What I don't get with your argument is that you claim the BBC is great value for money, so if the BBC went subscription wouldn't most people simply carry on paying it? And those who don't won't be criminalised and won't get free viewing.
i often smile when big supporters of the BBC state on the one hand that 40p a day is great value for money but then think if the BBC set a subscription at that level that people wouldn't pay.
So which is it?
It is not as simple as that, you would have to encrypt the signal and provide set top boxes for each TV in a house. Also people would want to opt out of part of the BBC they didn't want so some parts would become unviable. It would end up costing more than it does now for a poorer service. Yes the majority of people would probably sign up up but the BBC would have to put a bigger focus on ratings which again would affect the range of programs and it would cost them more - seems a pointless change.
Also how could you justify subscribers funding BBC radio when it listened to by non subscribers so you would end up with adverts. There is only so much advertising spend to go round so commercial radio stations would loose advertising to the likes of Radio 2. The World Service would have to again be funded by general taxation as it was in the past.
I really do not understand why people want to see an end to the licence fee which would result in the loss of much of what the BBC is.
Would you be happy to see adverts on BBC radio as a result of scrapping the licence fee?
Would you stop listening and watching the BBC Cyril if you had to subscribe?
If I have a few extra shekels to spare I'll subscribe to anything that I think is any good.
I don't see why I should pay £145.50 a year for the odd programme I watch or radio I listen too and I am sure future technology can be found to implement a subscription only tv service for those that can't live without it.
When BBC TV still had Test Match cricket, Sunday League cricket,golf tournaments,horse racing and even live top flight football matches,quality programmes on the arts and educational series like Horizon or Omnibus, yeah the licence fee was worth the money then, definitely.
I have had Sky Movies/Sports in the past when the mood takes me.Surely its more about individual choice nowadays.I wouldn't mind but the way the BBC has abused and used licence fee money in the past and has virtually just taken the pee, has made me lose faith in the whole system.You can't just keep shoveling money into these peoples pockets ( £3.6 billion annual income from the BBC licence fee alone ) without them taking some responsibility.
Btw if you want to use repeats to bash Sky with , just take a look at the BBC1/2/3/4 TV schedules on any given weekday.
Could the crop of UKIP plants please refrain from cluttering up another thread with their rants. People are on to you across many many different forums & it's all a bit dull now & sooo obvious.
Not a UKIP supporter - just want to see a fair and unbiased BBC. The comment about the make up of the Question Time audience is bang on - it is manufactured and disproportionate. Remember Nick Griffin, no matter what you think of him, he was not allowed a fair hearing because the BBC allowed the mass left wing rent a mob in to barrack him. As much as I disagree with his policies Griffin was set up by our state broadcaster to which he no doubts contributes.
Anyone else hear Peter Allen's comment when he thought he was off mic today ? Sam Walker was interviewing an anti fracking speaker when I thought I heard Allen say 'who's this loony' . He apologised afterwards and said it wasn't aimed at the person on air at the time
Anyone else hear Peter Allen's comment when he thought he was off mic today ? Sam Walker was interviewing an anti fracking speaker when I thought I heard Allen say 'who's this loony' . He apologised afterwards and said it wasn't aimed at the person on air at the time
Sadly not but if it was the same person that Richard Bacon lost his cool with when he interviewd a anti fracking campaigner today then I can sympathize with Peter Allen,
Bacon became professional and pulled the guy up sharply on his unproven rant claims about frackin.:)
Is there such a thing as a proven claim about fracking ? We all know they're the same anti establishment soap dodgers who'd prefer it if we were back in caves.
Is it really necessary for the Yuppie show on 5 Live every morning (5.15 Wake Up to Wonga) to have TWO presenters at that time? Utterly ridiculous waste of resources given that Radio 2 is going automated during the night.
Is it really necessary for the Yuppie show on 5 Live every morning (5.15 Wake Up to Wonga) to have TWO presenters at that time? Utterly ridiculous waste of resources given that Radio 2 is going automated during the night.
Yes it is necessary. Oh and it's a different budget, so wouldn't make a difference to what is happening to Radio 2 if it only had one presenter. 5 Live have made cuts already, that's why WUTM has been extended, and Morning Reports cut.
Anyone else hear Peter Allen's comment when he thought he was off mic today ? Sam Walker was interviewing an anti fracking speaker when I thought I heard Allen say 'who's this loony' . He apologised afterwards and said it wasn't aimed at the person on air at the time
I heard him apologise, but I wasn't sure what it was about as I was driving at the time and not listening properly. He said he used offensive words. If all he done was call someone a looney, then meh.
Is it really necessary for the Yuppie show on 5 Live every morning (5.15 Wake Up to Wonga) to have TWO presenters at that time? Utterly ridiculous waste of resources given that Radio 2 is going automated during the night.
I found it sad very sad, all these young lives wiped out, we praise them but when the same conditions apply in Afghanistan we prosecute are soldiers on war crimes.......I hate politicians they caused it then and they cause it now.
BBC 5 Live coverage was excellent and some really interesting callers, there was a Lady on Nolan's show last night who had wrote a book about D-Day I could have listened to her all night,can't remember her name or the books title.:):)
I found it sad very sad, all these young lives wiped out, we praise them but when the same conditions apply in Afghanistan we prosecute are soldiers on war crimes.......I hate politicians they caused it then and they cause it now.
Yes good point well made - I find it incredulous that our guys are put into an impossible war at unbelievable risk and get prosecuted if they step over a line. I am afraid it is symptomatic of the way the PC has driven us in recent years.
Is it really necessary for the Yuppie show on 5 Live every morning (5.15 Wake Up to Wonga) to have TWO presenters at that time? Utterly ridiculous waste of resources given that Radio 2 is going automated during the night.
Didn't that used to start at 5.30, with Morning Report being half an hour as well?
I like Ian Payne. He now does a sports magazine on national LBC every Saturday afternoons -"Score".
Lbc is not putting Score on for its health; it is trying to gain more listeners for its advertisers. No doubt many of these listeners are drifting over from Five (and radio sets still on Lbc from the weekdays). I think its called rivalry or competition.
Bearing in mind this, why do the (budget pressed) Five continue to engage Ian Payne at other times?
It does seem very strange.
I like Ian Payne. He now does a sports magazine on national LBC every Saturday afternoons -"Score".
Lbc is not putting Score on for its health; it is trying to gain more listeners for its advertisers. No doubt many of these listeners are drifting over from Five (and radio sets still on Lbc from the weekdays). I think its called rivalry or competition.
Bearing in mind this, why do the (budget pressed) Five continue to engage Ian Payne at other times?
It does seem very strange.
Ian Payne is freelance so can work for whoever will employ him. It seems a lot less common for sports presenters and pundits to sign golden handcuffs deal with one broadcaster than it used to be - eg Claire Balding does work for BT Sport, Channel 4 and the BBC.
LBC's Score show is pretty bargain basement, and not going to challenge 5live's sports coverage anything soon, so I doubt 5live bosses have much issue with him doing it.
It is not as simple as that, you would have to encrypt the signal and provide set top boxes for each TV in a house. Also people would want to opt out of part of the BBC they didn't want so some parts would become unviable. It would end up costing more than it does now for a poorer service. Yes the majority of people would probably sign up up but the BBC would have to put a bigger focus on ratings which again would affect the range of programs and it would cost them more - seems a pointless change.
Also how could you justify subscribers funding BBC radio when it listened to by non subscribers so you would end up with adverts. There is only so much advertising spend to go round so commercial radio stations would loose advertising to the likes of Radio 2. The World Service would have to again be funded by general taxation as it was in the past.
I really do not understand why people want to see an end to the licence fee which would result in the loss of much of what the BBC is.
Would you be happy to see adverts on BBC radio as a result of scrapping the licence fee?
Would you subscribe to BBC TV?
Who should fund BBC online?
Imagine you have a lake, all to your self, on land that you have purchased. You then spend and invest on keeping the lake clean and the water pure. But people who haven't paid for it come in and take the water, pollute it etc. Would you be pissed at this? This is what the BBC do when it spends TV licence money on providing services WORLDWIDE such as Online and the radio streams. And I know many who are able to watch iPlayer from the States, very, very easily.
The licence fee payers are being ripped off because the BBC sees itself as an international broadcaster primarily and a national one very secondary, using funds forced out of the hungry mouths of the British for fear of a criminal record.
Imagine you have a lake, all to your self, on land that you have purchased. You then spend and invest on keeping the lake clean and the water pure. But people who haven't paid for it come in and take the water, pollute it etc. Would you be pissed at this? This is what the BBC do when it spends TV licence money on providing services WORLDWIDE such as Online and the radio streams. And I know many who are able to watch iPlayer from the States, very, very easily.
The licence fee payers are being ripped off because the BBC sees itself as an international broadcaster primarily and a national one very secondary, using funds forced out of the hungry mouths of the British for fear of a criminal record.
A disgrace.
The World Service was until the last Charter renewal funded by the Foreign Office rather the licence fee. However the Tories forced the BBC to take over funding of the World Service and Welsh language S4c and accept a frozen licence fee despite these extra responsibilities plus the expense of broadband rollout. I agree the licence fee shouldn't be funding overseas broadcasting but this wasn't the BBCs decision.
iPlayer is blocked overseas and BBC online has adverts when viewed from outside the UK
The World Service is a shadow of its former self. I used to listen to it overnights quite frequenly many years ago. Back then there used to be a good variety of programming but these days it all seems quite "samey".
However I do believe that at some point in the not so distant future the World Service will be heard on 5 Live overnight as well as on Radio 4. I can't see Up All Night surviving the next round of budget cuts at 5 Live. Plus these days UAN is, like the World Service, a shadow of its former self so if it was to go I personally would not be bothered.
Comments
It is not as simple as that, you would have to encrypt the signal and provide set top boxes for each TV in a house. Also people would want to opt out of part of the BBC they didn't want so some parts would become unviable. It would end up costing more than it does now for a poorer service. Yes the majority of people would probably sign up up but the BBC would have to put a bigger focus on ratings which again would affect the range of programs and it would cost them more - seems a pointless change.
Also how could you justify subscribers funding BBC radio when it listened to by non subscribers so you would end up with adverts. There is only so much advertising spend to go round so commercial radio stations would loose advertising to the likes of Radio 2. The World Service would have to again be funded by general taxation as it was in the past.
I really do not understand why people want to see an end to the licence fee which would result in the loss of much of what the BBC is.
Would you be happy to see adverts on BBC radio as a result of scrapping the licence fee?
Would you subscribe to BBC TV?
Who should fund BBC online?
If I have a few extra shekels to spare I'll subscribe to anything that I think is any good.
I don't see why I should pay £145.50 a year for the odd programme I watch or radio I listen too and I am sure future technology can be found to implement a subscription only tv service for those that can't live without it.
When BBC TV still had Test Match cricket, Sunday League cricket,golf tournaments,horse racing and even live top flight football matches,quality programmes on the arts and educational series like Horizon or Omnibus, yeah the licence fee was worth the money then, definitely.
I have had Sky Movies/Sports in the past when the mood takes me.Surely its more about individual choice nowadays.I wouldn't mind but the way the BBC has abused and used licence fee money in the past and has virtually just taken the pee, has made me lose faith in the whole system.You can't just keep shoveling money into these peoples pockets ( £3.6 billion annual income from the BBC licence fee alone ) without them taking some responsibility.
Btw if you want to use repeats to bash Sky with , just take a look at the BBC1/2/3/4 TV schedules on any given weekday.
Not a UKIP supporter - just want to see a fair and unbiased BBC. The comment about the make up of the Question Time audience is bang on - it is manufactured and disproportionate. Remember Nick Griffin, no matter what you think of him, he was not allowed a fair hearing because the BBC allowed the mass left wing rent a mob in to barrack him. As much as I disagree with his policies Griffin was set up by our state broadcaster to which he no doubts contributes.
Sadly not but if it was the same person that Richard Bacon lost his cool with when he interviewd a anti fracking campaigner today then I can sympathize with Peter Allen,
Bacon became professional and pulled the guy up sharply on his unproven rant claims about frackin.:)
Great! One night's relief from the D-word.
And the night after from the looks of things.
Yes it is necessary. Oh and it's a different budget, so wouldn't make a difference to what is happening to Radio 2 if it only had one presenter. 5 Live have made cuts already, that's why WUTM has been extended, and Morning Reports cut.
I heard him apologise, but I wasn't sure what it was about as I was driving at the time and not listening properly. He said he used offensive words. If all he done was call someone a looney, then meh.
Yeah, Mickey Clarke really sounds like a yuppie:)
I agree, it's really good !
Peter Allen was great today and all the descriptions of the events in France today have been excellent.
Well done to all....the BBC at its best
BBC 5 Live coverage was excellent and some really interesting callers, there was a Lady on Nolan's show last night who had wrote a book about D-Day I could have listened to her all night,can't remember her name or the books title.:):)
Didn't that used to start at 5.30, with Morning Report being half an hour as well?
Lbc is not putting Score on for its health; it is trying to gain more listeners for its advertisers. No doubt many of these listeners are drifting over from Five (and radio sets still on Lbc from the weekdays). I think its called rivalry or competition.
Bearing in mind this, why do the (budget pressed) Five continue to engage Ian Payne at other times?
It does seem very strange.
Ian Payne is freelance so can work for whoever will employ him. It seems a lot less common for sports presenters and pundits to sign golden handcuffs deal with one broadcaster than it used to be - eg Claire Balding does work for BT Sport, Channel 4 and the BBC.
LBC's Score show is pretty bargain basement, and not going to challenge 5live's sports coverage anything soon, so I doubt 5live bosses have much issue with him doing it.
Imagine you have a lake, all to your self, on land that you have purchased. You then spend and invest on keeping the lake clean and the water pure. But people who haven't paid for it come in and take the water, pollute it etc. Would you be pissed at this? This is what the BBC do when it spends TV licence money on providing services WORLDWIDE such as Online and the radio streams. And I know many who are able to watch iPlayer from the States, very, very easily.
The licence fee payers are being ripped off because the BBC sees itself as an international broadcaster primarily and a national one very secondary, using funds forced out of the hungry mouths of the British for fear of a criminal record.
A disgrace.
The World Service was until the last Charter renewal funded by the Foreign Office rather the licence fee. However the Tories forced the BBC to take over funding of the World Service and Welsh language S4c and accept a frozen licence fee despite these extra responsibilities plus the expense of broadband rollout. I agree the licence fee shouldn't be funding overseas broadcasting but this wasn't the BBCs decision.
iPlayer is blocked overseas and BBC online has adverts when viewed from outside the UK
However I do believe that at some point in the not so distant future the World Service will be heard on 5 Live overnight as well as on Radio 4. I can't see Up All Night surviving the next round of budget cuts at 5 Live. Plus these days UAN is, like the World Service, a shadow of its former self so if it was to go I personally would not be bothered.