If the TV licence was optional would you pay it?

I don't pay it now, so no.

What do you mean by optional? A Netflix/Sky subscription or the decriminalisation of non-payment?

As long as the TV licence is compulsory I will pay it. If the BBC turns into a commercial network then I will judge it based on the output. If the output continues to be of high quality then I will subscribe, if it is gooseberry fool then I will cancel and pirate anything I want.

A few years ago, yes.

But there's no way I would support the BBC in their current incarnation.

Yesterday I watched Top Gear, Travels in Euroland with Ed Balls, and Universal Credit: Inside the Welfare State; Oxford vs Newcastle on Tuesday night; and Match of the Day 2 and the Superbowl on Sunday, all on the BBC. So yes.

Yes, absolutely. I get more value from BBC output (across all forms - TV, Radio, Internet) than I do pretty much any other service or subscription.

If the quality dropped or the range of what they offered became narrower then I would reconsider but right now I would be happy to keep subscribing.

90% of my tv viewing is now through Netflix, so no I probably wouldn't.

Interesting question.

I feel the BBC has, in the last 12-18 months, really allowed it's coverage to slide to a point where you cannot call it neutral. It has cowered to the right-wingers and no longer categorically states things as they are.

I'd miss Match of the Day, Dragons' Den and Test Match Special.

I probably would - but the new side's decline in last few years makes it very uncomfortable to do so

Moggy wrote:What do you mean by optional? A Netflix/Sky subscription or the decriminalisation of non-payment?

As long as the TV licence is compulsory I will pay it. If the BBC turns into a commercial network then I will judge it based on the output. If the output continues to be of high quality then I will subscribe, if it is gooseberry fool then I will cancel and pirate anything I want.

Decriminalisation of non payment.

Dual wrote:
Moggy wrote:What do you mean by optional? A Netflix/Sky subscription or the decriminalisation of non-payment?

As long as the TV licence is compulsory I will pay it. If the BBC turns into a commercial network then I will judge it based on the output. If the output continues to be of high quality then I will subscribe, if it is gooseberry fool then I will cancel and pirate anything I want.

Decriminalisation of non payment.

In that case, yes I would continue to pay.

I tend to prefer BBC output to that of most other media companies. In saying that, I only have access to the Freeview channels in terms of TV, though. I like how the BBC delivers output across tv, radio and the web and I feel that it tries to offer balanced programmes and reporting... although I recognise that not everyone feels that way. It seems that many folk feel it favours the opposite side to their particular viewpoint :-) .

I would be happy to continue paying the annual fee.

Probably continue to pay and review if it's worth it on a payment scale basis.

Probably not. I don't use it enough.

Corazon de Leon

Nope, along with about 45% of other Scots and, probably, 100% of Rangers supporters who are currently boycotting the Beeb. :lol:

I don't watch enough BBC content to justify £12/month for the license fee. That's more expensive than Netflix which offers a significantly wider variety of content. So if the BBC went to a subscription style of service I absolutely wouldn't bother.
If it's just "You still need a TV License to watch/record any form of content as it's broadcast no matter what channel it's on" but it just isn't a criminal offence not to pay it, then I'll continue to pay it.

Their news reporting has gone completely to gooseberry fool in the last few years as well. They've gone from a pretty strong unbiased position to having lurched to the right in the pursuit of "balance".

Corazon de Leon

They haven’t had a strong unbiased news position for the best part of a decade now, at least.

Corazon de Leon wrote:They haven’t had a strong unbiased news position for the best part of a decade now, at least.

I always thought the BBC (on their website, at least) was continually being criticised by The Right for being too left? "Another pro-climate change/pro-EU/pro-diversity article etc - wasn't that a thing?

Or am I thinking of something else?

A few years ago I'd have said yes absolutely, but now I barely watch live TV. The only thing I'd probably watch on BBC are a couple of quiz shows and Match of the Day. Big sporting events as well I suppose.

Preezy wrote:
Corazon de Leon wrote:They haven’t had a strong unbiased news position for the best part of a decade now, at least.

I always thought the BBC (on their website, at least) was continually being criticised by The Right for being too left? "Another pro-climate change/pro-EU/pro-diversity article etc - wasn't that a thing?

Or am I thinking of something else?

It is a thing. It’s why I’m always a little sceptical about everyone saying the Beeb has lurched, en masse, to the right. If it’s pissing off both sides that suggests it’s doing a decent job at neutrality, although of course ‘neutrality’ is debatable.

I don’t follow it for the news anyway. I watch stuff on iPlayer (HIGNFY :wub:

) and listen to Radio 3 and Test Match Special. So yes, I would keep paying, assuming output continued at current levels.

If the TV licence was optional would you pay it?

If the TV licence was optional would you pay it?

Who is online

Affiliates