BBC Licence fee to be abolished in 2027

[knark]

Fucking Tories. Why do people vote for them? Why isn't there a viable opposition?

I would protest against this decision, but, oh, they've abolished that too.

Sky news are obviously owned by murdoch with a well known bias and I can’t say that I believe their journalists are not restrained by commercial interests. The murdoch empire is worthy of investigation and inspection imho and I have too many reservations to think it’s a comparable replacement for the BBC. Channel 4 are pretty good but they don’t do much past presenting information (again with their own traditionally left bias which is probably why I think they’re pretty good) and don’t provide a platform for the public to engage. Neither provide regional news.

To some extent radio might plug the gap somewhat but there are very few stations that could possibly take up that mantle and still be commercially viable.

Podcasts might be a newly emerging format but is still so new there is very little in the way of standards or accountability.

@Cornettoninja no, Sky News aren’t owned by Murdoch.

You are massively out of touch with the real world.

People talk about Netflix. I have Netflix. They also show a lot of BBC shows.

[quote phishy]@Cornettoninja Channel 4 and Sky News do hold the government to account as much as the BBC.[/quote]
I don't rate Sky News. I do think Channel 4 are good, but what happens to them?

@DdraigGoch

So what next?

I'd like to see the genuine "public service broadcasting" separated from the mass-market dross. If someone wants to watch Eastenders and Strictly, they can pay a subscription. If someone wants to watch sports, they can subscribe to BBC Sports (then we'll see just how much Lineker is really worth). Radio 4 and a purely public service TV operation can be funded from taxation, Radio 3 can bid for arts funding.

What Arts funding do you want Radio 3 to bid for? Or do you want them to compete with Arts charities with ever-decreasing grant pots for charities?

[quote phishy]@Cornettoninja no, Sky News aren’t owned by Murdoch.

You are massively out of touch with the real world.[/quote]
Thanks for updating me. Who are they owned by now then and what’s their background?

I think it's great news...

If it was a subscription service like sky, netflicks, Disney plus etc I'd opt out.

I hate the fact I have to pay it, and wish they just put adverts in or make it subscription based.

@phishy and you still haven’t addressed the point of public engagement or regional news?

@Faithtrusts some of the content in services like Netflix is BBC stuff that will presumably then disappear.

I'm not sure if this was posted already (apologies if it has) but this is a frank and honest discussion by Russell T Davies about the BBC possibly being turned into a subscription only service, like HBO for example.

PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE don't let the BBC become another casualty to the Conservative Party. Don't be sold a bag of lies again. Brexit is not good for the UK and I think it'll take decades for the UK to realise that. Don't let the BBC with it's wonderful coverage of wildlife programming and dramas and news and current affairs and popular culture and politics and radio and podcasts and everything else that the BBC does so brilliantly, go down the sewer as that is the way it looks to be headed.

@AllThePogs I appreciate that and it's a fair comment, I've not realised. I don't watch BBC content on netflicks either it would appear!

I don't think we would suffer, as others have said the dramas would just be tendered to other platforms to be bought and made.

There are a lot of flippant "if the BBC is so great, people will pay for it - just make it subscription" responses on here.

The problem is a subscription BBC becomes a commercial service - just like Netflix. I'm sure it would be great. But a subscription BBC would need to appeal to a maximum number of subscribers. That means it would 100% need to drop all the public service stuff that isn't profitable for a commercial business.

The BBC would be likely to drop Bitesize/educational content, local news, public affairs, parliament channel, funding orchestras, specialty radio stations, local sport, religious programming, speciality shows for niche interests, programming made around the UK as well as UK focused live action children's TV.

It would be just another commercial offer appealing to the masses. Is that what people want when they shrug and say "just become subscription"?

BBC is better value for money than Netflix imo. All they need to do is decriminalise not paying the licence fee. Tories just want to destroy it to distract from all the crap they have created and the parties.

@movinghelprequired

There are a lot of flippant "if the BBC is so great, people will pay for it - just make it subscription" responses on here.

The problem is a subscription BBC becomes a commercial service - just like Netflix. I'm sure it would be great. But a subscription BBC would need to appeal to a maximum number of subscribers. That means it would 100% need to drop all the public service stuff that isn't profitable for a commercial business.

The BBC would be likely to drop Bitesize/educational content, local news, public affairs, parliament channel, funding orchestras, specialty radio stations, local sport, religious programming, speciality shows for niche interests, programming made around the UK as well as UK focused live action children's TV.

It would be just another commercial offer appealing to the masses. Is that what people want when they shrug and say "just become subscription"?

I doubt they care if they never watch BBC or listen to BBC radio .

[quote Faithtrusts]@AllThePogs I appreciate that and it's a fair comment, I've not realised. I don't watch BBC content on netflicks either it would appear!

I don't think we would suffer, as others have said the dramas would just be tendered to other platforms to be bought and made. [/quote]
I don't agree the dramas on BBC will just happen anyway. We will end up with mainly US dramas and comedies instead.
ITV which is a commercially-run service rarely has a good drama or comedy. It's a Sin is the only one I can think of. Most of it is dross. They still show On the Buses for example. That is what we will end up with. Some people won't care about this, I will.

@movinghelprequired

There are a lot of flippant "if the BBC is so great, people will pay for it - just make it subscription" responses on here.

The problem is a subscription BBC becomes a commercial service - just like Netflix. I'm sure it would be great. But a subscription BBC would need to appeal to a maximum number of subscribers. That means it would 100% need to drop all the public service stuff that isn't profitable for a commercial business.

The BBC would be likely to drop Bitesize/educational content, local news, public affairs, parliament channel, funding orchestras, specialty radio stations, local sport, religious programming, speciality shows for niche interests, programming made around the UK as well as UK focused live action children's TV.

It would be just another commercial offer appealing to the masses. Is that what people want when they shrug and say "just become subscription"?

Most of that list is a complete waste of money, and for the rest of it we could pay for out of general taxation or a levy on broadbank or something.

But the idea that we need a government mouthpeace with it's own sodding orchestra and songs of praise belongs about 40 years in the past.

Look at ITV, that is what we will end up with. Virtually all repeats, and a lot of dross.
For anyone looking for a good news channel, Al Jazeera is good. They do invest in proper journalism.

@WindyState I never watch Songs of Praise. But it is pretty popular with elderly people who cant get to a church.

@AllThePogs

Look at ITV, that is what we will end up with. Virtually all repeats, and a lot of dross. For anyone looking for a good news channel, Al Jazeera is good. They do invest in proper journalism.

You won't end up with another ITV.

ITV is fulfilling their role (even with all of the repeats) and you won't end up with another one. Does ITV even do radio stations??

You will end up with a far inferior set up than ITV and it will be such a shame to see what was once the bastion of public broadcasting and local broadcasting become a shadow of it's former self.

I'm not even in the UK and I'd pay for what it is that the BBC produces year after year after year.

To be honest, if you ever watched RTE, that's what you'd end up with if you allow what is planned for the BBC to go ahead. And you wouldn't have the opportunity to populate the schedule (as RTE very often does) with shows bought in from the UK and oh yes, the BBC!

I'd actually prefer to pay a license fee for what the BBC produces than be obliged to pay for RTE.
It's shite. We know it's shite and we can't do any thing about it because everything costs money and we just don't have enough of it.

The BBC is honestly a BRILLIANT service.

Just because you can dip into the likes of Netflix or HBO or whatever for one series....now imagine that you have to keep producing that level of programming scheduling 24 x 7 x 365 and make some of it local but not affect the bottom line. They wouldn't be able to do it yet the BBC does.

The BBC is really wonderful.

@LookItsMeAgain

I'd actually prefer to pay a license fee for what the BBC produces than be obliged to pay for RTE. It's shite. We know it's shite and we can't do any thing about it because everything costs money and we just don't have enough of it.

The BBC is honestly a BRILLIANT service.

Just because you can dip into the likes of Netflix or HBO or whatever for one series....now imagine that you have to keep producing that level of programming scheduling 24 x 7 x 365 and make some of it local but not affect the bottom line. They wouldn't be able to do it yet the BBC does.

The BBC is really wonderful.

Again in your opinion , Why can people accept that some people have no desire to watch the BBC it's only brilliant If you like what it produces ,I don't .

@Doyoumind

The fact that a large proportion of the BBC's critics claim it's biased and on the side of the Tories and a large proportion of the BBC's critics claim it's not impartial because it's too left wing merely confirms that people's views of the BBC are heavily influenced by factors external to the BBC and its output.

Completely agree.

[quote Cornettoninja]@phishy and you still haven’t addressed the point of public engagement or regional news?[/quote]
Your original post says only the BBC holds the government to account. I've countered that and you're now going 'what about public engagement, what about regional news', etc.

And you can Google who owns Sky News, do you really need me to update you?

with it's own sodding orchestra ... belongs about 40 years in the past.

The BBC provides employment to some fantastic British musicians and singers, and in return, the British public gets access to really high quality live music, very cheaply. You could go to some recordings (pre-covid) at Media City for free, and the BBC orchestra tours and recordings often have tickets at around £20, so it's much more accessible than other orchestras.

I think (and my job is firmly in the science area, so it isn't like I'm a musician) that having world class musicians is something a country should be pleased about! And the BBC means that more people can afford to be professional musicians. We can't all be accountants (although maybe the BBC does need some better ones of those!).