I was throwing a flan at you
.................
Why?
comment by Vidicschin (U3584)
posted 1 minute ago
I was throwing a flan at you
.................
Why?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Because, being the other side of the pond, you don't pay the license fee yet you (undoubtedly) still access BBC services
Oh and I wanted to, just because I'm childish
Ji
Agreed, thing is more and more people are not paying the license fee because they say they don't watch TV but I bet a large portion of those still use iPlayer or radio is some form.
The BBC have done a terrible job so far of making the public appreciate what they offer to us. The letter the got all their highly paid celebs to write was embarrassing.
Just pay the funking fee you bloody tight-wads. It's just over a tenner a month ffs. Cheap at twice the price.
Bloody entitlement culture, pay for your products and services with a smile and be funking grateful.
comment by manutd1982 (U6633)
posted 1 minute ago
Ji
Agreed, thing is more and more people are not paying the license fee because they say they don't watch TV but I bet a large portion of those still use iPlayer or radio is some form.
The BBC have done a terrible job so far of making the public appreciate what they offer to us. The letter the got all their highly paid celebs to write was embarrassing.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
This was my point earlier
People will claim not to, but how do you stop that person listening to radio, looking at BBC News on their phone, watching iPlayer on a tablet etc...
comment by HenrysCat (U3608)
posted 1 minute ago
Just pay the funking fee you bloody tight-wads. It's just over a tenner a month ffs. Cheap at twice the price.
Bloody entitlement culture, pay for your products and services with a smile and be funking grateful.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
comment by Robben #20 (U1145)
posted 38 minutes ago
It would probably be prohibitively expensive to implement some sort of blocker. Also, imagine the number of people who would cancel... the BBC would collapse overnight and people would still use/watch the content through streams or online or whatever.
It's £150 ffs, over the course of a year it's £2.50 a week - get over it.
Ads would dumb the bbc down? Has anyone actually watched the bbc recently? It's as dumb as they come, with a side serving of pro-establishment bias thrown in.
It's not great value at all, for less than that cost you can get an annual subscription to lovefilm/amazon prime and choose what you want to watch. If you want to watch any film made since 1995 the bbc is hardly the place to go.
If they actually invested their cash into decent programs I wouldn't have a huge problem, but instead your taxes have paid billions for:
Failed IT projects
Ludicrous star salaries
Excessive pay-offs to departing execs
Legal fees/investigations/damages for historic child abuse cases
Taxis from London to Cardiff
And so on and so on. the bbc is living proof of how easy it is to spend other people's money. the whole thing is an anachronism, a relic of an age when people had 3 tv channels and 2 radio stations to choose from, how it can still exist in 2015 I do not know.
What I hate, and this isn't just on iPlayer, is when you settle down to watch a film only to be told -- just as it's about to start -- that it's not available to view online.
BBC is worth keeping. It needs to improve it's content though and stop adding to the brainless reality tv/social experiment dross that has become far too common.
Because, being the other side of the pond, you don't pay the license fee yet you (undoubtedly) still access BBC services
................
So what?
Ji didn't make this debate for UK residents only, as far as I am aware.
Try and be constructive.
On the whole, though, paying £12.12 a month doesn't bother me one bit. I give more than that to charity (or at least I did until recently).
They also need to get rid of that idiot Alan Yentob. Claims he makes these great documentaries for his Imagine series that are actually already made abroad, he just feels the need to add himself into these docs for no reason what so ever other than to massage his ego.
comment by Vidicschin (U3584)
posted 28 seconds ago
Because, being the other side of the pond, you don't pay the license fee yet you (undoubtedly) still access BBC services
................
So what?
Ji didn't make this debate for UK residents only, as far as I am aware.
Try and be constructive.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Which of the BBC's services, other than the website, can you use abroad? Surely you can't watch live TV on iPlayer outside the UK?
When I lived in Mexico I used to hate the fact that I couldn't even listen to live football on BBC Radio.
And the BBC News site had adverts on, which was weird.
comment by Vidicschin (U3584)
posted 3 minutes ago
Because, being the other side of the pond, you don't pay the license fee yet you (undoubtedly) still access BBC services
................
So what?
Ji didn't make this debate for UK residents only, as far as I am aware.
Try and be constructive.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I know, but you don't pay the license fee... so how can we accept that your opinion is valid?
comment by Robben #20 (U1145)
posted 1 second ago
comment by Vidicschin (U3584)
posted 3 minutes ago
Because, being the other side of the pond, you don't pay the license fee yet you (undoubtedly) still access BBC services
................
So what?
Ji didn't make this debate for UK residents only, as far as I am aware.
Try and be constructive.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I know, but you don't pay the license fee... so how can we accept that your opinion is valid?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I imagine like most things, because he said so.
The problem with the BBC is because we all have to pay this stupid fee, they have a nationwide target audience and this will be it's downfall, you just can't appeal to everyone and introducing new radio stations, new channels and any other new platforms, dilute the viewing for everyone else.
It's annoiying that you are forced to pay for a service, half of which you can't watch when you're in 40 hour a week employment. I chose to pay for Sky so it's my own doing that I can't watch it when at work, but I don't have a choice to pay my TV licence, I have to!
comment by HenrysCat (U3608)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Robben #20 (U1145)
posted 1 second ago
comment by Vidicschin (U3584)
posted 3 minutes ago
Because, being the other side of the pond, you don't pay the license fee yet you (undoubtedly) still access BBC services
................
So what?
Ji didn't make this debate for UK residents only, as far as I am aware.
Try and be constructive.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I know, but you don't pay the license fee... so how can we accept that your opinion is valid?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I imagine like most things, because he said so.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I know, but you don't pay the license fee... so how can we accept that your opinion is valid?
....................
I would have thought that the opinion from someone who doesn't pay License fees would be worth listening to.
For instance, none of the major US networks can get away with the crap the BBC get away with, because they are not publicly funded.
comment by MJ-BCFC (U6355)
posted 1 minute ago
The problem with the BBC is because we all have to pay this stupid fee, they have a nationwide target audience and this will be it's downfall, you just can't appeal to everyone and introducing new radio stations, new channels and any other new platforms, dilute the viewing for everyone else.
It's annoiying that you are forced to pay for a service, half of which you can't watch when you're in 40 hour a week employment. I chose to pay for Sky so it's my own doing that I can't watch it when at work, but I don't have a choice to pay my TV licence, I have to!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well, you also choose to operate a TV to receive live broadcasts for which you need a license. Much like the rest of Europe, at least.
In case it wasn't clear - the BBC could disappear tomorrow, you'd still need a license to watch Sky.
comment by Vidicschin (U3584)
posted 2 minutes ago
I know, but you don't pay the license fee... so how can we accept that your opinion is valid?
....................
I would have thought that the opinion from someone who doesn't pay License fees would be worth listening to.
For instance, none of the major US networks can get away with the crap the BBC get away with, because they are not publicly funded.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Without a 'vested' interest, your opinion is arbitrary
comment by HenrysCat (U3608)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by MJ-BCFC (U6355)
posted 1 minute ago
The problem with the BBC is because we all have to pay this stupid fee, they have a nationwide target audience and this will be it's downfall, you just can't appeal to everyone and introducing new radio stations, new channels and any other new platforms, dilute the viewing for everyone else.
It's annoiying that you are forced to pay for a service, half of which you can't watch when you're in 40 hour a week employment. I chose to pay for Sky so it's my own doing that I can't watch it when at work, but I don't have a choice to pay my TV licence, I have to!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well, you also choose to operate a TV to receive live broadcasts for which you need a license. Much like the rest of Europe, at least.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
well, yes, that's what the discussion is about, whether that fee is appropriate. don't know what % of the licence fee goes on the tv output, but you don't need to pay it to listen to the radio, or to use iplayer, or to view the website, which is curious in itself.
comment by Don Draper's dandruff (U20155)
posted 46 seconds ago
comment by HenrysCat (U3608)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by MJ-BCFC (U6355)
posted 1 minute ago
The problem with the BBC is because we all have to pay this stupid fee, they have a nationwide target audience and this will be it's downfall, you just can't appeal to everyone and introducing new radio stations, new channels and any other new platforms, dilute the viewing for everyone else.
It's annoiying that you are forced to pay for a service, half of which you can't watch when you're in 40 hour a week employment. I chose to pay for Sky so it's my own doing that I can't watch it when at work, but I don't have a choice to pay my TV licence, I have to!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well, you also choose to operate a TV to receive live broadcasts for which you need a license. Much like the rest of Europe, at least.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
well, yes, that's what the discussion is about, whether that fee is appropriate. don't know what % of the licence fee goes on the tv output, but you don't need to pay it to listen to the radio, or to use iplayer, or to view the website, which is curious in itself.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well, due to the multiple platforms it is too difficult to enforce I imagine.
I don't own a TV because I refuse to pay for a license. Albeit, my refusal to pay is over the BBC's shameful record on pro-power, pro-establishment bias in its reporting (which is well studied, analysed etc... I'll give you references if you want!)
It would be nice to be able to enjoy the sport and the nature documentaries and so on, which are obviously great. Whether or not I'd pay for them is another matter entirely but certainly with its current news output I won't be supporting it.
Sign in if you want to comment
BBC / License Fee
Page 3 of 8
6 | 7 | 8
posted on 28/7/15
I was throwing a flan at you
.................
Why?
posted on 28/7/15
comment by Vidicschin (U3584)
posted 1 minute ago
I was throwing a flan at you
.................
Why?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Because, being the other side of the pond, you don't pay the license fee yet you (undoubtedly) still access BBC services
posted on 28/7/15
Oh and I wanted to, just because I'm childish
posted on 28/7/15
Ji
Agreed, thing is more and more people are not paying the license fee because they say they don't watch TV but I bet a large portion of those still use iPlayer or radio is some form.
The BBC have done a terrible job so far of making the public appreciate what they offer to us. The letter the got all their highly paid celebs to write was embarrassing.
posted on 28/7/15
Just pay the funking fee you bloody tight-wads. It's just over a tenner a month ffs. Cheap at twice the price.
Bloody entitlement culture, pay for your products and services with a smile and be funking grateful.
posted on 28/7/15
comment by manutd1982 (U6633)
posted 1 minute ago
Ji
Agreed, thing is more and more people are not paying the license fee because they say they don't watch TV but I bet a large portion of those still use iPlayer or radio is some form.
The BBC have done a terrible job so far of making the public appreciate what they offer to us. The letter the got all their highly paid celebs to write was embarrassing.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
This was my point earlier
People will claim not to, but how do you stop that person listening to radio, looking at BBC News on their phone, watching iPlayer on a tablet etc...
posted on 28/7/15
comment by HenrysCat (U3608)
posted 1 minute ago
Just pay the funking fee you bloody tight-wads. It's just over a tenner a month ffs. Cheap at twice the price.
Bloody entitlement culture, pay for your products and services with a smile and be funking grateful.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
comment by Robben #20 (U1145)
posted 38 minutes ago
It would probably be prohibitively expensive to implement some sort of blocker. Also, imagine the number of people who would cancel... the BBC would collapse overnight and people would still use/watch the content through streams or online or whatever.
It's £150 ffs, over the course of a year it's £2.50 a week - get over it.
posted on 28/7/15
Ads would dumb the bbc down? Has anyone actually watched the bbc recently? It's as dumb as they come, with a side serving of pro-establishment bias thrown in.
It's not great value at all, for less than that cost you can get an annual subscription to lovefilm/amazon prime and choose what you want to watch. If you want to watch any film made since 1995 the bbc is hardly the place to go.
If they actually invested their cash into decent programs I wouldn't have a huge problem, but instead your taxes have paid billions for:
Failed IT projects
Ludicrous star salaries
Excessive pay-offs to departing execs
Legal fees/investigations/damages for historic child abuse cases
Taxis from London to Cardiff
And so on and so on. the bbc is living proof of how easy it is to spend other people's money. the whole thing is an anachronism, a relic of an age when people had 3 tv channels and 2 radio stations to choose from, how it can still exist in 2015 I do not know.
posted on 28/7/15
What I hate, and this isn't just on iPlayer, is when you settle down to watch a film only to be told -- just as it's about to start -- that it's not available to view online.
posted on 28/7/15
BBC is worth keeping. It needs to improve it's content though and stop adding to the brainless reality tv/social experiment dross that has become far too common.
posted on 28/7/15
Because, being the other side of the pond, you don't pay the license fee yet you (undoubtedly) still access BBC services
................
So what?
Ji didn't make this debate for UK residents only, as far as I am aware.
Try and be constructive.
posted on 28/7/15
On the whole, though, paying £12.12 a month doesn't bother me one bit. I give more than that to charity (or at least I did until recently).
posted on 28/7/15
They also need to get rid of that idiot Alan Yentob. Claims he makes these great documentaries for his Imagine series that are actually already made abroad, he just feels the need to add himself into these docs for no reason what so ever other than to massage his ego.
posted on 28/7/15
comment by Vidicschin (U3584)
posted 28 seconds ago
Because, being the other side of the pond, you don't pay the license fee yet you (undoubtedly) still access BBC services
................
So what?
Ji didn't make this debate for UK residents only, as far as I am aware.
Try and be constructive.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Which of the BBC's services, other than the website, can you use abroad? Surely you can't watch live TV on iPlayer outside the UK?
When I lived in Mexico I used to hate the fact that I couldn't even listen to live football on BBC Radio.
And the BBC News site had adverts on, which was weird.
posted on 28/7/15
comment by Vidicschin (U3584)
posted 3 minutes ago
Because, being the other side of the pond, you don't pay the license fee yet you (undoubtedly) still access BBC services
................
So what?
Ji didn't make this debate for UK residents only, as far as I am aware.
Try and be constructive.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I know, but you don't pay the license fee... so how can we accept that your opinion is valid?
posted on 28/7/15
comment by Robben #20 (U1145)
posted 1 second ago
comment by Vidicschin (U3584)
posted 3 minutes ago
Because, being the other side of the pond, you don't pay the license fee yet you (undoubtedly) still access BBC services
................
So what?
Ji didn't make this debate for UK residents only, as far as I am aware.
Try and be constructive.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I know, but you don't pay the license fee... so how can we accept that your opinion is valid?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I imagine like most things, because he said so.
posted on 28/7/15
The problem with the BBC is because we all have to pay this stupid fee, they have a nationwide target audience and this will be it's downfall, you just can't appeal to everyone and introducing new radio stations, new channels and any other new platforms, dilute the viewing for everyone else.
It's annoiying that you are forced to pay for a service, half of which you can't watch when you're in 40 hour a week employment. I chose to pay for Sky so it's my own doing that I can't watch it when at work, but I don't have a choice to pay my TV licence, I have to!
posted on 28/7/15
comment by HenrysCat (U3608)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Robben #20 (U1145)
posted 1 second ago
comment by Vidicschin (U3584)
posted 3 minutes ago
Because, being the other side of the pond, you don't pay the license fee yet you (undoubtedly) still access BBC services
................
So what?
Ji didn't make this debate for UK residents only, as far as I am aware.
Try and be constructive.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I know, but you don't pay the license fee... so how can we accept that your opinion is valid?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I imagine like most things, because he said so.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
posted on 28/7/15
I know, but you don't pay the license fee... so how can we accept that your opinion is valid?
....................
I would have thought that the opinion from someone who doesn't pay License fees would be worth listening to.
For instance, none of the major US networks can get away with the crap the BBC get away with, because they are not publicly funded.
posted on 28/7/15
comment by MJ-BCFC (U6355)
posted 1 minute ago
The problem with the BBC is because we all have to pay this stupid fee, they have a nationwide target audience and this will be it's downfall, you just can't appeal to everyone and introducing new radio stations, new channels and any other new platforms, dilute the viewing for everyone else.
It's annoiying that you are forced to pay for a service, half of which you can't watch when you're in 40 hour a week employment. I chose to pay for Sky so it's my own doing that I can't watch it when at work, but I don't have a choice to pay my TV licence, I have to!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well, you also choose to operate a TV to receive live broadcasts for which you need a license. Much like the rest of Europe, at least.
posted on 28/7/15
In case it wasn't clear - the BBC could disappear tomorrow, you'd still need a license to watch Sky.
posted on 28/7/15
comment by Vidicschin (U3584)
posted 2 minutes ago
I know, but you don't pay the license fee... so how can we accept that your opinion is valid?
....................
I would have thought that the opinion from someone who doesn't pay License fees would be worth listening to.
For instance, none of the major US networks can get away with the crap the BBC get away with, because they are not publicly funded.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Without a 'vested' interest, your opinion is arbitrary
posted on 28/7/15
comment by HenrysCat (U3608)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by MJ-BCFC (U6355)
posted 1 minute ago
The problem with the BBC is because we all have to pay this stupid fee, they have a nationwide target audience and this will be it's downfall, you just can't appeal to everyone and introducing new radio stations, new channels and any other new platforms, dilute the viewing for everyone else.
It's annoiying that you are forced to pay for a service, half of which you can't watch when you're in 40 hour a week employment. I chose to pay for Sky so it's my own doing that I can't watch it when at work, but I don't have a choice to pay my TV licence, I have to!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well, you also choose to operate a TV to receive live broadcasts for which you need a license. Much like the rest of Europe, at least.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
well, yes, that's what the discussion is about, whether that fee is appropriate. don't know what % of the licence fee goes on the tv output, but you don't need to pay it to listen to the radio, or to use iplayer, or to view the website, which is curious in itself.
posted on 28/7/15
comment by Don Draper's dandruff (U20155)
posted 46 seconds ago
comment by HenrysCat (U3608)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by MJ-BCFC (U6355)
posted 1 minute ago
The problem with the BBC is because we all have to pay this stupid fee, they have a nationwide target audience and this will be it's downfall, you just can't appeal to everyone and introducing new radio stations, new channels and any other new platforms, dilute the viewing for everyone else.
It's annoiying that you are forced to pay for a service, half of which you can't watch when you're in 40 hour a week employment. I chose to pay for Sky so it's my own doing that I can't watch it when at work, but I don't have a choice to pay my TV licence, I have to!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well, you also choose to operate a TV to receive live broadcasts for which you need a license. Much like the rest of Europe, at least.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
well, yes, that's what the discussion is about, whether that fee is appropriate. don't know what % of the licence fee goes on the tv output, but you don't need to pay it to listen to the radio, or to use iplayer, or to view the website, which is curious in itself.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well, due to the multiple platforms it is too difficult to enforce I imagine.
posted on 28/7/15
I don't own a TV because I refuse to pay for a license. Albeit, my refusal to pay is over the BBC's shameful record on pro-power, pro-establishment bias in its reporting (which is well studied, analysed etc... I'll give you references if you want!)
It would be nice to be able to enjoy the sport and the nature documentaries and so on, which are obviously great. Whether or not I'd pay for them is another matter entirely but certainly with its current news output I won't be supporting it.
Page 3 of 8
6 | 7 | 8