comment by HenrysCat (U3608)
posted 43 seconds ago
In case it wasn't clear - the BBC could disappear tomorrow, you'd still need a license to watch Sky.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
not sure what your argument is, we all know that we need a licence to watch live tv - bbc or not - but we also all know where the licence fee goes, and it's not to itv or sky.
"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."
I hear this often and if true then I agree but I'm sure I've been on iPlayer and had a sign come up asking me if I have a license fee. It would make far more sense if the license fee covered all BBC services, that could potentially make more people willing to pay.
comment by BerbaKing11 (U6256)
posted 15 seconds ago
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.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
i always get confused when people talk about the left-wing bbc, when it is clear, as you say, that it is a bastion of the establishment, and it's not for the right or the left, but for the institutions of the establishment.
come the revolution the royals may be first up against the wall, but the bbc royal correspondents won't be far behind.
Without a 'vested' interest, your opinion is arbitrary
.....
But an opinion, none the less, to which I am perfectly entitled to.
comment by manutd1982 (U6633)
posted 17 seconds ago
"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."
I hear this often and if true then I agree but I'm sure I've been on iPlayer and had a sign come up asking me if I have a license fee. It would make far more sense if the license fee covered all BBC services, that could potentially make more people willing to pay.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You get that message if you try to watch live TV, either through iPlayer or the BBC Sport website.
comment by Vidicschin (U3584)
posted 6 seconds ago
Without a 'vested' interest, your opinion is arbitrary
.....
But an opinion, none the less, to which I am perfectly entitled to.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Of course, but a) I didn't agree with it and b) I doubt the validity of your opinion.
Hence, the
comment by Don Draper's dandruff (U20155)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by HenrysCat (U3608)
posted 43 seconds ago
In case it wasn't clear - the BBC could disappear tomorrow, you'd still need a license to watch Sky.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
not sure what your argument is, we all know that we need a licence to watch live tv - bbc or not - but we also all know where the licence fee goes, and it's not to itv or sky.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The argument was with the guy I was responding to and choice. He seemed upset that he HAD to pay for a licence but he could CHOOSE to pay for Sky. The point was he is CHOOSING to operate a TV at all, and for that you need a licence.
comment by manutd1982 (U6633)
posted 1 minute ago
"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."
I hear this often and if true then I agree but I'm sure I've been on iPlayer and had a sign come up asking me if I have a license fee. It would make far more sense if the license fee covered all BBC services, that could potentially make more people willing to pay.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
to watch a program live through the iplayer you do need a licence, but watching anything after its original transmission you don't.
odd world when watching dragons den live needs a licence, but waiting until 10 minutes after it finishes to watch on the iplayer you don't.
You don't pay the license fee for iplayer, you only pay for live TV. A TV license is not required for anything which is not live.
comment by There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
posted 55 seconds ago
You don't pay the license fee for iplayer, you only pay for live TV. A TV license is not required for anything which is not live.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But, the funds collected by the license fee fund the operation and maintenance of iPlayer. Which is fair as nearly everyone has and pays for a license. If people "opted out" you get into all sorts of stickiness.
"come the revolution the royals may be first up against the wall, but the bbc royal correspondents won't be far behind. "
The royals have a certain charm about them, the pathetic, toadying, sycophantic correspondants should be up against the wall now.
comment by HenrysCat (U3608)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Don Draper's dandruff (U20155)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by HenrysCat (U3608)
posted 43 seconds ago
In case it wasn't clear - the BBC could disappear tomorrow, you'd still need a license to watch Sky.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
not sure what your argument is, we all know that we need a licence to watch live tv - bbc or not - but we also all know where the licence fee goes, and it's not to itv or sky.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The argument was with the guy I was responding to and choice. He seemed upset that he HAD to pay for a licence but he could CHOOSE to pay for Sky. The point was he is CHOOSING to operate a TV at all, and for that you need a licence.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
well sure, everyone chooses to have a tv, same way they choose to have a phone line, or a laptop, or running water.
yes, we can all choose not to watch tv, as some do, and not pay the licence; but it strikes me as odd that i could watch itv for 24 hours a day every day (and i am aware what that would do to my brain) and still have to cough up a licence fee that finds its way almost exclusively to the bbc.
comment by HenrysCat (U3608)
posted 14 seconds ago
"come the revolution the royals may be first up against the wall, but the bbc royal correspondents won't be far behind. "
The royals have a certain charm about them, the pathetic, toadying, sycophantic correspondants should be up against the wall now.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
hee hee, you bring the guns and i'll bring the ammo
comment by Don Draper's dandruff (U20155)
posted 16 seconds ago
comment by HenrysCat (U3608)
posted 14 seconds ago
"come the revolution the royals may be first up against the wall, but the bbc royal correspondents won't be far behind. "
The royals have a certain charm about them, the pathetic, toadying, sycophantic correspondants should be up against the wall now.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
hee hee, you bring the guns and i'll bring the ammo
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Bring a copy of your license fee
Don
Yeah that is stupid and something the BBC should really sort out.
comment by Don Draper's dandruff (U20155)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by HenrysCat (U3608)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Don Draper's dandruff (U20155)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by HenrysCat (U3608)
posted 43 seconds ago
In case it wasn't clear - the BBC could disappear tomorrow, you'd still need a license to watch Sky.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
not sure what your argument is, we all know that we need a licence to watch live tv - bbc or not - but we also all know where the licence fee goes, and it's not to itv or sky.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The argument was with the guy I was responding to and choice. He seemed upset that he HAD to pay for a licence but he could CHOOSE to pay for Sky. The point was he is CHOOSING to operate a TV at all, and for that you need a licence.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
well sure, everyone chooses to have a tv, same way they choose to have a phone line, or a laptop, or running water.
yes, we can all choose not to watch tv, as some do, and not pay the licence; but it strikes me as odd that i could watch itv for 24 hours a day every day (and i am aware what that would do to my brain) and still have to cough up a licence fee that finds its way almost exclusively to the bbc.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
How would you calculate exactly how much each household uses BBC services?
The BBC doesn't get away with crap, the us shows you see here are the best, most of it is rubbish, plus ads every five minutes. French TV where I live is mostly very poor, and again plagued with ads.
Its not a stupid fee, its a bargain.
"something the BBC should really sort out."
Oh yeah, just wave a magic wand
comment by Robben #20 (U1145)
posted 15 seconds ago
comment by Don Draper's dandruff (U20155)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by HenrysCat (U3608)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Don Draper's dandruff (U20155)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by HenrysCat (U3608)
posted 43 seconds ago
In case it wasn't clear - the BBC could disappear tomorrow, you'd still need a license to watch Sky.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
not sure what your argument is, we all know that we need a licence to watch live tv - bbc or not - but we also all know where the licence fee goes, and it's not to itv or sky.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The argument was with the guy I was responding to and choice. He seemed upset that he HAD to pay for a licence but he could CHOOSE to pay for Sky. The point was he is CHOOSING to operate a TV at all, and for that you need a licence.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
well sure, everyone chooses to have a tv, same way they choose to have a phone line, or a laptop, or running water.
yes, we can all choose not to watch tv, as some do, and not pay the licence; but it strikes me as odd that i could watch itv for 24 hours a day every day (and i am aware what that would do to my brain) and still have to cough up a licence fee that finds its way almost exclusively to the bbc.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
How would you calculate exactly how much each household uses BBC services?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
i wouldn't, because i would scrap the licence fee completely. they can switch to a subscription model, or move to ads, or sink like a stone, won't bother me.
but a "tv tax" in 2015 is ludicrous in my opinion.
Robben
Would it be so hard to at least say that the fee covers all BBC services. If by law it currently only covers live TV coverage then there's little the BBC can do. At least enforcing this rule would be a start.
comment by manutd1982 (U6633)
posted 49 seconds ago
Robben
Would it be so hard to at least say that the fee covers all BBC services. If by law it currently only covers live TV coverage then there's little the BBC can do. At least enforcing this rule would be a start.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It does, doesn't it?
I certainly don't pay for all BBC services separately.
Of course, but a) I didn't agree with it and b) I doubt the validity of your opinion.
....................
I frequently doubt the validity any of your opinions as well, so we are at an impasse here.
Robben
No, from what others are saying the license fee technically is only for use of the TV. You can legally listen to BBC radio, use their websites and watch iPlayer (as long as it isn't live) free without any license fee which is why so many people are stopping.
comment by Vidicschin (U3584)
posted 6 seconds ago
Of course, but a) I didn't agree with it and b) I doubt the validity of your opinion.
....................
I frequently doubt the validity any of your opinions as well, so we are at an impasse here.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Stealing my lines now... I barely communicate with you
I can't believe people are so bothered about £12 a month. It's probably the best value of any product or service out there, I genuinely cannot think of something that offers so much for so little - maybe the NHS.
Sign in if you want to comment
BBC / License Fee
Page 4 of 8
6 | 7 | 8
posted on 28/7/15
comment by HenrysCat (U3608)
posted 43 seconds ago
In case it wasn't clear - the BBC could disappear tomorrow, you'd still need a license to watch Sky.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
not sure what your argument is, we all know that we need a licence to watch live tv - bbc or not - but we also all know where the licence fee goes, and it's not to itv or sky.
posted on 28/7/15
"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."
I hear this often and if true then I agree but I'm sure I've been on iPlayer and had a sign come up asking me if I have a license fee. It would make far more sense if the license fee covered all BBC services, that could potentially make more people willing to pay.
posted on 28/7/15
comment by BerbaKing11 (U6256)
posted 15 seconds ago
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.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
i always get confused when people talk about the left-wing bbc, when it is clear, as you say, that it is a bastion of the establishment, and it's not for the right or the left, but for the institutions of the establishment.
come the revolution the royals may be first up against the wall, but the bbc royal correspondents won't be far behind.
posted on 28/7/15
Without a 'vested' interest, your opinion is arbitrary
.....
But an opinion, none the less, to which I am perfectly entitled to.
posted on 28/7/15
comment by manutd1982 (U6633)
posted 17 seconds ago
"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."
I hear this often and if true then I agree but I'm sure I've been on iPlayer and had a sign come up asking me if I have a license fee. It would make far more sense if the license fee covered all BBC services, that could potentially make more people willing to pay.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You get that message if you try to watch live TV, either through iPlayer or the BBC Sport website.
posted on 28/7/15
comment by Vidicschin (U3584)
posted 6 seconds ago
Without a 'vested' interest, your opinion is arbitrary
.....
But an opinion, none the less, to which I am perfectly entitled to.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Of course, but a) I didn't agree with it and b) I doubt the validity of your opinion.
Hence, the
posted on 28/7/15
comment by Don Draper's dandruff (U20155)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by HenrysCat (U3608)
posted 43 seconds ago
In case it wasn't clear - the BBC could disappear tomorrow, you'd still need a license to watch Sky.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
not sure what your argument is, we all know that we need a licence to watch live tv - bbc or not - but we also all know where the licence fee goes, and it's not to itv or sky.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The argument was with the guy I was responding to and choice. He seemed upset that he HAD to pay for a licence but he could CHOOSE to pay for Sky. The point was he is CHOOSING to operate a TV at all, and for that you need a licence.
posted on 28/7/15
comment by manutd1982 (U6633)
posted 1 minute ago
"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."
I hear this often and if true then I agree but I'm sure I've been on iPlayer and had a sign come up asking me if I have a license fee. It would make far more sense if the license fee covered all BBC services, that could potentially make more people willing to pay.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
to watch a program live through the iplayer you do need a licence, but watching anything after its original transmission you don't.
odd world when watching dragons den live needs a licence, but waiting until 10 minutes after it finishes to watch on the iplayer you don't.
posted on 28/7/15
You don't pay the license fee for iplayer, you only pay for live TV. A TV license is not required for anything which is not live.
posted on 28/7/15
comment by There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
posted 55 seconds ago
You don't pay the license fee for iplayer, you only pay for live TV. A TV license is not required for anything which is not live.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But, the funds collected by the license fee fund the operation and maintenance of iPlayer. Which is fair as nearly everyone has and pays for a license. If people "opted out" you get into all sorts of stickiness.
posted on 28/7/15
"come the revolution the royals may be first up against the wall, but the bbc royal correspondents won't be far behind. "
The royals have a certain charm about them, the pathetic, toadying, sycophantic correspondants should be up against the wall now.
posted on 28/7/15
comment by HenrysCat (U3608)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Don Draper's dandruff (U20155)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by HenrysCat (U3608)
posted 43 seconds ago
In case it wasn't clear - the BBC could disappear tomorrow, you'd still need a license to watch Sky.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
not sure what your argument is, we all know that we need a licence to watch live tv - bbc or not - but we also all know where the licence fee goes, and it's not to itv or sky.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The argument was with the guy I was responding to and choice. He seemed upset that he HAD to pay for a licence but he could CHOOSE to pay for Sky. The point was he is CHOOSING to operate a TV at all, and for that you need a licence.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
well sure, everyone chooses to have a tv, same way they choose to have a phone line, or a laptop, or running water.
yes, we can all choose not to watch tv, as some do, and not pay the licence; but it strikes me as odd that i could watch itv for 24 hours a day every day (and i am aware what that would do to my brain) and still have to cough up a licence fee that finds its way almost exclusively to the bbc.
posted on 28/7/15
comment by HenrysCat (U3608)
posted 14 seconds ago
"come the revolution the royals may be first up against the wall, but the bbc royal correspondents won't be far behind. "
The royals have a certain charm about them, the pathetic, toadying, sycophantic correspondants should be up against the wall now.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
hee hee, you bring the guns and i'll bring the ammo
posted on 28/7/15
comment by Don Draper's dandruff (U20155)
posted 16 seconds ago
comment by HenrysCat (U3608)
posted 14 seconds ago
"come the revolution the royals may be first up against the wall, but the bbc royal correspondents won't be far behind. "
The royals have a certain charm about them, the pathetic, toadying, sycophantic correspondants should be up against the wall now.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
hee hee, you bring the guns and i'll bring the ammo
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Bring a copy of your license fee
posted on 28/7/15
Don
Yeah that is stupid and something the BBC should really sort out.
posted on 28/7/15
comment by Don Draper's dandruff (U20155)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by HenrysCat (U3608)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Don Draper's dandruff (U20155)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by HenrysCat (U3608)
posted 43 seconds ago
In case it wasn't clear - the BBC could disappear tomorrow, you'd still need a license to watch Sky.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
not sure what your argument is, we all know that we need a licence to watch live tv - bbc or not - but we also all know where the licence fee goes, and it's not to itv or sky.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The argument was with the guy I was responding to and choice. He seemed upset that he HAD to pay for a licence but he could CHOOSE to pay for Sky. The point was he is CHOOSING to operate a TV at all, and for that you need a licence.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
well sure, everyone chooses to have a tv, same way they choose to have a phone line, or a laptop, or running water.
yes, we can all choose not to watch tv, as some do, and not pay the licence; but it strikes me as odd that i could watch itv for 24 hours a day every day (and i am aware what that would do to my brain) and still have to cough up a licence fee that finds its way almost exclusively to the bbc.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
How would you calculate exactly how much each household uses BBC services?
posted on 28/7/15
The BBC doesn't get away with crap, the us shows you see here are the best, most of it is rubbish, plus ads every five minutes. French TV where I live is mostly very poor, and again plagued with ads.
Its not a stupid fee, its a bargain.
posted on 28/7/15
"something the BBC should really sort out."
Oh yeah, just wave a magic wand
posted on 28/7/15
comment by Robben #20 (U1145)
posted 15 seconds ago
comment by Don Draper's dandruff (U20155)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by HenrysCat (U3608)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Don Draper's dandruff (U20155)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by HenrysCat (U3608)
posted 43 seconds ago
In case it wasn't clear - the BBC could disappear tomorrow, you'd still need a license to watch Sky.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
not sure what your argument is, we all know that we need a licence to watch live tv - bbc or not - but we also all know where the licence fee goes, and it's not to itv or sky.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The argument was with the guy I was responding to and choice. He seemed upset that he HAD to pay for a licence but he could CHOOSE to pay for Sky. The point was he is CHOOSING to operate a TV at all, and for that you need a licence.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
well sure, everyone chooses to have a tv, same way they choose to have a phone line, or a laptop, or running water.
yes, we can all choose not to watch tv, as some do, and not pay the licence; but it strikes me as odd that i could watch itv for 24 hours a day every day (and i am aware what that would do to my brain) and still have to cough up a licence fee that finds its way almost exclusively to the bbc.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
How would you calculate exactly how much each household uses BBC services?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
i wouldn't, because i would scrap the licence fee completely. they can switch to a subscription model, or move to ads, or sink like a stone, won't bother me.
but a "tv tax" in 2015 is ludicrous in my opinion.
posted on 28/7/15
Robben
Would it be so hard to at least say that the fee covers all BBC services. If by law it currently only covers live TV coverage then there's little the BBC can do. At least enforcing this rule would be a start.
posted on 28/7/15
comment by manutd1982 (U6633)
posted 49 seconds ago
Robben
Would it be so hard to at least say that the fee covers all BBC services. If by law it currently only covers live TV coverage then there's little the BBC can do. At least enforcing this rule would be a start.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It does, doesn't it?
I certainly don't pay for all BBC services separately.
posted on 28/7/15
Of course, but a) I didn't agree with it and b) I doubt the validity of your opinion.
....................
I frequently doubt the validity any of your opinions as well, so we are at an impasse here.
posted on 28/7/15
Robben
No, from what others are saying the license fee technically is only for use of the TV. You can legally listen to BBC radio, use their websites and watch iPlayer (as long as it isn't live) free without any license fee which is why so many people are stopping.
posted on 28/7/15
comment by Vidicschin (U3584)
posted 6 seconds ago
Of course, but a) I didn't agree with it and b) I doubt the validity of your opinion.
....................
I frequently doubt the validity any of your opinions as well, so we are at an impasse here.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Stealing my lines now... I barely communicate with you
posted on 28/7/15
I can't believe people are so bothered about £12 a month. It's probably the best value of any product or service out there, I genuinely cannot think of something that offers so much for so little - maybe the NHS.
Page 4 of 8
6 | 7 | 8