The evil BBC

Seainsea said:
Looking in from the outside the BBC is still highly regarded for the quality and content of its programs and production values. However, it is also viewed as an example of peddling extreme Liberalism.

It does seem odd that there is a lack of black/asian girls in the England women's football team. Especially when you compare against mens football. It is worth investigating further to see if there are barriers to young black/asian girls or whether there are deep lying cultural reasons. The success of the England women's team should be the catalyst for attracting more girls into the game especially as the big Premier League teams are now increasingly involved in the women's game.
Click to expand...
It is also viewed... Hummm very non committal. Viewed by who? By you and some others, obviously. You choose a one-off example to do down the BBC? Come off it. The BBC is much, much more than that. And I would suggest, it is the one remaining jewel in the crown.
 
Scaramanga said:
The world service ? Obviously not watched much of the BBC news then.
Click to expand...
Not the World Service, very rarely tune in to that. I don't watch BBC news on TV but I listen to it and read it. Perfect, it is not, but quality, it is and is recognised as such far beyond the shores of the UK.
 
Brazil said:
Not the World Service, very rarely tune in to that. I don't watch BBC news on TV but I listen to it and read it. Perfect, it is not, but quality, it is and is recognised as such far beyond the shores of the UK.
Click to expand...
Just to add:it's not just the news, it's the full package. Pure quality.
 
GeminiPool said:
It averages between 30-50 per year, so yes, cumulatively.
Click to expand...
Figures for imprisonment for the last five years.

2018 5
2019 2
2020 zero
2021 zero
2022 zero so far.

So not only is it completely untrue that there are thousands of people in prison. There might not even be one thousand cases in total since the licence was introduced in 1946.

Why did you say there are thousands of people in prison?
 
Foolweary said:
Figures for imprisonment for the last five years.

2018 5
2019 2
2020 zero
2021 zero
2022 zero so far.

So not only is it completely untrue that there are thousands of people in prison. There might not even be one thousand cases in total since the licence was introduced in 1946.

Why did you say there are thousands of people in prison?
Click to expand...
I have no qualms with it, I see the value in the BBC and the value of the license fee and why it was introduced when it was a monopoly supplier of the service; however it no longer is and for those who don't want to use it, why should they feel they need to pay it under threat of imprisonment?

There would be uproar if we were threatened with prison to pay for a grocery delivery from Tesco, when actually we wanted to shop at Asda and didn't even use the things that Tesco delivered.
 
TSSeasider said:
I have no qualms with it, I see the value in the BBC and the value of the license fee and why it was introduced when it was a monopoly supplier of the service; however it no longer is and for those who don't want to use it, why should they feel they need to pay it under threat of imprisonment?
Click to expand...
I don't frequent prisons but I fully expect the State to fund them from my taxes. Then there are people who choose to educate their children privately - should they get a tax rebate because they haven't used State schools? Think of the TV license as a tax on access to broadcasting. My view is that the license fee should be brought under the purview of general income tax; ie. something that is deemed to be a service provided by and for society's well-being.
 
1966_and_all_that said:
I don't frequent prisons but I fully expect the State to fund them from my taxes. Then there are people who choose to educate their children privately - should they get a tax rebate because they haven't used State schools? Think of the TV license as a tax on access to broadcasting. My view is that the license fee should be brought under the purview of general income tax; ie. something that is deemed to be a service provided by and for society's well-being.
Click to expand...
The BBC isn't a state broadcaster in the truest sense (Pravda, NK etc) so I don't think it's a fair comparison to state provision.

As a monopoly provider and even potentially in the analogue world; the license fee made sense. In a digitally connected world where I can get just about any form of broadcast media from anywhere on earth into my home or on my phone in real time - it makes less sense.

I like the BBC' it's great value, but I can understand why some people who think it's gone beyond it's 'inform, educate and entertain' remit to become some form of moral arbiter of, or worse influencer on what they believe the audience should think, feel they shouldn't need to pay towards it.

Edited to add; as an actual tax, it's pretty regressive. To think that Gary Lineker earning his £1.5m for reading an autocue, pays the same rate as your average nurse working in the intolerable NHS can't really be seen as fair.
 
Last edited:
Foolweary said:
Figures for imprisonment for the last five years.

2018 5
2019 2
2020 zero
2021 zero
2022 zero so far.

So not only is it completely untrue that there are thousands of people in prison. There might not even be one thousand cases in total since the licence was introduced in 1946.

Why did you say there are thousands of people in prison?
Click to expand...
To be fair they do all get life
 
Foolweary said:
Figures for imprisonment for the last five years.

2018 5
2019 2
2020 zero
2021 zero
2022 zero so far.

So not only is it completely untrue that there are thousands of people in prison. There might not even be one thousand cases in total since the licence was introduced in 1946.

Why did you say there are thousands of people in prison?
Click to expand...
Nice of you to only include low years.

2017 38
2016 39
2015 75

In answer to your question; hyperbole.
 
TSSeasider said:
The BBC isn't a state broadcaster in the truest sense (Pravda, NK etc) so I don't think it's a fair comparison to state provision.

As a monopoly provider and even potentially in the analogue world; the license fee made sense. In a digitally connected world where I can get just about any form of broadcast media from anywhere on earth into my home or on my phone in real time - it makes less sense.

I like the BBC' it's great value, but I can understand why some people who think it's gone beyond it's 'inform, educate and entertain' remit to become some form of moral arbiter of, or worse influencer on what they believe the audience should think, feel they shouldn't need to pay towards it.

Edited to add; as an actual tax, it's pretty regressive. To think that Gary Lineker earning his £1.5m for reading an autocue, pays the same rate as your average nurse working in the intolerable NHS can't really be seen as fair.
Click to expand...
Re. the regressive tax point. It only appears regressive because it is a stand-alone, hypothecated tax. The same could be said of national insurance. If it were subsumed within general income tax there would not be this issue.
 
1966_and_all_that said:
Re. the regressive tax point. It only appears regressive because it is a stand-alone, hypothecated tax. The same could be said of national insurance. If it were subsumed within general income tax there would not be this issue.
Click to expand...
It doesn't appear regressive, it is regressive.

It's a universal requirement to pay it (with some minor exceptions) and failure to pay it can land you in prison.
 
Haven’t paid licence fee for many years and watch bbc when I want to. There’s no way they can track you down and if they do you can refuse entry to your house, refuse to answer a single question and can legally ask them to leave your property ….Simple as that ….FACT
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top