TV Licence Resistance

[dutchmanswife]

DH has been running a campaign for years against the TV licence and has appeared in the Sunday Times this week.

entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/tol/arts_and_entertainment/tv_and_radio/article6797727.ece

I'm feeling quite proud of him.

I heart the BBC.

NO, No, No to only commercial TV.

Fuck the BBC, as a working class girl it doesn't speak for me at all, it does occasionally speak down to me in a mocking and condescending voice sometimes which annoys me.

But the BBC is a smoke screen anyway, the government take a percentage of the fee for themselves so it's just like any other tax and Capita are raking in the cash from it, it's all just another scam to get rich off the little people,

The BBC makes plenty of cash from sales of shows worldwide, publishing and letting others use there facilities for filming etc, as a resident of West London I am well aware of the amount of money squandered by them simply because they have too much, the amount of buildings they have round here is shocking as is the amount of traveling they do between them via cabs, vans and there own bus service, they would be better off if they had to work for the money, they would be forced to sort out the spending. maybe the filming would improve as well, they are the worst, they think they have a god given right to clog up the streets, drop litter everywhere and treat locals like scum, no one else is arrogant like them, you all ways know a BBC film crew when you see one.

It's getting harder and harder to avoid the tax, years ago all you had to do was gut the tuner out of your TV, now days if you have internet access on your PC or games console you can watch TV on it and DF was told that his shop has to pay for a license because customers and staff can use smart phones on the premises that can get TV.

Gosh, a Murdoch owned newspaper has run an article with someone who doesn't like the licence fee?

It might not happen these days - the start of the thread was a while ago, and the Murdochs have had the UK newspaper portion of their empire thrust under the spotlight of late, so might be taking higher interest in content :)

I adore the BBC and loathe all commercial stations. I listen to Radio 2 and 4 and only watch the BBC channels.

If I never have to watch or listen to a commercial again it will be too soon.

The BBC has set benchmarks throughout the world for the quality of its broadcasting and long may it continue.

Once you have lived in other countries and seen what other public broadcasters have on offer, you tend to appreciate the BBC far, far more. I'm living overseas now where I'm furtunate to be able to listen to BBC Radio through the internet and I happily pay to watch BBC television.

I assume that's BBC World, notmydog. Or have the BBC released their iPad player worldwide ? I think if they charged the same fee here (approx US $10 a month) I might be willing to use it (if I had an iPad, too, of course) but given some of the wasteful spending over the years, I'm far from inclined to support the BBC financially at present.

I expect 2012 to be quite heavy on trips to the USA to follow the run-up to the next Presidential Election (and when all is said and done, since we ave no part in the run-up, and cannot vote, why do they bother when no other country gets similar attention ? Seems to me to be a round of freebies for BBC staff to jet off and get their shopping while over there. We'll no doubt find Richard Bacon does another trip, Up All Night might report for weeks from Boston, and others will find ways to incorporate a trip, and it's not just the presenter but a string of people and no doubt there will be 'free time' for shopping in every place they go :)

Bloodredrubyblue - "If I never have to watch or listen to a commercial again it will be too soon."

I used to listen to BBC Radio 4 around 18 hours a day, but the endless 'commercials' for BBC shows, or Red Nose Day, or the TV Licence, have become such a nuisance I listen far, far, less these days.

The first commercial (sorry, 'trail') is at 05:21 and you then have a minimum of 2 per hour, sometimes 4 in an hour, throughout the day. A couple of years or so ago, Clive Anderson (whose programmes and wit I enjoy) was going to do a one-off show about the internet, I think. It was promoted every day for over a week until the show went out.

If they just gave a rundown of shows for the next couple of hours as a simple list, read by the continuity announcer, I would be better informed as to what was on each day. I heard no promotion of the latest series of "Click On" because clearly science related programmes (apart from someone who was given a spot on Tuesday) get less promotion than art/book review shows and drama, on R4.

The producer of "Click On" has today responded to my e-mail and tells me my comments have been passed on to BBC Management, which decides what to promote. Fortunately "listen again" options (OK, dratted iPlayer) allow me to catch up with the episode(s) I missed, as I now listen to commercially sparse alternative stations via the internet, and hardly more than 6 hours a week of BBC stations, live.

Networkguy

I find those preferable to the feckin' GoCompare adverts and bloody sofas that are permanently on feckin sale and the We Buy Any Car mind numbingly bloody awful shite advert.

They genuinely anger me and I can't understand how DP can sit through them on a 12 minute loop.....................I want to boil my own brain and shoot someone in the face.

And breathe...............

I'm with your DH 110%.

politically not decided where I stand re BBC fee..

..but remembered Sandi Toksvig on Radio 4 News Quiz last week querying everyone who moaned about paying for 140 quid annual license fee for telly and radio versus 60 quid per MONTH to Sky.

Not everyone can afford that 140-odd quid, so it's a moot point - perhaps she was cognisant of the bulk of the Radio 4 audience being easily able to pay - after all, they do claim it is "intelligent speech" even if Any Questions and some "discussions" sound like they are recorded at "chucking out time" of some city centre pub!

I heard today that Five Live will be halving the number of sports commentators going to football matches, as they send 2 at present. I would be happy to also hear there will be no "coverage" of the US Presidential Election "run up" as there may be dozens of BBC staff on jaunts to the USA next year otherwise.

When the tsunami took place off Japan, I remember there being at least 25 (or was it over 40?) different BBC reporters covering stories from there, using some of the precious resources such as food and fuel that should have been available to local people in distress, and for what, a few extra minutes per day of output that would get onto radio and TV services back home.

The BBC does need to cut back, on salaries and programming, so for a start they could stop "bidding wars" for rights to some of the sports coverage they currently pursue... If a body representing some sport sets too high a "reserve" there will be no coverage, and if Sky happens to bid against (say) Virgin or ITV, so be it, they could all do with drawing in their spending, and force the sports bodies to take a cut, too.

Back to the BBC, whether the reports of Jonathan Ross getting 6M per year (when he was with the BBC) was correct or not, the only way the public can give an informed view (as the BBC Trust is touring the country to get such views) on where cuts could be considered is to give a breakdown, by radio station and TV channel, as to the total expenditure. I would like to know

a) how many BBC staff support the service
b) salaries: total wage bill, and then bands so it could show how many on
10K-15K, 15K-20K, 20K-25K, 25K-30K, 30K-45K, 45K-60K, 60K-80K, 80K-100K, 100K-150K, 150K-200K, 200K-250K, 250K+
c) external costs, ie how much (in total) is paid to external production firms
d) 'talent' costs, how much is paid (in total) for regulars, and how much for individual 'guest appearances' (eg for an episode of The News Quiz, Have I got News for You, etc).
e) infrastructure costs (signal transmission costs, technical staff in support departments serving all the different services from the background)
f) other major expenditure, such as the cost involved with modernising kit to take a centre of operations into the digital age, eg Glasgow some few years ago, Salford (for Five Live), etc. Also, where services (such as Five Live) are moved, what extra costs are paid for to cover temporary and permanent staff moves.

There are probably significant other costs for moving staff around, so if a presenter such as Stephen Nolan is asked to work for FiveLive, no doubt the BBC picks up the travel costs for him to fly from Belfast on a Friday and back from Manchester on Monday so he can do his morning show from Belfast at 9am after finishing on FiveLive at 1am...

Does he need to be in Manchester, or could some other person already working for FiveLive do the Friday/ Saturday/ Sunday night shows on FiveLive without similar travel costs / logistical problems?

So perhaps another cost centre should be travel costs - from time to time different personalities have indicated they have been on long journeys (eg Manchester to London) by taxi, paid for no doubt by the BBC... Morning show presenters are also likely to be picked up on a daily basis by car, at some significant cost, no doubt !!

I am not arguing that 140/year with the BBC is affordable for all households ...just that it sounds a lot better to me than 60/month for Sky.

At times I've been incredibly pissed off with some things on the BBC. Often it's been dreary old cheapo reality tv and cosy, uninsightful news broadcasts.
However have you seen some of the brilliant things that have been on in the past 2 or 3 years? I would be bereft if some of the science or history or comedy programming simply did not happen because it wasn't commercially viable in the UK. There is no other set of channels anything like the BBC.
I think it is incredibly short-sighted and dull to not want to pay the pennies a day to keep 4 channels which together try to keep the nation at least thinking.

been thinking about this thread a lot.

having lived overseas see incredible value BBC has in radio and TV stuff.

We go and bomb countries ...isn't better to try to support too?

BBC doesn't offer value for money IMO - it's been forcing the licence fee on households for as long as anyone can remember and is because of this fact that nobody really questions it - it's not like you get a choice is it?

I pay it but very grudgingly so.

The quality of the BBC's output has plummetted in recent years. They need to get their act together if they want to have a future.

I think you guys have missed the point... Most people are not discussing the fee itself... but the harassment and threats to people who have no TV get from the BBC.

Yes, one is treated as a freak of nature, if one indicates a choice that does not match the 'norm'.

JLK2 - I disagree. We've been gobsmacked at how the quality (and quantity) of history and science programming has gone up in the past few years. There's been some brilliant comedy too. News - meh. Reality tv - spit. Drama - some fantastic programmes. I think it's orders of magnitude better than it was even 3 years ago. (I think they must have employed a scientist to commission science progs, for one thing, and got rid of the clueless art history grad we imagined had that job previously.)

oi, what have you got against Art History grads?! I do agree with you though LaPruneDeMaTante. People also usually appear to forget that the 'tv licence' funds Radio output too (I live on Radio 3 & 6). BBC4 is fantastic I agree , although it seems to be in line for some cuts sadly.

I despise those that enforce the licence fee, they are condescending, arrogant and self important with zero comapssion or understanding.

We moved into our flat in Dec 2007, and were burgled 5 weeks later, our (brand spanking new) TV was stolen, we couldnt afford to replace it straight away so cancelled our licence fee. I wrote to the TV licencing bods, even photocopied my letter from the police with crime reference number included. The fuckers hounded me, demanding to visit during the day, despite the fact I told them I'd be working and could take no time off for a 10 minute visit! I ended up telling one of their enforcement officers to get fucked when he tried to demand entrance to my property at 8pm at night!

Wow, discussion of the licence fee and not one person saying how great it is, in terms of making sure all other news providers on the internet are forced to be free and not subscription - this includes influencing other countries on this. Not one person saying how incredibly good it is for helping with democracy. Not one person saying how great it makes the UK look abroad. Not one person saying how having a British voice that is so well respected internationally means we have more power and leverage politically to get things in our favour...

No its all about whether you like whats on television on a Saturday or not...

...yes its bloody patronising and horribly middle class at times, but it is far more than simply entertainment or the odd documentary. Its a advertising campaign for the UK. Its the thing that more than anything else gives an impression to the rest of the world. It attracts a hell of a lot of people to the UK.

Murdoch hates the BBC for so many reasons I'm not even going to start... and even if you do like it, if it wasn't for the BBC the quality and range of services it has wouldn't be as good. Competition between the BBC and SKY is good. No one else would be able to do it.

Leave abroad for a while or ask an ex-pat about the BBC. For a hell of a lot its one of the things you miss about the UK most when you leave.

Whine about the £140 it costs. The alternatives are more expensive and bring fewer benefits.

My airel broke and I was left without the ability to watch live tv and so got rid of my tv licence - I don't have digital tv and so can't watch any live.

I had threatening letters which said they would come to the house and they would prove that I had a tv. These letters really where menacing - we had a man force his way into a house locally and rape a girl and I certainly didn't want any person coming to the door and frightening either of my dd's.

i telephoned and the tv licencing man was very rude - so I called agian and got a another man who explained I needed to withdraw any rights of access to my property as this would include threatening letters.

i wrote and gave a bog standard miss smith refuses rights of access and they wrote back and said they would find others ways to prove I had a tv but since then have left me and my dd's alone - I did this about 18 months ago. Apparently it will last three - four years and then I repeat the same process

my dad has had the investigators out twice now as he emailed and told them they where silly - he doesn't have a tv but being male isn't intimidated by there threats he is happy to waste there time, as whilst they waste their time with him they are leaving someone else along who maybe scared.

I must admitt I know have the opinion bbc is not wonderful tv and I wonder why I ever watched it, the news is very churned out and repeats and repeats and repeats. I saw the bbc news in the bank recently and was horrified at how bad it is - possibly because I am not used to it and realised it was on a loop of about 1.3 minutes ten times they showed the same car with a man getting inside and I was only in the queue for around 10 minutes....

I have no problem with paying for the BBC, I just don't like the mechanism of the licence fee. It is a very inefficient way of collecting tax. Given that the vast majority of people do watch BBC TV (broadcast or online) or listen to BBC radio, it's ridiculous to waste so much money trying to establish who watches or records live TV and who doesn't and hunt down the offenders. On a moral level it is intrusive to spy on people to establish who is watching TV. Just tax everybody.

I say this as someone who isn't liable for the licence fee, as I only watch TV online and never live. That is a weird loophole which more and more people are making use of. I am sure I benefit from BBC programmes every bit as much as a person who has a normal telly. Like most people, I haven't volunteered to pay tax when I am not legally required to. But it is ridiculous that people like me are exempt.

It would make far more sense and be more cost-effective just to collect this tax through a small hike in income tax or VAT or some such.