Location: A civilised little County..with a bit of eccentricity to boot
No doubt it will help fund several more series of : "Strictly Come flog a tired old format to death and offer some equally tired has beens a few more quid which we have ripped of the tax payer under the promise of actually producing decent programmed like we used to, but, as we now prefer to concentrate on dross, we really couldn't give a toss at times about serious programmes anymore. " .
There is very little if anything to distinguish the BBC's output from the rest of the dross,cut them loose, let them sink or swim in the real world,as someone has already stated, why should we pay to keep people in other countries informed,and if their news output to those places is as biased as their news service here, poorly informed. The BBC is about twenty years past its sell by date any rise is to much.
Don't know whether your response Ms(Mr, Miss, Madam???) Wombat should be taken literally or tongue-in-cheek.
If literally, then you don't watch TV (at home anyway) if so, good for you - you are pure, live long and prosper, Grasshopper.
If tongue-in-cheek, then you do watch TV in the UK but don't pay the tax - even gooder IMHO for you. The active rejection of State bullshit speaks far louder than the the whiney arse don't-like-but-pay-anyway attitude.
In case non-UKer's are confused, the BBC licence fee is effectively a tax on owning a television - it doesn't matter if you tune to any BBC tv broadcast or not. If you own a tv then the point is you have the capability - hence the state levies as much flesh as they can get away with.
..and for what exactly? Oh wait, don't tell me, I know it... err....ok, I don't know it exactly, but it's something really good and unique. BM
I'm still surprised by the way in which the BBC can report on itself and manage to be quite balanced about it. I doubt shITV could manage the same. If someone pays the license fee already, is an extra £5 a year really going to bother them? It doesn't bother me - i'll pay it just for the few decent programs left (Planet Earth, Ray Mears, various comedies (that's actual comedy - i don't mean your 'My Family' or whatever) and the pleasure of watching a film without advert breaks).
The only thing that I watch on the Beeb, is the Local News [a tad better than ITV]. As for "Quality" , we had 80% repeats over Chrimbo, and about 70% throughout the year. Bin the Licence Fee, and go "Commercial", they'd last 6 months..or am I being optomistic? watp,iktch
BBC4 int bad but not worth 150 quid a year,the only news based prog I still watch is Newsnight,don't watch question time since they took that down market,anybody wanna bet they will have that Jade Goody person on next week.
the BBC licence fee is effectively a tax on owning a television
Which is abvout as unfair and illogical as road tax (unrelated to road useage), Council tax (unrelated to use of services) and a zillion other unfair, thieving, excuse-for-grabbing cash-from-the-innocent taxes.
I suppose someone has to pay for Public sector pensions, early retirements, MP wagwes and pension and all the other hangers-on.
The BBC went to hell when they became obsessed as with viewing figures as the commercial channels,beats me why, not as if they have to attract advertisers,although one notes the BBC have taken to placing what amounts to a irritating commercial break between progs as well. Often wondered how viewing figures are calculated,Sky news just came out with figures about how many more were watching that shite Big Bruver because of the latest media created storm in a tea cup,how the hell do they know how many are watching any specific prog? and just how accurate they are.
Just listen to the World Service. From the announcers to the programme content, there is nothing to tell you are are listening to Britain.
Untrue, there are constant inserts to advise listeners they are listening to the World Service of the BBC.
Irrelevant to this discussion though - the World Service is not funded from the BBC licence, but independently through a separate Parliamentary Grant-in-Aid from the Foreign & Commonwealth Office budget.
Some of you perhaps might benefit from reading this.
The government gets no money from the licence fee. They do, however, require the BBC to use the money for the benefit of the public - this is firmly laid down in the charter. The revised one in fact includes a commitment to provide free digital set-top boxes for the elderly, and others in need, and also an educational remit (like BBC schools stuff).
I think the BBC is caught within a rock and a hard place. Either it competes with other channels, and it's accused of pandering to the lowest common denominator, or it becomes, as someone suggested above, a place for programming that isn't commercially viable (like PBS in the states).
Having seen PBS, I know which I'd rather. I think having an independent voice in this country (anyone who thinks the likes of Sky etc are independent needs their heads checking) is crucial. You just have to look at the way the government reacted to the 'dodgy dossier' affair to see it hates the fact it can't influence the BBC. It would love the new licence fee settlement to strip the BBC of some of its power, but I really hope it doesn't.