The bbc, again.

We should not be forced to fund an organisation that creates false news and gives tacit support to terrorist groups and far-left politics.
 
Badger11 said:
Yup, it's simply not good enough. They think that wheeling out a Z list celebrity in front of the camera to learn about baking, DIY or gardening is something we want to watch.

Somehow they have to up their spending on original non news programmes. To do that they need to cut back on the bureaucrats.
Click to expand...
I never watch those type of programme. That’s my choice. I do though pay for the licence. That’s my obligation.

How the BBC decides to satisfy its very varied viewer base is up to them. What part of their output suits me is my decision.
 
Forest Hillbilly said:
BBC Christmas highlights are a fine example or urine-poor programmes.

Celebrity Bake off
Celebrity Dance off
Celebrity Apprentice (nearly forgot)
Christmas with some of the Royal Family (another public-funded shambles)
re-runs of stuff they used to do very well.

And they want people to watch this ? and pay for it ?
Click to expand...
Then don’t watch those programmes. That’s your decision.

Paying for it isn’t. The BBC is not just another broadcaster. It’s our national broadcaster. There are other things it does other than make programmes, or show repeats, you don’t like.
 
Wisbech Eagle said:
I have evidence, some of which I have presented, but you asked me to prove it and I don’t need to. This isn’t a court of law in which the outcome depends on proof. This is a matter determined by government. It’s them, not you, who decide whether everyone pays because everyone, in their opinion, benefits.

What you, or I, think about the issue is irrelevant.

The government determines the level of funding the BBC needs to meet their obligations. Not how it is spent. Traditionally it’s been raised via the broadcasting licence but it looks likely to be scrapped and replaced by something more appropriate for the way we live now.Something backsliders cannot avoid.
Click to expand...
This is increasingly becoming less a defence of the BBC and more the usual defence of Governmental authority. Should a future government scrap the licence fee you'll presumably support that decision as vehemently.
Licenses had some validity when the BBC had a monopoly but now there are too many options.
 
Forest Hillbilly said:
Which is why the BBC is reaching a crossroads. People are swerving obligations to pay for a TV licence, because they have found other media outlets providing better value.
It will be impossible to impose a BBC tax, which is why alternate forms of funding are being explored, such as advertising revenue.
People are voicing their dissatisfaction with the BBC services via their wallets and media choices. Trying to impose a direct levvy on the entire population for something that the viewing figures suggest they are increasingly fed-up with , would be hugely unpopular for any Government to do.
Click to expand...
It won’t be either advertising in the UK or subscription. Either would destroy the ethos of the BBC and remove its point of difference. That point of difference being essential as a marketing tool in the world market it functions in.

Something independent of taxation yet as unavoidable as taxation must be found. A communication levy applied to internet charges being my preferred option. It would certainly be unpopular with some. Not with others. How it’s introduced will be difficult to balance and interesting to observe. Possibly in stages, with the licence continuing at a reduced rate for a while, boosted by a moderate levy and increased funding from taxation. We will see.
 
Teddy Eagle said:
This is increasingly becoming less a defence of the BBC and more the usual defence of Governmental authority. Should a future government scrap the licence fee you'll presumably support that decision as vehemently.
Licenses had some validity when the BBC had a monopoly but now there are too many options.
Click to expand...
I wouldn’t defend it at all. I would criticise it with all the arguments that would show why it was a mistake. What I wouldn’t do is refuse to pay whatever was put in its place, unless optional.
 
Wisbech Eagle said:
I wouldn’t defend it at all. I would criticise it with all the arguments that would show why it was a mistake. What I wouldn’t do is refuse to pay whatever was put in its place, unless optional.
Click to expand...

"This is a matter determined by government. It’s them, not you, who decide whether everyone pays..."
 
Teddy Eagle said:
This is increasingly becoming less a defence of the BBC and more the usual defence of Governmental authority. Should a future government scrap the licence fee you'll presumably support that decision as vehemently.
Licenses had some validity when the BBC had a monopoly but now there are too many options.
Click to expand...
Daily x 178
 
Teddy Eagle said:
"This is a matter determined by government. It’s them, not you, who decide whether everyone pays..."
Click to expand...
If you choose to quote me it would be a courtesy to do so in full, and not remove part, thus distorting the context. The quote was:-

“This is a matter determined by government. It’s them, not you, who decide whether everyone pays because everyone, in their opinion, benefits.”

The missing words being critical to my argument!
 
Wisbech Eagle said:
If you choose to quote me it would be a courtesy to do so in full, and not remove part, thus distorting the context. The quote was:-

“This is a matter determined by government. It’s them, not you, who decide whether everyone pays because everyone, in their opinion, benefits.”

The missing words being critical to my argument!
Click to expand...
Call it a BBC edit. It's fine when they do it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Holmesdale Online Shop

Back
Top