Why do we moan so much about the TV Licence?

Question

but are happy to pay through the nose for Sky TV. I'm not saying I agree with the licence fee, but just think it's ironic that we pay £40 or £50 quid for Sky with all their repeats and adverts.
What do you think?

I should have said Sky is per month not per year.

Answer 1

My main bugbear with the liscense fee is as someone with only terristial channels, my money is being spent on the lieks of bbc three and bbc four. Most people I mention this too go on about how cheap a digi box is, but I think the bbc should supply me with a free one on principle since they take my money to make the shows. the bbc is now at a point with downloads and dvd sales to sustain its own programming content without taking the money each year from ourselves. let alone outsourcing to various production companies for even cheaper deals.will stop now as its all gone a bit daily mail.

Answer 2

I really don't mind paying the licence fee, i not saying that i don't think that its over priced and most of the money goes to paying w@nk actors on soaps i never watch, but without the BBC, we'd have no national radio bands would take years to break into commericial radio. The online content of the BBC site is amazing with every radio show and a few tv programmes being able to be watched for free - or be it as part of your licence fee.

Personally i think Sky is a complete waste of money with Sky1 showing nothing but simpsons and adverts none stop, and as for the rest of the channels well nearly everyone of them shows BBC repeats. the sport channels cost a fortune and then only concentrate on teams with mass appeal chelski, the rags and arsenal. I spend the bulk of my time watching TV on BBC channels which most of the time show better quality programming than any of the other terrestrial channels.

Besides i'd rather live in Britain and pay through the nose for a licence, than have the systems like they have elsewhere with adverts on the whole time, and even when the programs actually on there is so much product placement that it might as well be an advert.

Therefore i say if anyone doesn't want to pay for a licence is either a fool or an american.

Answer 3

without the funding from the licence fee the BBC would become like all the other commercial channels that are out there, competing for money from advertisers as their priority rather than the good of the audience. At £10/month its really not a lot to receive higher quality programming, particularly in relation to children's programming. The BBC are a public service broadcaster and have to show a certain amount of educational and informative programmes and can only import a certain amount of american etc programmes.

They also use the money to make original programming which is usually of much better quality than other channels own programming.

Answer 4

Personally I think we should prevent our TV's and VCR's being able to accept BBC1 or 2 so we can justify not paying the TV licence . I thought the way "actors" pays and related production expenses are increasing it was only a matter of time that BBC would be funded like other channel's i.e. through advertising revenue but with the introduction of BBC3 , 4 and soon probably 76 I don't think that'll be happening soon.The yearly amount isn't a lot in itself I don't think but for what we get in return, it's just pants.

Answer 5

i hate paying for it, why should I, I would opt out of it if i could, so what id miss eastenders, but i dont watch it anyway, the only thing I watch on bbc is crimewatch once a month and if i could then I would just watch it online the next day because they put all the details on there, also why should pensioners have to pay for on the minimal pensions they get, then there a lot of people that are poor in this country also that have to pay for it, its a stupid idea and its greedy, why dont they just have adverts like the rest and get their fees from them, then we would all be happy. STOP THE LICENCE FEE!. oh also we dont mind paying for ntl as you get lots more channels than what you buying the licence for, even if they are repeats....

Answer 6

The TV licence should be completely optional, i don't watch BBC i have sky @ a resonable £17 a month, but just because i have an RF input on my telly i have to pay £140 a year for the privilage. Bull***t it should be my choice, the same way i choose to turn off Sky Sports and not pay for it.

Makes me laugh at the discount you get if your blind, you still have to pay for a Black and White Licence! LOL

Answer 7

At the end of the day no one forces us to have SKY TV - it is a choice you make if you can afford it or want it. The licence however is mandatory, whether you actually watch any of the BBC channels or not.

Answer 8

I don't have a TV license anymore so I'd second that thought. I don't miss TV either.

The quality of UK content has gone downhill over the last 10 years and no one seems to care. I'm sure once the UK is all digital they will be able to tighten the screw further, as they will be able to charge you per TV.

I don't see what's so special about the BBC that it can't be sold off like everything else seems to be, and forced to survive on it's own two feet?

Answer 9

People chose to have sky so they then have to pay the subsription. Having a tv.. even just to watch dvds and never watching BBC means you need to pay for a licence. What a rip off

Answer 10

It's about choice. I happily pay for Sky because I want to watch the channels. Your TV license is to pay for the BBC. If I decided to choose not to watch the BBC, I think it's wrong that I still have to pay the license. Rip off.