Home› Politics & Debate
If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨
Options

BBC demands obscene inflation-busting tax hike

245

Comments

  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    minimi38 wrote:
    .



    Where have i said you should.
    sorry about that.
    sat at home sipping whiskey and paracetamol feeling awful
    it made some kind of sense at the time.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Kermit wrote:
    The BBC is not a public service.

    Does it save lives? No.
    Does it educate the children? Not unless they have a desire to find out which is Britain's Worst High Street it doesn't.
    Does it stop people from starving? No.

    It does no public good whatsoever, except keeping morons enthralled with EastEnders, football, and Dale Winton.

    The BBC should be selling off its "core business" because it has no right to be using my money to drive its commercial competitors into the ground. The only things the BBC can justify keeping publicly funded is the local radio, the religious and educational programmes, and possibly the news channel.

    Commercial channels are not as good because they cannot compete with the BBC. The BBC has funding of £3billion, guaranteed, no matter how many Eldorado-sized mess-ups it makes. If ITV poured that amount of money away it would go bust; if ITV shows programmes nobody likes then its advertsing revenues drop, and it goes bust. ITV also have to pay over £200m a year to the Government, whereas the BBC enjoys Government protection and can imprison people who don't pay it. Some level playing field.

    The populist channels should be put into the private domain where they belong. Dale Winton, Graham "twat" Norton, and EastEnders cannot be justified in any way as a "public service".


    So you rather have a media channel controlled by business interests? Thats hardly gonna lead to balanced news reporting is it?

    Manufacturing Consent
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Man Of Kent wrote:
    There is an alternative, don't watch TV. Radio is free...

    Amen.

    I've not had a TV since I was 9. It's good to watch it ocassionally with friends and family. Not part of everyday life though.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    The BBC should be de-nationalised in my view, its a media dinosaur that would have been extinct by now if it hadn't been for the more-than generous handouts that it received from the British taxpayer for broadcasting left-wing drivel and propaganda. Its a national disgrace. Bring on Fox, CNN, et al.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    LOL! :D How funny!
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Blagsta wrote:
    LOL! :D How funny!
    Not if you're a taxpayer whose taxes are going into funding this Government-controlled propaganda machine. But then again you're probably not a taxpayer.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Government controlled propaganda machine?! LOL! :D What planet do you live on? Have you even watched the BBC recently? Or read any papers?

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4257190.stm
    Prime Minister Tony Blair believes BBC coverage of Hurricane Katrina is "full of hate" for America, media tycoon Rupert Murdoch has claimed in a speech.

    and thats not even mentioning David Kelly and Andrew Gilligan.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    True Blue wrote:
    The BBC should be de-nationalised in my view, its a media dinosaur that would have been extinct by now if it hadn't been for the more-than generous handouts that it received from the British taxpayer for broadcasting left-wing drivel and propaganda. Its a national disgrace. Bring on Fox, CNN, et al.
    you do realise that the bbc has often been opposed to the government ...what do you expect of creative people?
    ask harold wilson ...ted heath ...magaret thatcher ...the bbc is healthy when it is giving the government of the day a bad time.
    thats why it's worth its money.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    morrocan roll wrote:
    sorry about that.
    sat at home sipping whiskey and paracetamol feeling awful
    it made some kind of sense at the time.

    mmm whiskey
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    byny wrote:
    does anyone think the itv channels provide better all round programming?

    :lol: Thanks I needed a good laugh. ITV has the best soaps and gameshows. Well done, the two lowest forms of entertainment in existance, and ITV does them the best.

    Did anyone watch that ITV 50 Greatest Shows a while back? I was struggling to come up with ten half decent programmes from 50 years. Ant and Dec's Saturday Night Takeaway was actually in the top ten for God's sake. :banghead:

    On topic, I have to agree that in principle, the licence fee is probably wrong, but I really can't bring myself to oppose it. I know that if it was abolished, we would end up with another channel of cheaply-made mass-market crap, with no money being spent on high quality specialist interest proramming, like the documentaries, dramas or comedies. I think that if you asked people a few of their favourite programmes, other than perhaps the soaps, most people wouldn't pick something which gets a lot of ratings. That's why thing like The Office or Red Dwarf have excellent DVD sales, even though they might not be a ratings winner when they're first shown. Blackadder, for example, would never have got a second series on ITV, but on the BBC it was given a second chance, and became an excellent comedy series.

    Apparently the hike in the licence fee is to pay for the switch over to digital TV, which I also think is bollocks. We're looking for a 17" LCD TV with a built in digital tuner, and it's practically impossible to get hold of one. It's not as if it's an older style of TV, so why are they still allowed to sell them with analogue tuners in? That would be like them saying "right, were switching to hydrogen powered cars in five years time, and we'll be switching the petrol supply off," then still letting manufacturers sell petrol cars til the switchoff. I just don't see how they can do this when the electrical manufacturers aren't cooperating.

    They also need to upgrade the signal. It was raining tonight (shock, horror!) and the digital TV signal didn't work.

    Anyway, the extra money is supposed to be going to "vulnerable" people, to help them make the switch. Tell me what the hell is a vulnerable person. Someone who's too lazy to read the manual? Someone who still doesn't know how to get digital TV after all the advertising campaigns? By all means give people the information to switch, but I don't see why I should pay for their digibox, or for their aerial to be upgraded (don't know if this is exactly what they mean).

    Also as a side note, I'm an ex film and TV student, and would like to say that I think that any students which require a TV in order to do their course, should be entitled to a free TV licence.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    vulnerable people - the old, the infirm, the mentally ill, the disabled, adults with learning difficulties. Why should you pay for them? Well I guess it depends whether you want to live in a society which looks after each other or not.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I'm With Stupid wrote:
    :lol: Thanks I needed a good laugh. ITV has the best soaps and gameshows. Well done, the two lowest forms of entertainment in existance, and ITV does them the best.

    Did anyone watch that ITV 50 Greatest Shows a while back? I was struggling to come up with ten half decent programmes from 50 years. Ant and Dec's Saturday Night Takeaway was actually in the top ten for God's ake. :banghead:

    It was a question not a statement of fact - I work for the BBC!
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Bring on Fox

    So instead of the "left-wing" BBC, you want right wing Fox???
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    True Blue wrote:
    The BBC should be de-nationalised in my view, its a media dinosaur that would have been extinct by now if it hadn't been for the more-than generous handouts that it received from the British taxpayer for broadcasting left-wing drivel and propaganda. Its a national disgrace. Bring on Fox, CNN, et al.
    LOL!

    It's almost as if they came with an identical chip that tells them what to say.

    Bless. :)
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Panthro wrote:
    So instead of the "left-wing" BBC, you want right wing Fox???
    In a word, YES. Its not right-wing as you say, its fair, balanced reporting that provides clarity and truth.
    With the BBC totally reliant on the government to sanction its funding does it really surprise you that its reporting is so biased?
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    True Blue wrote:
    Its not right-wing as you say, its fair, balanced reporting that provides clarity and truth.

    Aye right
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    True Blue wrote:
    In a word, YES. Its not right-wing as you say, its fair, balanced reporting that provides clarity and truth.
    With the BBC totally reliant on the government to sanction its funding does it really surprise you that its reporting is so biased?

    Ladies and Gentlemen:Say hello to Rich Kid!!!
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    hi richkid
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Already did on aniother thread. :D
    vulnerable people - the old, the infirm, the mentally ill, the disabled, adults with learning difficulties. Why should you pay for them? Well I guess it depends whether you want to live in a society which looks after each other or not.

    We live in a "society" that puts investment into TV over and above those things in the first place. Would you design things so that you took a £100 from every household and then used the cash to make Dale Winton a game show when there were people in genuine need?

    I mean if you are gong to advocate theft, at least have a decent fucking reason for it.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Just for the record, I'm NOT Rich Kid, whoever he/she might be!
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    True Blue wrote:
    With the BBC totally reliant on the government to sanction its funding does it really surprise you that its reporting is so biased?

    But isnt it the government which complains the BBC has a bias against them?
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    In my view the BBC needs to tighten its belt instead of spending OUR money as though it came from a bottomless purse, (having said that, it probably is a bottomless purse under this Labour government):

    Do we really need:

    BBC 1
    BBC 1 Scotland
    BBC 1 Wales
    BBC 1 Northern Ireland
    BBC 2
    BBC 2 Scotland
    BBC 2 Wales
    BBC 2 Northern Ireland
    BBC3
    BBC4
    CBBC
    CBeebies
    News 24
    Parliament
    Radio1
    Radio1 Xtra
    Radio 2
    Radio 3
    Radio 4FM
    Radio 5 Live
    Radio 5 Extra
    Radio 6
    Radio 7
    World Service
    Radio Scotland
    Radio Wales
    Radio Northern Ireland
    Nan Gaioheal
    Asian Network

    Plus: Various local TV & radio stations (BBC LDN, BBC South etc)

    And don't forget: BBC i (Massive BBC website and interactive text service).

    No wonder the BBC is always pleading poverty, it has yet to learn to live within a budget, something the market place would teach them!
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    50% of the licence fee is BBC 1 and 2

    Whereas only 3% is BBCi
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Panthro wrote:
    50% of the licence fee is BBC 1 and 2

    Whereas only 3% is BBCi

    That may be true, but if only 50% of the budget is going on your core business (plus some more on National radio) you really need to have a rethink. I don't want to get rid of the BBC, but I do want it to get rid of all the excess channels/radio stations/websites it produces (or at least make them self financing)
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Manufacturing Consent

    Why should we read that Chomsky rubbish?

    Id rather get stuck into some Milton Friedman - there was a true capitalist!
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    did you know the BBC get as many complaints about right wing bias as they do left!
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    if there was no licence fee the BBC wouldn't have to budget, they'd have loads of money from advertising!
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    The Matadore wrote:
    Id rather get stuck into some Milton Friedman - there was a true capitalist!
    Of the first order! What a man, what a economist!
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Milton Friedman was a capitalist?

    That;s news to me. I thought he was another collectivist stooge. Politically he blathered on about free markets etc but his policies were done by government intervention, and so were just another type of state control. The central tenets of his theory are incompatible with a free market, because he doesn't allow currency itself to be subject to market forces.

    Albeit in a more insidious and harder to spot form, monetarism was another excuse to collectivise everything.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    True Blue wrote:
    In a word, YES. Its not right-wing as you say, its fair, balanced reporting that provides clarity and truth.
    With the BBC totally reliant on the government to sanction its funding does it really surprise you that its reporting is so biased?

    Quote me an example of the BBC broadcasting "Government-controlled propaganda". However, you seem confused as you also accused it of "broadcasting left-wing drivel and propaganda". Which is it? A mouth piece of the government or a bed of raving commies?
Sign In or Register to comment.