We and all the other competitors got the impression that the BBC wanted something along the lines of 'Friends', that they could sell to America and make a packet. So why choose the ideas that they did? The overall winner was a painfully shy little man, who deserved better. I've never seen his sitcom on television, so I can only presume that it was never made and the whole experience was for nought.
We had to sign contracts giving the BBC full ownership of our work and were not paid much. If we'd known what was going to happen, we'd have been better off selling it to BBC Scotland or Channel 4, as it was more their kind of thing.
There was far too much booze on the go and the BBC people all got merrily sloshed. Ben Elton turned up, bless him, he didn't have to. All the BBC cared about was that the buffet wasn't up to standard for him. He was very gracious, stayed longer than he'd intended, answering questions and generally giving advice, but he desperately wanted to get home as his wife had recently given birth after many years of trying to conceive.
After all the stuff that has come out about the BBC ignoring the goings on by the likes of Savile and Mr Gadd, our experience of The Corporation was no better! The wrong people are overpaid and anybody over the age of 30 is ignored. I hardly ever watch BBC1. Their 'sitcoms' of the last 15 years have, in general, been atrocious. When we were there, they kept banging on about 'My Family', which had not been broadcast yet. My sister and I watched it in utter despair and wondered what the hell such fine Shakespearean actors as Robert Lindsay and Zoe Wannamaker were doing. I hope they got paid a lot.
The BBC are the mafia of all the production companies going. If your face doesn't fit, 'You'll never work again in this town' seems to be their mantra. They are not worth the licence fee and it goes through me to pay it!

[youngmafbog]

// I find the licence fee is a fair trade for their output//

That is probably because you are relying on others to fund your enjoyment.

Would you feel the same if you had to pay the real cost? That is by a subscription for only those that want the BBC?

Only a penny in the pound? Hmmm, and only a penny in the pound for more nurses, or more doctors or perhaps more Police or armed forces or even to help the pensioners.

but just where you do stop with your 'only a penny in the pound before the whole pound has gone?

[Gromit]

you've got to admire their cheek.

This is the worse possible funding proposal.

They should freeze the existing fee for those who watch through an aeriel.
iPlayer should carry advertising. Users can pay 99p a day to watch without advertising.

[Hypognosis]

@youngmafbog

I buy products which are advertised on ITV and other commercial channels so I am helping in funding the people who enjoy those channels. Not only are they not 'free' channels but you have no way of knowing how much you are being stiffed for on your weekly shop for the adverts they show you.

How much for a 60 second ad in the middle of Coronation Street, for example? (No, I don't know the answer yet).