Talk

Advanced search

I am a fan of the BBC....But let,s talk License Fee

(116 Posts)
GabbyLoggon Mon 09-Aug-10 11:16:15

The TV license fee is getting close to £3 a week. That is a lot of money for poor people. And rich and poor alike have to pay it; or be hauled up in court.

There must be a better, fairwer way to fund the BBC. Got any ideas?

DuelingFanjo Mon 09-Aug-10 11:19:49

A fairer way would be advertising but it wouldn't be better.

I always wonder about those people who pay loads of money for Sky/Virgin and how they feel about the awful standard of programming they get for their £20 - £50 a month and yet they don't seem to ever complain.

GeekOfTheWeek Mon 09-Aug-10 11:20:06

Opt in for bbc channels.

Like with sky and virgin, pay for the channels you want.

I really hate the fee as i never watch bbc.

GeekOfTheWeek Mon 09-Aug-10 11:22:01

Or reduce the ridiculous amounts they pay to presenters and actors and pass the savings on.

sanielle Mon 09-Aug-10 11:25:49

I don't see why I have to pay to be force-fed Graham Norton. YANBU

ISNT Mon 09-Aug-10 11:30:10

DF I don;t understand your comment. Sky and virgin are optional, so people only pay for them if they want them. So if they want them, they're unlikely to complain IYSWIM.

HeadFairy Mon 09-Aug-10 11:34:13

UI think £3 a week for the BBC is fantastic value when you think about the whole picture, online content, radio, fantastic original programming. Sky can't even come close to how amazing the BBC is.

GabbyLoggon Mon 09-Aug-10 11:44:07

Heead fairy

Yes, I agree the BBC is amazing. But some people never watch it. So they feel unhappy about paying £3 a week.

GeekOfTheWeek Mon 09-Aug-10 11:46:19

Headfairy, I dont find the bbc amazing in the slightest.

I would prefer the option of paying for it than being forced to.

violethill Mon 09-Aug-10 11:47:30

Cut back on the massively overpaid presenters ?

ISNT Mon 09-Aug-10 11:48:08

BBC going downhill fast IMO.

Although OTOH dr who is top banana and ...

um...

Yes Dr who is very good.

Squitten Mon 09-Aug-10 11:48:43

I heard that ITV are considering moving to some kind of subscription service and there was a question over whether the BBC should do the same instead of a license fee.

I'm all for it personally. I'd happily pay a subscription for BBC and Channel 4 channels and drop ITV and Channel 5. Paying for what you watch seems to make sense

FindingMyMojo Mon 09-Aug-10 11:52:51

I love the BBC - as as the last bastion of advertisement free broadcasting I treasure it, Tv & radio & online. Love it!!! Such a marvel to not have ads - seriously. Licence fee is OK for me.

fedupofnamechanging Mon 09-Aug-10 11:55:59

I have sky and would like to get rid because of the amazing amount of total shit on there. Unfortunately my DH and DC want sky sports so I'm stuck with it. Also, our area doesn't give you a lot of choice. I think there are more freeview channels available in London, than in Wales for ex.
Wrt the BBC, I think they should be independently audited to reduce wastage. Presenters are paid too much and I quite like the idea of an opt in/out system. I would probably pay for it, but resent having no choice in the matter. Might make them raise their game. Some programes are very good, but this is not true of everything they produce.

HecateQueenOfWitches Mon 09-Aug-10 11:57:21

subscription.

I truly object to being forced to pay for this service. Why the hell should I? If I want it - I'll pay for it.

Or they could use advertising.

But to make us pay for a service we may not even want, and fine us if we don't pay, well! It is totally out of order.

I pay £23 a month for sky and it gets me loads of channels. I very much doubt I would choose to pay nearly £12 a month for just a couple of channels and some radio stations I never listen to!

xkaylax Mon 09-Aug-10 12:00:35

Geek I also dont watch anything on bbc and find it frustrating having to pay this for nothing.

ISNT Mon 09-Aug-10 12:02:42

I guess the argument is that if it's all commercial then we end up with lowest common denominator on every channel and there are no risks taken for new comedies / dramas etc

The BBC is a public service, rather than a commercial venture, and so in theory they should be able to take more risks, produce more minority interest progs and generalls not be broadcasting Britain's Got Talent 24/7.

In practice I think BBC has taken stick for being stuck in the middle - being told that it has to be more commercial to compete, then slated for moving away fromwhat people think it is there for.

It's a tough one really.

capricorn76 Mon 09-Aug-10 12:11:38

I'm happy to pay the license fee as its the last barrier between half decent and in some cases excellent programming/radio and the total Rupert Murdochification of tv.

David Attenborough, Brian Cox and programmes like Horizon are what the BBC excel at. ITV and Sky could never make anything of that quality. I think the BBC should focus on making quality informative programmes, period drams etc and give up trying to chase for ratings with reality tv shows and celeb presenters etc, leave that for the commercial channels and give me more Horizon and I'd pay even more for my license fee.

If we got rid of the license fee then the quality of tv/news across all channels would fall through the floor as there is no low some of these producers would go to to chase ratings. With no BBC trying to hold even a minimum standard, UK tv would be like tv in Italy (shudders). Richard Desmond, porn king and owner of the Express just bought Channel 5, I can only imagine what he would put on, probably bring back topless weather girls and soft porn.

droves Mon 09-Aug-10 12:13:19

i dont like being forced to pay for crap like "the one show" and "bargan hunt" ...the licence fee is too high imo , and would prefer if it was pay per view instead ..then i could pay only for the programs i watch and not the !filling the scedual crap" i dont.

tyler80 Mon 09-Aug-10 12:26:38

News alert: a TV is not an essential item. If you don't want to pay the license fee don't have a TV

sapphireblue Mon 09-Aug-10 12:26:50

You see I would have a huge dilemma.........the only programme I ever watch on the BBC is Eastenders, so I would have to pay the subscription to just watch one programme.......that would really pee me off!!

I don't object to the licence fee as a concept, but i do think it's far too expensive. The BBC should make some cut backs IMO......it's true that some of the presenters are paid a ridiculous sum of money.

ISNT Mon 09-Aug-10 12:39:38

The new BBC website is shitto too.

mousymouse Mon 09-Aug-10 12:42:30

I love the programs the bbc offers, radio as well as tv. for that I happily pay my tv license.
just look at the crap they offer in different countries that also have a tv license system, eg Germany. utter rubbish in comparision

blackberryway Mon 09-Aug-10 12:51:32

BBC output is extremely patchy and I agree it's an anachronism in these days to be forced to pay for it. I wouldn't mind paying something for the radio service, which I use constantly and is generally great, but I hardly watch any TV and the stuff ds watches on cbbc is endless repeats. Plus the fact that the bbc makes loads of money, has an unfair advantage and pays outrageous wages. It all needs a thorough shaking up.

HollyGoHeavily Mon 09-Aug-10 13:08:23

I happily pay my licence fee for the BBC radio stations alone - I don't watch much tv at all and, thinking about it, it doesn't tend to be BBC stuff. The exception being CBeebies now DD1 is old enough to express a preference!

If Radio 1, 2, 4, FiveLive and 6 Music were to become commercial stations i would be gutted....

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, watch threads, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now »

Already registered? Log in with: