AIBU to be totally unsurprised at the press response to the BBC review

[DreamingofSummer]

Effin Daily Mail and effin Murdoch press want to cut out the competition

Not a surprise but the BBC needs to move with the times.

I don't buy or read Murdoch papers (or watch Sky TV) or the Daily Hate, but I am seriously pissed off with the BBC and have given up live TV so I don't have to pay for million pound redundancies (with £3m pensions).

Trying to cling to the licence fee won't work.

I don't get all the gushy ravings for the bbc

It's an outdated format a yes while a certain set can't begin to imagine life without radio two the rest of the uk really resent paying for executives to lunch and get taxis everyday and truss it up as essential.

Same wanker I'm sure it's because it's seen as a British institution more than anything.

For which your evidence is? Oh yes, the Mail and the Murdoch press!

DreamingofSummer The million pound redundancy was confirmed by Byford when he popped up on BBC Radio to plug his book

"BBC isn't perfect! Shock! Horror!" says the Mail and its fans on MN

"BBC is pretty damn good" says the rest of the world and most of the UK.

"Well worth keeping and keep your Tory hands off " says DreamingofSummer

Expenses and salaries are a matter of public record -

www.bbc.co.uk/aboutthebbc/insidethebbc/managementstructure/biographies

Oh we're fans of the Mail if we aren't supporting the BBC now.

Oh and Tories to boot?? I voted labour thanks.

For what's it's worth one of my family has done some work for the BBC, a few times, and they are very very careful about money.

She's obviously referring to the Cameron et al, not people who voted Tory.

DreamingofSummer It's a nice theory, but not everyone who thinks it's time for shake up at BBC Towers is a Tory or Mail reader.

No-one is suggesting not "keeping" the BBC.

Another "Daily mail reader" accusation? Is it the new Goodwin point to win arguments now?

We all know the BBC is not perfect, and the extravagant salaries and expenses should be stopped.

But this government seems to talking about something more drastic than that. Am I being unreasonable to think that governments, especially this Conservative one, is too cosy towards the BBC's rivals? Murdoch and others would love the BBC to be broken up and sold piecemeal.

Maybe the Government's ideology cannot fathom the idea of a communally-owned service. and thinks the right thing to do is to convert it into a money-making business.

Well they're doing their best to sell the NHS off to their pals so why will the BBC be any different!

How does paying a licence fee make me a co-owner of the Beeb?

I don't think it needs a vast makeover but a lower licence fee might concentrate a few minds.

What I am puzzled about is how exempting over 75's from paying licence fees was viewed as a "cost" to the govt, and is now going to be a "cost" of the BBC.

Surely the income from licence fees is just reduced a bit as you only have to pay up to the age of 74. So you pay licence fee from 18-74. That is the maximum licence fee income.

But it seems to be calculated as the LF is paid by all adults, less the "cost" of those adults over 75. Surely it does cost more to administer it this way too?

Why is it always spun as a political issue and a "cost" to be met by one party or another? It just seems to be a certain way of reporting to taint/diminish the licence fee and BBC (though the BBC themselves report it as a cost).

What am I missing?

The government was giving BBC money from general taxation to pay for the free licences. It will now phase in a a new system where the BBC won't get this any more - it is effectively a cut in funding for the BBC.

BTW the BBC has apparently asked people over 75 who can afford it to carry on paying instead of claiming their free licence.

Oh, and it's a political issue as it was a government (not BBC) idea to give over 75s free licences.

Thanks Dad
I did get all those points but hadn't joined them up.
Its a reduction in Licence Fee income as less people are charged the LF.

I have the same issues with the way they talk about free Travelcards/Bus travel for OAP's. How do you calculate the cost of those? Is it per Freedom Pass issued? In which case what about those that don't get used? Or do they count up all the FP journeys at the end of the year and charge that to the council? Anyway I am digressing ........ apologies.

I've never seen another TV or radio broadcaster as good as the BBC (although they've dumbded down far too much in recent years) in any other country and I've travelled a lot.

It costs about £120 a year and I'm sure a lot of the people complaining about them don't complain about paying £70 a month to watch Sky who's only 'original' content is Premiership football. I think most people would like to keep the BBC it's just that the negative people get a lot of press (I wish Murdoch would go away)

Sky who's only 'original' content is Premiership football.

Think your being a little harsh there, I'm not a subscriber but I have seen many original sky comedies Yonderland, Moone Boy etc and a couple of documentaries, also its not like the BBC do not buy content in from other channels and flood a lot of the schedule with repeats...

It costs about £120 a year and I'm sure a lot of the people complaining about them don't complain about paying £70 a month to watch Sky who's only 'original' content is Premiership football. I think most people would like to keep the BBC it's just that the negative people get a lot of press (I wish Murdoch would go away)

It costs £145.50.

Sky is optional, and you won't be cautioned on your doorstep if you decide you don't want to pay for it. Or taken to court. Or have your name published in the local paper. You don't pay, you don't receive. With the BBC you have to receive if you watch freeview live TV, and you have to pay.

The BBC is a bargain. You don't just get TV, you get the website and radio as well.

It's definitely a case of knowing the cost of everything and the value of nothing.

And I don't want my programmes interrupted by adverts!