If the TV licence was optional would you pay it?

twitter.com/caitlinmoran/status/1225056636873715712

twitter.com/BBCRadio4/status/1225380385963618304

worrying that people seem ok with the only stuff being on tv completely commercial

Dual wrote:If the TV licence was optional would you pay it?

It is optional, I don't pay mine as I don't watch any TV. strawberry float the BBC.

as a student in the 3rd decade of the 21st century, no I do not pay for a TV license

I have no problem with the BBC, but I consider it a luxury and haven't paid for it for about 8 years now. Since I went back to being a student I can watch most things on the BBC through Box of Broadcasts anyway, which the university has a subscription to.

The license fee amounts to a regressive tax, as it affects the poor far more than if affects the rich. Therefore it should be abolished and a fairer funding model sought.

Somebody Else's Problem wrote:The license fee amounts to a regressive tax, as it affects the poor far more than if affects the rich. Therefore it should be abolished and a fairer funding model sought.

If this was brought in I wouldn't pay. As it is I don't mind funding something that I don't use a great deal but others can use.

The Watching Artist wrote:

twitter.com/caitlinmoran/status/1225056636873715712

Having high debt isn't necessarily an issue nor does it mean they don't have a sustainable business model (which they definitely do). Infact, looking into it, Netflix's debt situation is pretty healthy. I don't think it's even that high for the industry, in relative terms.

Somebody Else's Problem wrote:The license fee amounts to a regressive tax, as it affects the poor far more than if affects the rich. Therefore it should be abolished and a fairer funding model sought.

And without it we lose our public broadcaster and are at the mercy of Murdoch, Comcast and Viscount Rothermere.

When I moved out 5 years ago I had already pretty much stopped watching TV for a while, so it was a no-brainer to just stop paying for the licence altogether. I don't feel I've missed anything worthwhile.

Met wrote:When I moved out 5 years ago I had already pretty much stopped watching TV for a while, so it was a no-brainer to just stop paying for the licence altogether. I don't feel I've missed anything worthwhile.

Completely unrelated but check your PMs.

Moggy wrote:

Somebody Else's Problem wrote:The license fee amounts to a regressive tax, as it affects the poor far more than if affects the rich. Therefore it should be abolished and a fairer funding model sought.

And without it we lose our public broadcaster and are at the mercy of Murdoch, Comcast and Viscount Rothermere.

You saw the BBC during the last few elections right? They're far from being a public unbiased broadcaster anymore. A lot of the board of directors are Tory supporters.

Qikz wrote:

Moggy wrote:

Somebody Else's Problem wrote:The license fee amounts to a regressive tax, as it affects the poor far more than if affects the rich. Therefore it should be abolished and a fairer funding model sought.

And without it we lose our public broadcaster and are at the mercy of Murdoch, Comcast and Viscount Rothermere.

You saw the BBC during the last few elections right? They're far from being a public unbiased broadcaster anymore. A lot of the board of directors are Tory supporters.

And getting rid of the BBC would make our media better? Whatever you think of the BBC, have you seen The Sun and the Daily Mail?

Very right wing people are convinced the BBC is full of lefties. Very left wing people are convinced the BBC is full of righties. For all it’s faults (and there are many), it’s basically an impartial broadcaster. Don’t mistake it not agreeing with you for evidence of bias.

And don’t go thinking that the solution to the faults is to get rid of it, that’s basically the sort thinking that led to Brexit. It’s better to reform and improve than to destroy and replace - because the destruction will lead to American news style replacements.

Moggy wrote:

Qikz wrote:

Moggy wrote:

Somebody Else's Problem wrote:The license fee amounts to a regressive tax, as it affects the poor far more than if affects the rich. Therefore it should be abolished and a fairer funding model sought.

And without it we lose our public broadcaster and are at the mercy of Murdoch, Comcast and Viscount Rothermere.

You saw the BBC during the last few elections right? They're far from being a public unbiased broadcaster anymore. A lot of the board of directors are Tory supporters.

And getting rid of the BBC would make our media better? Whatever you think of the BBC, have you seen The Sun and the Daily Mail?

Very right wing people are convinced the BBC is full of lefties. Very left wing people are convinced the BBC is full of righties. For all it’s faults (and there are many), it’s basically an impartial broadcaster. Don’t mistake it not agreeing with you for evidence of bias.

And don’t go thinking that the solution to the faults is to get rid of it, that’s basically the sort thinking that led to Brexit. It’s better to reform and improve than to destroy and replace - because the destruction will lead to American news style replacements.

They are quite literally biased towards the right - just because people think it is left wing doesn't mean it is. During the last election campaign by the Tories not one single bad news story about ANYTHING awful the Tories was published. They did however smear Corbyn at every opportunity. Lisa Kussenberg is essentially a tory and she's the chief political editor or whatever her title is. She's one of Boris Johnsons closest allies. Many moderate people don't trust the Mail or the Sun, but they do trust the BBC and if they're not broadcasting facts then they're just as bad.

Qikz wrote:

Moggy wrote:

Qikz wrote:

Moggy wrote:

Somebody Else's Problem wrote:The license fee amounts to a regressive tax, as it affects the poor far more than if affects the rich. Therefore it should be abolished and a fairer funding model sought.

And without it we lose our public broadcaster and are at the mercy of Murdoch, Comcast and Viscount Rothermere.

You saw the BBC during the last few elections right? They're far from being a public unbiased broadcaster anymore. A lot of the board of directors are Tory supporters.

And getting rid of the BBC would make our media better? Whatever you think of the BBC, have you seen The Sun and the Daily Mail?

Very right wing people are convinced the BBC is full of lefties. Very left wing people are convinced the BBC is full of righties. For all it’s faults (and there are many), it’s basically an impartial broadcaster. Don’t mistake it not agreeing with you for evidence of bias.

And don’t go thinking that the solution to the faults is to get rid of it, that’s basically the sort thinking that led to Brexit. It’s better to reform and improve than to destroy and replace - because the destruction will lead to American news style replacements.

They are quite literally biased towards the right - just because people think it is left wing doesn't mean it is. During the last election campaign by the Tories not one single bad news story about ANYTHING awful the Tories was published. They did however smear Corbyn at every opportunity. Lisa Kussenberg is essentially a tory and she's the chief political editor or whatever her title is. She's one of Boris Johnsons closest allies. Many moderate people don't trust the Mail or the Sun, but they do trust the BBC and if they're not broadcasting facts then they're just as bad.

The trouble with hyperbole like “ANYTHING”, is it’s bloody easy to prove incorrect.

https://www.bbc.com/news/election-2019-50700874

There’s one.

The BBC has many faults and it’s deeply worrying that the Tory government are getting their claws into it. But the fact remains that it’s pretty much bang in the middle of the political divide. Again just because it doesn’t agree with you, doesn’t mean it’s biased.

And getting rid will not improve anything. All that will do is make things worse, far worse.

That probably took Moggy less than 3 minutes to disprove

StayDead, you can't state that something isn't true just because someone believes it is, then go on to make a statement of your own belief that is easily proven to be false like that .

I completely believe the BBC tries to be unbiased. I also think they fail a lot, both from individual bias creeping in (like from Laura Kuenssberg during the election) and from a misunderstanding of balance (thereby unfairly weighting "both sides" in debates). The right wing appear more effective at taking advantage of the BBC in this way.

Preezy wrote:That probably took Moggy less than 3 minutes to disprove

It took far longer to write the post than to find a Tory bad news story.

OrangeRKN wrote:I completely believe the BBC tries to be unbiased. I also think they fail a lot, both from individual bias creeping in (like from Laura Kuenssberg during the election) and from a misunderstanding of balance (thereby unfairly weighting "both sides" in debates). The right wing appear more effective at taking advantage of the BBC in this way.

This. There’s plenty of problems with the BBC at the moment and they should do much better. But the idea that the left wing will be better off without the BBC? That’s insane.