Should we pay BBC licence fee

[Daygloboo]

I think we should still pay ithe BBC licence fee but I see someone else has been accused of bullying ....this time on BBC breakfast..I still think it is great value for money though. They make quality programmes and are are balanced in their reporting. I think it's unfair that they get so much stick. We need a public service broadcaster..

It’s well known and documented he was inspired, in part, by his time working there and the wartime propaganda room at the BBC. So, yes, in part he was.

You dont know how ' insane ' got in there? Well., i's a good job it's not you editing the news then, isnt it.

Oh no, I made a typo, big deal. Totally invalidates everything else I say,

The global viewing figures belie that.

Sorry not RTFT but having just watched the 10 o'clock news and a feature on the 'heatwave' (a.k.a - summer) with some presenter seriously telling viewers they should wear loose clothes, keep hydrated (not fizzy drinks!) take a cool shower and close curtains to keep the heat out. Is this seriously what we pay our tv licence for?! Dumbed down politically biased rubbish now. It used to be a revered institution that we could be proud of. Not anymore.

The BBC has a massive presence in Salford.

' insane' is a typo ? 😂😂😂

Yes I meant to type “I mean” but I have notoriously fat fingers so somehow it became insane, and I apologised. Biig deal. Laughing at minor errors instead of focusing on the actual points always a sign of someone in the right though…

I said that about Salford earlier and someone else said the presence in Salford wasn't that big. So is it or sn't it. I don't know.

Oh for gods sake Ralph. Get off my case and go and invade a country or something. Leave me alone .

I’m not on your case. It’s you who’s being condescending to anyone who doesn’t agree with you. Patronizing me about 1984 (when actually I’m a huge Orwell fan).

Oh, and if you’re implying I’m right wing, you couldn’t be more wrong.

Once mighty, now shitey 🥴
it’s tired, had its day,
irrelevant state broadcaster
mediocre, repetitive, lost its way
Reith would shrivel at the continuous drivel inflicted near and far
sad, lame, not fit for the game
Beeb, beep be gone

When did I patronise you about 1984. You started it I'm afraid. And when someone writes insane, it's not because their fingers slipped.. ...however fat they claim their fingers to be. I've not been condescending to anybody. I was just making a few points. I think you've overreacted. I think you like a fight.

Oh of course I wasn’t calling you insane, it made no sense in the context and I immediately apologised when you pointed it out. And no I didn’t start it at all. You started it by claiming another poster was being manipulated just because she reads a wide variety of sources. Anyone reading the thread can see that.

For someone who doesn’t like manipulation, you’re sure doing a lot of it. I mean you even told me to go invade a country, implying I’m some far right loonie, but whatever. I shall indeed leave it there because your posts speak for themself.

I watch a lot of BBC output and listen to the radio. The licence represents good value for money for me, so I pay it.

For me I very rarely watch anything on BBC so I would say no.

It's themselves isn't it. Plural..

I can see you’re being deliberately goady. I don’t think this is genuine.

Just read the last twenty or so comments and baffled that the Op thinks it’s Ralph that should leave her alone. Rather than completely the other way round.

The global audience access BBC content via the BBC commercial arm which people around the world pay to see along side their regular channels, most via a monthly cable subscription which is exactly what we are talking about. If they weren’t interested they can simply switch to anyone of a hundred other channels. In the UK where many people still only have a limited selection of channels, the wall to wall coverage was beyond excessive and left many with little alternative. Also many took exception to the implication of a mass forced participation in public morning which is archaic and a relic of the BBC of 50 years ago. Just another example of how the BBC hasnt kept up with its audience.

Many people felt it was entirely appropriate. So the BBC satisfied part of its audience and displeased another part. It was ever thus. With over 100 free view channels in the UK nobody was left with little alternative.

The BBC has around 2,700 staff in Salford. The total number of public sector BBC staff is around 17,000. So that's 15% on a good day as many of them will be WFH or commuting to/from London/SE.

By far the majority of the BBCs staff are based in an around London. The BBC is culturally and ideologically based in London. Simply moving a small amount of it's work to Salford has not changed this.

Don't get me wrong, I used to be a big BBC supporter. Sadly, the last two decades has seen the BBC forget that it is meant to represent the whole UK. Yet, increasingly, they patronize and disrespect us.

So it's time for the BBC to move to a subscription model. The irony is that the BBC knows that a majority of (young, urban) people no longer bother with a licence fee, but will happily buy Netflix ...

How old are those figures? The latest published I could find on their website reports nearly 3.2K in Salford. Old FoI numbers also have about 1500 in the Cardiff base, 1600 Pebble Mill/Birmingham base, 1300 Glasgow and another 1700 in South but outside SE bases (which seems to include Bristol, Exeter, Borehamwood and other specialist centres). That was more than a decade ago before the BBC exited White City and moved a ton more jobs out of London and into the regions.

London is the centre of both government and finance in the UK. As in other countries those two dominate the location of news and current affairs staff. If you look at distribution of staff in ITV (who have taken over White City) it will be similar, ditto C4, Sky et al.

There are plenty of problems with the BBC but distribution of staff is likely to worsen, not improve if it becomes a private company as it will have no government set responsibility to support the regions.

No it demonstrates that the main BBC bias is, as always, toward the status quo for the establishment.

Even now it is still dominated by white public schoolboys making white public schoolboy decisions. Women are still underpaid compared to male peers, its track record on abusive behaviour is poor and nepotism runs rampant. Whilst all of these are problems industry wide the BBC has performed poorly on even just those measures and is funded by public money.

Where it used to be the default place for fact checked news it is now frequently regurgitating press releases but with the “authority” of the Beeb. Science and Tech coverage is frequently shockingly bad and formerly great science programmes are dumbed down to pop science. What is the point of having a public service remit if you churn out the same old dumbed down nonsense as self produced youtube videos?

Totally disagree.

I watched none of that coverage, because I care not a whit about the Royal Family - but I know plenty of people who were glued to it. because it matters to them. It was a national event and the national broadcaster should cover it.

Same with the Proms, Wimbledon, various marathons. Me, I don't care at all - but I'm happy to pay for it because lots of people do care.

And, of course, the TV licence funds BBC Radio too. I don't listen to the radio - and I positively loathe Radio 4 - but I think this is a service that should be provided, without advertising, free of commercial considerations.

As to the political bias of the BBC - well, the left think it biased towards the right, and the right think it's biased towards the left, and as long as it's irritating both sides, I think it's doing fine.

I pay the licence, I watch a few shows, and a lot of archive and I think it's worth every penny - both for what I consume and what I don't care about much.