[Closed] BBC Licence fee

Get rid ( or reduce it ) with sponsored programmes or adverts at the end of a programme - all you get now's adverts for future BBC stuff .

Scrap it. Sell off the BBC.

It's sort of enforced subscription, isn't it? We watch more stuff on the BBC than any other channel though, rarely owt on ITV and never on Sky (mainly because we don't subscribe). I dunno. It's worth the fee I suppose, but I resent [i]having[/i] to pay it.

Keep it or fund from general taxation. The alternatives are much worse.

Protect and enforce it.

Keep it or fund from general taxation. The alternatives are much worse.

Keep it. Or create some other hypothecated tax to fund it.

I'm sure a bunch of folk will show up saying how rubbish the BBC is etc etc

But anyone who has spent any time in countries that [i]only[/i] have commercial broadcasting will recognise that the Beeb actually drags the standards up a bit and covers things that would otherwise be ignored because they are not commercial enough.

Funny how nobody mentions that you pay a subscription for Sky, but you still get bombarded with adverts.

mikewsmith- that's a good idea. Just bung a few quid onto everybody's tax bill each year and problem solved! No ads and you get to keep the good programmes and radio stations.

edit- we love the BBC, it's brilliant. Ok, there's some utter tosh on there as well but in the main it's brilliant.

the BBC is fantastic. i can see that the fee needs to change - but it should not be at the detriment of the programming.

imnotverygood - Member
Funny how nobody mentions that you [b]can choose to[/b] pay a subscription for Sky, but you still get bombarded with adverts.

Keep it as-is.

At the moment their budget is ring-fenced by how much they get through the License Fee and whatever they can generate by selling formats/programmes to other countries. If we move to paying for it through general taxation they could easily go asking for more whenever a big event comes up eg. a state funeral or a huge sporting event. As we all know anything run financially by the government on a big scale ALWAYS goes over budget!
If it goes subscription-based then we could end up with an ITV clone or, even worse, what America has.

I'd give them an additional £100 p.a. to STFU about it.

If we move to paying for it through general taxation they could easily go asking for more whenever a big event comes up eg. a state funeral or a huge sporting event

Conversely rolling it into general taxation means the government could quietly cut funding to it. 🙁

I'd give them an additional £100 p.a. to STFU about it.

I'm in favour of general taxation which would then take into account the ability of people to pay. Seems a fair and equitable solution to me.

I'm in favour of general taxation which would then take into account the ability of people to pay. Seems a fair and equitable solution to me.

The biggest problem is that it turns the BBC into even more of a political football than it is now and opens it up to the "would you rather have three weeks of eastenders or 10 extra hospital beds" line of argument which results in it being completely devalued.

I'd expect that there would be (good) rules against it being paid for out of general taxation as it would then become a government funded organisation, and as much a people like to think that that is what it is right now; it's not.

Cut the licence fee by 50% and make the Beeb live within its means.

as much a people like to think that that is what it is right now; it's not.

Ooooh... you're going to get JHJed so good.

Keep it, hell, increase it. It is the best value for money think I pay for each year, £150 ish for above average content and some very good internet resources? I really struggle to see why anyone would either want to remove it or worse, put the BBC into private ownership. I'm a raging capitalist and even I know that would be a bad idea.

Get rid of the mandatory fee. Let people pay a subscription for it if they want it, or buy content on demand.

Personally I rarely watch anything on the BBC channels and wouldn't miss them if I didn't have them. IMO the content used to be good when the BBC "did it's own thing" but now they're just trying to compete with ad-funded/subscription TV and it's just a race to the bottom; most of the original content is drivel.

The whole idea of "TV channels" has become outdated now IMO as thanks to streaming/on demand I can actually watch something I want to see when I sit down in front of the telly rather than watch something just because it's [i]on[/i].

ohnohesback - Member
Cut the licence fee by 50% and make the Beeb live within its means.

There is something nice about not having your news funded by corporations.

But the Government set the level of the licence fee now. What's the difference between that and doing it through taxation (except taxation takes into account ability to pay)?

Scrap the license, most folk subscribe to tv suppliers. Sponsored programmes or adverts like the rest of them.Might actually wake the bbc up a bit.

Keep it as the BBC is such a huge asset to the UK.

The ONLY reason we have decent News channels in the UK eg Sky is they have to compete with the BBC. If you want to see what Murdoch news is like with no competition, just watch Fox news for 2 minutes.

The Beeb is a corporation; and as for it's news coverage and agenda, it's becoming more 'Radio Pyongyan' as time passes.

What the BBC should be doing is providing a high quality core service of TV and radio. I'd scrap radios 1, 1Xtra, 2, and 5, as well as convert the local radio into regional services. As for TV, dump the likes of Eastenders, Top Gear, and Flog It to concentrate on the BBC2/4 output. This could probably be contained within one or two channels with the surplus being auctioned to help fund the Beeb.

As for TV, dump the likes of Eastenders, Top Gear

[s]So[/s] improve funding by dumping the programmes that make them a huge profit in licensing so they can concentrate on the loss-making special interest shows?

Top Gear is one of their cash-cows together with a lot of the CBBC stuff. Kill those and their budget would drop considerably.

And DO NOT kill off 6Muisic, it's totally unique and worth the £145.50 on it's own!

Keep it as the BBC is such a huge asset to the UK.

The ONLY reason we have decent News channels in the UK eg Sky is they have to compete with the BBC.

I'd rather (and in fact do) get my news online from a range of sources.

And DO NOT kill off 6Muisic, it's totally unique and worth the £145.50 on it's own!

Top Gear makes the BBC vast amounts more than it costs as they sell it across the world for a huge profit. Plenty of other shows are the same, drop them and you are going to cost the BBC money.

BBC radio 1, 2 and 5 are about the 3 most popular stations in the UK, loved by millions of people as they offer ad-free content to a huge range of people, why on earth would you get rid of them?

Seriously, it's awesome.
http://www.buzzfeed.com/danmartin/26-reasons-the-bbc-is-actually-brilliant#.wglYZq9R4

I'd prefer to see the BBC distanced from any political influences than anything else.

Aside from Netflix, I have no other subscriptions and have no intention of signing up to any. Barely watch ITV tbh.

It's good value for me just for the BBC4, Radio 3/4 content. I suddenly feel old.

Driving the 1000 mile round trip to visit the folks is a lot easier with Radio 3 and 4

Divide up all the content and make it subscription only; those who want it can pay for it.

Which would completely defeat the objective of public service broadcasting and turn it into just another commercial lowest common denominator broadcaster.

BBC radio 1, 2 and 5 are about the 3 most popular stations in the UK, loved by millions of people as they offer ad-free content to a huge range of people, why on earth would you get rid of them?

Which would completely defeat the objective of public service broadcasting and [b]turn it into just another commercial lowest common denominator broadcaster.[/b]

The Beeb is a corporation;

I'd scrap radios 1, 1Xtra, 2, and 5, as well as convert the local radio into regional services.

What is the big deal about TV news? By the very nature of the format they can only cover a limited amount of stories in a limited amount of detail, plus you only get to hear what they want to tell you and with their spin on it.
I'd rather (and in fact do) get my news online from a range of sources.

The big deal is that you can get your news from somewhere a bit more independant. I also read a variety of sources but tend to find the BBC is relatively well balanced.

I would argue it's turned itself into that already to be honest.

Can you provide a metric for that(no Scottish academic links), or is it just personal perception? Genuine question.

I cant help but think that age and cynicism go hand in hand. (That'll be personal perception.)

Write a simple law that says you can have ads or subs - not both.

I hate subscription TV that then has ads. I like the BBC as it is. 90% of the TV I watch is BBC, the rest C4/E4.

I don't agree at all; I think the days of the BBC being unbiased

There was an article on R4(ironicaly) discussing how the BBC's reporting on Israel changed largely in tune with the Governments stance. And this was going back to (iirc) the late 40's

ceebeebies is the 3rd parent in our house

well worth it just for that!

oh and 6music, radio4, iplayer, BBC4, newsnight, QT, the detectorists

According to some listening figures I just found online, 29% of the population listen to R2 ... Not a compelling reason for forcing the rest of the population to pay for it!

Same argument can be made about any public funded institution and tax.

it's simply more efficient to consume news in an online format.

Yep and one of the most read online news sources in the world is the BBC:
http://www.alexa.com/topsites/category/Top/News

I hate subscription TV that then has ads. I like the BBC as it is. 90% of the TV I watch is BBC, the rest C4/E4.

What is the big deal about TV news?

Depends on whether you care about a Democracy or not.

BBC News is independent and unbiased (as much as is possible). This keeps Sky etc in line and they in turn, stay pretty unbiased to compete. In the US, the equivalent of Sky (FOX news) is 100% a GOP publicity machine, about as biased as you can possibly get. I'd hate to see the UK go the same way.

the bbc is lossing it (radio 4 news anyway) they were having a go at the brits for being too white and too middle class ! 😯